You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Yes new wheel size prototype seen floating around on a competing bike website's social media channels.
My thoughts:
I'm still riding 24", 26", and 27.5".
It's a power of 2.
It's not a decimal size.
Surely this topic has bindun already?
No, just no.
29 caught on, 36 didn't
I don't know what that says
I think the rim size started as aiming for a 40mm tyre being the same diameter as an mtb tyre on a 700c rim
Probably more practical than 36
Sounds like Maxxis are going to make some decent tyres available in 32. Wouldn't be happening if several big bike companies weren't pushing behind the scenes. Maxxis ain't going to that kind of bother for DirtySixer. Their bikes look kinda naff anyway. Nextie already make a decent rim. So where's the decent bikes?
More interested in a 36er to be honest. Might as well go all the way and stop messing around!
A few years ago there was a guy locally that was building 36ers and constantly trying to sell them through Facebook. He was quite evangelical about the benefits, but people gave him so much shit. And they did look pretty bad too.
If 32" becomes the new standard I'm going to have to go back to BMX or something as I can't see how any bigger than 29" is going to be fun for me, it's already pushing it!
We ended up with boost spacing because 29er wheels weren't stiff enough. What will be the new hub width a few seasons after they start to talk hold (if they do)?
Wasn't boost spacing about plus tyres and clearance?
We ended up with boost spacing because 29er wheels weren't stiff enough. What will be the new hub width a few seasons after they start to talk hold (if they do)?
Nah we didn't, there was never a problem with the old format and stiffness. Hardly any companies even thought it was worth maximising the stiffness available with nonboost hubs with larger flanges or maximising outboarding, easy things to do with the old standard. And for that matter many boost hubs don't take advantage of the potential increases either. It was just one of the various excuses used for rolling out a new standard and making every mtb wheel and hub in the world "obsolete"
But you're spot on that it could be used as a new excuse. Maybe they'll have another crack at dead-on-arrival superboost.
Long wheelbase 29ers can feel dull, so I can’t imagine that adding another 80mm (minimum) is going to help ameliorate that feeling.
Similarly, long 29ers can be a PITA on tight switchbacks. What’s this going to be like?
Just because tyre vendors and rim manufacturers are getting on board doesn’t mean it will be a persistent thing. Just look at fat bikes. There were loads of tyres and rims at one point but you’re now relegated to a few niche models and old stock.
More interested in a 36er to be honest. Might as well go all the way and stop messing around!
I think the rim size started as aiming for a 40mm tyre being the same diameter as an mtb tyre on a 700c rim
what I'd be interested in is a bigger dia wheel for road/cx/touring type bikes. As a taller rider 29" makes for quite sensible MTBs. Its always been odd for any given make/model of bike the the same wheel size is used from the smallest to the largest frame.
Then I look at my road bike and wonder why it has to have those silly little wheels on it
I feel like someone needs to have a quiet word with the bike industry, OK they've had their fun and a bit of extra profit by playing with wheel sizes a couple of times... But maybe give it a rest for a decade or two now?
There comes a point where it's just taking the piss, we've actually arrived at a reasonable position where 622mm rims are a common standard, interchangeable enough between MTB/Road/Gravel (with MTB hubs deliberately nerfing full interchangeably) and that's OK, we like being able to play with tyre sizes and construction, let's just leave rims be for a bit.
For avoidance of confusion - 29” and 700 wheels have the same ETRTO bead seat diameter of 622mm. As for manufacturers listening to reason, they’ve reached the limits of how many 27.5 and 29 bikes they can sell and need to tempt the plus one’s amongst us to spend more. There are people on here who will buy the latest “thing” and reviewers and peer pressure will persuade folks that we can’t possibly enjoy ATB’s without this latest “thing”. It’s capitalism, doesn’t work for most people and certainly doesn’t work for the sustainability of a planet with finite resources! I’ve been out on my 26” fatbike this morning and had a splendid time..
Then I look at my road bike and wonder why it has to have those silly little wheels on it
Because small wheels are faster but the UCI ban* them. See Moulton frames.
On the road big wheels are just un-aerodynamic and the 'rollover' of bigger wheels isn't needed when the only think to rollover is a slightly imperfect tarmac and the odd pothole.
I'm a little surprised with the rise of 700x32 as the new normal there wasn't a shift to 650b/650c rim sizes. They're stiffer, stronger, more aerodynamic. If you're not choosing a bike based on the little UCI sticker then they make a lot of sense.
Crit bikes used to be built with smaller wheels as they accelerated quicker, it also allows a horizontal chain stay (shorter, stiffer, quicker handling).
*IIRC 55cm is the minimum, which is a roughly a 26" rim with a road tyre fitted.
Is 32" the same as 750d which is what I heard gravel-wheels-with-the-same-outside-diameter-as-MTB-wheels called a couple of weeks ago?
A few years ago there was a guy locally that was building 36ers and constantly trying to sell them through Facebook. He was quite evangelical about the benefits, but people gave him so much shit. And they did look pretty bad too.
Are you over York way by any chance?
“…..let's just leave rims be for a bit. ”
Agree. As a lifelong cyclist (over 15yrs riding now) I’m fed up and fatigued and - honestly - becoming more and more ‘put off’ by all this nonsense. 99% of cyclists and people who buy bikes aren’t geeks. We / I don’t want to have to keep thinking about compatibility etc. I’d absolutely spend more and buy more if it was easier for a lay person to understand all this
it’s like iPhones. Buy one it just works. Want to have music in your ears? Buy AirPods. They just work. Why would I ever want to think beyond that!
Fed up with it. Bored of it. It’s alienating. Running is easier. Shoes are shoes.
[They] should be focusing on making the great bikes already available cheaper and cheaper, more and more available, more widely adopted. Build the cycling customer base up rather than low key ripping off people who are already in to it. (By making 32 the new 29 over the next decade)
Spotify have done it with music. We’ve literally arrived at ‘perfect’ / ‘end game’ with music. You just get and use Spotify. That’s it. Done.
anyway!
29 caught on, 36 didn't
I don't know what that says
That 32" is the perfect inbetweener, of course.. The bike industy loves to create new stuff by splitting the difference and selling it as the best of both 😉
Thing is, we accept change in geometry and other components so we should be open to new options for a component that is so fundamental to what a bike is.
Change fatigue is the reason it's getting a kicking though. Personally I'd happily kick all this electronic shifting and £400 rear mech BS into the bushes and have more options for rim and tyre spec in place of that sort of 'tech'. Gimme stuff that really can change how a bike might ride rather than gadgets that make almost no difference.
Running is easier. Shoes are shoes
Haha are you new to running? 😉
What will be the new hub width a few seasons after they start to talk hold (if they do)?
Superboost rear, which is fine with current chainstay lengths and Transmission / 55mm+ chainlines. Fronts .. 120 or 135mm? Who knows.
Is 32" the same as 750d which is what I heard gravel-wheels-with-the-same-outside-diameter-as-MTB-wheels called a couple of weeks ago?
750D is 660mm BSD. 32" is 686mm BSD.
As 157mm rear hubs currently exist, I'm pretty sure the new standard would be 155 or 159mm
Can you explain this?
Surely you just buy a bike and it works. The only thing it connects to is a pump and every bike I’ve bought this century has been presta. An iPhone in the same time has had 3 connectors. My mums iphone no longer gets updates and can’t run more and more apps. My wifes 1994 trek works just fine and i don’t think there is anything that can’t be replaced.
The shifting standards effects the home builder and parts swapper. But that’s apparently a uk thing. It doesn’t effect most bike buyers
We / I don’t want to have to keep thinking about compatibility etc. I’d absolutely spend more and buy more if it was easier for a lay person to understand all this
it’s like iPhones. Buy one it just works. Want to have music in your ears? Buy AirPods. They just work. Why would I ever want to think beyond that!
750D is 660mm BSD. 32" is 686mm BSD.
Thanks.
Maybe we'll get a choice of 2 new gravel wheel sizes! 🫣
https://www.bikeradar.com/features/tech/750d-wheels-tested-for-gravel-riding
https://bikepacking.com/news/dirtysixer-gravel-bike/
Mmmmm. Given the physical size/wheelbase difference between my 26” 2006 orange. 5 (which I love) and my 29” 2020 levo, if we go 32 I’ll need to get the berlingo extended so the bloody thing fits in. Hopefully it will also have headset cabling, non replaceable bearings, built in brake pads, 1.86” triangular stanchion forks, an automatic gearbox and an electric parking brake all secured by very shallow slotted head screws made of cheeseanium.
32 is of limited benefit over 29+, hell a 3.25 duro crux is pretty much there already. I've just got a custom ti 36er for a laugh and for what its designed for it bloody hustles. My 29+ is for general trail duties, 32 can get in the sea
99% of cyclists and people who buy bikes aren’t geeks. We / I don’t want to have to keep thinking about compatibility etc.
I don't think that's true, maybe 50%(?) I know I very much want/need to understand how my bike functions and what is (and is not compatible).
Other people seem to need (pretty widely known) stuff spelling out:
For avoidance of confusion - 29” and 700 wheels have the same ETRTO bead seat diameter of 622mm.
And some other people are untroubled by such things:
Surely you just buy a bike and it works.
😀
The bike industry is in another one of it's "phases" where some reinvention happens. Sort of encouragingly SRAM announced mechanical transmission this week (I say 'sort of' because they want a small fortune for it, and it's clearly another nudge to get stinger punters on the path towards full AXS). The overall trend has long been towards more complex harder for users to service integrated bikes, taking queues from the car industry and really trying to squash the whole "incremental upgrades" thing where parts migrate from one frame to the next and over time "triggers broom" goes from an 8 speed Carrera to a 12 speed Santa Cruz.
More discouragingly there seems to be some testing the water for even bigger wheels (again) pitched to have a feel of a 'grass roots' thing like it's just guys in sheds trying stuff, but of course they've got buddies at WTB who just happened to be able to rustle up rims and tyres (that's an indicator that there's perhaps an industry push now)... I just wish they'd invent some new tricks, we've seen this one before.
of course they've got buddies at WTB who just happened to be able to rustle up rims and tyres (that's an indicator that there's perhaps an industry push now)...
It doesn't take much to get a company like WTB to try out something like this (they're a good company who do listen to and work with small brands who have ideas - it's where WTB came from themselves). Rims can be rolled to size w/o tooling costs and tyre molds aren't that expensive, so it doesn't indicate a 'push' as such, just somewhere between 1-5 small brands wanting to do something like that. I think every change like this - 29ers, Road Plus, B+ etc started with small brands who can sell bikes with rigid frames and forks using those tyres rather than any concerted effort by big brands. 32" would only work in MTB if Fox or SRAM backed it with forks though.
@tthew 750D isn’t all that new either - I think GT tried it in the ‘80s/‘90s, and a quick Google suggests that WTB and a few others were trying it a couple of years ago
I can see this being good for what used to be called monstercross, now gravel.
The larger diameter will benefit rollover on rigid bikes, just like we immediately felt the difference going from 26 to 29er.
The wheels may even fit a suspension corrected 29er fork, but probably not the back end unless it has adjustable dropouts. Must check my TD-1 🙂
I can see it more for gravel than singletrack because the wheelbase is going to be longer, but no doubt someone will manage to build a frame with a split seattube and bring the rear end in tight.
If mid-mount gear systems like Pinion become more popular, then I don't think that wheel stiffness will be an issue.
I'm actually quite interested in how this pans out, but totally understand the eye-rolling at another new standard. I guess 'does this create a new real world advantage' or 'lets market this as a new fad' is not yet clear.
like many folk, I rode 26" for years, but found out that step to 29" was actually amazing. having now settled on 29+ set ups and loved it (on various rigid bikes), and being taller, going a bit bigger seems like something that might great. I definitely fancy a spin on a 32er (and 36er).
mile munching adventure-type stuff might be perfect as long as you are carrying all your niche sized spares!
This is one of those fantastic trickle down benefits from the 1960's space programme. I'm in.
32ers. Then because they have their handling downsides someone will do a 32/29 mullet and sell the benefits of that (which will still be a compromise vs a 29/27.5 mullet). Then someone will create a wheel size thats a bit bigger - rinse and repeat for eternity. The bike industry really is that boring/predictable isn't it? Bikes are simple things - is making wheels, bars, bar diameters etc bigger the best they can do?
32 is of limited benefit over 29+, hell a 3.25 duro crux is pretty much there already. I've just got a custom ti 36er for a laugh and for what its designed for it bloody hustles. My 29+ is for general trail duties, 32 can get in the sea
So what you're saying is the Stooge MK4 will take a 32 front very nicely ...........
Just had a look at 32" rims. Not much choice and close to the weight of a fat rim at over 1,000gms. Looks like it's going to need carbon to make it light enough.
Nextie do carbon 32 and 36
it would enable the creation of a modern day off road penny farthing, with a 36" on the front maybe a 20" on the rear..
So what you're saying is the Stooge MK4 will take a 32 front very nicely ...........
But why would you want to stick some skinny rubber on a big hoop in the front of a rowdy hooligan to loose all of the comfort and grip of a 29x3.25 ? Bonkers I tell ya, bonkers
Nextie carbon 36 and 32 rims are under 600g and if you get them without the gopping logos Don't look minging either. They do loose spoke tension like a mofo as soon as a tyre is mounted though, so a re-tension once the big old rubber is on is a must.
And spokes are usually a custom job, unless you drop lucky and you can snaffle some unicycle spokes that just happen to be the exact length you need for the rim/hub combo.