What's the World Champ Think? Danny Hart on 29ers in DH Racing 19

Common, stop the silly wheel debate media

Did they just interview the Godfather?

Somebody else commented on DH being cycling's Group B. For those not in the know, I give you this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INwqyPct8qY -- Group B was rally's unregulated "send it" class. Cars were pushing 900 horse and weighed 2000 pounds. Crazy amazing stuff. If I remember right, the Delta S4 could push 70psi of boost if needed? Yes, 70.

I also don't know how many times I can point it out - EWS racers are allowed to run anything and there is still no consensus what is faster. Why is everyone so positive 29" is going to always be faster in DH? The only argument here that seems to have merit is cost. I can see teams running 29" here and 27.5" there. Two bikes, setup different for different tracks. That'll put the teams with money at an advantage. And I say "so be it". Awesome. The more crazy technology these guys have, the more we all benefit. Its how product is developed, tested, pushed, and those little tweaks that matter so much happen.

As far as overall cost, well, WC DH racing has a LONG way to go before we rival any form of motorized racing. An additional bike for every rider on a team costs relatively nothing. I may get pushback on this, but for racing at the top level, WC DH is relatively cheap. Teams aren't going anywhere (due in large part to sites like Vital telling the story of the sport). These days, more than ever, people care about DH racing as a ***sport***, not as a stunt. That is important as I'd argue you'll see more and more support in the space even if companies aren't selling DH bikes. Car companies always sell more "practical" cars than they do "race" cars (Outback vs STi for instance) but racing still matters.

Keep it open. Let WC guys develop the most kickass technology for hacks like me. We all win this way. Oh, and it makes for some interesting nerdery in the meantime...

Side note, if anyone wants to post more Group B content, please do!!!

the concept of more wheel sizes creating an unfair advantage in terms of cost/access is ridiculous....every single one the racers complaining has had access to prototype/one-off components for years. i don't recall anyone flipping out over SC creating a $100k XXL V10 frame just for Minnaar, and no one seems to be upset over Sram's Black Box program. just took a quick peak at Danny Hart's rig last year and immediately saw at least 5 parts no one else could ever get ahold of. if an even playing field is a true concern these riders should be aggressively lobbying for strictly OEM bikes to be the standard....nothing on the track you can't buy at your LBS.

The riders need to come together and put a stop to this. I'd like to see everyone else just refuse to ride a 29er. Take the penalty of a smaller wheel to prove the point that wheel size does matter, and everyone should be on the same standard. This wheel size growth race has gone too far. And after everyone is on the same wheel size no one benefits.

I think the problem is this will start giving larger riders advantages. yes the larger wheel sizes fit larger people better but they also roll over things better. So do we make obsticals bigger? But then even if 27.5 fits the rider better they are at a loss and almost have to jump up in size. I think everyone needs to be on the same wheels. 27.5 should be the limit.

The problem is if you limit the wheel size you are then giving the advantage to the smaller and lighter riders who fit the 27.5 platform better. What is next limiting everyone to flat pedals because clips give you more power, everyone has to run 165mm cranks and 780mm bars with 2.4 tires? As Danny said if it is faster for a given rider they will run it, if not they won't. The biggest challenge is to keep the integrity of the tracks so they stay proper DH tracks, that will solve everything.

Except tall guys won races just fine on 26". So any wheelsize above that should be looked at for who it excludes from competitiveness, not who it makes faster. If 29" makes Payet faster, but makes it harder for guys under 5'8" to compete, it shouldn't be allowed. because there's a lot more Troy Brosnans than Payets.

Again, looking at the qualification times, it's was super tight and nothing really out of the ordinary other than Loris having a blazer, but he was a top 10 contender all last year as was shaw. I guess we still need to see where race runs place them, but I see no advantages so far in times

I still can't get over how the underlying assumption that big wheels are always faster is the case. I still stand by the idea that it depends on the track, the rider, the conditions, other attributes of the bike etc.

Except if 29" is faster, tracks will be changed to suit. Corners too tight to ride fast on a 29er? If everybody's on one, then the corner will be widened or routed around. DH has been building tracks to suit the bikes currently being ridden since it's inception. There's a reason there aren't any fireroad races anymore.

Sven had a signature deck?

Minnaar on the V10 29er looks exactly like Hart on his 27.5" Summum, nothing more nothing less.

Haha, easy for all the short guys to lobby for a rule outlawing 29er's. I think as long as they keep the tracks proper the short guys will run 27.5 and the bean stalks will opt for 29er. If they start dumbing down or straightening out tracks that will be an issue. As a bean stalk myself I like seeing the progress, Minnaar looks normal on the V10 29er

The problem is,they are straightening out tracks for some time now,so it looks better (faster) on TV.

i keep hearing this argument, but are they really straightening out the tracks? aside from leogang which could never replace schladming, what track on the WC circuit doesn't reward cornering skill? i know MSA had the controversial section last year, but that seemed like a random experiment and half the riders who aren't stoked on 29ers seemed to LOVE that wide open section. some didn't. MSA had 50mph straight-aways in 1999/2000 ( according to trans continental headliners) and no one complained. a good test would be garbanzo at crankworx if anyone runs 29ers there (i know, not a WC).

True dat Spomer. Also there is a lot of talk about tall guy vs short guy, straight track vs tech track, fun vs speed....which is all good and dandy, but what about some actual scientific analysis of the physics of 27.5 vs 29? There must be some boss nerd mtbers out there that could enlighten us all with some analysis? As a side note, how the hell is there minimal discussion about Fayolle rocking a remote lockout rear shock?!?! Particularly on a track like Lourdes where there seems to be limited opportunity for boost mode....but come Ft. Bill, Cairns, ect....that seems like a bigger advantage than dropper posts we saw dudes rocking at Pietermaritzburg some years back. There has to be a story .... or podcast there?!?! ;-)

The science says a bigger wheel is slower to accelerate but has a higher top speed and increased rollover efficiency. Beyond that, nobody has any data because there are way too many variables. Rider size and strength, tire tread, compound and pressure, wheel stiffness, suspension, geometry, corners, rotational velocity on jumps, the variables are insane. That's why my hunch is this whole thing is primary a massive PR coup by Santa Cruz, the Emperors New Clothes. the head game is such a big part of racing. I just can't imagine that across all riders, bikes and tracks that minor variations in wheelsize make a consistent difference. Especially for the average rider, having ridden all three sizes extensively none have a meaningful impact on my speed, skill, or enjoyment. Pick your preference. Suspension setup, geometry, tire pressure, grip compound, stem length, brake brand... these all impact my average ride as much or more than wheelsize. For those at the pinnacle, it'll be fun to see if they can eek out a meaningful advantage one way or the other. All that said, I'm going to pause and just appreciate having a life that allows me to spend precious mental and temporal capital on the MTB wheel size debate. Life is good!

I read this all the time too and have to scratch my head a bit. I've really seen no evidence of this at all other than than the odd section like what was done to 100m of MSA last year (and if anyone can remember back to the old MSA start straight from 2007'ish they've actually added about a dozen corners over the years to just that section alone). MSA has always been the freeway of the circuit going back decades. Ft. William remains relatively unchanged since its a permanent track, though rumors of a new lower section this year. Leogang added new tech bits and tightened corners, Lenzerheide added corners, Andorra has countless corners and very few pure straightaways. My guess is that camera placements often chosen for maximum recording time are limited to the straighter sections of each track, combined with the fact that riders now tend to take the most direct line over and through rather than around rocks, stumps, holes, etc gives the impression that tracks are getting straighter. I've seen chicanes put in that riders still figure out how to straighten in ways the track designers never anticipated. So to some degree it's the bikes and the riders themselves who are also straightening out some parts of the tracks, though running the same tracks year after year on the same racing line doesn't do much to help. That said, I fully support a return to more Schladming-like designs. #MoarRoooooost