Anyone know if the 29’er BB height is higher than a standard 26’’ mountain bike’s BB??
Thanks.
No, not typically. That’s one of the pluses of a 29er: that the bottom bracket height is of equal distance from the ground as that of a 26" wheeled bike, making the center of gravity lower, since it’s that much lower than the bike’s wheel axles. Think of a low-strung hammock!
-CV
But the moment of inertial is higher and larger given the bigger wheels and heavier weight, so a 29er is inherently more difficult to maneuver quickly and in tight areas, making it “feel” as if the center of gravity is higher.
But the moment of inertial is higher and larger given the bigger wheels and heavier weight, so a 29er is inherently more difficult to maneuver quickly and in tight areas, making it “feel” as if the center of gravity is higher.
I absolutely disagree. At least if you are tall. I just switched from a XL Gary Fisher 26er hardtail with a Push tuned Fox fork to a XL Gary Fisher 29er hardtail with a Fox fork. Both are set up tubeless. The 29er is a tremendous and dramatic upgrade.
My local trail has its share of slow windy singletrack as well as fast corners. On the initial ride the 29er was much better in most spots and at least equal to the 26er on all other parts of the trail. On the second ride I dropped 6 minutes from my 2 lap average. I feel as if the bike has a lot more to offer me as I get to know it.
The 29er’s lower effective center of gravity allows me to go through every corner faster. It definitely does not feel as if the center of gravity is higher - quite the opposite.
I will grant you that I do not know how it might feel to ride both a “medium” 26er and 29er. But, I absolutely know how it feels to switch between XL bikes. Hands down, the 29e feels better, rolls faster, corners much better…
Added - (I got the XL 29er after my neighbor got a size L 29er (also a Gary Fisher) and started leaving me (worse than usual) in every corner. His raving about how his 29er cornered and the fact that he was obvioulsy faster convinced me to give it a go.)
David K
But the moment of inertial is higher and larger given the bigger wheels and heavier weight, so a 29er is inherently more difficult to maneuver quickly and in tight areas, making it “feel” as if the center of gravity is higher.
This statement is incorrect. My 29’er weighs 22 lbs, in an XL, so weight is not an issue, and there are many that weigh in the 20lb range. They roll better overall…
Anyone know if the 29’er BB height is higher than a standard 26’’ mountain bike’s BB??
Thanks.
bikes are designed with a bottom bracket height that’s appropriate for their intended use. If you need a higher BB height you can get a frame designed for a different style of riding and it will be higher…but you will pay a penalty in bike handling characteristics if trying to race.
Should have stated: 29ers are geometrically correct for riders over about 6 feet tall. Larger riders benefit from the larger wheels and they fit the bikes better. If your bike fits you, you will rider better. Mechanically, the concepts of maneuverability stay the same, but larger rides over come that very easily, sometimes they actually need the greater MOI.
You did a great job building your bike light weight, but a 29 inch wheel has 12-15% more mass than a similarly built 26 inch wheel–that’s just shy of 1lb in the lightest weight wheels and tires alone, and that’s rotating weight. A 29er bike has longer chaing and seatstays, and the fork has a slightly longer stancions and lowers. If i built a 26" bike with the same parts and the same frame material as your 29er, the 26" bike will be 1.5-2lbs lighter. Many 4" travel XC 26" bikes are 20-21lbs (Cannondale, Felt, Scott) and hardtails are 18-19lbs.
Again, a larger rider can overcome all this and the 29er will generally fit him better, and with practice the bike will feel right to a larger rider.
Again, a larger rider can overcome all this and the 29er will generally fit him better, and with practice the bike will feel right to a larger rider.
True, but the better roll, and larger contact patch (probably why his friend was carrying more speed through the corners) can be enjoyed by all!
Anyone know if the 29’er BB height is higher than a standard 26’’ mountain bike’s BB??
Thanks.
bikes are designed with a bottom bracket height that’s appropriate for their intended use. If you need a higher BB height you can get a frame designed for a different style of riding and it will be higher…but you will pay a penalty in bike handling characteristics if trying to race.
Thank you for explaining.
I do sometimes wonder just how long it’s going to take people to accept the FACT that WEIGHT OF BIKE IS THE MOST INSIGNIGICANT RESISTANCE A CYCLIST HAS TO OVERCOME ON ALL BUT THE STEAPEST OF GRADES.
I just don’t get it. There is so much science out there pointing to the fact that weight is way way down the list of things you should consider.
The advanatage of 29ers far outweight the issue of weight and handling. It’s a no brainer.
Weight only gets talked about cause it’s the easiest to measure.
I’m a MTBer and I just can’t believe the myths getting thrown around about 29ers and the weight issue. It is such a non-issue.
Oh and I should add - 29ers are NOT JUST FOR TALL PEOPLE.
Todays 29ers are geometrically well designed and suitable for all average adult heights, yes as short as 5’5" even.
Get some facts people and stop repeating myths.
I do sometimes wonder just how long it’s going to take people to accept the FACT that WEIGHT OF BIKE IS THE MOST INSIGNIGICANT RESISTANCE A CYCLIST HAS TO OVERCOME ON ALL BUT THE STEAPEST OF GRADES.
I just don’t get it. There is so much science out there pointing to the fact that weight is way way down the list of things you should consider.
The advanatage of 29ers far outweight the issue of weight and handling. It’s a no brainer.
Weight only gets talked about cause it’s the easiest to measure.
I’m a MTBer and I just can’t believe the myths getting thrown around about 29ers and the weight issue. It is such a non-issue.
Oh and I should add - 29ers are NOT JUST FOR TALL PEOPLE.
Todays 29ers are geometrically well designed and suitable for all average adult heights, yes as short as 5’5" even.
Get some facts people and stop repeating myths.
I agree with you. In particular the dogma/myth about rotational wheel weight being SO much more important. I weigh around 200lbs and thus let’s say while riding I am exerting 200 lbs of “downforce.” I can not fathom that a 1/4 or even 1/2 pound difference per wheel makes any real world difference to my riding.
I have a friend who obsessed about bike weight when we used to ride together. He finally admitted that he could not detect a real world difference in performance between two full water bottles or no bottles on his bike - He could feel the difference but could not detect a performance difference. He is still a weight weenie though.
David K
You did a great job building your bike light weight, but a 29 inch wheel has 12-15% more mass than a similarly built 26 inch wheel–that’s just shy of 1lb in the lightest weight wheels and tires alone, and that’s rotating weight. A 29er bike has longer chaing and seatstays, and the fork has a slightly longer stancions and lowers. If i built a 26" bike with the same parts and the same frame material as your 29er, the 26" bike will be 1.5-2lbs lighter. Many 4" travel XC 26" bikes are 20-21lbs (Cannondale, Felt, Scott) and hardtails are 18-19lbs.
Again, a larger rider can overcome all this and the 29er will generally fit him better, and with practice the bike will feel right to a larger rider.
So, am I correct in assuming that your tri bike has 650 wheels…seems logical that they would, given your arguement.
As far as size of the rider is concerned, three of the female US nominees for the upcoming world champs will be riding 29’ers…
So, am I correct in assuming that your tri bike has 650 wheels…seems logical that they would, given your arguement.
As far as size of the rider is concerned, three of the female US nominees for the upcoming world champs will be riding 29’ers…
Mine is, though I’ve had both 700c and 650c tri bikes, I like being low to the ground…waiting for Zipp to come out with their line of 24" TT bikes. 
Wow. You guys have some exposed nerves. I’ve only seen reaction like this on the clincher vs. tubular threads and the Cervelo vs. anything else threads.
29er bikes have longer chainstays. It’s fairly intuitive that if you have a larger wheel diameter, you have to have a longer chainstay. The longer chainstay means the rear axle if further from the BB. This leads either to a) a longer wheelbase to maintain the weight distribution, or 2) a shorter front-center measurement, putting a slight bit more weight on the front wheel over a bike with a longer front-center. This leads to a different handling characteristic for a 29er than a traditional 26" bike.
I never said that the 1.5-2 lbs difference is a bad thing or affects anything. I was arguing that a 26" bike is inherently lighter than a 29er and I stand by it. Weight only matters on accelerations and climbs. MTBing just happens to have a lot more accelerations and climbs that a typical triathlon, so yes, I like a light bike. It’s not as important on a road bike or tri bike, so no, I sold my 650c bike along with my padded speedo in the 90s.
More pros are riding 29er than in the past, but not all of them. This shows 2 things: 1) some find it faster, and b) some don’t. It personal preference, but the physics say what I mentioned above. If you liek it, ride it. If you don’t don’t. The top 10 at the MTB Nationals were a mix of 29er hardtails and 26" advances full boingers. The 26" hardtail, however, is likely on its last ride given the advances in suspension technology and the 29 revolution.
Here are some articles that say the same thing:
http://www.mountain-bike-world.com/29-inch-mountain-bikes.html
The best one:
http://www.bicycling.com/article/0,6610,s1-6-12-19690-1,00.html
Excerpt from the experts: “Here’s what all of this means when the rubber hits the ground: On trails with steep climbs, logs, roots and rocks, 29ers offer excellent performance and are worthy of consideration by riders who prefer XC and trail riding. If you put a premium on handling stability, and ride many open climbs and trails with large radius corners and flowing lines, 29ers are a viable option. This is especially true for riders taller than 5-foot-9. Shorter riders can still benefit from 29-inch wheels (Niner owner Chris Sugai is 5-foot-6), but should be very aware of any bike fit and handling compromises that become necessary to use 29-inch wheels on smaller bikes. Basically, you need to make sure that any gains offset any tradeoffs.”
It’s not as important on a road bike or tri bike, so no, I sold my 650c bike along with my padded speedo in the 90s.
Whoa, whoa, whoa...I'm not supposed to be wearing Speedos? Yeah, right, next you'll be telling me that neon colors are passe. Tell the truth, you're too short to join in on the 29er love. ;)
love both my 29ers, would never go back to a 26…ever.
‘‘Again, a larger rider can overcome all this and the 29er will generally fit him better, and with practice the bike will feel right to a larger rider’’
Have you ever ridden a 29er? That’s OK.
You might be surprised to see that a 5’2" woman won the US Cup XC race at Mount Snow, Vt on a Gary Fisher 29er.
My Niner EMD9 out performs my 2000 GT Zaskar LE in every way including comfort even though they are both around 24.5 lbs
The Niner frame is over 1/2 lb lighter!
niners are sweet!!! how do you like the EMD? I have a jet 9 and love it.
“Have you ever ridden a 29er? That’s OK.”
Actually, yes, I have. As I stated above numerous times: some people like 'em, some don’t. For every 5’2" person you show me on one, I can show you a 6’2" rider who hated it. Personal preference, but just because she liked it does not change physics.
Have fun on your 29er, I’ll stay on my 21.8lb 26" 4" travel full suspension.