Perhaps the sham part is that 27.5 is thought of as "in between" 26 and 29 when it's really much closer to 26 than 29. So things to take away from all the measure-fest are the following: - If you want a 650b feel without spending too much $$ on a new set of wheels, install beefy high volume tires - If you don't want to be weighed down by big heavy tires and have the dough to splurge on a new wheelset, go 650b, just make sure it clears your frame. - If you want to maximize the rolling capabilities of your 650b wheelset, install beefy high volume 650b tires
I wonder if the tire people will get into the low profile options like motor vehicles. Shorter stiffer sidewall but wide tread might work kind of good for handling on twisties. That would throw the whole "wheel size" thing more out of whack for sure. #-o
Wow I'm an idiot. I thought wheel size is the actual measurement of the rim, not the rim plus tires. What kind of crap is that?
Not sure it's a similar situation. Bicycle wheels seem to vary quite a bit in the angle the axle makes with the ground (lateral angle - don't know if there's a name for it) compared to auto wheels. Also, at least for mtb's, how much do we depend on tire squish for traction and a smoother ride? I dunno, it's an interesting idea.
What about a 150mm 650b fork on a 26in frame? A Pivot Mach 5? I want to add a bit more travel to the front end. Competitive Cyclist has a killer deal on a 650b Fox Talas right now. I'll primarily be using the bike for park/shuttle runs...so I won't be doing much climbing. I have a 29er for everything else. The bike currently has a 140mm fork on it now. It should raise the front about ~20mm. Will that make a big difference? How much will +20mm slacken the front end? Thanks!
I think you should just go for it, and tell us how it turns out. On the Thanksgiving FB/BP Cycles ride, I actually put a 26er rear tire on my 29er. It was awesome. OP, if fit is questionable, it's probably not a good idea to try and stuff a larger wheel in between a fork designed for a smaller wheel. My post was more in response to RS VR6. People have been running 96ers for some time, and I've read threads elsewhere where people are really liking 76ers. Of course the dynamics of the bike will change overall but, if you're thinking that it'll make positive changes to your bike feel, you'll probably be happy in the end.
There seems to be a lot of documentation out there on converting the SC Superlight to 650B/27.5". I guess the main issue is putting in that shim to keep the rear tire from hitting the seat tube. I wonder if anyone has put in a longer eye to eye shock with a shorter stroke in lieu of shimming their rear shock.
[video=vimeo;80894248]http://vimeo.com/80894248#at=0[/video] Watching the first part of this video made me think of this thread. :lol:
That's an interesting alternative. I get full travel goodness on my Remedy there's no need to shim the rear shock.
Thanks guys but this is all kind of moot (for me at least) as I bought a Kona Hei Hei Supreme (29er) in Sept. and just sold my SC Superlight 26. Perhaps it's still good info for others pondering like I was.
I really doubt that it will make much of a difference, though a 29er up front and 26 rear will make a difference as in the 96'er bikes. The complete 27.5---650b bike is a substantial difference as a trail bike/dh compared to a 26er. I find the size very nice and frankly that's what the mountain size should have been since the get go. However as you probably know, the history of mountain bikes started with chicken wiring together old 26" wheeled cruiser bikes. So for just having the 650b up front will not do much.
Are you planning to run that fork with your 26er wheel? If so, the downside is rake. 650b specific forks have a different front offset. It will also be heavier than its 26er specific counterpart. Also, you can count on about 1/2 degree slacker for every 10mm increase in axle-to-crown (or more accurately - bottom of head-tube to axle) measurement. If that 20mm of more travel translates directly into 20mm more axle-to-crown, it'll be a degree slacker with 26" wheels. If you put 650b, count on another degree for the tire/wheel - unless you do 650b in back as well. I wouldn't want to do that. Too far away from the Mach 5's optimal geometry.
Actual performance vs felt performance are two very different things. As others are stating, doing a 76er set up may actually degrade the bikes performance; however, you may actually like the way it feels. http://forums.mtbr.com/27-5-650b/650b-front-26-rear-vs-650b-front-rear-721566.html In the end, it's all about what you are trying to achieve and what makes you happy. Personally, I think it's money that could be spent elsewhere.
Will it be worth it to you? Maybe. Is there a significant difference between 26 and 650b? Yes. There's a 1" difference in diameter between 26 and 650b, and it's quite noticeable on the trail.
The Mach 5 comes stock with a 140mm fork. The one thing I don't like about the Mach 5 is the tipping feeling it has with the saddle at "pedaling" height. The bike has a high center and a low front end. I pretty much have the Mach 5 set up as a park/shuttle bike...which actually rides pretty good. I want to bring the front up a bit more. If that makes any sense. How much more will it affect handling? Will it give the bars a "flip/flop" feel? Other thing I want to try is just running a 27.5 wheel in the front.
:?: I actually think you'll like it if you feel the bike is angled too far downward. To me, what ever allows me to ride more confidently seems to yield more fun and overall better results, time wise, regardless if it's geometrically unsound.
