Why 32ers Are Coming, But Your Current Bike Likely Isn’t Suddenly Junk
Let me start with a disclaimer: I have not ridden a 32er – at all…
I’m certainly not going to pretend I have first-hand experience of how a 32er mountain bike or gravel bike feels. My opinion is based largely on what I’ve learned from living through the 26 to 27.5 to 29er wheel transitions in mountain biking and from what I’ve seen is being raced lately, particularly in professional gravel and mountain-bike events. Since my original opinion piece on this subject, back in March, I’ve had a number of off-the-record conversations with industry insiders who have a slightly closer view of where this big wheel thing might land…
Now, I may be completely wrong. Time will tell. But based on what I’ve seen so far, this is where I think things are going: 32-inch wheels are going to become increasingly important at the top level of endurance racing. That doesn’t mean everyone needs them.
In fact, I suspect the performance advantage will be small enough that, for the vast majority of riders, moving from a 29er mountain bike or a 700c gravel bike to a 32er platform won’t be anything close to an absolute must-do. I also think, at the pointy end of semi-pro and pro-racing, small advantages are precisely what matter and many of the pros will be jumping to the big hoops as soon as they can.
In case you’ve missed it, the argument for a bigger wheel isn’t particularly complicated. Increase the diameter and the wheel encounters obstacles at a shallower angle. In mountain biking, that can mean improved rollover over (try say that fast, five times) rocks, roots, holes and any uneven terrain. On rough gravel, the same basic principle applies. A larger wheel can carry speed more effectively across uneven surfaces and potentially maintain momentum with slightly less disruption. Also, increase the contact patch and the bike has more grip so it potentially corners better in some scenarios and perhaps is more stable on sketchy climbs. None of this is revolutionary. We’ve seen it before.
The move from 26 to 29ers wasn’t simply a matter of bigger automatically being better. It took years for frame geometry, tyres, suspension and component design to catch up. My first ride on a 29er some 20 years ago ended abruptly – just a few minutes into the singletrack I had enough, turned and went back to the carpark. The bike was terrible! True story! I recall exactly in Tokai where I called it quits, turned around and head back. The geometry on that particularly bike was wacked – you see, at the time, designers thought with bigger wheels they should steepen the head angle to help it initiate turns easier and this turned out to be extremely suboptimal. Over-the-bars-much-lately? But once the industry figured out how to make 29ers work properly – with good head angles, fork offset and trail numbers – the efficiency advantages became difficult to ignore. More grip, more momentum, etc etc
The 27.5 transition followed a slightly different path, finding its place as a compromise between the agility associated with smaller wheels and the rollover and momentum benefits of larger ones. Small sidebar here: do you remember how a certain Nino Schurter still won so many World Cups on a 27.5-wheeled Scott when just about the entire field had moved to 29ers? And that’s the lesson I take from those transitions. Wheel-size changes don’t necessarily replace the previous standard because the old standard suddenly becomes bad. They happen because manufacturers and racers discover that, in certain applications, the new format offers a small but measurable advantage. Endurance racing is one of those applications…
Over a 90-minute race, a tiny difference in how efficiently a bike rolls through rough terrain and carries momentum might not amount to much. Over three, six or ten hours, however, small efficiencies accumulate. If a larger wheel allows an elite rider to carry a little more speed through hundreds or thousands of small imperfections in the surface, the total difference could become meaningful. And at the highest level, meaningful doesn’t have to mean dramatic.
If the difference between two riders at the finish is measured in seconds, a technology that produces a fraction of a percent improvement can be worth pursuing. And this is exactly why I expect to see 32-inch bikes increasingly appearing in elite endurance mountain biking and gravel racing. The professional side of the sport is where the economic and competitive incentives to chase tiny gains are strongest. After all, a marginal gain is still a marginal gain.
What cannot be ignored, is that a 32-inch wheel isn’t going to transform an average rider into a podium racer. It isn’t going to compensate for poor pacing, inappropriate tyre pressures, bad bike setup, inadequate nutrition or simply not being fit enough.
Also, bigger wheels bring their own complications. They affect frame design, wheel weight, handling and bike fit. The advantages may also vary substantially depending on rider size, course characteristics and riding style. On a cross-country course with a lot of low-speed corners and technical descents, the bigger wheels might not be the best bet. For shorter riders, standover and butt clearance is going to be tricky. However, for a professional racer searching for every possible advantage, those compromises may be entirely worthwhile. For everyone else? That’s a different question.
A well-designed 29er with the right tyres and setup is an exceptionally capable machine. So too is a good 700c gravel bike. There is no reason to assume either suddenly becomes slow because a bigger wheel exists. I do suspect we’ll eventually reach a point where 32-inch wheels are simply another normal option, particularly for medium through to taller riders and endurance-focused bikes. Some race courses and some riders will clearly suit them better than others – but what about the Sina Frei’s of this world? Surely a 32er won’t work for her. Bottom line: I don’t think the arrival of 32ers means we all need to rush out and replace our bikes.
What is evident is the industry will move forward. Racing will help determine where the genuine advantages are. The fastest riders will experiment, manufacturers will refine the technology and eventually we’ll have a much better evidence of exactly where 32-inch wheels make sense. That’s exactly how the 26er to 29er and 27.5 transitions happened.
As I said, I haven’t ridden one yet and I could ultimately be wrong about where this goes. But based on the wheel-size transitions we’ve already lived through, what I’m seeing in racing, and what I’m hearing from people in the industry, my bet is that 32ers are coming – especially for endurance racing – mountain bike and gravel. As for Trail and Gravity riding – hmmm, I suspect it’s going to be less of a thing but let’s see.
For most riders though, just don’t confuse coming with immediately necessary. If you happen to be a good fit for the new big wheels, then they may be something you will end up considering the next time you are buying. Until then, rally on. Run what ya brung! //
| IMAGES: UCI |