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
Sven alluded to it, but the number of guys who have exploited a technological advantage over the years is many. Most of those advantages were a lot harder to see, but as anyone who has ridden custom tuned suspension on a custom fit frame can attest (which isn't many), its a big difference to a stock ride when it comes to shaving seconds.
I could argue Nico had a better working bike during his reign of domination. He had, what I would argue, the first modern DH bike. Years ahead of the competition, and his attention to detail changed the sport (for the better) forever.
We all benefit from teams trying to find an advantage and exploit it.
The reasons the wheel thing is becoming such a hot topic, I'd argue, is the big wheel also comes with some pretty strong stereotypes from yesteryear. Who can't forget their first experience on a 29" XC bike. Steep head tube angle. Bad fork offset. Wonky wheels. Getting "rad" on one of those meant staying upright...hard to "unknow" that and judge the big wheel for what they are in this day/age.
If we are going to regulate wheel size, we'd better be prepared to regulate a lot more than that. Wheel travel, tire width, total wheelbase etc.
At the end of the day, it's either gotta be Group B (not F1 - Group B was unregulated) or its gotta be made as "Nascar" as possible. Otherwise, we end in some silly middleground where teams are still exploiting technological advantages that are harder to see, but still favor the teams with money....
For the good of the technological progression of the sport, I know which way I lean, but its an open topic for sure...
I think my biggest issues go beyond that a little bit:
1: How will this affect smaller teams? Canyon come into a sport in their first year, only to find they have to redesign a new bike before the season even starts. Transition's work on their 27.5 prototype is wasted. Gwin confirmed that YT doesn't really have anything in the works soon (& considering how protective Gwin is of his career, if YT doesn't have a 29er for him to race next year at the latest, he'll be on a different team.) Canyon mentioned in their response to the broken Sender on PB that they've only sold about 1000 of them. At what point do these brands decide, like Evil did when 27.5 came on the scene, to just focus on Enduro, since they actually sell a decent amount of those bikes? DH bikes are already a money losing business for most brands, even if they don't spend the money to sponsor a team, at what point do they just stop developing bikes for this niche? There's probably already FAR more brands that don't have a DH bike in their lineup than brands that do.
2: Is it faster? Sure, probably. Team testing seems to bear that out. I am concerned, however, that it gives an advantage to taller riders. In the spirit of fair competition, the wheel size in use shouldn't make a 6'4" rider inherently faster than a 5'6" rider, or vice versa. Minaar gets the benefit of the bigger wheels, but also 20mm more travel than his teammates due to his height. That sounds like an advantage that won't go away when everybody is on 29", & is going to eventually push people like Brosnan out of the sport. That's absolutely the sort of thing that the UCI has a responsibility to prevent.
3. I don't see regulating wheelsize as a slippery slope when they already do it: you have to run the same size wheels, front & back. What's worse is THAT is probably the best way to make it fairest for all riders: a 29F/27.5R bike would probably be faster under all riders, corner better than either equal wheelsize option, & be extremely close to a full 29 in the straights.
There are teams of all sizes on the circuit. Privateers are at a disadvantage, but compared to literally any other form of tool-based (technological) racing, cycling as a whole is the most-level playing field I can think of.
To my point, if I were racing DH and wanted a 29" DH bike, I am 100% sure I could figure out a way to build one, right now. Alex Morgan did it a decade prior (though he's an unreal fabricator). Point is, I know I'm capable of pulling it off. So I really struggle with the argument that the small teams are at a disadvantage.
Any company can do their own math with respect to sales, but most have a DH team for the image, not for selling DH bikes. That has long been the case and will be the case with or without 29" wheels.
I'd argue preventing progression and regulating bike technology can also make it seem less worth it to a number of teams. DH racing has always been the hotbed of testing and building out ideas. If you come in with regulations (which we all know the UCI isn't exactly great at structuring), you may push out teams for this reason too.
2) The flip side to this is smaller riders will have an advantage on Minnaar if you don't let him ride a bike that fits (this includes wheels that fit). Few things. First, you also are presuming that 6'3" Minnaar is faster everywhere, which I'd argue isn't true. Minnaar has certain tracks that fit him, just like Danny has certain tracks that fit him. Are you suggesting all tracks need to suit all styles? That's impossible, just like all bikes don't fit all riders. Greg will likely carry more speed when he has room to do so, on all wheel sizes. Conversely, he will struggle to fit through tight stuff like the smaller guys. This is *any* sport.
To argue smaller guys will get pushed out of the sport seems a tough argument unless the tracks continually get built to only suit the bigger guys (then its a track, not bike, argument). I remember guys used to say Troy couldn't win at Fort Bill cause he's too small. Guess that proved to be wrong...
We are speculating that smaller guys can't ride 29" wheels as well as larger guys. True, Greg's bike has more travel, but I'd wager in time this too will be consistent through (most) sizes.
Looking at the stats, it looks like Gwin would have been right there had he not crashed. Now, maybe he's on a different level (I don't think he is, but maybe) but that alone should show how close the 27.5" wheel is to 29". I'd argue "blackbox" or "factory" suspension is the same differential as the larger wheel, just harder to see.
3) The hybrid (29/27.5) idea doesn't seem to hold much water in testing according to those I know who have tried variations over the years. Maybe its worth revisiting, but I am not buying that as being the fastest at this point. Both wheels after all have to roll over the same hole/obstacle at the same angle of attack with the same inertia to achieve any wheel size benefit.
In the end, as I've implied, DH racing shouldn't be Nascar. It should be a place where ideas can be played with. What is to say a smaller rider with a low COG can't be the best pilot of a big wheeled bike? Right now, the answer is, "speculation".
I find it funny there was none of this talk when we went to 27.5" bikes (or at least not to this degree). I also find it funny that a certain Rat found no problems to continue to win on his "slow" 26" wheeled bike in a sea of bigger wheeled brawlers.
The same will ring true here. And like EWS racing, I think we'll see both wheel sizes for the foreseeable future...
The rules of a sport are intended to make for a level playing field while letting the spirit of the sport carry on in an uninhibited fashion. Making DH racing a socialist environment, negatively impacts this. Keep it open. Keep it free. Let people run what they want and let the chips fall where they may....maybe that's too democratic and capitalist of me, but those are two principals I (obviously) whole heartedly believe in, in life and in DH racing.
Signed,
A libertarian DH fan.
Also,having rules so that racing is fair isn't "socialism." It's just fair play.
On principal I'm arguing technological progression has long been a cornerstone of the sport, despite whether or not its fair.
On "quantifiable results" I'm yet to see anything that suggests 29" wheels to be so much of a "step" that it breaks the status quo of what other "technologies" have brought to the sport with respect to speed. EG: Everyone has access to it (within reason), and nobody has shown me that small guys can't use it, only big guys benefit etc (this is speculation).
The platform I'm standing on says "its arbitrary to all of a sudden pick this one thing an not allow it" when the sport has a history of other progressions rooted in technology that pre dates you or me being involved in the sport on any level. (well, at least it predates my 16 years in the sport)
Apologies for the political parallels but it is the best analogy I can think of. And it also illustrates why this is such a heated debate, as at its core, it will touch on the foundations of these beliefs as well...
Rules have always been there, will always be there. They are important. But like my view on government, I believe "less is more". Studies seem to imply we benefit the most, as a whole, this way.
...so in the end the question to me is "would banning 29" wheels seem like the UCI overstepping their rule making boundaries" to which i reply, based on previous history, yes, that is over reaching. They allowed other technology to progress, and allowed us to change wheel size in the past.
Didn't Vergier qualify higher than Greg at Lourdes (the race that never was)?
Greg has won more at Ft William than anyone, so hard to dissect those results. I also have to believe plenty of frames will have the same travel throughout the size lineup.
If we are going to argue travel is an unfair advantage then why aren't we seeing 12" travel DH bikes winning?
Point is, we're splitting hairs, which is exactly why I say "let em run it!"
Hmmmm, but again he also qualified slower than both his shorter-trace teammates in Lourdes. Using Minnaar and Ft. William to draw any conclusion beyond Minnaar being the man to beat on that track is fairly heavy speculation.
I'm not sure a centimeter of travel on either end constitutes a measurable advantage, certainly not to the point where it's tilting in the favor of any particular size or style of rider. Travel already varies tremendously across the range of frames being raced on the WC, as do suspension components, access to custom components, tire treads and compounds, frame geometry, weight, etc etc. The standard to which all the bikes adhere is that there is no standard. Soon as we start framing 10 cm increases in suspension as an advantage where is the line drawn? I'm not talking the slippery slope nonsense that says this will end with everyone using the exact same spoke tensions and tire pressure, but keep in mind that the nature of racing is to always be looking for an advantage against all your competitors. That Minnaar can get 10cm more travel on his personal frame is no different from another rider fitting a custom longer stroke shock onto their own bike or simply being sponsored by a different frame supplier. This sort of thing is already done all the time, and truth be told the biggest advantages racers and teams are able to find often go unreported and unnoticed by those of us who cover the WC racing year in and year out. That's the just the nature of racing, to start framing minute details as aseries of advantages/disadvatages fair/unfair cut against the grain of what DH racing has always been.
WC DH racing isn't fair. Never has been. That's racing.
None.
We've had exactly 1 proper WC race with 29ers in the field and really nothing out of the ordinary in terms of times and results. Look at the time gaps for the top 5, they're almost identical to last year. Maybe best to take the long view and wait a few rounds before getting worked up any farther over a few cm of wheel diameter?
Second, I'm not making any conclusions. I merely making the point that there's a legitimate example of a taller rider getting something that shorter riders are not on 29" DH bikes. I'm saying that if we're talking about advantage, it's one of the only clear defined differences we've got to talk about. "Burden of proof" isn't a conclusive, it's merely terminology for which side of an argument has presented a point, & which side is on the hook for refuting it with an argument of equal merit.
This race still came down to execution. Perhaps the 29er wheels helped keep Minaar, Mior, and Remi out of the holes in the mud bog, but why not Luca and the rest?
If Gein didn't throw it away and he still got beat by 4+ seconds then we can talk. But as it was it still came down to execution.
All that being said, I'm still in favor of a wheelsize standard for racing. Whatever it may be.
I was under the impression he had settled at 200. So Greg is 200 front / 210 rear presumably and his teammates are 190/190 then.
This remains a distinction without a difference.
Older V10s had up t0 250mm, Remi Thirion's 275 wheeled Commencal had 220, the Pivot has 205, Loic's Demo has 200mm, Troy's Canyon has 200mm. That's a 2 cm difference just among a handful of the top tier 275 frames currently being raced. Of the published travel #'s for 29ers we've seen so far Trek is 190 and SC is 190-210, so the same 2cm variance as existed between various 275 frames remains with 29s. Just the facts.
Edit* more facts: The Intense M16 has 215-240mm and the 29er proto is 180-200mm. That makes up to a 4cm difference among current WC level 275 bikes and as much as 3cm variation between current 29ers that we know of.
Anyway, I agree that this whole idea that 29 is always faster/unfair is premature, and the idea that it's something new and unimaginable is laughable. I'm pretty sure all these companies had a 26 before going to 27.5, and they didn't consider 29 when they were making that change?
Different gear for riders on different teams/brands=discrimination based on skill level or talent at sponsorship deal making.
Different gear for different riders based on height=discrimination based on uncontrollable physical attributes.
Those are fundamentally different from each other.
Or, the Giant Bicycles two-page ad at the front of most the Magazines a couple years back.
It is nonsense really. EWS is a calculated race with riders conserving energy and also going FOT, It is much more than pointing straight downhill and following gravity.
2) There is a school of thought that implies bigger guys can use more travel more effectively whereby smaller guys are more efficient with less travel...
3) Your definition of "fair" and discrimination is a bit wonky. Sports in general are not "fair". Under your school of logic, its unfair tall guys can rebound better in the NBA or the small guys are better horse jockeys. Yes, sports in general do reward certain body types/physical attributes.
4) As to deathstars point, sure, maybe I shouldn't have used hyperbole with my "more travel isn't always better" example. Still, as I alluded to above, even if there is an "optimal travel" amount for a bike, this may be highly dependent on rider weight and wheel size.
^^^ said, what makes DH so special, as Lee alluded to, is there is no one bike, one suspension setup, one amount of travel, or one body type that is so obviously the "magic formula". Its the mesh of all these things combined with an otherwordly understanding of your own body's capabilities/reaction times/ability to perform when it counts that makes for a great racer.
Here, this is a fun one - https://youtu.be/BZdz9MdeQDM?t=51 Watch how Peaty talks about cornering styles. Small guys can lean. Tall guys have to lean the bike. Is this also unfair that we have to ride differently? (yes, I know, I'm being semi-dramatic again)
End of the day, looottt of speculating from one point five races. To add, at this point, it seems pretty obvious there will be no rule change.
Keith's initial thoughts:
Section 1: Fast, fairly smooth, switchbacks on grit, rocks and ladders
Fastest Loic (27.5), then Gwin (27.5), then Greg (29). Fairly close timing with 0.4 seconds between Top 3. Slight advantage 27.5… maybe from acceleration out of gate?
Section 2: Fast rough 'pinball' with switchbacks / rock, grit
Fastest Gwin (27.5), Greg (29), Remi (29). 1.4 seconds between Top 3. This is where I’d expect 29er to excel the most as highspeed and rough. Other than Gwin, they did. Loic crashed here after early lead losing 10-12 seconds so out of race.
Section 3: New section, fast flowy start, but the dreaded glaggy tech woods section also…
Fastest Greg (29), Loic (27.5), Troy (27.5) 0.9 seconds between Top 3. None of these riders crashed in the woods, but it took out a lot of top contenders on both wheel sizes. A lot of luck played it’s part here, was drying off a bit towards end of race. Gwin crashed after woods in a weird spot and threw away 0.5 second lead over greg, plus has to pedal harder til end due to lost momentum at start of flat section… killed his race, could have maybe won… would have been close.
Section 4: Road gap into mixed flattish section/ grit, hard, roots
Fastest Moir (29), Marcelo (27.5), Remi (29) 0.2 seconds between Top 3. Fairly boring section of track to be honest, just about keeping flow as it’s fairy flat, but lots of stumps and roots so tricky to pedal without pedal strikes on parts. Moir on 29er seemed to hold speed best. Marcelo probably put down most power.
Section 5: Motorway, fast, pedal, jumps / grit
Fastest Marcelo (27.5), Greg (29), Moir (29). 1.1 seconds between Top 3. Marcelo put down the power on final section… what an animal! This is really a test of fitness and smoothness through the jumps, doubt wheel size played much part in this section and it’s like a bmx track.
Random thoughts:
Overall, Greg won by 3 seconds… he won by 3.5 seconds last year, and he is the master of Fort William with seven wins there now. He wasn’t stand out fastest anywhere, but was Mr. Consistent as per usual. So I wouldn’t say it was stand out result to be honest. Jack Moir coming 2nd… he is a rider on the up, but that is a great result for him.
Weather didn’t play a factor between top guys. While a bit of rain might have made it a little harder to see, it also makes the grit corners a lot more grippy weirdly… it’s very loose when bone dry. So I don’t feel the light rain right at end was a factor.
Both top guys on 29ers are tall (over 6’), I honestly think 29er only makes sense if you can control it… Look at the women's race. Tracey Hannah won on 27.5 by 10 seconds over someone she has close battles with race in race out who was on 29er.
29ers didn’t dominate the pinball section, which was the one bit of the track I thought they would be significantly faster one due to high speed and very rough.
The woods… they took out a lot of contenders and wheel size didn’t seem to be much of a factor in that… lots of luck and commitment required. It was certainly getting drier and easier by end of race, looked impossible when women's race was on. But top guys were all near the end so not a factor between them really.
Ultimately, top two riders were on 29ers… would they also be top on 27.5? Possibly yes, impossible to tell, but there is no obvious evidence that 29ers excelled on any one section of the track which made a big difference.
Gwin was on a banger run at Ft. Bill, arguably flawless till he washed out. If Gwin nails a run flawlessly, I don't think the wheelsize matters - he's winning. However, if Gwin and Greg both make a couple small mistakes, I bet Greg comes out on top because the mistake on the 29 looses slightly less time.
That being said, I will defer to Keith who actually makes bikes vs. someone like me that hits the cube couloir every morning.
Watch Greg in 2013 and compare it to Ft. Bill 2017. The big wheels make it look so boring. #loicisright
I think in general there is a slight advantage because its more about keeping momentum rather than accelerating
Post a reply to: Should There Be a 29er DH Class and 27.5 DH Class at World Cups?