http://www.bikerumor.com/2014/03/06/tai ... more-74156

I said a long time ago that 27.5 fat / 650B+ would be just the thing.. : ) I have no idea if it is a good idea but on paper it makes a lot of sense to me.

Lighter than a 4" fat, smaller / more realistic OD than 29+, same OD as a normal 29". Winner?

You could probably get away with keeping the frame and changing the wheels instead - on certain frames possibly. But is there much of a difference between 26 & 27.5 anyway?

The difference that I'm interested in is that it has less rubber and more rim - so it's lighter in theory and there's less air volume - but still enough. A Knard is probably enough too but the 780mm OD is getting pretty big. I'm not sure if we need more than a 29" wheel's 740-750mm OD but to have that OD with more tyre squash could be good, that's why I was hoping for a 650B+. If you like fat bikes this is 'less' but if you like big tyre 29ers this could be 'more'. It could also be just a load more wheel size bollcks )

Yep - I always thought the Krampus would have been better as a 650B. I'm very much interested in something between my 29er and my fatbike - preferably as a wheel option into one of the former.

What I want is 29x5".

Bud and Lou just aren't enough.

Some people just can't get enough roll-over : )

A 650b+ might be a nice thing to stick in the front of a 26" wheeled bike?

I caught up with a couple of blokes on 36" unicycles the other week, the wheels were about the same size as that pic

jameso wrote:

Some people just can't get enough roll-over : )

I'll take a wild guess at where that picture was taken…………is it America by any chance?

Ray Young wrote:I'll take a wild guess at where that picture was taken…………is it America by any chance?

Lilliput actually, the bike's normal size )

jameso wrote:

Ray Young wrote:I'll take a wild guess at where that picture was taken…………is it America by any chance?

Lilliput actually, the bike's normal size )

I want 29x5" as well, then I will buy a fatty :)

I want 29x5" as well, then I will buy a fatty :)

29" x 5" would actually be a horrible thing to ride ... I shudder to think.

a few more 29+ tyres showing up though. Which is nice.

s8tannorm wrote:

I want 29x5" as well, then I will buy a fatty :)

29" x 5" would actually be a horrible thing to ride ... I shudder to think.

My logic says this....

26 x 2.3 is good

26 x 5 is better

29 x 2.3 is very good

Surely 29 x 5 will be at least reasonable.

hey bear bones! hello, first post.

29+ and 29 (2.3) is great i think
about to find out if i like a fat front with nate as well. i think 29+ is the way but i want to be sure.

i agree that the 29+ is getting big but i think as long as the back end is smaller.

two of my mates have bought bikes - a mukluk and an ecr. interesting times as they both canned 26 full sussers. chins will be stroked. psi will be discussed.

fat seems a bad idea on the rear. thats preconception rather than experience.

650b? no idea.

been riding for 25 years. last 2.5 on my first non 26. i think bigger wheels are fundamental better off road whatever size. its exciting times to be a biker. i love experimental and most of this stuff 'works'.

(love the site btw. planning a route, ill be picking your brains! on everything from tarps to torque wrenches)

Hello :)

Somehow having different sized wheels at the front and back seems wrong somehow! I have no sensible reason for this feeling.

Yorlin Im with you on that

Saddle looks a bit low