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
So, bicycles don't move? The common explanation "motorized bicycle" sounds more plausible to me, but whatever. Gotta keep the English purists happy!
Ich möchte ein Motorrad mit eine Dampfmaschine haben!
Silly stuff I know, but it comes from French "motocyclette" using the same Latin. If it hadn't been derived from another language it would make much more sense to be "Engine Cycle" or something.
Am I crazy or does the cable guide on Tommy G's new rocky head tube look different than any of their current bikes?
I was taught that engines burn a fuel inside, motors get their power from an unchanged source (electricity, water, something that remains the same after it does its thang in the motor…so almost always electricity.) This was troubling to my engineer dad when I asked how their whole their whole logic wasn’t fried anyways because Detroit isn’t the Engine City…expect a subject change!
American exceptionalism!
motor engine whatever, if we’re talking about a thing we are talking about a thing, that’s what matters
I have a different opinion. As long as it's a bike with 2 wheels and human power output, I say anything flies. Don't level the playing field. Let it be raw. If the winning combo is sitting in between 60 inch wheels then let that be. Maybe there will be an advantage we don't know yet to shorter people vs taller people. Don't limit the equipment beyond necessary, let it all play out.
Flame me if you’d like, but 32” wheels is one of the few things that has me excited for a new bike. There are so many amazing full suspension bikes now ,and geometry, for whatever discipline, have pretty much leveled out. As someone that rides my Singlespeed as much or more than my FS, I’m excited to build up a rigid Singlespeed 32er. My local trails are fairly mellow and as I get older I appreciate momentum and keeping a higher average pace over “shredding the gnar!”
No you're right and I can also convince myself it's made of metal (I feel I can see a weld along the top-tube junction to the head-tube)
I mean the main thing I’m seeing is that he has has stuff routed to enable barspins and tail whips
Wheel size will increase until air drag and extra weight overcome increased roll over. I assume 34"
The new TLD open face helmet
https://www.racecompany.fr/fr/casques-jets/4599-28087-casque-troy-lee-d…
They tested 32 vs. 29. Maybe the automatic subtitles work for our anglosaxon friends here
One of the things they point out is that the bigger wheel not only has more weight and needs more energy to "spin up", but also has to rotate slower for the same speed wich "kind of" cancels out the more on energy you need to spin it up.
Thats a point I did not read anywhere else before but makes sense in my book.
They have measured a advantage of about 2-3% for the 32 over the 29.
In a scenario where 32" wheels turn out to be a clear competitive advantage for racing and become dominant in XCO, the UCI will have no choice but to ban them for race use, or relegate them to their own separate class. Smaller riders don't have access to the full range of advantages of the larger wheelsize and 32" wheels would therefore facilitate a disproportionate and unfair advantage for larger riders.
it will be interesting to see who rolls up to the start line on them in May
How big of a disadvantage is being taller on the air resistance front? And how much of an advantage being smaller brings here?
If we're banning wheel sizes, why not also ban frame sizes?
Not to mention the Square-Cube law making it increasingly hard to maintain a competitive W/Kg. I doubt there are any endurance athletes on earth who would ask a genie to be 6” taller.
I cannot believe how inane the convo around 32 is. Please, people: you are saying the exact same things they said about 29.
My concerns over 32" wheels are practical not performance. My current bike barely fits into my bike bag, cars, trains etc. Storage space in my home is limited, a bigger, longer bike is not something I want right now.
I doubt if uplift trailers and chairlift mounts are ready for the bigger wheels yet.
So then don't buy one?🤷
With Trek lifting the curtain of their new flex stay XC bike, Giant going all in with the new Anthem SL and X version (they've yet to hit sales floors though), and the Epic being competitive and sought after on the consumer front, who's going to be the first big player to go 32? Seems like Trek is waiting to see what the market does with big wheels before they hit the green button on the bike maker machine for this new bike.
This is what companies want. You need a new bike bag, a higher price train ticket, a new car, and a new house for your new 32” bike. The Consumerism dream.
it's funny when the 32" "advantage" won't be an advantage when everyone is on one.
I see what you mean, but if that were the case, why not limit DH bikes to 160mm travel because smaller forks are cheaper and more accessible to the everyday rider? Or outlaw cleats in soccer because they give better grip? I agree that every single innovation isn't necessarily better for us mere mortals, but in the pinnacle of the sport, we should be pushing the bounds of what is possible.
Be good if they put some effort into selling bikes to new people, rather than new bikes to existing riders. If the industry was a bit more outward looking and less self sabotaging, we would not be in the current slump. 32" wheels won't fix the market. Same with companies only focussing on high end, if everyone does it, nobody wins.
Don't worry, I'm in no hurry.
The problem I'm trying to highlight is that bikes are less and less easy to live with and less likely to bring people into the sport or persuade them to stay in the sport. Always focussing solely on performance as the most important product attribute is wrong in my opinion. Same with unserviceable and increasingly powerful ebike motors and other 'innovation' in the bike world.
E-bikes completely changed the average persons idea and relationship with cycling. It revolutionized the industry
Absolutely ebikes can improve accessibility and utility, making bikes a great solution in a wider range of situations. More focus on durability, reliability and serviceability as performance measures for new product innovation would only help that.
I’d hanker a guess that most of us here have zero problem with 32 on gravel, rigid mtb, hardtails, and XC race bikes but we’re very wary of it going into disciplines with travel above those. Some of us got bamboozled by 150mm+ 29ers only to have to buy new bikes yet again to get the handling we want out of a mullet bike.
We’re tired boss. Our bikes handle really good and we don’t need or want them to be faster. (non racer obv)
These are good posts and discussions for the bikeconomics thread. This thread, is about new technology rumors and new tech. Remember, no one forces you to buy a new bike. The gear in this sport would be less interesting and not worth talking about if the prevailing notion was, "meh, we didn't develop this any further because it didn't fix the market and new riders don't care." Bikes used to be shite, but the sport was still fun. Now the sport is fun, and bikes aren't shite.
What happens for small riders who hit the hard limit on stack with a 100mm fork and a 32in wheel? Reduce the travel? Drop stem so low their chin is on the top cap? Maybe this won’t be an issue in practice but I’d like races not to be decided by how someone was born and what equipment they can reasonably use because of that.
Post a reply to: 2026 MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation - Longer and Slacker