Gravity pulls mass downhill, mass moves downhill because of rotation of wheels change wheel size and it affects the effect of gravity on mass.
If you...
Gravity pulls mass downhill, mass moves downhill because of rotation of wheels change wheel size and it affects the effect of gravity on mass.
If you took two bikes with different wheelsize and rolled them down a smooth hill with no rider the bigger wheel would be faster.
Advantage bigger wheels as its increased the effect of gravity it has a bigger hypothetical 'engine'
To be honest all arguments aside it shows how amateur the organisation of the sport is, it should have been handled in a different way, teams and component manufacturers should bring different standards in when it's available to everyone at the same time, if you don't want to be regulated externally get your act together internally.
Least popular team in the pits -syndicate
Least popular rider- Minaar
Gravity pulls mass downhill, mass moves downhill because of rotation of wheels change wheel size and it affects the effect of gravity on mass.
If you...
Gravity pulls mass downhill, mass moves downhill because of rotation of wheels change wheel size and it affects the effect of gravity on mass.
If you took two bikes with different wheelsize and rolled them down a smooth hill with no rider the bigger wheel would be faster.
Advantage bigger wheels as its increased the effect of gravity it has a bigger hypothetical 'engine'
To be honest all arguments aside it shows how amateur the organisation of the sport is, it should have been handled in a different way, teams and component manufacturers should bring different standards in when it's available to everyone at the same time, if you don't want to be regulated externally get your act together internally.
Least popular team in the pits -syndicate
Least popular rider- Minaar
Er, it's pretty correct before you get on your high horse, if the mass is the same so is the pull of gravity the larger wheels will roll faster with the same pull, don't think I ever stated that gravity cares about wheel size, maybe you should read comments twice before going on about books!
What makes the larger wheels roll faster? What force acts on 29" wheels that doesn't effect 27.5" wheels? Momentum is different. Acceleration and deceleration would be different. But, on a smooth hill with no rider one would not be "faster" than the other. I don't think...
What makes the larger wheels roll faster? What force acts on 29" wheels that doesn't effect 27.5" wheels? Momentum is different. Acceleration and deceleration would be...
What makes the larger wheels roll faster? What force acts on 29" wheels that doesn't effect 27.5" wheels? Momentum is different. Acceleration and deceleration would be different. But, on a smooth hill with no rider one would not be "faster" than the other. I don't think...
Take 2 skateboards swap wheels on one for pram wheels roll em down a hill if you think they both roll at same speed you clearly don't get the physics involved.
Take 2 skateboards swap wheels on one for pram wheels roll em down a hill if you think they both roll at same speed you clearly...
Take 2 skateboards swap wheels on one for pram wheels roll em down a hill if you think they both roll at same speed you clearly don't get the physics involved.
[sigh] Your comprehension of physics made me join this forum. Look up rotational moments of inertia.
Assuming the 29er tires and rims weigh the exact same as the equivalent 27.5 tires, if you took a 29er and a 27.5" DH bike that also weighed the exact same and let them both roll down a hill, the 27.5" bike would accelerate faster because the rotating mass is closer to its axis. Assuming that the majority of the drag forces on the bikes are caused by the cross section of the frame, both bikes would have the same terminal velocity, so the 27.5" bike would reach this velocity first, and sustain it's lead to the bottom of the hill. The equal tire weights probably isn't true, mfg's are not going to compromise sidewall thickness just to keep the weight down, but for the simplicity of this argument lets say they are, however the results are worse if the 29er set up is heavier.
The best part of the above situation? A 26" wheeled bike would win...
Take 2 skateboards swap wheels on one for pram wheels roll em down a hill if you think they both roll at same speed you clearly...
Take 2 skateboards swap wheels on one for pram wheels roll em down a hill if you think they both roll at same speed you clearly don't get the physics involved.
[sigh] Your comprehension of physics made me join this forum. Look up rotational moments of inertia.
Assuming the 29er tires and rims weigh the exact same...
[sigh] Your comprehension of physics made me join this forum. Look up rotational moments of inertia.
Assuming the 29er tires and rims weigh the exact same as the equivalent 27.5 tires, if you took a 29er and a 27.5" DH bike that also weighed the exact same and let them both roll down a hill, the 27.5" bike would accelerate faster because the rotating mass is closer to its axis. Assuming that the majority of the drag forces on the bikes are caused by the cross section of the frame, both bikes would have the same terminal velocity, so the 27.5" bike would reach this velocity first, and sustain it's lead to the bottom of the hill. The equal tire weights probably isn't true, mfg's are not going to compromise sidewall thickness just to keep the weight down, but for the simplicity of this argument lets say they are, however the results are worse if the 29er set up is heavier.
The best part of the above situation? A 26" wheeled bike would win...
Take 2 skateboards swap wheels on one for pram wheels roll em down a hill if you think they both roll at same speed you clearly...
Take 2 skateboards swap wheels on one for pram wheels roll em down a hill if you think they both roll at same speed you clearly don't get the physics involved.
[sigh] Your comprehension of physics made me join this forum. Look up rotational moments of inertia.
Assuming the 29er tires and rims weigh the exact same...
[sigh] Your comprehension of physics made me join this forum. Look up rotational moments of inertia.
Assuming the 29er tires and rims weigh the exact same as the equivalent 27.5 tires, if you took a 29er and a 27.5" DH bike that also weighed the exact same and let them both roll down a hill, the 27.5" bike would accelerate faster because the rotating mass is closer to its axis. Assuming that the majority of the drag forces on the bikes are caused by the cross section of the frame, both bikes would have the same terminal velocity, so the 27.5" bike would reach this velocity first, and sustain it's lead to the bottom of the hill. The equal tire weights probably isn't true, mfg's are not going to compromise sidewall thickness just to keep the weight down, but for the simplicity of this argument lets say they are, however the results are worse if the 29er set up is heavier.
The best part of the above situation? A 26" wheeled bike would win...
[sigh] Your comprehension of physics made me join this forum. Look up rotational moments of inertia.
Assuming the 29er tires and rims weigh the exact same...
[sigh] Your comprehension of physics made me join this forum. Look up rotational moments of inertia.
Assuming the 29er tires and rims weigh the exact same as the equivalent 27.5 tires, if you took a 29er and a 27.5" DH bike that also weighed the exact same and let them both roll down a hill, the 27.5" bike would accelerate faster because the rotating mass is closer to its axis. Assuming that the majority of the drag forces on the bikes are caused by the cross section of the frame, both bikes would have the same terminal velocity, so the 27.5" bike would reach this velocity first, and sustain it's lead to the bottom of the hill. The equal tire weights probably isn't true, mfg's are not going to compromise sidewall thickness just to keep the weight down, but for the simplicity of this argument lets say they are, however the results are worse if the 29er set up is heavier.
The best part of the above situation? A 26" wheeled bike would win...
So, did jcook convince you of the error in your ways? Or do you still believe your initial claim?
"If you took two bikes with different...
So, did jcook convince you of the error in your ways? Or do you still believe your initial claim?
"If you took two bikes with different wheelsize and rolled them down a smooth hill with no rider the bigger wheel would be faster."
Also, my horse is perfectly sober.
This one seems pretty easy and can be broken down to pretty basic science. I am hoping that we can reach an agreement here.
I'm pretty sure moments of inertia only disproves my statement if the wheels are solid objects and doesn't consider the extra mass around the edge of the wheel, which adds an extra gyroscopic effect meaning a larger wheel will roll faster for longer despite accelerating slower, that's probably why your mate had to explain that for his argument to work the wheels would be identical weight at the outer parts which isn't practical considering the original statement
Having said that, because of the relationship between rotational speed and angular momentum, a larger wheel will achieve a higher top speed if the energy is sufficient to accelerate it there.
After all the discussion people saying it won't make a difference and it's the rider, 29ers qualify 1st 3rd and 6th hmmmmm.
I'm gonna say if all the field were on 27.5 Bruni 1st Hart 2nd Gwin 3rd which would correlate to all last years form with those 3 clearly being the fastest, anyone disagree? Exactly what I was saying pre qualification.
Minnaar usually starts the season slow. Based on most recent form Gwin and Hart seem to be fastest. We now have the likes of Vergier and Shaw beating them. 29er's in DH have truly arrived.
Online forums are more productive and healthier environments if people stick to simply expressing their personal opinions if it's only ridiculing other people's opinions and shouting people down that stimulates you to get involved get yourself on 4chan.
As someone who started in this sport 25+ years ago, I can tell you the purpose has never been to simply highlight the most skillful rider. If that were the case, we could have just stuck to riding those complete pieces of garbage we had back in the nineties.
Downhill mountain biking has always been about the pursuit of speed through technology.
And the fastest guys have consistently always had better tech.
Dual crown forks, disc brakes, downhill tire casings, chain guides, thru axles, more travel, slack geometry, and on and on. Everything we take for granted these days was at one time "done unilaterally by stealth and only in the interests of a couple of riders."
Yep, that's downhill.
It's not like all the teams and manufacturers get together and decide to implement a new piece of equipment. That's just not how it works.
Nico V is arguably the most talented male downhiller ever. But is that because of skill alone? Or perhaps a combination of skill and his fanatical attention to technical details of his equipment? Check his Sunn bikes from the mid 90s, they were unlike anything anyone else was riding at the time.
This sport has always, and (hopefully) always will, be one of change. It's part of what makes it special.
Debating wheel size in 2017 is as pointless as debating single vs dual crowns in 1995. If it's going to get from the start house to the finish line faster, game on.
So bring on the 29ers! This season is gonna be epic.
Somebody said:
"At the end of the day, we need to decide what direction we want the sport to take. Do we want it to be like road racing or rally where officials scrutinise equipment before and after and sometimes during events? Or do we want to keep it about getting down the hill fastest?"
Are those things mutually exclusive? Regulations and scrutineers exist to make sport fair so that we know who the fastest person is. Ok so the top teams will always have more resources and money, but at least they have to follow the rules.
Personally I feel bad for Loris. Is he the fastest rider or is he 4th fastest on the fastest bike? Who knows? The lack of regulation only serves to discredit his result.
Again I agree with Lighthowler. The fact that a sport regulates what people wear so that it looks cool (and is SLOWER as an effect), but then doesn't regulate a fundamental component on the bike is a complete contradiction.
As someone who started in this sport 25+ years ago, I can tell you the purpose has never been to simply highlight the most skillful rider...
As someone who started in this sport 25+ years ago, I can tell you the purpose has never been to simply highlight the most skillful rider. If that were the case, we could have just stuck to riding those complete pieces of garbage we had back in the nineties.
Downhill mountain biking has always been about the pursuit of speed through technology.
And the fastest guys have consistently always had better tech.
Dual crown forks, disc brakes, downhill tire casings, chain guides, thru axles, more travel, slack geometry, and on and on. Everything we take for granted these days was at one time "done unilaterally by stealth and only in the interests of a couple of riders."
Yep, that's downhill.
It's not like all the teams and manufacturers get together and decide to implement a new piece of equipment. That's just not how it works.
Nico V is arguably the most talented male downhiller ever. But is that because of skill alone? Or perhaps a combination of skill and his fanatical attention to technical details of his equipment? Check his Sunn bikes from the mid 90s, they were unlike anything anyone else was riding at the time.
This sport has always, and (hopefully) always will, be one of change. It's part of what makes it special.
Debating wheel size in 2017 is as pointless as debating single vs dual crowns in 1995. If it's going to get from the start house to the finish line faster, game on.
So bring on the 29ers! This season is gonna be epic.
It's nice you've been at it 25+ years and I'm sure that's given you the experience to form your own personal opinion which I don't share with you other than Niko being up there.
I'm 38 I replaced my Raleigh burner with a mongoose bmx that got stolen just as the first emmelle mountain bikes came out, diamond back next then saved my milk round money for a pro-flex with the rubber stop as suspension bought the magazines bought the t shirt went on the holidays went to the uplifts in wales as soon as they opened watched freecaster watched Eurosport thanks to that I can formulate a concise opinion of my own without being "told" or spoken down to by anyone.
My opinion is that it's to definitely to highlight the fastest rider that's why it's the rider that gets the medal, when Valentino Rossi wins the moto gp it's reported that Valentino Rossi won not that a Yamaha won, if it were as you say purely about the tech we'd pin rosettes on the bike similar to horse racing, when it's reported who won the grand national it's the horse that's first in the reports jockey secondary . Loris vegier qualified 1st is the headline not a Santa Cruz v10 large maxxis fox enve shimano rode by loris.
I remember clearly when disc brakes dual crown forks came out and there is a difference to now, that difference is the entire field welcomed their introduction with open arms, they were universally accepted as improving the sport for everyone by everyone weather you had a deal or not, same with full suspension carbon fibre wide handlebars chain guides. There is a longer list of pro racers and team managers who would rather leave the 29ers than those in favour that's the difference now with this issue and that difference brings a revelance I don't think should be lightly dismissed.
It's being debated in the pits by riders and teams whose opinion is more valid than ours. Saying it's pointless to debate yet debating it on a forum that's own title is to encourage debate on the very subject we are debating renders a point to something at least.
I remember the sunn bikes shame they're not still racing. I think it is skill on Nikos part, yes he has an interesting attention to detail and he has his reasons for not being part of the race scene, I honestly can't see Niko jumping on a 29er regardless of its advantages.
All sports get more technologically advanced with the aception of horse racing , martial arts I can't think of any that haven't but with those advancements must come regulation to ensure an even playing field, look at regulation of golf clubs, the aim of golf is to hit a ball further and more accurately but technology has to be regulated or people get advantages from technology beyond their ability, archery same, cricket same, baseball all have regs.
As for saying teams don't sit round and discuss well in fact they do hence the we circuit being limited to Europe and North America to reduce costs, if at the end of the day regulation doesn't come externally in sports it comes internally through rider unions etc. When uci banned cameras on helmets it was united team organisation that found a resolution.
The 29ers are here this season seems less epic to me.
Never said the sport is purely about the tech. My point in bringing up Nico was to illustrate that it's a combination of the two. Clearly talent, fitness and a bunch of other factors come into play.
But it's hard to argue that tech doesn't play a massive role. The playing field is far from even. Just ask anyone on stock suspension. Bet they wish Fox would give them the Gwin internals.
I simply find it interesting that many riders who were for other advancements are now advocating for limits to wheel size. Why draw the line there? Why not limit amount of suspension? Or handlebar width? Or tire pressure? Wouldn't that even things up so we could focus on skill alone?
In my opinion that's just silly and not what this sport is about. Ride what you can win on. It's guys like Nico, Fabien and Greg who are pushing everyone forward. And the rest of us can be thankful when it trickles down in a season or two.
And while the pits may have been debating the benefits / limitations of 29" wheels, I have a feeling that debate is over.
Copying and pasting what Eric Carter commented on a post on Facebook:
It has been interesting to watch all this unfold.... I am laughing when I hear that teams are upset about this whole deal or the undercurrent of negativity. 29" wheel size is not new and everyone had a chance to do what Santa Cruz did. Frankly I can not believe this hasn't happened way sooner... You can not deny the wheels are faster on a race course... Every course I saw when I was with Spesh on the circuit a couple years ago would have been faster with a 29"... It's downhill.... any course with any type of sustained speeds will be faster. It really is a none argument. I see it the same this year.... As GM said in a interview " I will be on 29" all year" He already knows no matter the course these bikes are faster. There is no turning back now. As a former rider at this level I would love to have the advantage that Santa Cruz does, All the other teams got caught with their pants down.... But I think long term after everyone has 29" this potentially could make for more injuries...For sure riders will have better control with a bigger contact patch... but the speeds will be higher no doubt... when you do come off its just that much faster. I can't imagine how fast Ft Bill and the Mt St Anne freeway will be! Right now i am sure there are some product devo teams doing calendar math trying to be ready for the next event. I imagine there will be a number of Aluminum 29" DH bikes at the next event.
If Fox came out with a new fork and only allowed Gwin, Gee and Minnaar to race with it, and the 3 of them went 1-2-3 at a race, would everyone be up in arms that the fork gave an unfair advantage to them? Should Fox be forced to give that same fork at all of their other sponsored riders? What about Non-Fox riders? Should they also be given the fork to level the playing field?
I think all the e spec while interesting to debate, reality is unlike what 27.5" did to 26" which was too fold, the industry wanted everyone on 27.5" for the next big wave to influence sales in stagnant MTB market, which it did! The wheel did not have a huge effect on individual rider size vs skill, 29" esp in DH won't nessecarily suit everyone, that said it took a good year for teams to really develop DH GEO to a good base level in DH bikes, so saying Hart and co couldn't make it work maybe a bit premature, some have been developing longer than others and as others have said components have been a big hold up. At the moment while they're are only 3 29ers on track that we know of at Lourdes, holes bumps may give them an advantage due to the wear of the track by 27.5" wheels, but when the numbers even out and 29" bikes create the same track issues it may benefit smaller riders on 27.5" bikes, it needs a year or two to develop and settle down!
I started riding 29er steel Hts 5-6 years ago and could feel benefits in certain places then, knew once GEOS, components and designs got to the point I was happy with I would go 29er which Indid last year and I won't be going back to 26" or 27.5" the fit is better for me, first and foremost it's about sizing, I have always been a long low fan before it became fashionable same with short and wide, it was the industry that was slow maybe a MX thing, dunno, either way like Enduro I will see this settling down if the tracks are balanced enough eg technically demanding enough, EWS has this down to a tee, so if DH can keep that together, imo wheel size will balance out, to suit rider size, as yet regardless of results it's too early to just say it's wheel size alone, once enough 29ers are running on the same track conditions will change and will even out, jmo, still exciting times to see what and who comes up with what next in 29er or 27.5" revenge!
Lets get ready to rumble!
If Fox came out with a new fork and only allowed Gwin, Gee and Minnaar to race with it, and the 3 of them went 1-2-3...
If Fox came out with a new fork and only allowed Gwin, Gee and Minnaar to race with it, and the 3 of them went 1-2-3 at a race, would everyone be up in arms that the fork gave an unfair advantage to them? Should Fox be forced to give that same fork at all of their other sponsored riders? What about Non-Fox riders? Should they also be given the fork to level the playing field?
UCI rule is, if it's raced then it must be on sale in 9months to general public!
So that being said, you'd prob want your other teams riding the product, get it developed and first to be in OEM and after sales, why would you hold back other teams that ride your product sponsored esp!
Other than the fact they may have limited numbers at this stage, also factor in for example the Syndicate may have a pro bono (paid shared or otherwise) agreement to develop this product which gives only them access for a certain time period, they can't lock it in, but could get the initial jump and imo that's fair enough too! But it will be released for sale that's the rules!
UCI rule is, if it's raced then it must be on sale in 9months to general public!
So that being said, you'd prob want your other...
UCI rule is, if it's raced then it must be on sale in 9months to general public!
So that being said, you'd prob want your other teams riding the product, get it developed and first to be in OEM and after sales, why would you hold back other teams that ride your product sponsored esp!
Other than the fact they may have limited numbers at this stage, also factor in for example the Syndicate may have a pro bono (paid shared or otherwise) agreement to develop this product which gives only them access for a certain time period, they can't lock it in, but could get the initial jump and imo that's fair enough too! But it will be released for sale that's the rules!
I guess I should have said "initially" gave the New Fox fork to those riders. I did not know the 9 month rule though, very interesting.
This whole 29er debate reminds me a little of the mid-late 90s when everyone was rocking rebranded Intense frames. Haro, mongoose, etc couldn't (or didn't want to) build WC quality frames that allowed their riders to podium so they were more than happy slap a few stickers on a modified M1. Was there any uproar about riders on other brands frames? Just curious...
UCI rule is, if it's raced then it must be on sale in 9months to general public!
So that being said, you'd prob want your other...
UCI rule is, if it's raced then it must be on sale in 9months to general public!
So that being said, you'd prob want your other teams riding the product, get it developed and first to be in OEM and after sales, why would you hold back other teams that ride your product sponsored esp!
Other than the fact they may have limited numbers at this stage, also factor in for example the Syndicate may have a pro bono (paid shared or otherwise) agreement to develop this product which gives only them access for a certain time period, they can't lock it in, but could get the initial jump and imo that's fair enough too! But it will be released for sale that's the rules!
I guess I should have said "initially" gave the New Fox fork to those riders. I did not know the 9 month rule though, very interesting...
I guess I should have said "initially" gave the New Fox fork to those riders. I did not know the 9 month rule though, very interesting.
This whole 29er debate reminds me a little of the mid-late 90s when everyone was rocking rebranded Intense frames. Haro, mongoose, etc couldn't (or didn't want to) build WC quality frames that allowed their riders to podium so they were more than happy slap a few stickers on a modified M1. Was there any uproar about riders on other brands frames? Just curious...
All good mate wasn't disagreeing with btw, yeah DH has gone through these big changes many times, I am not and never have been concerned about wheel size myself, I am more concerned about the tracks or quality tracks and number of rounds and lack of continental spread of DH venues! I'd rather see costs go towards a longer series and a true WC accross the globe than the industry fighting over wheel sizes and effectively draining resources into developing a truly professional global DH series that also includes development of women's DH, eg I'd like to see every trade team as part of the UCI rule book require one female rider for their team, bigger benefit to team overall points and title like F1 , like EWS, but that would require visionary UCI DH leadership (not delegates who I think do an amazing job with the tools the UCI allows them) different topic!
Had a further thought about the wheel size debate a further solution which I'm sure is not new here, think Carver bikes, Rachel joking and talked about it too in Wyn TVs interview is potentially for smaller riders or bikes that struggle or are struggling to develop 29" around they're designs is designing around a 29" front wheel and retaining the benefits of 27.5" in the rear, therefore riders like Hart and co could have the best of both wheels! Just thoughts and I'm sure teams are looking at it..
Copying and pasting what Eric Carter commented on a post on Facebook:
[i]It has been interesting to watch all this unfold.... I am laughing when I...
Copying and pasting what Eric Carter commented on a post on Facebook:
It has been interesting to watch all this unfold.... I am laughing when I hear that teams are upset about this whole deal or the undercurrent of negativity. 29" wheel size is not new and everyone had a chance to do what Santa Cruz did. Frankly I can not believe this hasn't happened way sooner... You can not deny the wheels are faster on a race course... Every course I saw when I was with Spesh on the circuit a couple years ago would have been faster with a 29"... It's downhill.... any course with any type of sustained speeds will be faster. It really is a none argument. I see it the same this year.... As GM said in a interview " I will be on 29" all year" He already knows no matter the course these bikes are faster. There is no turning back now. As a former rider at this level I would love to have the advantage that Santa Cruz does, All the other teams got caught with their pants down.... But I think long term after everyone has 29" this potentially could make for more injuries...For sure riders will have better control with a bigger contact patch... but the speeds will be higher no doubt... when you do come off its just that much faster. I can't imagine how fast Ft Bill and the Mt St Anne freeway will be! Right now i am sure there are some product devo teams doing calendar math trying to be ready for the next event. I imagine there will be a number of Aluminum 29" DH bikes at the next event.
I agree and disagree with Eric's comments. He is a racer at heart so obviously he is fine with having an advantage over the other competitors. He'd be just as pissed as the other guys if he had to compete against the Syndicate this year. I don't agree with his comments about safety. Crashing at 40 or 45mph is hardly a game changer in terms of speed. Most of the top guys don't even wear body armor when they can get away with it. Safety is hardly top of the agenda in this sport.
Here is what I can conclude and what I see happening iver the next couple of seasons.
- 29" wheels are faster for dh.
- The Syndicate will have this advantage for most of this season (maybe Trek can bring a bike to Fort William).
- The other big factory teams will be on 29" in 2018.
- In 2018 the tracks will get rougher and this will widen the time difference between 27.5" and 29".
- Privateers and the public won't see 29" bikes until 2019.
What this means for bike sales, development and the industry in general is tough to say.
All good mate wasn't disagreeing with btw, yeah DH has gone through these big changes many times, I am not and never have been concerned about...
All good mate wasn't disagreeing with btw, yeah DH has gone through these big changes many times, I am not and never have been concerned about wheel size myself, I am more concerned about the tracks or quality tracks and number of rounds and lack of continental spread of DH venues! I'd rather see costs go towards a longer series and a true WC accross the globe than the industry fighting over wheel sizes and effectively draining resources into developing a truly professional global DH series that also includes development of women's DH, eg I'd like to see every trade team as part of the UCI rule book require one female rider for their team, bigger benefit to team overall points and title like F1 , like EWS, but that would require visionary UCI DH leadership (not delegates who I think do an amazing job with the tools the UCI allows them) different topic!
Had a further thought about the wheel size debate a further solution which I'm sure is not new here, think Carver bikes, Rachel joking and talked about it too in Wyn TVs interview is potentially for smaller riders or bikes that struggle or are struggling to develop 29" around they're designs is designing around a 29" front wheel and retaining the benefits of 27.5" in the rear, therefore riders like Hart and co could have the best of both wheels! Just thoughts and I'm sure teams are looking at it..
I'm pretty sure that the definition of a bicycle in the UCI rules says that the front and rear wheels have to be of equal diameter. Please correct me if I'm wrong on that.
Assuming the 29er tires and rims weigh the exact same as the equivalent 27.5 tires, if you took a 29er and a 27.5" DH bike that also weighed the exact same and let them both roll down a hill, the 27.5" bike would accelerate faster because the rotating mass is closer to its axis. Assuming that the majority of the drag forces on the bikes are caused by the cross section of the frame, both bikes would have the same terminal velocity, so the 27.5" bike would reach this velocity first, and sustain it's lead to the bottom of the hill. The equal tire weights probably isn't true, mfg's are not going to compromise sidewall thickness just to keep the weight down, but for the simplicity of this argument lets say they are, however the results are worse if the 29er set up is heavier.
The best part of the above situation? A 26" wheeled bike would win...
Sounding like a scientist and being a scientist are two different things (heavy sigh)
"If you took two bikes with different wheelsize and rolled them down a smooth hill with no rider the bigger wheel would be faster."
Also, my horse is perfectly sober.
This one seems pretty easy and can be broken down to pretty basic science. I am hoping that we can reach an agreement here.
Having said that, because of the relationship between rotational speed and angular momentum, a larger wheel will achieve a higher top speed if the energy is sufficient to accelerate it there.
You really shouldn't let a horse get drunk.
I'm gonna say if all the field were on 27.5 Bruni 1st Hart 2nd Gwin 3rd which would correlate to all last years form with those 3 clearly being the fastest, anyone disagree? Exactly what I was saying pre qualification.
Bad taste!
http://www.vitalmtb.com/news/news/RESULTS-Qualifying-2017-Lourdes-World…
remember ticks of a sec is not enough..
cheers
Downhill mountain biking has always been about the pursuit of speed through technology.
And the fastest guys have consistently always had better tech.
Dual crown forks, disc brakes, downhill tire casings, chain guides, thru axles, more travel, slack geometry, and on and on. Everything we take for granted these days was at one time "done unilaterally by stealth and only in the interests of a couple of riders."
Yep, that's downhill.
It's not like all the teams and manufacturers get together and decide to implement a new piece of equipment. That's just not how it works.
Nico V is arguably the most talented male downhiller ever. But is that because of skill alone? Or perhaps a combination of skill and his fanatical attention to technical details of his equipment? Check his Sunn bikes from the mid 90s, they were unlike anything anyone else was riding at the time.
This sport has always, and (hopefully) always will, be one of change. It's part of what makes it special.
Debating wheel size in 2017 is as pointless as debating single vs dual crowns in 1995. If it's going to get from the start house to the finish line faster, game on.
So bring on the 29ers! This season is gonna be epic.
"At the end of the day, we need to decide what direction we want the sport to take. Do we want it to be like road racing or rally where officials scrutinise equipment before and after and sometimes during events? Or do we want to keep it about getting down the hill fastest?"
Are those things mutually exclusive? Regulations and scrutineers exist to make sport fair so that we know who the fastest person is. Ok so the top teams will always have more resources and money, but at least they have to follow the rules.
Personally I feel bad for Loris. Is he the fastest rider or is he 4th fastest on the fastest bike? Who knows? The lack of regulation only serves to discredit his result.
Again I agree with Lighthowler. The fact that a sport regulates what people wear so that it looks cool (and is SLOWER as an effect), but then doesn't regulate a fundamental component on the bike is a complete contradiction.
I'm 38 I replaced my Raleigh burner with a mongoose bmx that got stolen just as the first emmelle mountain bikes came out, diamond back next then saved my milk round money for a pro-flex with the rubber stop as suspension bought the magazines bought the t shirt went on the holidays went to the uplifts in wales as soon as they opened watched freecaster watched Eurosport thanks to that I can formulate a concise opinion of my own without being "told" or spoken down to by anyone.
My opinion is that it's to definitely to highlight the fastest rider that's why it's the rider that gets the medal, when Valentino Rossi wins the moto gp it's reported that Valentino Rossi won not that a Yamaha won, if it were as you say purely about the tech we'd pin rosettes on the bike similar to horse racing, when it's reported who won the grand national it's the horse that's first in the reports jockey secondary . Loris vegier qualified 1st is the headline not a Santa Cruz v10 large maxxis fox enve shimano rode by loris.
I remember clearly when disc brakes dual crown forks came out and there is a difference to now, that difference is the entire field welcomed their introduction with open arms, they were universally accepted as improving the sport for everyone by everyone weather you had a deal or not, same with full suspension carbon fibre wide handlebars chain guides. There is a longer list of pro racers and team managers who would rather leave the 29ers than those in favour that's the difference now with this issue and that difference brings a revelance I don't think should be lightly dismissed.
It's being debated in the pits by riders and teams whose opinion is more valid than ours. Saying it's pointless to debate yet debating it on a forum that's own title is to encourage debate on the very subject we are debating renders a point to something at least.
I remember the sunn bikes shame they're not still racing. I think it is skill on Nikos part, yes he has an interesting attention to detail and he has his reasons for not being part of the race scene, I honestly can't see Niko jumping on a 29er regardless of its advantages.
All sports get more technologically advanced with the aception of horse racing , martial arts I can't think of any that haven't but with those advancements must come regulation to ensure an even playing field, look at regulation of golf clubs, the aim of golf is to hit a ball further and more accurately but technology has to be regulated or people get advantages from technology beyond their ability, archery same, cricket same, baseball all have regs.
As for saying teams don't sit round and discuss well in fact they do hence the we circuit being limited to Europe and North America to reduce costs, if at the end of the day regulation doesn't come externally in sports it comes internally through rider unions etc. When uci banned cameras on helmets it was united team organisation that found a resolution.
The 29ers are here this season seems less epic to me.
But it's hard to argue that tech doesn't play a massive role. The playing field is far from even. Just ask anyone on stock suspension. Bet they wish Fox would give them the Gwin internals.
I simply find it interesting that many riders who were for other advancements are now advocating for limits to wheel size. Why draw the line there? Why not limit amount of suspension? Or handlebar width? Or tire pressure? Wouldn't that even things up so we could focus on skill alone?
In my opinion that's just silly and not what this sport is about. Ride what you can win on. It's guys like Nico, Fabien and Greg who are pushing everyone forward. And the rest of us can be thankful when it trickles down in a season or two.
And while the pits may have been debating the benefits / limitations of 29" wheels, I have a feeling that debate is over.
It has been interesting to watch all this unfold.... I am laughing when I hear that teams are upset about this whole deal or the undercurrent of negativity. 29" wheel size is not new and everyone had a chance to do what Santa Cruz did. Frankly I can not believe this hasn't happened way sooner... You can not deny the wheels are faster on a race course... Every course I saw when I was with Spesh on the circuit a couple years ago would have been faster with a 29"... It's downhill.... any course with any type of sustained speeds will be faster. It really is a none argument. I see it the same this year.... As GM said in a interview " I will be on 29" all year" He already knows no matter the course these bikes are faster. There is no turning back now. As a former rider at this level I would love to have the advantage that Santa Cruz does, All the other teams got caught with their pants down.... But I think long term after everyone has 29" this potentially could make for more injuries...For sure riders will have better control with a bigger contact patch... but the speeds will be higher no doubt... when you do come off its just that much faster. I can't imagine how fast Ft Bill and the Mt St Anne freeway will be! Right now i am sure there are some product devo teams doing calendar math trying to be ready for the next event. I imagine there will be a number of Aluminum 29" DH bikes at the next event.
I started riding 29er steel Hts 5-6 years ago and could feel benefits in certain places then, knew once GEOS, components and designs got to the point I was happy with I would go 29er which Indid last year and I won't be going back to 26" or 27.5" the fit is better for me, first and foremost it's about sizing, I have always been a long low fan before it became fashionable same with short and wide, it was the industry that was slow maybe a MX thing, dunno, either way like Enduro I will see this settling down if the tracks are balanced enough eg technically demanding enough, EWS has this down to a tee, so if DH can keep that together, imo wheel size will balance out, to suit rider size, as yet regardless of results it's too early to just say it's wheel size alone, once enough 29ers are running on the same track conditions will change and will even out, jmo, still exciting times to see what and who comes up with what next in 29er or 27.5" revenge!
Lets get ready to rumble!
So that being said, you'd prob want your other teams riding the product, get it developed and first to be in OEM and after sales, why would you hold back other teams that ride your product sponsored esp!
Other than the fact they may have limited numbers at this stage, also factor in for example the Syndicate may have a pro bono (paid shared or otherwise) agreement to develop this product which gives only them access for a certain time period, they can't lock it in, but could get the initial jump and imo that's fair enough too! But it will be released for sale that's the rules!
This whole 29er debate reminds me a little of the mid-late 90s when everyone was rocking rebranded Intense frames. Haro, mongoose, etc couldn't (or didn't want to) build WC quality frames that allowed their riders to podium so they were more than happy slap a few stickers on a modified M1. Was there any uproar about riders on other brands frames? Just curious...
Had a further thought about the wheel size debate a further solution which I'm sure is not new here, think Carver bikes, Rachel joking and talked about it too in Wyn TVs interview is potentially for smaller riders or bikes that struggle or are struggling to develop 29" around they're designs is designing around a 29" front wheel and retaining the benefits of 27.5" in the rear, therefore riders like Hart and co could have the best of both wheels! Just thoughts and I'm sure teams are looking at it..
lezgetiton
cheers
Here is what I can conclude and what I see happening iver the next couple of seasons.
- 29" wheels are faster for dh.
- The Syndicate will have this advantage for most of this season (maybe Trek can bring a bike to Fort William).
- The other big factory teams will be on 29" in 2018.
- In 2018 the tracks will get rougher and this will widen the time difference between 27.5" and 29".
- Privateers and the public won't see 29" bikes until 2019.
What this means for bike sales, development and the industry in general is tough to say.
9yrs ago.. intense already predicted it..
HYPE pa more
cheers
Post a reply to: Should There Be a 29er DH Class and 27.5 DH Class at World Cups?