Since being spotted on a prototype BMC, the widespread adoption of 32-inch wheels in mountain biking has been the talk of the town for at least the past year. I’ve had the opportunity to ride the wheelsize, and since then, I’ve decided that there’s a much bigger picture to consider, one that extends well beyond mountain biking.
- “Real tangible advantages”: Schwalbe reckons 32in tyres offer more grip, more stable handling and faster cornering
- Life Time’s drop bar ban was made in the interest of fairness, claims Payson McElveen
- 32in wheels for mountain bikes are here… but do we really need them?
Before spending a bit of time on Starling’s mega mullet, Big Bird, a bike that runs a 32” wheel up front paired with a 29” hoop at the rear, I was sceptical about the new tech but excited to see what all the fuss is about. When riding that bike, the advantages became instantly clear, but I was left with one lasting impression – 32-inch wheels aren’t just for mountain bikes.
During that time with Starling’s mahoosive-wheeled trail bike, I rode a bit of gravel, and a bit of trail centre tracks, leaning more towards the latter. And I’ll say that the big wheel does provide some tangible advantages. Mostly, it makes the ride of the 120mm Big Bird ridiculously smooth. That boost in smoothness ups the bike’s general composure, making it feel a lot more comfortable than I would expect of a short-travel trail bike when tackling technical terrain. In the hands of the average Joe, they might not be faster, but more comfortable and composed through lumpy trails.
It’s also incredibly stable. There are a lot of forces at play with the 32-inch wheel, and because there’s a larger mass spinning further away from its centre, the level of stability it produced was seriously impressive. Additionally, because there’s a fairly sizable contact patch with the big wheel, I found grip to be plentiful, despite riding on the frighteningly low-treaded Maxxis Aspen.
Another key benefit of the big wheel is that because there’s an increase in inertia compared to 29in wheels, for 27.5, the wheel wants to stay upright much more. While that doesn’t sound like all that great, and in some respects, it’s not, I found that rolling through thick mud was much more doable. Rather than get taken and swept away by the quick loss in traction, the forces at work helped the bike stay on line and upright, as it glided over the slop, despite the bike being equipped with the frighteningly low-treaded Maxxis Aspen.
Of course, the 32-inch wheel wasn’t without its downsides. As you’ll expect, it’s not as maneuverable as smaller wheels, as forcing it away from the plane it’s rolling in (I mean turning), takes a noticeably higher level of effort. We’re also not going to see such large wheels on bikes with more suspension travel, at least not any time soon, unless those bikes are going to be especially large. Check out Dirty Sixer’s MonsterEnduro. It’s a big old thing, but although it dons ‘enduro’ in the title, it runs 140mm of rear suspension. That said, the brand says that the big wheels don’t need tonnes of travel, and I would agree, thanks to the 32-inch wheel’s smoother roll over.
But to progress my ramblings, the one trait that the Big Bird’s 32-inch wheel has left me pondering is how it pedals. It takes a little more effort to get up to speed, but once at speed, it feels as if it’s rolling faster with less effort. It’s not too dissimilar to aero road or gravel bikes, which are more efficient at higher speeds.
So while the bigger wheel will bring benefits to cross-country mountain bikes with some clear disadvantages, I reckon those benefits are a match made in heaven for gravel. And because of how gravel bikes are ridden, the downsides won’t be as detrimental.
Now, we have seen the odd 32-inch gravel bike, namely Genesis’s prototype Vagabond, and the bike at Schwalbe’s Velofollies stand. But 32-inch wheels on gravel bikes is a potential that’s seriously overlooked, for now, at least.
I say that because gravel bikes typically ride at consistently higher speeds, and they’re not often threading the needle through trees and such. So they’ll benefit from that efficiency at speed, but not become such a victim to the wheel’s lesser agility.
There has also been a lot of technology built to make gravel bikes grippier and more comfortable. I mean, suspension forks, elastomer-clad seat posts, and of course, gravel bikes are, more recently, adopting large-volume mountain bike tyres. Bigger wheels solve all of the things that these products are aimed at achieving.
Although there are very few about, tyres to fit 32-inch tyres are just higher in volume, so you can run lower pressures, revel in more comfort, and take full advantage of a boost in grip. That doesn’t mean that we’ll stop seeing more comfort-inducing flexy frames and bouncy seat posts, however.
Now, as a bit of a disclaimer, I’m not especially tall at 5’10”. And I’m not a complete believer that certain wheel sizes are height-specific, to a point, of course. Smaller wheels allow for smaller frame sizes, which allow smaller people to fit on more bikes. So, we’re not likely to see 32-inch wheels on small mountain bike frames, apart from a few that cater only for the sharp end of XC. I believe that a wheel size’s performance is more relative to the rider, and importantly, personal choice.
On mountain bikes, 32-inch wheels are going to go one of two ways. They might be the flash in the pan that plus tyres were, or they’re going to become commonplace on the XC circuit. However, having ridden a 32-inch wheeled bike (granted, mega mullet), I predict that the bigger wheels bring all of the advantages without such harsh downsides to gravel. So… over to you, bike industry.
You might also like:
- DJI’s super powerful Avinox motor looks set to dominate, and 32in MTB wheels are officially a thing: all the best tech from Europe’s biggest bike show
- Race Face’s carbon Era eMTB wheels get 130Nm hub rating and lifetime warranty
- Built for aerodynamics and high volume tyres, Nobl’s FAR Series wheels are set to be its lightest yet, starting at 1135g
12 thoughts on “I’ve ridden a 32-inch wheel, and now, I think we’re overlooking its gravelly potential”
Fast forward to 2050. MTBers and gravelers are riding bikes with tyres compatible with the olde Penny Farthings.
Yup. Pretty cool indeed!
Until they discover that 32.33-inch are 17% more efficient in 14.5-degree wind on Sundays, that is. Otherwise, you totally need a 30.97 one.
Bigger wheels should roll better over lumpy ground and bigger wheels will lead to more aesthetically pleasing bikes for very tall riders. The hazard in my view is that the market cannot support all sizes and even 29″ wheels are already too unwieldy for the shorter riders that comprise most of the world’s population, including, critically, most women. I fear the loss of sensible sizes for average users, pushed aside by marketing of equipment that gives marginal gains to superathletes in extreme terrain.
At 167cm tall I couldn’t agree more with Rookybiker, I find certain 29 ers problematic, particularly running a dropper and getting low off the back(700c -50s are just ok!) 32 would be a total nightmare from stand over – toe over lap being the first of many problems, sorry it’s a big no from me!
Ah yes. Because what a gravel bike needs is a shed ton more weight.
None of the 32 tyre options are likely to be in Gravel friendly widths and weights.
Parts of this article are baffling.
>a bike that runs a 32” wheel up front paired with a 29” hoop at the rear
Why doesn’t it have two wheels? What use is a hoop on a bicycle?
>it makes the ride of the 120mm Big Bird ridiculously smooth
You know that’s only 12cm, don’t you? (4.7in.) Rather tiny for a bike… Perhaps that is the measurement of a component you failed to mention.
Why has this site swallowed my line breaks? Where has the ‘Preview’ box gone, and the Edit button? Has it been enshittified?
The Enigma gravel bike I recently tested was an XL, on 50 mm tyres, and it had around 30 mm toe clearance when clipped in.
You need exactly that 30 mm to accommodate the 32 mm larger radius 32″ wheel and same width tire (the taller axles help).
What to do for smaller frames? Sure, you might add 10 mm of offset, that helps, but less than the toe clearance loss even on an L, methinks?
Let alone when running the cushy and grippy 32×2.4″ tyres.
Can gravel let go of the super steep head tube angles? Are those steep angles of a special use for drop bar bikes? Road and cross bikes used them as well, despite lack of tight hairpins to negotiate, which was why mountainbikes used to have them. XC bikes let go of steep head tube angles prioritizing the ever rougher descends built into public trails and race courses.
Monstercross bikes (29″ in a gravel bike) already tend to run slacker head tube angles. But those are not ridden by mainstream gravellers, but rather by people who don’t mind to differ.
With 32″ gravel bikes forced to adopt more modern-XC-like front ends…when will the drop bars finally be given up? Alt bars come in wonderful shapes, all of them banned by the UCI. But when you’re not racing, just enjoying the freedom and quiet of non-paved roads…do you need drop bars? Are drop bars of ANY use over alt bars that accept lighter and cheaper MTB controls?
With alt bars you can have wider bars for leverage and control. You can have a built in aero position you can comfortably hold for hours on end.
Is gravel a performance concept, or a handicap category?
If you were to just set PBs on a gravel course, no UCI rules, would you end up with a drop bars, if you were as bikenerdy as me, only cared about PBs and comfort?
That word… it doesn’t mean what you think it means.
I think you’re going to need to be more specific, because no-one can tell who or what you’re responding to.
[placeholder for obligatory picture meme of Inigo Montoya]
Riders as short as 167 cm (I can’t seem to reply to a specific comment) are already riding and loving 32″ hardtails.
Children and adults under 150cm (exist that) are loving 29″ and bikes barely get bigger from bigger wheels. With gravel, that’s a bit different when you allow UCI to dictate you bar style, controls style and by extension, top tube length.