Reodoc

Hey All, thanks for reading!

I am in the market for a MTB. Lots of trails near by in Northern NJ. I'm mainly a roadie but looking to change things up this winter and get in the woods.

My price range is about ~1.3k. I know that limits me but I'm certain I can get something decent!

My LBS is trying to sell me on a Roscoe 8 but I swear the tires look like one of the geriatric beach cruisers you push grandma in. He also casually showed me a 29er but was definately pushing me towards the bike with fatter tires. I think the Roscoe is a "mid-fattie". Keep in mind they mainly carry Treks, Salsa, and I think Cannondales.

I really don't like the Roscoe 8 and I comes in Orange, blah. I suppose my question is, what's the difference? Am I missing out if I don't go with the Plus sized tires? The 29ers simply seem more like a MTB.

Thx!

MarcusT

Don't be put off by fat tires, millions are switching to them for off road use. Have you ridden the bikes? That should be the deciding factor. Wider tires give better traction and more "float" is loose terrain. There are some helpful videos on Youtube. Check them out

JonathanGennick 

Do you know any local-to-you mountain bikers who have bought new bikes recently? Maybe talk to them about what they chose, and why. Find out what others in your area are liking for the local trails they are riding. Maybe one with a plus bike would let you take a short ride on it. There's nothing like a good trail ride to clarify one's thinking about a bike.

The winds on plus size tires may be shifting too. I've been reading in various places that we might see an adjustment downward toward 2.6" tire widths. For example, here: https://www.outsideonline.com/219436...-mountain-bike. And especially here: A new tire size is coming and it doesn?t suck - Mtbr.com.

Edit, you'll find riders with actual experience in this forum: https://forums.mtbr.com/26-27-5-29-plus-bikes/

dirthurts

Fat tires are going to be heavier and provide a little more rolling resistance.
29ers are going to be faster, a bit more nimble, but provide less squish and traction.
I personally like the nimbleness and quick turning of a 27.5. It's less fast than a 29, but also doesn't feel like I'm riding a tower when things get steep. It's also worth noting that I'm 5'8" and about 172 lbs, so a huge bike is a bit overwhelming for me.

In my opinion, it comes down to tank like forward momentum and traction (fat tires), fast speed and little rolling resistance over obstacles(29) or nimbleness (27.5) but with a solid roll.
I'm not a fan of 26" tires in any form really...

JonathanGennick 

I like this summary. Feels like you've nailed it.

I like them in some applications. It's the nimbleness thing. But I wouldn't point a new buyer toward that size today. You really have to want 26, and know why you want it, and then go way out of your way to obtain it.

tyrion

27.5+ gives you a bigger footprint (tire-print) for more traction and can handle a wider variety of terrain. Old fashioned 29ers are faster.

There are 12,500 videos comparing the two tire types.

Many newer bikes can take either type of tire.

Canker

The roscoe is a trail bike, has a 120mm fork and a slackish 68 degree head angle. I'd bet the 29er the shop showed you is your standard 100mm 70 degree headangled XC bike. I personally find a trail bike more fun to ride.

Just to add to what tyrion said a 29er and a 27.5+ are basically the same diameter and about all 27.5+ bikes can also run 29er wheels. With 29ers it is a bit more hit and miss if they have the clearance to fit the wider 27.5+ tires in the rear.

Reodoc

Thanks Mate, I will check out these videos.

Reodoc

Lets say I'm deciding between a Stache 5 and an X-Caliber 9. Am I in the same quandary as before... tire difference?

Reodoc

That is my way of thinking. The sheer size of the of the 29. Mind you all these sizes are foreign to me. Does PLUS just simply refer to width of the tire? I know there are 27.5 + and 29 +?

I like the idea of a more nimble tire, but my LBS really thinks I'd enjoy a larger tire.

dirthurts

Yes, the "+" is simply additional width. I've never found a plus size necessary (I'd rather have the easier pedal), but if you do a lot of mud or sand it could pay off.

A BIG tip here, don't let anyone tell you what you "would enjoy". Think of how you naturally move. Are you quick nimble guy? Do you exert your weight? Consider that you'll likely, once you learn the ropes, bike a very similar way. I've never met a tank who rode like a ninja, and vice versa. I'd recommend picking a tire size that fits your natural way of moving.

I find a lot of die hard 29 guys are starting to trickle back to the 27.5 sizes (myself included). It's, in my opinion, just a little bit too far to one extreme. But, that's just my experience/opinion, so use your own judgement.

Reodoc

That's some good advice - In your opinion, what do you consider the sweet spot and what do you consider extreme?

Canker

No again you are also comparing a trail bike the Stache 5 and a standard XC bike the x-caliber.

And no the + is not just extra width it is also extra diameter hence why you can run a 29er wheel in a 27.5+ bike.

Pendergast

If I were buying a hardtail, 27.5+ is where I'd start looking. The Salsa Timberjack seems pretty decent. Not crazy about some of the colors, but the geometry looks like it would be a fun bike.

dirthurts

True, but they're still not quite the size of a 29. The rim size is still the same except the width(if my observations are correct).

Between the bikes you chose, I would offer a third option. You can easily go full suspension with air at those prices via other, more affordable but comparable brands.

https://www.rei.com/product/111785/g...-275-bike-2017

https://www.diamondback.com/atroz-comp

prj71

27.5+ tires are what mountain bikes should have been in the first place. I have both a plus bike with 27.5 x 3.0 tires and 29er with 29 x 2.35 tires.

Riding on my local trails I lose traction on the back tire quite often with the 29er. It likes to slip on roots where as my 27.5+ doesn't.

dirthurts

What tires are you using on the 29? I've not really had that problem. Although a cheaper tire, the WTB wolverines seems to lock up great on a 29.

Reodoc

Thanks. I was also looking at a full suspension Fuel EX 5 29, 2017 model priced a decently.

prj71

Rocket Ron on both. I made a mistake in my post above...the 29er is 29 x 2.25.

prj71

27.5+ tires are within a few mm diameter of a 29 tire.



The rim size is different between the two. 27.5+ is 584 mm diameter and 29 is 622 mm diameter.

dirthurts

It varies dramatically by about 5-15mm based on what I've read, as shown by real world measurements in this thread:
27.5+ tire height- Mtbr.com

They mention the same image you posted. In some cases it's much than I was thinking.

FrozenK

Just like the actual diameter of any other size will vary.

In general, as tires get wider they get taller. So a large 650b (aka 27.5) tire will roughly end up the same size as a 29r (700c) tire. And a fat bike tire (26 inch by 3.8 or more) is roughly the same diameter too. And a 26inch-2.4 or 2.5 will be about the same diameter as a 650b 2.2/2.1

A wider tire will have more traction but be heavier. Also, the bigger the tire (both diameter and width) the harder it becomes to fit it OK a frame. It is all about compromises.

cycloaptrgangr

A key point that hasn't been mentioned is that the higher volume plus tires allow you to run lower pressures which equals better traction.

Noctilux.95

I just picked up a 27.5" plus+plus/semi-fat bike. Its a 2018 Trek Farley EX 9.8 which comes with 27.5" wheels, 3.8" semi-fat tires. The bike is awesome! This bike climbs almost as good as my my current bike, a Giant Anthem Advanced SX cross country bike, though it goes down a single track faster with more stability and control. It rolls over roots, rocks, and loose dirt so much easier than my cross country bike.

colombo357

If you're price conscious, note that 27.5+ tires are generally more expensive than regular 29" tires.