Thread: 26er with 650b front only

Quote: Originally Posted by TNC Honestly, I think you guys may be obsessing about the effect of the 650B/26 setup on many bikes. I've done an SC Nomad and an '08 Spec Stumpjumper, and neither bike had screwball geometry or weird handling traits. The geo doesn't bother me. My obsession is with wieght

Quote: Originally Posted by TNC sal, ever wonder why dirt motors have generally settled on a taller wheel up front and a shorter wheel out back?...in the case of my dirt motor, 21"/18". The total tire and wheel measurement comes to 27.5"/25.5". Remember back when they even tried to go to a 23" front wheel, but it ate up too much travel in the fork and/or dinked up the geometry too much? A taller front wheel is an...

Quote: Originally Posted by keen Maybe if my bike had a 70ish* HA it wouldn't have been as noticable but like I said depends on your sensetivity level. 17" 100mm fork frame geo w/ 71* head angle. I run a tall WTB WW 2.55LT in back anyway so that should help to level the back end up with the trail I would think. I will be running a 2.1 up front either Neo, Nev or Wolverine if it ever comes oout in production.

Quote: Originally Posted by JMac47 Just like the way it rides now but want the benifit of the bigger wheel without the flop factor. I think it really depends how sensetive you are to wheel flop. I rode DH bikes for years w/ 65-67* HA's and never gave any thought to wheel flop or slow steering. Fast forward a number of years I have been riding trail bikes w/ 68-70* HA's and now I can really feel the effects of a slack bike. My...

Quote: Originally Posted by salimoneus Which kindof goes back to my original assertion.. It's entirely possible that if your frame would fit a 650b rear you would be raving about it's advantages just like the front. I am just wondering if people are mostly running this because they have no other choice, or because even though they could run both they feel this is a better configuration. Well...consider the 69er. Clearly the rollover...

Quote: Originally Posted by salimoneus Which kindof goes back to my original assertion.. It's entirely possible that if your frame would fit a 650b rear you would be raving about it's advantages just like the front. I am just wondering if people are mostly running this because they have no other choice, or because even though they could run both they feel this is a better configuration. The fact that dirtbikes run with mismatching...

That second image is a very good image showing the size diff.

Quote: Originally Posted by salimoneus Does anyone else believe that this particular configuration (and 69er as well) just isn't all that interesting? You should try it. I think big wheels are necessary in the front, but the small disadvantage of traction/rollover in having a 26" wheel in the back is more than made up from its ability to speed. Currently I have 650b front and back (SS), and while it is a little smoother and traction...

Quote: Originally Posted by salimoneus I don't recall ever seeing any other offroad vehicles like dirtbikes or 4-wheelers or Jeeps that have mismatched wheel sizes front/back. Are you trolling for giggles or are you serious? The set-up works well.

Putting a Neomoto on the front of my 2003 Santa Cruz Superlight was an improved bike, for me. It lead me to go for a 09 Heckler with 650B front and rear, which is working nicely for me. I'll try to attach some pics here of a side-to side comparison of a Neomoto next to a 2.5" Nevegal. For me, I liked the improved roll-over-ability of the Neomoto, but then again, I ride slow. I couldn't tell you which of the two tire set-ups has...