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
No.
Watts-per-kilogram doesn't see a dramatic deviation as weight goes up. That shows that weight isn't preventing equal opportunity to win.
32" is a clear speed advantage and there's no training method to get taller.
32" Wheels also look shit. Banning skinsuits was done primarily to keep DH racing looking "Cool" (although these new one piece kits take the piss and look garbage if you look me) so I wouldn't be mad if part of their reasoning was to maintain the desired look for the sport. That stuff matters.
While I am shouting at the clouds can we get the UCI to ban under the jersey body armour and long pants. Sam Hill 2005 is the desired aesthetic.
It's already out there... 750d..
So the NBA should lower the hoops because smaller people can’t dunk and there is no training for growing?
C‘mon, I like keeping things fair but there is other ways like introducing tighter corners in technical sections or whatever.
Plus bigger, heavier riders have the disadvantage of „higher g-forces“ and more weight to be slowed down in crucial moments.
Team sportsball vs non-team sport (yes there is a team in DH, but unless they run a team points win for everyone per round, it's totally different).
Simple.
... probably just try to sell it to racers who don't participate in UCI-sanctioned races or other events by governing bodies enforcing UCI rules. I don't know the situation in the US, but here where I live, even the local XC state cup enforces UCI rules...
Even with the ban, there's probably going to be a niche-market for 32" wheels in bikepacking and ultra-long distance racing, big enough to sustain a couple of small brands like Enve and some boutique manufacturers. But with the proposed ban, making and selling 32"-bikes will very likely not be a profitable endeavor for big brands like Specialized, Canyon, Orbea, Scott, etc.
I run that set up on my Bronson last year, and really want it for my ebike….
There's not that much overlap in individual sports such as cycling and teams sports like basketball, but I'll humor your.
In your NBA-example, the chance of success for physically smaller athletes is diminished by factors outside of their control. They're not less successful because they are less fit or skilled, but because of a factor outside their control. Taller athletes on the other hand have a higher chance of success, not by the merit of their superior skills or fitness, but because of winning the genetic lottery.
By definition, I would say that is unfair - especially in a sports competition, where the outcome of the match is supposed to be determined by the athletes skill, not arbitrary outside factors. In a way, that precisely is the point of rules in sport - to ensure fair competition - because unfair competition is entirely pointless.
But that's somewhat besides the point.
As opposed to your baketball example, the advantage for a tall rider in cycling and mountainbiking specifically doesn't directly result from them just being physically taller than others. But from their taller size enabling them to utilize mechanical equipment in a disproportionally advantageous way, which, to make matters worse, most smaller racers can not utilize at all (, or only in a limited manner).
That's why the "same conditions for everyone and the rest is genetic lottery"-argument simply doesn't apply in cycling, because when some riders can utilize equipment which gives them an advantage over others who can't, that's not "same conditions" and as such, not a fair competition.
Also, I'm just going to say this at risk of stating the obvious; taller riders aren't generally put at a disadvantage by riding 29" wheels. 29" wheels aren't a handicap for taller riders the same way that 32" wheels are a handicap for smaller riders.
I’m not sure you understand how math works.
But you are correct, there is no way to get taller. There is also no way for me get below 90kg. I’m skin and bones at 6’4”. I ain’t bitching just the way of life. I use it to my advantage where I can.
I just don’t think stifling innovation solves any of that.
I wonder what the legal recourse is if any? Quite a few brands have been testing openly and probably pouring oodles of money into it just for the uci to now ban them.
With the sunk development costs, not just frame companies but wheels, tires, and suspension companies as well what's the chance it all still gets released just to possibly less sales since it's banned from high level competition?
That's utter BS. Mondraker and Nicolai/geometron are the reason we have longer reaches and slacker bikes. Pros could have had custom geo in the late 90s and early 2000s but most still rode tiny bikes. Minnaar is famous for saying he was glad for bigger wheels so he could finally have a bike for his size. As if Santa Cruz couldn't have made a longer V-10 with smaller wheels...
International Court of arbitration for Sports in Lausanne, Switzerland.
But, legally speaking, bike manufacturers would hardly have a case to make for recourse for their sunken development cost. Sinking millions of RnD-money into a product the UCI might later ban from competition is simply their risk to bear.
The situation might be different if the UCI had very explicitly permitted 32“ wheels and then, all of a sudden, changed their mind. But that wasn’t the case. They made it very clear from the beginning that 32“ wheels would only be allowed provisionally until they would come to a final decision.
Is this supposed ban only for XC and gravel, or DH and enduro as well? DH rules for a long time have basically been that you need two wheels (and maybe brakes?), and that what makes it so cool. Road bike development has been stifled for decades because of the UCI, and I'd hate to see that mentality of prescriptive design come into DH. AON et al are some of the coolest setups, and limiting wheel size would be a step towards travel limits, weight limits, or geometry prescription like road bikes are.
"or geometry prescription like road bikes are."
the UCI has made a number of attempts to regulate road and time trial bikes position and geometry... and usually they base the rules around a medium-large man.
Then comes the amendment or extra clause that people over 180cm (category 2) or over 190cm (category 3) get slightly different rules once they work out that their 'once size fits most' arbitrary measurements dont work fairly for everyone.
So give it a year or two and maybe they will decree that Coulanges gets to ride a mega mullet and Blevins and Aldridge get to ride a full 32.
But 29" wheels aren't as big an advantage over 27,5" for rollover for taller riders as it is for smaller riders. The cog of a smaller rider is lower, thus the lever acting on the wheel trying to tip the rider over is shorter. Which means a smaller rider will have an even better roll over performance than a taller rider.
To make things fair a taller rider NEEDS larger wheels to level the playing field in that regard.
"So fast it was BANNNED" is actually good marketing if you are trying to move units to joeblow non-$300-uci-license holding weekend warriors.
Will we be seeing 32" to 29" convertible flip chips for XC now?
Rollover isn't about not going otb, it's about the slowing down the absorption of the bump and getting less pushback from that bump. A big wheel is in contact with a bump for a longer distance so the suspension / rider has more time to absorb it in addition to getting the axle further above a bump so it works to spin the wheel more and push the axle (and bike) backwards less.
New Orbea Wild LT is live, complete with their own RS tuned Avinox RS motor - https://www.vitalmtb.com/product/guide/e-bikes/orbea/wild-lt-carbon-76496#product-reviews-813296
Highlights
Hey, let's stay on topic here. This is the UCI 32" rule debate thread.
Seriously though, that aluminum hydroforming and construction work looks really clean. It's really hard to tell where the carbon models and and the aluminum ones begin in the website photos.
Love Orbea. Beautiful bikes. Just frickin beautiful. And I hear they ride well too. Bravo.
Post a reply to: 2026 MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation - Longer and Slacker