Pinkbike Poll: Does Mixing Wheel Sizes Make Sense?

Sep 18, 2020
by Mike Kazimer  
The Grim Donut
Probably world's most notorious mixed-wheel mountain bike.

I'd thought bikes with two different sized wheels had disappeared with the Specialized Big Hit, but the advent of 29” downhill bikes seems to have breathed a little more life into the concept. For those who aren't familiar, proponents claim it's a best-of-both-worlds scenario, with a bigger wheel up front for better rollover, and a smaller wheel out back for quicker cornering, increased stiffness, and more clearance between rider and tire.

The mullet configuration has seen success on the DH World Cup and Enduro World Series circuits, although the “correlation does not imply causation” concept does need to be kept in mind. In some cases, riders were on mixed wheel sizes because their sponsor didn't have a dedicated 29” wheeled bike ready yet, and they wanted to at least benefit from some of the advantages that come with an increased wheel diameter. In other cases, it's the rider's height that steered them towards the mullet setup. Especially on a DH bike, when you have 190mm or more rear travel and a rider with short legs it can be difficult to avoid buzzing the rear tire. Anyone who's ever felt the 'bzzzt' of a mud spike at full speed knows it's not the best feeling in the world.

The new Canyon Sender has mixed wheel sizes for the small and medium frames.

Multiple companies are now offering DH bikes in the mixed wheel configuration, but the trend hasn't really caught on to the same extent in the enduro / trail bike world. In many cases companies will offer a bike with 29” wheels for the large and extra-large sizes, and then include a 27.5” wheeled option for the smaller sizes. Having wheel size based more on a rider's height makes sense to me, and it's the premise for this week's poll.

Will mixed wheels will end up being the norm for medium and small bikes, with matching 29" wheels for taller riders, and matching 27.5" wheels for extra-small riders? Or is it just a flash-in-the-pan trend, doomed to disappear just as quickly as Plus bikes?


Either way, I'm curious where the interest in mixed wheel sizes lies – are shorter riders more likely to gravitate towards the concept? Find your height below and cast your vote in the appropriate poll.



Would you rather have 29" wheels or a 27.5" / 29" setup on a trail / enduro bike?


For riders 5'3" (160cm) and below.

Would you rather have 29" wheels or a 27.5" / 29" setup on a trail / enduro bike?

For riders 5'3" and below.


For riders 5'4" - 5'6" (161 - 168cm)

Would you rather have 29" wheels or a 27.5" / 29" setup setup on a trail / enduro bike??

For riders 5'4"-5'6"



For riders 5'7" - 5'9" (169 - 175cm)

Would you rather have 29" wheels or a 27.5" / 29" setup setup on a trail / enduro bike??

For riders 5'7" - 5'9"


For riders 5'10" - 6'1" (176 - 185cm)

Would you rather have 29" wheels or a 27.5" / 29" setup setup on a trail / enduro bike??

For riders 5'10" - 6'-1"



For riders 6'2" and taller (186cm and up)

Would you rather have 29" wheels or a 27.5" / 29" setup on a trail / enduro bike?

For riders 6'2" and taller





150 Comments

  • 150 0
 Choose two wheel sizes and be a dick about it.
  • 12 3
 - Mahalo my Dude/ IFHT Films
  • 5 1
 Choose one wheel size and be a bigger dick about it.
  • 10 5
 This looks about right from my experience. Really Short people and most Really Tall people are closed minded and too stubborn to realize the benefits of trying something new...





Smile
  • 4 0
 @stiingya: the issue is that there isn't many options that actually fit us (at either end of the scale), no matter what the industry keeps telling you.
  • 95 3
 95% of us should answer "i don't know"

How many of us have ridden a proper (not ghetto) mullet setup?
  • 9 2
 Yep, the question doesn't make sense. But mixing wheel sizes does.
  • 7 0
 exactly, i would assume 50% of the people who choose mixed have never actually ridden one. That should be the next question in order to qualify the answer.
  • 25 3
 i voted for mullet in every catagory hoping some manufacturers will make mullet specific bikes so I can try one out.
  • 3 0
 And how many of us are all those size/height categories? Haha
  • 2 0
 @chadtague1: unfortunately or fortunately I dont think manufacturers rely on pinkbike comments, or maaaaaybe they do . . . .
  • 2 0
 @noplacelikeloam: lol, unfortunately or fortunately.....
  • 1 0
 @noplacelikeloam: Giant bicycles was mixing it up in the comment section about the new Trance X
  • 2 0
 Only a few bikes out w/mullet link options
  • 1 0
 I rode a 26" until recently. I rented a DH mullet at the bike park and loved it. But, I haven't ridden a 29 on both at the bike park. I just got a 29 enduro and am very happy with it. Even with the 27.5 rear, my ass got buzzed on the DH bike so I'd stick with the mullet for DH. I don't see the downside on my 29 enduro.
  • 4 0
 Me. I mulleted my Druid and love it.
  • 1 0
 @kit-nz: u using their special link for it?
  • 2 0
 Bought my GG megatrail set up as a mullet. I'm 5'7 had 27.5 and 29ers but can't see myself riding anything but a mullet from here on out.
  • 2 0
 @hamncheez: yip. Figured I’d get it when I purchased, “just in case” Smile Found it more fun to ride than 29/29. Only takes 15min or so to swap so will probably pop back and forth depending on the riding location/style.
  • 1 0
 @noplacelikeloam: Yes Pinkbike does all this for your entertainment?
try this for size 20/7?
www.pinkbike.com/photo/19310752
  • 1 0
 I definitely don’t know. Probably wouldn’t know the difference between 29 and 27.5 in a blind test, only that they feel “different”. I just don’t like the idea of even more incompatible items on my bike.
  • 2 0
 Copy that, but those that have, professional and regular folk know.

Re the Ghetto builds, Come on Man - It's just numbers and geometry :-)

Get the HTA you like, hopefully the BB is somewhere that works, and enjoy.

Every bike - mullet or not - has their own set of numbers... With any wheel size category Geo is varied...that's what makes the ethos of the brand!

Are my home made mullets Janky Ghetto builds?
Not sure, but they ride great and the components to build them are very good. And the Geo on my Wolfridge and Levo mullets are super close to Alchemy's Nine7Five Mullet - a true non Ghetto factory build that's a proven winner.

Just build one already! ...or buy one cause they are finally coming available. SC will have them in non DH MX form soon as will every big brand manufacturer. It's not even a question any more, thank goodness.
  • 1 0
 Specialized Big Hit FTW haha... Yes aware it's old skool sizes but still legit.
  • 63 5
 I just want a dh bike with 27.5 wheels. I don't give a shit about going racing and being glued to the ground, I like to hit jumps and do big shit, not just go fast in a strait line down a trail. Why are bike companies only making 29 or mullet DH bikes. Not everyone is a racer.
  • 40 3
 This.
I don't race and don't care about bigger wheels - I see them as a big disadvantage. Not to mention the majority of those that are screaming "29ers are faster!!! " are slow as hell on the trail. So what's the point, if you get smoked by people on 26" bigger wheels won't help you get faster - fitness and technique get you fast.
  • 8 0
 I refuse to give up my 26" wheeled Knolly Podium because it's just too damn fun to ride. Sure I could "quicker" through the rough stuff with a wagon wheeled DH bike but I love the playfulness of this thing. I also have a Yeti SB6 and prefer the way the Knolly rides at the bike parks.
  • 5 1
 Yeah. It is a shame, pros develop bikes not to be fun but to squeeze an extra half second out of their race laps. Gapers make up most of the people purchasing bikes and they just buy what the pros are riding. So the freedom riders that are looking for a more fun ride and not worried about the half second get aces out by a lot of bike companies. But if you look you can find bikes designed around a more playful ride, just seems like fewer companies are doing that anymore.
  • 5 0
 @tonit91: Using the brakes less is mostly the answer to going faster. I guess this falls into the technique.
  • 8 2
 @tonit91: Ya, I don't think it's just about speed. I went from an SB66 (26in, 151mm travel) to a Transition Smuggler (2019, 29in whee, 120mm travell) The smuggler is faster and more fun and it had nothing to do with the wheel size. It also corners much better. I think the wheel size only plays a small part in this. The geometry is going to be the major player in these improvements.
  • 2 1
 Comm Clash?
Spesh Status ?
  • 7 0
 @dwmetalfab: Of course the geometry plays a much bigger roll, but most people overlook that and just go for the 29in wheels without looking at the geo. I'm not saying there should not be any 29in wheels, it's great to have the option. And those that prefer them should definitely buy them.
I'm against pushing them to everyone and leaving 27.5 on size S frame, wtf is that? And then we get to mullets, which again comes from racing.
  • 15 0
 Agreed, not everyone is a racer. But where is the 27.5/26 mullet option in the polls?
  • 4 0
 @nsmithbmx: My Podium has an Avy 888 on it. I taco'd a wheel at the park one day and the only thing available was a friends 27.5. It fit and I after I figured out the cornering, I liked it. So now my Podium is a mullet, and I'm still very happy with no interest in changing wheel sizes or bikes. Sorry, I'll get me coat and see myself out.
  • 4 1
 I feel you, but 29 front allows you to run over bigger rocks, logs, holes, creeks, animals, ditches, people, roll away from front wheel cases better and stay behind the front axle on steeps.
  • 1 0
 @DoubleCrownAddict: thats the fun size.
  • 1 0
 @DoubleCrownAddict: now your talking I like that idea
  • 3 1
 Absent because there are essentially no NEW 26 inch bikes being developed. Also a ton of wheel companies dont even sell 26 anymore. it sucks

Note: My primary bikes are large and medium 26 inch 2012 slayers. Medium is for jumps and super tight stuff, large for everything else.
  • 1 0
 They didn’t stop making those...
  • 2 0
 @shredjekyll: And it's hard to find 26" tires anymore, too.
  • 2 0
 @usmbc-co-uk: the clash is not a DH bike
  • 1 0
 @dwmetalfab: I went from the SB66 to a Pivot Firebird 29 and was surprised how quickly I adapted, but I still say it's about wheel size. The geometry on the SB66 is right for a 26" wheel. Modern geometry is right for bigger wheels.
  • 2 0
 @DoubleCrownAddict: could not agree more, have 2 27.5/26 bikes and love them so much, much more then the 29/27.5 i had
  • 1 0
 @gmdunn: Ya, though i have had great results buying direct from manufacturer. Kenda and Schwalbe have plenty in stock
  • 5 2
 I’ve ridden both a fair bit and to be honest the rollover on the 29 and not getting front wheel caught up just works better compared to 27.5. Every time I ride 27.5 now I think it feels lively but then when it gets steep or rocky wish I had the 29 again.
I guess if you ride manicured bike park stuff and like to just do jumps and berms 27.5 is perfect.
29 gives you a bit more for proper mountain terrain
  • 1 0
 @K3vinmaldo: but Commencal makes the furious DH 27.5
  • 30 0
 Might make sense to have a polling option "doesn't apply to me but I want to see the results"
  • 10 0
 Or a see results button.
  • 24 0
 27.5" for life! I mountain bike for fun, not to see how fast I can go, and I've found 27.5" to be the size for me (as a 6'0" tall person)
  • 19 0
 Where’s the 26” option??
  • 25 1
 @McArdle it got rebranded as 27.5
  • 7 2
 You can still find them. Just go to any manufacturer's website and look for "kids' bikes" Smile
  • 1 0
 It is not mentioned in the poll. I actually have one "mullet bike" as they say. A Specialized P1 from 2006 (I think). 24" rear, 26" front.
  • 1 0
 @vinay: P1 cro-mo! Loved mine.
  • 17 2
 Is anyone else poor after dropping thousands on a bike frame, few hundred on smashed derailleurs and brake levers, not to mention maintenance cost for bearings, shocks, and brake bleeds with pad replacement?

Point being, it is cheaper to shred away your rear tire and when it finally has no knobs on it replace your front tire and put the used front on the rear. Who has money for new tires because you wanted different size wheels?
  • 1 0
 Absolutely this. I wish I could upvote it more than once!
  • 5 0
 For me, that would only work on a DH bike or if I used uplifts.
Since I pedal everywhere and I use a soft/high grip compound in the front, it would really slow you down if used at the back. Not to mention that the softer compound doesn't last very long at the back. So in the long run, it may even be cheaper to use a different rear tire since it may last longer that way.
  • 12 0
 Bring back 2001...24" with 3.0 Gazz's, all you old school dudes know what's up...
  • 1 0
 I had plans to to me a 24” bike . It may have been around that time . The bike was may 1997 Cannondale SV 2000 . I think that was the letters . It was a 4” travel XC single pivot with the 90mm travel headshok . Wow has suspension design come a long way since then.
  • 10 0
 as someone who's 5'1, i'll keep my 26 inch wheels thanks
  • 2 0
 You do ride it well though... Some excellent photo's. tup
  • 4 0
 I'm 5'9", and I'll keep my 26" wheels, too.
  • 5 1
 Im 186 (6'2") and just feel like my senses have a better connection to the ground under the bike on 27.5s. As in I feel better whats happening between me and the terrain and that gives me more confidence.
I do however agree that 29 is slightly faster, and that it looks a bit stupid with huge people on small wheels.
  • 3 0
 "... it looks a bit stupid with huge people on small wheels."

Yeah. As a tall rider, I think 29 is better than the alternatives in every respect, but I'm not gonna lie--this probably influences me more than any other consideration. Don't wanna look stupid.
  • 2 0
 @facelessghost: do these wheels make my butt look smaller?? Grabs snack from snack box..
  • 4 0
 I had always wanted to try mullet when I had a 29".. then got a frame that would accept a 27.5+ rear (which is what I wanted) and the results (on single track trails) was what I expected -> mullet turns quicker, more agile, accelerates better but keeps the roll over and confidence of the pure 29". Now I don't even own a 29" rear... and don't plan to.
  • 1 0
 I intentially bought a Scott Genius due to the ability to run both sizes. I'm a 173cm, (whatever that is in your language) small/medium bloke. I've been on 29 for over 10 years - love the roll-over smoothing effect of 29, and grip. Have recently set-up with a 27.5 2.8 rear (Butcher), 29 front (Mary 2.6). Only a few rides, but the difference is bigger than I thought. Can definitely feel the rear cuts through and around corners better - tighter arc, more nimble. Also better in the steeps, not that I've shave by butt with the 29 that I recall.
Great for enduro, but I would switch back to 29 for rides where I want efficiency and roll-over (xc, or light trail). spare tubes is a slight concern, but surely those tubeless plug things have put that issue to rest?
  • 4 0
 I'm 6'2 and I used to be pretty adamant about 29ers, but now I'm on a 27.5 and it's a blast. I don't know what my next bike will be. I'm not 29 or die, I'm not convinced my HTA has to be less than 65 in order to go down a hill, pretty sure I can make it up a hill if the STA is under 80. I think I've lost all my biking convictions.
  • 3 0
 I turned a 2014 Nomad into a mullet with 26 rear and 27.5 front. Put a 150mm 27.5 fork on the front to compensate for the larger wheel and it really improved the bike. The back end was just as snappy as before and the front rolled over obstacles with ease. I think this is a great concept and excited to see more brands embrace in the future. The only down side is the need to pack 2 tubes in case of flat.
  • 11 0
 You can totally just run 27.5 tubes in a 26 wheel... speaking form experience.
  • 5 0
 @yoimaninja: Also the reverse.
  • 3 0
 I just keep a 26" spare in my pack. It'll fit 26", 27.5", and 29" wheels, and you'll always be able to help out a buddy in a pinch no matter which size they're running!
  • 3 0
 6'5" and riding 27.5 currently. I'm not a racer and would love to try a mullet, but zero desire to go bigger than 27.5 on the rear wheel. As tall as I am, i still find myself in the occasional situation where I am close to buzzing my ass on 27.5.
  • 3 0
 Grew up riding dirt bikes. Larger front wheels make sense/feel normal to me, and honestly I've been wondering why we didn't see it more in mountain bikes, especially DH (turns out, UCI rules previously prevented it).

I'm 6'1", so I don't have a huge problem hitting the rear wheel in the steeps, but I'd absolutely try a mullet... if it was designed in that way to begin with/their geo wasn't screwy.
  • 1 3
 on dirt bikes, the front wheels aren't large. They just look nice because the rim's bigger and the tyre isn't as voluminous as the rear one.
  • 3 1
 @vhdh666:

Dirt bikes/MX bikes have different sizes wheels front and rear. And whats more, they have had different size wheels for at least the last 30 years.

Most current full size MX bikes are 21in front wheels, with 19in rear wheels.

powersports.honda.com/off-road/competition/crf450r/specifications

It was kind of a big deal about 15-20 years ago when they went from 18in rear wheels to the now current 19in rear wheels. They did it for the shorter sidewalls, to get less "wallow/squirm" from the rear tire while slamming them into berms/etc.
  • 4 1
 This is straight up proof, pure data, 29ers are for ppl at the very least 5'10' and up. LISTEN manufacturers, we need more than 2-3 properly designed mullets that retain geometry.
Mullets are not wanted purely for hype, it just happens to be hyped as its THE new solution for average and smaller riders where a 29er results in less space to move on the bike AND have that tire grind your ass. No one one wants to compromise on comfort and space to work just to ride 29s.
Mullets are literally the best of both world, corners way better,manuals and hops better/easier while having all the space we need to work and with the truck feel/capability up front.
nuff said
  • 3 0
 My favourite as a tall rider is the bike companies that offer larger sizes in 29" only, and reduce the travel for the 29" versions. It's pretty counterintuitive reaĺly. Give me the full fat version please.
  • 2 0
 Shorter riders only 'need' a smaller wheel out back (due to their height) if they're riding super steep tracks where they're constantly getting buzzed by the tire. Otherwise on normal MTB tracks and trails being smaller doesn't mean you need a smaller rear wheel. What being smaller/shorter does mean is that the cockpit on 29ers is usually too high. If anything the shorter rider would benefit from keeping the big wheels but being able to get the handlebar lower so they're in the same saddle-to-bar-drop position as taller riders and product manager who design bikes.
  • 2 0
 There's also the issue of weight. Smaller riders weigh a lot less, and the weight of the bike is a bigger deal to them (a 30 lb bike for a 185 lb guy is less of an impact than a 25 lb bike to a 110 lb girl). Bigger wheels mean more weight & more moment of inertia. More moment of inertia means wider handlebars to get leverage to control them. But smaller riders (especially women) don't fit those wider bars.

It makes sense for the whole bike to be scaled to fit the rider, and that includes smaller wheels for smaller people.
  • 1 0
 I'm a bit over 6' and just went off-course the other day due to butt-wheel contact. It made me lose speed and the ability to control direction while the rear wheel was going over the edge of the drop. I've been riding 29" for a while and this may be related to a more recent switch to a dropper with more travel. It could have also happened with a 27.5" rear wheel but either way it makes me consider trying the mullet configuration.
  • 4 0
 Every other time in history that companies have used mixed wheel sizes it’s gone out of fashion after just a season or two...
  • 2 0
 I think Liteville were the first to introduce this concept commercially. They explain nicely why it makes sense (in theory). www.liteville.com/application/filebrowser/master/PDF/Scaled_Sizing_ENG_Flyer_210x210_8seitig_ver-05.pdf.

The problem is that it only works (well) if your bike is designed for it, otherwise you run the risk of the variation in geometry having more impact than the smaller wheel in the rear.
Remember the time when we stuck 27.5 wheels in our 26” bikes? I do. Felt great but not sure if it really was Wink

And much like the grim donut works on a certain course we will see 32” wheels. Its basic physics imho.
  • 1 0
 Came down to the comments looking for this. Back when Pivot was exclusively building aluminum bikes, I ran a 27.5" front wheel on my Mach 5. It seemed like a great solution at the time!

I guess it's time to put a mullet setup on my list of things to tinker with this winter and try next year. I've held off because I like the way 29ers roll, but I'll admit I'm curious to try it out!
  • 2 0
 With computational abilities to be soon exceeding (or exceeded)current limits, perhaps qauntumn computers can give us a clearer answer. At the end of the day it comes down to a perfect balance of intuitive control and kinetic wantingness to go faster. Our current suspension systems have only 2 degrees of freedom (yes a rear wheel has two, but for analogy sake). So would more far analysis give us more ideas? Such as dynamic adaptive head angles acceleration dependent damping or pure AI suspension...... Just a thought... who knows
  • 6 0
 Who else still rocking a 26"er LMAO
  • 3 0
 f*cking love my Foes Mixer Enduro, 7" rear travel with a 180mm Lyrik has been a blast and climbs well for what it is. After the grim donut vid I may reconsider not running an angleset although my shit is pretty slack already
  • 1 0
 I can't believe I'm replying to someone who has actually bought one of their bikes in the last decade. They used to be the top dog when I started riding and the weasel I owned was amazing at the time.
  • 4 0
 After listening to the podcast a few weeks ago, I think I'd rather have 32s or 36s (6'4", for what it's worth).
  • 2 0
 I'd be interested to see some independent review of the claims on the Mullet Cycles technology page, especially related to scrub radius:

www.mulletcycles.com/technology
  • 4 0
 There is so much nonsense on that website. I am a fan of mullets, and I understand the meaning of all the words used on that site. But they are talking utter shite. Pointless technical language used in place of actual logical statements.
  • 3 0
 I'll even go as far as saying I agree that the smaller rear wheel tracking a tighter radius than the front would improve cornering. Just, their uneccesary use of excessively long and technical words makes it sound like they don't really know what they are talking about. If someone truly understands something, they should be able to explain it simply
  • 3 0
 @gabriel-mission9: Paul Aston described it perfectly in a recent NSMB article, something like ...the rear wheel turns a smaller arc in the corner compared with the front causing the rear to drift slightly creating oversteer. That's not his words, he described it better.
  • 3 1
 Yeah but Aston jumps on literally every bandwagon going. I bet he even owned a Spooky Bandwagon back in the day.
  • 2 0
 @gabriel-mission9: Haha. I guess time will tell just like with plus bikes (although some people still like them). I had a ghetto mullet bike a couple of years ago and was impressed. I'm going to build a second mixed size wheelset 29/27.5 for my latest bike soon.
  • 4 0
 I ran a mullet setup on my Capra 29 last year and was pretty blown away by how much better the bike cornered.
  • 1 0
 as a smaller rider (175) i wouldn't know how to answer, let me explain:
for a trail bike (130-150) I'd take 27.5 wheels for playfulness/jibs, which is what i like most.
for a leisure trail/enduro (155-180) bike I'd _probably_ pick 27/29 for a middle ground in maneuverability/stability.
for an enduro bike for races or focusing on speed (strava w/e) I'd pick 29/29 all day.

also, i haven't yet ridden many proper mullets but many 27ers and 29ers
  • 5 0
 Can I have a 26r/27.5f please?
  • 2 0
 Mullet Bikes Mythmaker
  • 3 0
 I’ve got my Nomad setup this way, love it
  • 1 0
 I don't have any real experience with anything larger than 26". But will probably go for 29" front and back when buying.

The first bike I recall having mixed wheel sizes was the 80's Ibis Comp trials (24" front and 20" rear).
  • 1 0
 I have been experimenting with mullet setups last couple years. In my opinion, mullet setups make more sense for shorter riders because of tire butt buzz due to shorter legs. However, the geo and handling is slightly different on mullet setup, but is noticeable. Slightly slacker, stack height changes in relation to BB because BB is lower, and turns tighter and quicker.
  • 1 0
 As a life long geometry and general mtb nerd I actually feel shame that I never really considered the mullet a viable option until recently. Having a higher axle at the front than the rear opens up a whole new world of options when you’re looking at BB drop and trying to balance a heavy dose of stability with equal amounts agility.
I hear the guys that just want a playful bike because that’s me too. But in trying to design a bike that fits the current trend (and rightly so in many ways) of massive stability that you can still rip down the jumps; the mullet setup has been an awakening for me.
I dare say some of the pros riding mullet setups have realised a similar thing.
  • 1 0
 I would be interested to see the potential benefits for trail hard tail use with a fat 27.5 rear tire with less aggressive tread and a 29 inch standard width aggressive front tire. Would this be better or worse than 29 inch aggressive standard size on both ends?
  • 1 0
 A friend of mine rides just this setup and loves it. Swears its better than a short travel full sus setup. It looks really stupid but it works for him. I don't know how i would feel about having a wider rear than front. The silly appearance would probably prevent me from trying it.
  • 3 0
 @Afterschoolsports: motorcycles do just fine with that aesthetic it I think
  • 1 0
 @Deoratwo: if I had the desire to run it I might feel differently. At the end of the day looks are irrelevant to performance and as I said my friend loves the ride.
  • 1 0
 I think the bike has to be designed for it. You can't just put a 27.5 on the back of a 29er. And you really can't throw the same travel 29 fork and wheel on the front of a 27.5er.

I almost know this is true but I chickened out halfway. Put the 29er fork on but stayed with a 27.5 wheel. Still had to dial the travel back 20mm to maintain geometry. Still 140F/130R but was designed for 160mm fork.
  • 1 0
 I haven't ridden one so I can't speak for how mullets handle. However, based soley on rear wheel to bum clearance, there's a grey area for medium and large bikes based on bike design intent. At 5'11", I'd be keen to try a mullet on a burly enduro bike like a Rocky Slayer or Specialized Enduro if I'm going to ride it on steep single track. Racing a 160/150 bike on lower angle terrain, I'd be shocked if the full 29er wasn't faster. For general trail riding, I don't really care. I'll just take whatever handles better and is more fun.
  • 2 1
 I like the idea of a mullet bike, but it's not really applicable to someone like me, who climbs a lot. Sure, they could have geo dialled in specific to mullet bikes, but then you're not really getting the advantages of a mullet bike.
  • 1 0
 I'm 6'2 but have a short -for-height 32 in inseam and the only thing I can't stand about 29r's is that I just can't get the bike as far under me as I can with a 27.5. I would love to try/see some playful trailbike mullet options in the 140mm range. To me a mullet trail bike makes more sense than something super slacked out with conservative travel.
  • 1 0
 5’10, last year rode 27.5 current model Fury. This year have Mixed wheels on basically the same bike.
Although different wheel set, boxxer ultimate this year versus World Cup last year, and put Cushcore in the back this year so lower tire pressure than I’ve been able to run before.
So not an exact comparison, but close.
And riding the same trails which I know well, I generally get between 70 and 80 Park days a season.
So it’s a pretty level playing field I say.
I hide my Strava profile because it’s just for me, but it tells me without a doubt that this set up is faster.
There could be other factors, but in my opinion that is the obvious difference.
Not surprisingly it feels faster in the rough straight stuff. Surprisingly, it corners better.
Have only ever tried one lap on a full 29 DH bike. Didn’t like it, but to be fair the bike was one size smaller.
  • 1 0
 Every single timed test Ive seen has found the mullet bike to be quicker by a decent enough margin to make it a no brainer for pros. That said, unless the bike geo can be adjusted to suit the bigger front or smaller back wheel, it may jist ruin your bikes handling...
  • 1 0
 I'd be interested in a mullet setup if wheel producers actually sold mixed wheelsets. Considering how popular mullet bikes are now on the racing market, I'm surprised you don't see that. Too expensive to buy 2 separate wheels vs a set.
  • 1 0
 Just for the hell of it, I took my 26er out for a ride after about a year of sitting. I used to go back and forth with my 29er and 26er but that just kinda stopped. The 26er was cramped and the front wheel seemed to find every hole, but the acceleration. It was like I had super powers or something. I don't think mixed wheels is not a bad concept, just need to get it all sorted.
  • 1 0
 I have a frame in the garage designed for a 24" rear wheel and a 26" front... it's also a hard tail and my first proper "DH" bike.

Is it time to long fork it and have a 24"/29" uber-mullet? Surely thats EVEN faster than a normal mullet.
  • 1 0
 I had a Ventana El Chuco for few years, loved that bike but the smaller ear wheel would hang up on things that the front did not and in the end just became too frustrating to deal with.
  • 3 0
 Sensible bike = grim donut
grim donut = mixed wheels
sensible bike = mixed wheels
  • 3 0
 Can I see results for any other heights? I'm gonna screw the poll up by answering just to see results...
  • 2 0
 I've just gone 26/27.5 mullet on my DH. I can still buzz my nads on a 26 on the steep stuff. I now have a spare 26 rim if wreck rear as could be hard to find in the Alps.
  • 3 0
 I wish sizes were based upon the Lord of the Rings. Much simpler. Hobbits Dwarves Elves Orcs Giants
  • 1 0
 I'm 5"7 and I buzzed my arse on a local trail on my hardtail. I'm willing to give the full 29er a go because it's so much better on the rough, but I want the option to mullet if it causes me issues.
  • 1 1
 Why does the Grim from the future even have wheels? "we don't need roads where we're going." Sides, we're going to be under water. If anything it should have pontoons or horizontal mullet rotors. Haven't you seen Water World?
  • 1 0
 5 years down the road, as a tall rider ill be forced to ride 32” front 29” rear.

Btw I thought I like the idea of 29”/27,5” but then I rode the new Spec Status.
  • 1 0
 Yes. And the dh bikes with these wheels will only have 120mm of travel.
  • 2 0
 Ride what the fxxk you want. For me (like anyone gives a cluck) 26" for my trail bike, 27.5 for my enduro.
  • 1 0
 163 cm here, ordered Canyon Spectral and 29" 150mm travel Lyric. The bike is so cheap compared to competitors, it's a shame not to try.
  • 1 0
 Am I wrong for liking multiple wheels? I thought I was supposed to buy one of every bike? I don't need a garage full of bikes?
  • 2 0
 29 front/27.5 rear for 150mm and up Enduro bike and DH bike. Trail bike and below 29" front and rear.
  • 2 0
 27"/ 20" makes more sense than you might think?

LOOKS wrong but feels fine?


www.pinkbike.com/photo/19310752
  • 1 0
 It seems like a cheap and easy way for bike companies to sell a new bike/Update an existing one without costing them lots of money making an actual new model of bike
  • 2 0
 Everyone go buy a Starling Twist and then come back and answer this question.
  • 1 0
 I am running 27.5x2.4 up front and 26x2.6 rear. Honestly it's very hard to tell what the difference is from the old 26" front setup. Bike was fun, still is.
  • 2 0
 The Grim Donut V2 should be a 29"/24" mullet.
  • 2 0
 Why not 29"/20" dual back wheel tricycle?
  • 1 0
 @gmdunn: shoulda gone with 3 10" wheels in one of those rotating triangle configurations. Now that would be bad ass...
  • 2 0
 Fuck 2 sizes I want all sizes all the time.
  • 1 1
 Mixed wheels are stoopid, it’s just a way to sell more bikes, gives people something to mess with.

But do carry on, whatever makes people happy. I could give two shits .
  • 2 0
 24" X 26" is the Holy Grail.
  • 1 0
 My bike is 26/24. It is what it is. Personally you can only climb somewhat steep gradients on a bicycle, no matter what, and descend as steep as want, so having mixed wheels makes sense to me. Apart from ease of maintenance. But, you're not going to be able to climb any steeper with a same sized rear wheel, and it make it less level for descending. So in my opinion, it makes sense.
  • 1 0
 Lamest bike in the world 700c
Coolest bike in the world 20”
Where you at ????????‍♂️
  • 1 0
 Where's the mini mullet option??
  • 4 0
 It's called a Specialized Big Hit ;-)
  • 1 0
 When do we get a wheel size between 27.5 & 29? Need more options!
  • 1 0
 Also, I have no idea if it’s better or not.
  • 1 0
 Modular drop outs and headset cups - give all the sizes all the options
  • 1 0
 Err...27.5 front and back for me. How is that not an option? ????
  • 1 0
 Fucked if I know

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2020. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.026691
Mobile Version of Website