Muscovir

If even 6'3" Dario thinks the handling of 32"-wheeled bikes kinda sucks, then imagine how bad it is for anyone of average height.

Physics dictates that a 32" wheel and a 29" wheel at the same tire pressure will have the exact same size contact patch.

Yes, this. Anyone who claims that "32 inch wheels inherently have a larger contact patch" hasn't understood the physics of tire pressure. It's a relative measurement, not an absolute one. A 32" wheel and a 29" wheel at the same tire pressure will have the exact same size contact patch.

Component brands are hesitant to jump onto the hype train because they're aware of the one thing that some bike brands seem to be tone-deaf to: The fact that basically no consumer is interested in 32" wheels and this is very likely going to turn out to be a massive waste of time.

Could a full 29" configuration increase the fun factor (- and also massively increase the fitment)?

Hate to say I told you so. If even 6'3" Dario thinks the handling of 32"-wheeled bikes kinda sucks, then imagine how bad it is for anyone of average height. The rider gets relegated to passenger.

@CustardCountry: The ironic thing is that most pro XC racers aren't interested in 32" wheels either, because an all-but-negligible advantage in rolling resistance under certain conditions does not make for a fast racing bike all by itself. Especially if you start considering the downsides in geometry, fitment, weight, handling and acceleration that come with 32" wheels.

And once again, not a single racer chose to compete on 32" wheels.

Women // 1. Sina Frei 2. Jenny Rissveds 3. Puck Pieterse Men // 1. Tom Pidcock 2. Matthieu van der Poel 3. Luca Martin

@Chondog94: I think you're correct in saying that a consumer-goods company typically doesn't survive long term by forcing their customers to have limited options. But short term, things can be very different. Adopting a new wheelsize like 32" is a multi-million dollar investment - a substantial endeavour for any bike brand and fragmenting the market by giving consumers a choice could pose a risk to that investment. If we, as consumers, should continue to make choices that put their investment at risk by continuing to buy 29" bikes over 32" bikes, there will come a point for some brands where they might be tempted to rather take away our choicethan to risk their investment into 32". Take Cube, for example. Probably not a brand you're very familiar with - I don't even think they have a US-distributor - but over here in Europe, they are absolutely huge. Probably the biggest brand by sales volume in Europe of all the "traditional" store-bought bike brands. They are also one of the only bike brands that have managed a steady rate of growth during the rocky last couple of years, with the post-covid outdoor sports market collapse. My point is: Cube is probably not strapped for cash and could absolutely afford to give their customers the choice of wheelsize. But as a matter of fact, they don't. They have already started to take away consumer choice in regards to wheelsize. Their new XC bike for example will exclusively roll on 32" wheels. No 29er version planned, despite their previous 29er XC bike selling really well. Same for their upcoming gravel bikes. They've practically eliminated consumer choice before anyone ever got the chance to vote with their wallet. Others will probably follow.