Face it: The 26-inch Hardtail is Dead

by Matt Pacocha

The results of measured and timed trials put the 29-inch hardtail ahead of both 26-inch-wheeled hardtail and full-suspenion bikes. Photo Brad Kaminsky

The results of measured and timed trials put the 29-inch hardtail ahead of both 26-inch-wheeled hardtail and full-suspenion bikes. Photo Brad Kaminski

The 26-inch-wheeled hardtail mountain bike is, indeed, dead.

OK, so I’ve been intentionally stirring the pot this summer with that proclamation. What you’re about to read is no exception.

In an article in the July issue of VeloNews entitled, A Racer’s Edge, Which is Faster: Hardtail or Full Suspension? I wrote a story comparing the prowess of hardtails to full-suspension bikes for cross-country racing. The result of our real-world, semi-scientific testing put the full-suspension bike on top. And I must note that the terrain I used for testing seemingly favored the hardtail — if one were to base their choice on only perception.

The prowess of the big wheels in my measured testing and racing leads me to continue to pronounce the death of the 26-inch-wheeled hardtail. At this point, if you’re racing one, I truly believe that you’re at a disadvantage.

That story spurred a flurry of reader mail into my inbox. Many people liked it. Others expressed the opinion that they think I’m full of it. Those readers specifically pointed to multiple-world mountain bike champ Julien Abaslon as the proof that the 26-inch hardtail is still better. For the record, I did mention Mr. Absalon in my story. Alas, if only we could all ride like him.

These two points aside, the most frequent comment and complaint I received from readers was that 29ers weren’t represented in the test.

Warming up to 29-inch wheels has been a long time coming for me. I’ve never been against the idea or technology, but I’d never spent enough time on a well-designed example to really learn how to exploit its benefits and minimize its shortcomings. My experience was left to yearly exposure at Interbike’s Dirt Demo and Gary Fisher media events; admittedly not enough to form any sort of opinion. For a long time I simply thought that big wheels made sense for big riders and left it at that.

Then two things happened this summer that forced me to take a better look at the technology and form a true opinion. You, the reader, filled up my email inbox and the husband and wife duo of Heather Irmiger and Jeremy Horgan-Kobelski (both Subaru-Gary Fisher) won two sets of national championships on 29ers. Those victories inspired me to write another oft-commented web story about the 26-inch hardtail dying.

It should be noted that 29er carbon (frames, wheels) and tire technology evolved significantly over the last few years and are key in allowing Horgan-Kobelski and Irmiger to win big races on big wheels. There is now very little disadvantage — in terms of weight and tire technology — associated with 29ers.

So after being inundated with mail and watching the Subaru-Gary Fisher racers win, I took up the cause of trying to compare a similar 29-inch-wheeled hardtail to the 26-inch hardtail and full-suspension bikes that I tested for the magazine in July.

THE TEST AND TOOLS

Powertap

TEST TOOLS: Test protocol depended on two training products working in tandem to record the data and monitor our output — Garmin’s 705 cycling computer and the ANT+ transmitting PowerTap disc hub. CLICK ON THE PHOTO TO READ MORE.

Average Lap Time Average Speed (mph) Max Speed (mph) Average Power (Watts)
29er hardtail 13:39 13.71 23.96 219.9
26er full suspension 14:36 12.9 24.6 220.5
26er hardtail 15:00 12.5 23.5 225.0

Over the course of 14 days I rode a full-suspension bike and hardtail bike 28 times on our 3.1-mile test course. Both bikes were built from aluminum and the position of the bikes was matched. The weight of the bikes differed by roughly one pound. The same wheelset was used on both bikes and tire pressure was kept the same. The bikes also used the same gearing. They were ridden in the same smooth-pedaling manner; riding out of the saddle created power spikes and was therefore avoided. Data was gathered using Garmin’s 705 GPS unit and a PowerTap Disc hub.

The constant was our power output, keeping in mind that it’s very hard to keep anything constant on a mountain bike. Climbing was limited to 300 watts and flats limited to 250 watts. In reality the closest I could get was to keep the ranges within 25 watts of each side of these set parameters. Downhills were all ridden at zero watts, simply coasting, and we abstained from pedaling out of corners.

The test course consisted of just under a mile of rolling, lightly technical terrain: A half-mile climb gaining 50 feet in elevation, 1.2 miles of flat, non-technical-but-bumpy doubletrack and a half-mile of twisty, fast-descending singletrack with three moderately technical sections.

It took roughly 15 minutes to complete each loop; the fastest lap recorded stopped the clock at 13:30 and the longest took 15:48.

Following the same protocol I tested Gary Fisher’s Paragon 29-inch-wheeled aluminum hardtail. As equipped for our test, it split the weight difference between the 26-inch hardtail and full-suspension bike.

The surprising results of our measured and timed trials put the 29-inch hardtail ahead of both of the 26-inch-wheeled bikes. The fastest lap recorded on the 29er was 13:26, four seconds faster than the fastest of the full-suspension bike. The 29er reigned supreme, however, because of its consistency on our test terrain; the big bike’s averages were significantly better than either of the small-wheeled bikes. The 29er’s average lap time was 13:39, the lowest by about a minute. It also posted the lowest heart rate and power averages, which means that I was going faster and doing less work.

So what does this mean? Did I get rid of my full-suspension bike in addition to proclaiming the death of the 26-inch hardtail?

29ERS: THE TAKE AWAY

THREE SWEET 29ERS: 29er frames, wheels and tire technology  has evolved significantly over the last few years and have allowed top racers to win big races on big wheels. There is now very little disadvantage — in terms of weight and tire technology — associated with 29ers.

THREE SWEET 29ERS: 29er frames, wheels and tire technology has evolved significantly over the last few years, allowing top racers to win big races on big wheels. There is now very little disadvantage — in terms of weight and tire technology — associated with 29ers. CLICK ON THE PHOTO TO READ MORE.

29-inch wheels are quite fast in the context of cross-country racing. The big wheels seem to smooth out moderately bumpy terrain and they definitely make descending easier, especially when it’s steep, due to the larger diameter wheel. It’s much harder to go over the handlebars of a big-wheeled bike.

In addition to the testing I carried out on the test 29er, I also raced it in both short track and technical cross-country races. My findings here were twofold. I expected it to be slower for short track because of the importance of quick acceleration in this type of racing. In practice I found it faster than a 26-inch-wheeled bike and was even able to win a local weeknight race on our 29-inch test bike.

In a technical cross-country race, however, I found myself wishing for my full-suspension bike. Even with the larger wheels I was bounced around, which lead to fatigue, not to mention a greater fear of flatting than when on a full-suspension bike.

The prowess of the big wheels in my measured testing and racing leads me to continue to pronounce the death of the 26-inch-wheeled hardtail. At this point, if you’re racing one, I truly believe that you’re at a disadvantage.

For the one-bike quiver, I still conclude that a full-suspension bike is more practical. It’s more fun, more comfortable and the fastest both down the hill and in technical terrain. If you could have two bikes, however, my pick for that second bike would surely be a 29-inch hardtail. I believe the big-wheeled bike is the fastest for smooth-to-moderately bumpy terrain. A 29er is a great tool for racing and is my new go-to short-track racer.

It looks as thought Specialized’s Todd Wells might have the perfect quiver right now as his team allows him both a 29er hardtail and 26-inch-wheeled full-suspension bike. Both of his bikes weigh about 20-pounds, so weight doesn’t factor into his choice and he can focus his decision on which is best for each individual racecourse.

Read about the tools used for this test, and three of Matt’s favorite 29ers.

Matt Pacocha can be reached at velonewsmatt@competitorgroup.com

  • FUNNY!!!
  • phil
    ok i understand the idea of a full suspension in xc but come on mountain biking started on cheap klunkers screaming down fire roads why cant we man up and just use a hard tail and save a thosand dollars i mean i understand the sport has evolved to where one would want a full suspension but if you dont need one dont use one......thats my opinion
  • Nate
    You still can own and ride an inexpensive cruiser up and down your favorite trail -- or at your local race.
  • kerfwagen
    There are a lot of people on this thread claiming to know things they could not possibly know at this point: That is, whether a 29er or 26er is definitively the faster bike. As if that could be true for everybody, on every trail you might ride.

    I think you need to have both bikes, and time trail them on the kind of trail (level of technicality, amount of climbing and twistiness etc.) that you would like to be fast on. Do this a bunch of times. Then you might have some idea about which *you* will fastest on. But not what *everybody* will be faster on.

    Considering I am almost as fast on my heavier, fully rigid redline as I am on my specialied FS epic, I am guessing I am going with the 29er.
  • JohnG
    The benefits of the 29er include greater momentum, traction, and ability to more easily roll over obstacles. The weight of the wheels / tires, of course, is contradictory to everything we've come to believe about what is fast - lighter being better.

    So...if I put heavier, wider tires on a 26" wheeled bike (say 700g 2.3-2.4) it should also carry more momentum, provide more traction, and roll over obstacles more easily. Doing so should just slow the acceleration down.

    I'm struggling believing this would make it a faster race bike. More fun, yes, but not necessarily faster for XC racing. So how would a 29er be faster? I need to try one...
  • ChrisC
    Nice "initial" test. Results are contradictory to the complicated side-by-side testing done over at cyclingnews.com and by another guy I can't remember right now. We need some reproducible results. Why not take the comments here and refine the test. Main two design issues as I see it: you need to be riding a technical course with a lot of elevation and you need to get multiple riders to do the test on the same gear. Carry on!

    Chris
  • chris sieverts
    "Its not the the bike that makes the biker it is the biker who makes the bike." I love the 29er but the 26er is just as fast.
  • Dennis
    Pure hype, no mater what you say. First, companies introduce the new standard, then you get the press to back it up, then you have some people switching from 26 to 29 = more sales and an overall expansion of the MTB market just when sales had started to drop. What is there to debate exactly? The economics of the bike biz? Just get out and ride!
  • BicycleRay
    European courses are different from American trails. American trails stick to single track and rougher design as for euro courses are much faster and smoother. 26 inch wheels are just as fast on 29 wheels on euro courses and the weight is the final advantage. 26 inch is not dead, just depends on where you live.
  • I got a 26 Specialized Epic at the beginning of this year and a month later picked up a Stumpjumper HT 29'er. I quickly found myself riding the 29er exclusively. I found it to be faster and more efficient on the trails that I ride here in western NC. I am late coming to big wheels because of my size, but the 15.5" 29er fits me perfectly. I am curious about normalizing the gearing between 26 and 29. I think a lot of the criticism of 29ers with regards to climbing slower have to do with riding in a "lower" gear. I think the issue comes from running the same gearing as on a 26. If you think back to 700c and 650c wheeled bikes, 650c's ran much larger chainrings to equal the gearing of the 700's. Using that model, 29ers would need smaller chainrings to equal the gearing of the 26.
  • Celtic Dave
    Interesting discussion. The results really don't mean anything conclusive. If we all ride the same course and have different results every time as well (10% is not that big of a diff when you consider the vast margin of error here on the method here). Ride strength and stamina, tire pressure and suspension set up as well as weather could all account for the same deviation without even changing bikes. The point is ride what works for you. If you want to try a big bike go a head. If you want to sick with what you have and enjoy those advantages then hold your ground. Test ride for yourself before you let marketing hype get to you. Just because racers are doing it with some success does not mean it is right for everyone (they’re paid to ride the company’s latest bikes many of which are pushing these new models). Plenty of pro racers rode with shimano biopace rings or even break boosters too and how did those prove out. Ride what you want. Every course has its perfect bike and every rider does too. That might even be a 26 inch hardtail.
  • JumperJohn
    Just got done riding the 650B, I think I found a solution for this debate. It actually rolls over stuff just like the 29ers and handles like a 26er. I know there is hard press movement for the 29er. I also know that very few people have thrown a leg over a 650b I was blown away I currently ride a 29er Hi-FI, It's to bad that 650b wasn't invited to the party!!
  • GordonGray
    The way the bikes were tested:
    "They were ridden in the same smooth-pedaling manner; riding out of the saddle created power spikes and was therefore avoided."
    is not the fastest way to ride a bike.

    Pumping your way over bumps and using every deformation in terrain to propel yourself forward is much more efficient - but the power used in this way of riding can't be measured easily (or at all).

    Anyway I think 29ers are a great way to go for anyone and that the less technically skilled riders would benefit most.

    Ok, time for a ride ;)
  • I have been racing on 29ers for a while now and the advantages far out weigh the disadvantages for me. I have a rigid geared, a hard tail single speed and a geared suspension 29er. They all excel in different conditions over 26" bikes.

    The main reason you still do not see 29ers in DH or freeriding application is Tires. There simply is not a rugged, big knobby tire made yet. The new long travel frames/forks and heavy duty wheels have arrived. Tires are not here yet.

    Now that I have enough experience on how a 29er reacts I am faster on it than on a 26" bike in most circumstances. I have similar test results like matts on my 29ers and I feel less tired.
  • Rob
    I agree with Matt. If you are racing on a 26" hardtail, you are probably at a disadvantage. While they do accelerate faster, which is important if you're racing at an elite level making and responding to numerous attacks on steep grades, for the average rider the added comfort, control, and traction granted by either a 29er or a dually more than makes up for the slight increase in weight.

    And you can now get very stiff, light weight items in 29er. My Cannondale Caffeine weighs 20.9 lbs complete made of stock, off the shelf non-boutique parts.

    Again, rider and riding style, along with tire setup make a big difference (anyone running tubes is at a disadvantage too).

    But remember when we said "who needs disk brakes?" then they turned into the standard?

    Stay tuned.
  • jccolorado
    I have definitely enjoyed reading all the comments on this topic. some smart, some not, some inflammatory, some not. I have been reluctant to accept the 29er but after having ridden a 29er ss the whole summer, inclucdng a stage race, i can say i really like the way the it rolls and the improved ride c/w a 26 HT. my frame of reference for the 26 HT is a Ti IF. Regarding the world cup, it is clearly a case of the indian, not the arrows.
  • smitty
    matt's views are so ridiculous that he should be a fox news host
  • Sonni
    At the end of the day, 'Sneaky Russian' may have said it best:

    "You may find that each bike exels at a certain type of course."

    True.

    But I find it a bit suspect when someone asserts:

    "americans were, have been and will be beaten in uci competitions even if they use 29ers."

    .....when they fail to look at how the U.S. women faired at the recent World CHamps in Australia:
    --5 US elite women in the top 21
    --and 3 of those on 29'rs.

    THis was a very solid World Championships for the Elite US women....& 3 rode 29r's.

    So if you want to use the "what the pro's use" argument as proof in the 26 vs 29 debate......you at LEAST have to consider the obvious TREND of more and more 29r's higher up in the results.
  • Rick
    I think this was a very good analysis and if that riding each bike in the same fashion was the best way to reduce the number of variables. The comments, on the other hand... why the anger? I'm an old dude, started doing BMX in 1979, and have raced motorcycles, DH, DS, XC and road on pretty much every frame material and configuration you can think of with some success... got sponsors and trophies and ended up a reasonable Expert contender for several years. And I am not going to start name calling and stamping around over a new technology. I got my first mountain bike in 1984: rigid steel, friction shifting, big bear trap pedals, slow handing and tough. If you'd told anyone at the time that a carbon-fiber frame with (gasp) a suspension fork, indexed shifting, hydraulic disc brakes and clip-in pedals, weighing in at 20 pounds, would be considered RIDEABLE off-road, let alone "old school" we'd have laughed our wool-clad asses off.

    Instead we rode neon-spattered "modern" bikes in the late 80s. Remember those? Giant tubes, elevated stays, weighed a ton, had no-rise stems, V-brakes, disc rear wheels, those atrocious Scott forks with coil springs and no damping, the Trek "pogo bike" with one fat elastomer and no damping that would kick like a horse over every twig in the trail, AMPs frames that twisted like pasta in every corner and creaked like geriatrics in a limo contest... the list is amazing. Every time we KNEW that this was the future we were riding. Pretty much every time we were wrong. Maybe we'll look back at 29ers and scratch our heads, wondering what we were thinking.

    I happen to ride a carbon 26 hardtail because I like the simplicity and light weight and I don't race any more. Here in the Appalachians we ride a lot of really twisty slippery stuff, steep up and down, and I think the advantages of a bigger wheel might be outweighed by trickier cornering in low-speed threading through rocks and grunting it over logs and through switchbacks.

    But that's my choice, an old ex-racer who wants something light and fun that doesn't need a lot of maintenance. Maybe you're tall and fast and ride out west where a 29er is gonna be perfect. Maybe you like to ride crazy Vermont descents, dropping over logs and rocks and know your 26 FS with fat tires is your ride. I think it's great that we have choices and that there are options so we can all have the most fun possible riding. That's what it's about, not dissing people who ride a different wheel size. Get a grip, shut up, ride and have fun!
  • Peter
    Rick,

    One of the best comments / reply's to a review I have seen in a long time. I happen to ride both a carbon 29 HT from specialized and a carbon epic 26, they both ride great and have thier applications.
    I love having the choice, and applaude your comment "That's what it's about, not dissing people who ride a different wheel size. Get a grip, shut up, ride and have fun!"
blog comments powered by Disqus