29" road bike wheels.

Why would you want to have ~2cm more in diameter?

>>1016515
This is why I don't ever run tires.
Whatever tire you use is gonna be wider than the rim it fits on, and if I wanted to roll on something thick I'd buy a fucking MTB.
Rims are real.

But they are

What difference does it make?

>>1016523
Biggest pro I can imagine is an easier time on bad surfaces without compromising tire pressure/width/grip

This is some real incoherent posting here gentlemen

wheel weight matters too.

>>1016516
18mm?

>>1016538
17mm

They are. 28" and 29" rims have the same diameter.

Don't even try to understand it. It's called marketing.

>>1016512
How is this board even slower than it was before?

>>1016561
It's a holiday weekend, cunt

File: penny-farthing1.jpg (44KB, 400x267px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 400x267px

>>1016512
Why aren't all road bikes pennyfarthings?

>>1016585

>nextXCfad.jpg

File: moulton_double_pylon_d004n38w.jpg (71KB, 670x503px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 670x503px

>>1016512
>Why aren't all road bikes 29"?
A greater question is why aren't all road bikes 20" (406mm)?

If you want to build a range of frame sizes and want to use the same size wheels, you can't do that with big wheels because they're disproportionate for smaller riders. You *can* do it with small wheels tho.

As to the harshness issue of small wheels, small wheels also allow more room for designing a frame with suspension.

And small wheels resist tacoing better since they're more laterally stiff... And a folding bike with small wheels will pack down smaller than one with large wheels will....

So in the end the question becomes, why aren't all bikes mini-folding-velos with full suspension?

>>1016585
>check out my 69er

>>1016950
622 doesn't really become and issue until you get to really small manlet frames, for most people it's not an issue. Because you don't need room for suspension (which adds extra weight, more flex, less aero, worse reliability, and more cost) you can get the top tube that little bit lower for stand over clearance and bringing the seat and bars down.

The strength advantages of smaller wheels also aren't really needed on road bikes, the only time a wheel is getting tacoed is after a crash.

>why aren't all bikes mini-folding-velos with full suspension?
Suspension I've addressed. As for why large wheels instead of small, one of the reasons I can think of is gearing.

>>1016993
>622 doesn't really become and issue until you get to really small manlet frames

What about the female half of the world? We should have stuck to 650b imo.

>>1016561
I left for a few days after the f/o/ggots flooded the board. Im here to stay after seeing the mods did their work

>>1017066
47/48cm frames are good down to around 5ft, midgets should obviously use smaller wheeled bikes but I don't see why that should mean the rest of us should also be using small wheeled bikes.

>>1016950
forgot to mention, small wheels have low moment of inertia so they can accelerate and brake faster

>>1016993
>Because you don't need room for suspension (which adds extra weight, more flex, less aero, worse reliability, and more cost)
Once upon a time, people said that about pneumatic tires too, ya know.

And not too long ago, they said it about mountain bikes.... (some particularly obstinate people are *still* saying it...)

>>1017066
>What about the female half of the world?

They don't race.

>>1017092
We're talking about road bikes, not mountain bikes. Suspension doesn't make you any faster on the road, in fact it's just going to slow you down. If you're after more comfort then there are other and better ways to achieve it.

>>1016554
Wheel size is traditionally about tire diameter, not rim diameter. 700c is supposed to have the same tire diameter as 700a, 700b and 700d.