Hello Vital MTB Visitor,
We’re conducting a survey and would appreciate your input. Your answers will help Vital and the MTB industry better understand what riders like you want. Survey results will be used to recognize top brands. Make your voice heard!
Five lucky people will be selected at random to win a Vital MTB t-shirt.
Thanks in advance,
The Vital MTB Crew
There are riders in the top 20 who aren't keen on the introduction of 29" wheels to DH. If we aren't going to listen to the guys actually competing in the sport, then who should we listen to?
Riders' concerns about the standard and style of tracks in recent years is largely being ignored. I can't remember how many times people have been calling for Schladming or Champery to be back on the WC circuit. Even the legendary MSA was changed last year for the benefit of coverage.
If tracks become more open, faster, and less techy at the demand of commercial pressure, then the equipment used evolves to meet the new style of tracks, there might be a point in the future when we can't go back. When the equipment will have become so specialised that it won't be usable on tight, rooty, knarly, steep tracks.
29er wheels are just another change to the bike like when we moved from rim brakes to disc, when we got suspension, when we moved from 26 to 27.5, etc, etc (did suspension not fundamentally change the bike and the way we ride it?) At this point we don't know if they have a legitimate place on the DHWC but we'll never know until we try it.
I am really hoping that those guys at the top, with all the influence, race 29er wheels and they turn out to be fucking rad so that if nothing else we can lose this pathetic stigma. There's no place for it here.
We enjoy a relatively unrestricted racing platform and we should explore every corner. Why restrict ourselves? You don't know if you don't try.
...and some of the pros already have been.
There will be no benefit when everyone is on one so why go there.
Development will continue, and rules in time can change seasonally but I think its time to rule on a wheel size.
Skin suits make you go faster thats a fact!!! but due to a few people having a moan and saying they don't look cool the UCI ban them.
29 wheels make you faster (still never tried them so and probably won't but hey I'm not up against the clock) but even thou they make you faster how are they a good look for DH ?
The tracks are getting smoother and easier, and people like Ratboy who has an overall title to his name (and won a race on a 26" bike when everyone else was on 27.5) are now leaving the sport as the tracks are not difficult nor scary enough but the UCI won't listen to that ?
Its about time someone actually pulled their finger out and took the DH scene away from the UCI and let the riders have more races and on the tracks they want to race on, in failing that the UCI should listen to what riders they should have 7-9 rounds a year (like the good old days, and they even raced the NORBA series back then also it was non stop) and get given say 15-20 tracks to choose to vote for and the tracks with the most votes should get given the green light and a calendar set up.
Ps: If i'm rambling its cause I'm pissed off with some of the crap thats been throw around in the industry and nothing ever gets done about it
Pps: If someone wants to give me a a kitty of millions of dollars ill happily get the wheels in motion (no pun intended)
They could give Moto GP bikes more power but they don't. They could make F1 cars lighter but there is a minimum weight of car + driver. They could make tennis rackets bigger. They could make the goals bigger in football so it's easier to score. etc
I ride a 29er and it's fast. Faster than any other wheelsize I've ridden. I don't have a problem with them, but some top riders do, so I wanted to have a discussion about it.
I agree that it's too early to impose a regulation on wheelsize. Maybe bigger wheels will be great for the sport, I don't know yet. We'll see what happens this year.
The major reason I went for a 29er 160mm bike was because it felt like a DH bike over the tech stuff, rolls a whole lot quicker over bombholes and rock gardens. So if they cope better with tech, then hopefully trail builders can include more natural tech lines into tracks and we can #makeDHtechagain
I am dumbfounded by the notion "why bother l, when everyone's on them there's no advantage" For starters there's an expectation (admission?) that there will be an advantage and secondly this is precisely how progress works! One team finds an advantage in tyre compound, tread, suspension, wheel strength/ size / weight (I could list every single component) and eventually other teams catch up, others go one further and find the next advantage.
We shouldn't be asking for restrictions to the equipment. After all it's us that benefit from every improvement in the end.
I don't think there's an argument for tracks suffering because of the use of 29" wheels. There are a number of things that can affect the style of tracks and I don't believe the bikes have much to do with it. It's more to do with whether the track can be maintained to a similar standard for every rider over a period of intense use, the spectacle of the track and obviously where the money is. Which is a sad thought but the idea that people are actually considering the bikes we race I think is naive. Sure the teams will consider the bikes they take for a given course but not so much the other way around. We're at the mercy of the money on that one. Not sure I make sense, I'm in a hurry ;-)
Ultimately I don't believe there is that much difference between a 29er and a smaller wheeled bike. One is gonna be better in a straight line over rough (great to watch) the other is better through technical corners (same). Let the riders choose where they could use the most help and which suits their style and we could see even closer racing which again is great to watch. Or there'll be no difference at all, just something else for us all to chat shit about when we're not riding! And we've got to have something to pass the time.
The advantages/disadvantages may be the same on paper but how you are able to mitigate the disadvantages and take advantage of the benefits are going to largely depend on how big you are.
If I was shorter, I could not "articulate" the bike as well between my legs, pushing it into corners with my hips squared off. Physically, I'd be limited. Now, that said, I'd also corner differently if I wasn't on the taller side of things.I also feel proportionally the heavier wheel is harder to throw around without more leverage on the bike. (longer limbs)
Either way, taller riders generally have a different riding style than shorter riders. What we lack in COG advantage we make up for in our ability to "maneuver" the bike beneath us while staying more upright. For this riding style, I believe the bigger wheel can be an advantage. Look at Greg and his mega long V10. His style of holding speed at all costs while maybe going the "long way around" a corner, fits the idea well.
Its not going to be an advantage for all riders on all tracks. But for certain guys, certain styles, I think its an edge, especially when the margins are this thin...
Put another way, my dad, a big sports fan, struggles to watch either, just because he doesn't know it. Nascar is giant. Formula 1 is the biggest sport on the planet. Again, its not about the tracks, its about the story. Its a soap opera for dudes. (and now chicks)
29ers can corner well. They really can. More tire on the ground = you can corner. It just comes down to who can make the wheel work well for them.
Just like every other sport where a tool is involved, technology and technique go hand in hand...
World Cup tracks evolve to make money. Tracks change to make camera placement easier. Old tracks go away because they're not willing to pay the exorbitant prices to host a World Cup event. New tracks come into the lineup because the resorts think they can make some money on the deal. Occasionally, something might get changed for safety reasons.
Tracks aren't going to change just because someone bolted on some wheels that are slightly bigger.
If 29ers can make DH faster (I'm skeptical) then why on earth would that be a bad thing? Why didn't we ban 650b? Dual-compound tires? Disc brakes? Its true, the UCI regulates road bikes to death, but look at the outcome. There is no more innovation to road bikes. Pros even have to weight their bike to get it heavy enough for the stupid minimum weight rule! The UCI also has an incredibly stupid rule on the maximum wheelbase for road bikes, forcing tall riders to ride very unsafe, poorly handling bikes. Do we really want this in DH?
However, it wouldn't be such a bad idea to regulate a wheel size just to keep the expense of racing down a bit; if you can run any wheel size - and it does turn out that different tracks cater to each wheel size - then you need two DH bikes. This wouldn't really matter to the top riders, but would make things rougher and more cost prohibitive to everybody else.
DH may as well become 7 rounds on mammoth mountain doing the Kamikaze track
I don't see anyone mandating a certain wheel size. UCI I'm looking at you. If there's no rule against it, then someone or several someones will give it a whirl, at least in practice. But let's say someone starts killing it on a 29er, but that bike company doesn't sell a 29er bike....wouldn't that company object to their rider riding a bike that they don't sell?
I use the Richie Rude Yeti DH bike from last year as an example.
Build the tracks riders want to race on and race whatever makes you the fastest. If a niner works for you then race it. If not don't. If it's not "fun" to ride a 29 then go and be a free rider and run whatever is for you.
Having ridden 26, 27.5 and 29 I think they all have their merits and could all be correct for a certain track.
If the cost of upgrading / having a variety of gear options is too much then lets be honest you're not in the hunt in any relevant way when it comes to racing. Even "privateer" racers get kit on a deal.
As for pro riders calling 29-ers "gay" (like some recently on social media) I think we can all agree that it's juvenile at best and generally considered offensive in most "civilized" parts of the world. IMHO those riders are not deserving of sponsorship support for such talk.
Having seen it on occasion I cannot understand why it needs to be discussed. If there's a will, there's a way.
Teams will always choose the most cost effective way of making a bike (or car or whatever) perform better.
Maybe instead of spending the next few seasons testing and developing new frames, geometry, forks etc to work with a 'faster' wheelsize, they could work on other, more innovative stuff.
Biggest issue I can see with 29ers is loss of momentum. If things get tight or mistakes are made in a race run, then suddenly the affect might be significant especially at the pointy end.
P.S. I have 2x26" bike, 1x27.5", and 1x29". I ride the 27.5" mostly.
If I was playing guitar on stage, I'd have a few guitars - one at standard pitch, another set up for dropped D, and another tuned to C#. Certain songs can include baritone tones and include the guitar's standard A440 tuning through choosing particular chord progressions.
Supercross racers will run short gears for Arena Racers and longer gears for outdoor MX. Oval Track NASCAR will have a separate car built up for Road Courses.
Modern Day F1 has track segments where 'drive-by-wire' telemetry empowers aerodynamic advantage and then clamps down upon it at the exit.
Is something significant accomplished w/ introducing limitation upon wheel size within a Class of racing? That's the better-question to pose.
The only responses I think of to your final question are:
- To provide a level playing field. This is assuming that a smaller rider would be at a disadvantage on larger wheel sizes but we have yet to see if this is true.
- To encourage development in other areas of the bike.
- Because speed isn't everything or they would all be wearing skin suits.
If a smaller racer chooses a 29" bike which does not fit then this rider is not prepared for the race. My rationale is why dis-cludling 29" wheels would occur - not mandating bike-to-course WC racing.
I understand this a contentious point to make because it hasn't been proven that a small guy can't ride a 29" wheeled DH bike, or that bigger guys have an advantage on this wheel size, or if 29" wheels are even faster for DH. This is all just hypothesis at the moment.
To stick with the guitar analogy. This is what a short rider would look like on a 29" DH bike :-)
Be it Pro or Open Amatuer there is no class for weight, and there is no bike minimum weight. Or Rider weight...
For a small rider to be held against the ropes by big wheels over scores the fact that this is a small(er) light(er) rider than what is considered to be the general consumer of the market segment.
Post a reply to: DISCUSS - 29ers in WC downhill?