A major motivation behind my starting Singular in the first place was big wheels. I was an early adopter and strong advocate since I first rode a Gary Fisher X-Caliber with then new, exciting, and divisive 29" wheels - on loan from a Prague bike shop in 2003. What attracted me was not just the better roll-over, greater inherent stability or traction of the larger diameter wheels - it was that for the first time as a full grown adult I felt like I was on a bike which actually fit me. I'm taller than average at around 190cm or 6'3", but there are lots of folks out there taller than me!
The first two prototype Swifts in 2006 sporting 29" rubber - man those things looked huge!
In designing production and custom frames in the 20+ years since those halcyon days, I encountered more than one occasion when for particularly tall customers some even larger wheels would be a better choice. We were still able to design some very nice riding bikes around 29" wheels for a number of extra tall folks, but there comes a point when even they're too small.
32" (and indeed 36") wheels have been around for some time now, largely in the unicycle world (where bigger wheels are your only route to bigger gears) and by some custom builders specialising in these wheels - shout out to Dirty Sixer who've been building 36 and 32" bikes for over a decade. With an exceedingly limited and low quality selection of tyres they were mostly the preserve of people who needed such large wheels to suit unusually large proportions. I even made a few drawings at one time, but they never became reality, largely due to the lack of quality tyres suited to performance riding.
So when early last year I started hearing some rumblings about a new 32" tyre my interest was piqued. Maxxis were rumoured to be bringing out a lightweight folding tubeless mountain bike tyre - that changed everything. I had a number of other projects on the go over the course of the year, so it was November by the time I was able to get hold of some tyres and rims, then get a frame built up and rolling.
In fact I had the wheels built before the frame arrived - and couldn't help throwing one on the front of my Swift to get a feel for it. The Swift lent itself well to this because though the current generation of frames are built around a 483mm AC fork, I had some forks which are 470mm. This worked out nicely as the shorter fork would compensate to a large extent the effect of the larger wheel radius.
The Mega Mullet
The immediate impression on looking down at the massive front wheel is one of disbelief at its size - which keeps drawing the eye back. Settling in and riding, just watching the trail ahead, it felt remarkably normal. My feeling of how the front end geometry change with the shorter fork seemed validated, as at moderate speeds the steering response felt very similar to the stock fork and a 29" wheel. But the way that wheel rolls over stuff is something else! We're well familiar with the concept of 29" wheels rolling over things more easily than 26" - those things apply all over again in making the jump from 29 to 32. At higher speed the gyroscopic effect of the larger wheel becomes more noticeable - however once your body and feeling adapts to the sensation and different steering dynamics it feels very natural. The way it carried speed and held its line really got me excited to try the full 32" experience.
Design thoughts
Diving in and designing a frame around a new and notably larger wheel is not something new to me, I went through much of that process in designing the first Swift in the early days of 29ers. So I was keen to try to take my thinking and lessons learnt in that process and the subsequent development of many different 29" and 29+ bikes and apply them to even larger hoops.
Adding bigger wheels does a lot to how a bike behaves - more needs to change than just making an extra 20mm of space in the chainstays.
My aim for the prototype 32" frame was to create an all-round nice riding cross-country, bikepacking, flat bar, rigid specific MTB - much like the Swift or Pegasus but with larger wheels. I intentionally made it about as small as I think is reasonable for these wheels - effectively the equivalent of a size L Swift, suitable for riders from around 5'10" to 6'2". Though this would be slightly small for me, I wanted for it to be feasible for as many other folks as possible to ride it.
A key concern was to keep the chainstays relatively short, but not too short. Short chainstays help keep the overall wheelbase in check, making it easier to shift weight around and manoeuvre the bike. However, too short and you and up with a bike which doesn't want to stay in a straight line and has a front end prone to lifting on steep climbs.
Bottom bracket drop is a critical component in determining how a bike handles. I recall reading many years ago an article by Grant Petersen in the Rivendell Reader which I can't seem to find online. He provided an explanation which compared the effect of BB drop to the feel and ease of balancing on a pair of stilts - the type which are two lengths of wood with steps on the side for your feet and you hold the top handles. When the steps are toward the bottom of the stilts it is quite easy to balance as you have more leverage at the top of the stilts to correct your balance. When your balance starts to shift your feet are moving a smaller distance off axis and you have more leverage in correcting it back to the balance point - however your hands need to move further to do this. With the steps higher, once the balance point is found and maintained, it does not require much movement of the handles to hold that point, but if you start to lose balance it is more difficult to correct it.
So having more bottom bracket drop is like having lower stilts, it takes less effort to balance, and changing that balance point requires less force from the rider - i.e. is more manoeuvrable. Often people equate greater bottom bracket drop with increased stability. I think this is right, but in a weird sort of way. That stability comes about by having the ability to be able to change direction - not feeling 'stuck' on a line - so it is stable by virtue of its manoeuvrability. It adds stability in the sense that in a steady state it is easier to hold straight, but when you want to change direction it's easier to do so.
Often in thinking about the effects of changes to bicycle geometry, I find it's helpful to consider extreme examples. So try a thought experiment with analogy of Grant's stilts in a two wheeled context. Consider two extreme examples of BB drop - a tall bike which is one (or more) frames welded atop a normal frame, with the cranks sitting a metre or more above the wheel axle. Compared to a scooter with the platform close to the ground, so the platform level is a long way below the wheel axles - effectively having a lot of bottom bracket drop. The tall bike is actually not that difficult to ride in a straight line once you are on and moving, but it is difficult to control at lower speed as it is very difficult to change your centre of gravity in relation to the wheel axles other than by steering. Conversely, it's very easy to balance on the scooter, it's even possible without moving.
Of course, none of this works in isolation and every bike must consider the interplay of multiple different elements in the design and construction of the frame and fork. The relationship between bottom bracket position and weight distribution with steering geometry is fundamental to how a bike rides. But bottom bracket drop is a critical one and especially requires some thought when changing wheel size.
I like the amount of BB drop on the Swift and Gryphon (75mm at centre of BB +/- 6mm thanks to the EBB) effectively around 81mm when using large 29x2.6-3.0 tyres and the EBB in the bottom position. My thinking was to essentially scale the amount of drop up so that it remains the same as a proportion of wheel size, arriving at 90mm for my first prototype frame. However, due to the additional height of the wheels, though the BB drop is higher, the BB height still went up a little, making it somewhat trickier to get on and off the bike. So our next round of prototype frames will be up to 100mm drop, which will still give sufficient BB clearance, but will put the BB even further below the wheel axles, improving our 'stilt step factor' and increasing our ability to work against the gyroscope of the larger wheels and improving manoeuvrability.
So how does it ride?
As above, the first impression is OMG those things are huge. Once you get over that, it feels remarkably like a bike - albeit a really massive one. That size brings changes both good and bad very reminiscent of when we made the shift from 26" to 29" wheels. The rollover ability is immediately apparent and these wheels just eat up rough and chunky sections - clearly this is still a rigid bike, so you still feel the big hits, but the degree to which it smooths out the small to medium stuff is remarkable. That big front wheel is also confidence inspiring in rolling off ledges and steps - the tipping point of going over the bars feels much further away - a sensation which will be further increased with some more BB drop. The trade-off there is the possibility of bum buzz (see note below) as your weight is back over the rear wheel when tackling larger drops.
For general off-road riding on more open but still rough trails the bike just flies, it carries momentum like a locomotive once up to speed. Across slimy off camber ruts it holds its line incredibly.
Cornering has a different feel to it. You notice the gyroscopic effect of the big wheel, and initial turn in feels more hesitant. However the body quickly adapts to this in my experience and it feels natural before long. But that doesn't change the laws of physics, the bigger wheel is going to have a longer turning radius and if lots of tight twisty trails are a regular part of your riding diet, maybe this isn't your wheel-size. But on moderate and long radius turns it feels on rails, traction is incredible for what is quite a lightly knobbed tyre in the Aspen tread pattern - more on tyres below. I put this down (as with 29" wheels) to a larger and different shaped contact patch. With a larger wheel radius the shape of the rubber's contact patch (all else being equal) gets longer and narrower - more of an elliptical shape. The section provides better grip laterally than a contact patch which is shorter and fatter as it is gaining purchase on a greater section of dirt. The longer patch also makes it more resistant to turning, which again is more noticeable at low speeds.
For the riding around here (Chiltern Hills, SE England) climbing tends towards short, steep and punchy, so I can't really speak to how they do on multiple mile long, sustained climbs (yet!). However, on our short steep stuff (with an added layer of slimy filth at this time of year) they've been nothing short of mind-blowing. The combination of long chainstays, bottom bracket below axles, a long top tube and that big, long contact patch keeps them gripping and going forward long after I'd normally have spun out and ground to a halt on normal wheeled bikes. This has been especially surprising considering the very modestly knobbed Aspen tread - which wouldn't normally be my choice for UK winter conditions...... I really hope Maxxis bring out something like a Rekon or/and Rekon Race. A few thoughts on parts and tyre availability below.
Bum buzz. An inescapable fact of these wheels is the sheer size of them puts the top of the rear wheel closer to your rear end - so if you're really hanging off the back of the saddle over the rear wheel, on a large drop in for instance, there's an increased chance of the wheel making contact with your nether regions, which may be add a frisson of excitement to your ride. For technical riding with steep drops this may be a factor - especially for riders at the bottom end of the size range for this wheel size.
Who are 32" wheels for?
Are they just for the tall folks? I only plan to offer the stock geometry Albatross in three sizes - L, XL, and a fairly gargantuan XXL. The large stock Albatross has a minimum saddle height of around 760mm with a 170mm dropper seatpost. My long held opinion is that wheel size should be proportionate to bike, and ultimately rider size. This is why our Swift and Gryphon frames only come in sizes M-XL, and when I did the 26" wheeled Hummingbird way back in 2009 it came in S-L. So my stance at this stage is that riders should generally be around 5'10" (177cm) to consider this as an option. Those over 6'2" (188cm) it will really feel natural, and for those 6'6" (198cm) plus would be crazy to look elsewhere if considering a new bike of this style. Of course, we will also be able to offer custom framesets built around this wheelsize, probably with a minimum height of around 5'7" (170cm)
What about riding style? They are amazing for relatively non-technical technical riding at higher average speeds. They carry speed unbelievably well, and hold a line while smoothing out rough, chattery trails. For covering big distances over rough terrain I truly think they offer a great advantage over 29" for those big enough to ride them.
Tyre choice and platform longevity
"The Tire" this time around is not the WTB Nanoraptor (the first commercially available 29" tyre) - but the Maxxis Aspen. For the moment, it's the first and only player on the field. Interestingly, they are not dissimilar to the venerable Nano - a light weight, supple carcass, with a round profile, a relatively small side knob and fast rolling centre strip. Almost a semi-slick. My 32" Aspens came in around 770g, very respectable for what is a massive tyre. However they are quite thin, and while I've not yet had any major slashes (fingers crossed....) it feels like they could be susceptible to that if riding in sharp, rocky terrain. There are rumours (and even some spy pics of protos) of a chunkier Maxxis tread, and Schwalbe have announced they're throwing their hat in this very large ring. The first tyre from them is a rather spindly 50mm, but could be a very fast option for more gravel leaning riding. Other tyre manufacturers are rumoured but not yet formally announced.
Are they here to stay then? That remains to be seen. I've been incredibly impressed in riding them so far and sincerely hope they find a long term spot in the bike industry. Certainly there seems to be significant industry interest. We wouldn't be hearing about more tyres and big brand suspension forks if there weren't OEM orders from a major bike brand. I strongly suspect we will see 32" wheeled bikes in some big player's 2027 line-up. It feels at this point like it's more than a 750d flash in the pan, it could indeed be the death knell for 750d. But whether you can expect to be riding a 32" wheeled bike in a decade (and able to buy replacement parts) it's hard to say right now, but I certainly hope so and will be doing everything I can to make that a reality.