Reading through the archives it seems that in the past 24” was the preferred size for technical muni, with cranks between 140 and 170mm and tires running 2-3” wide.
These days it seems like 26” and 27.5” are the preferred sizes. Crank length is between 110 and 150mm and tires seem to be 3” wide or close to it and fat tires seem to have come and gone.
The crank lengths getting shorter makes sense considering that brakes became common equipment in that time. Same thing with tire width. Fat bikes and wide tires/plus size tires became common in that period. So people tried different things and some worked and developed new preferences.
Changing to the larger wheel makes a little less sense to me however. Obviously 26” and 27.5” have vastly larger selections of rims and tires, but it’s not like the 24” is an oddball size like the 32”. There is still a selection of good tires and rims available and in the past it seems that the consensus was that the 24” was superior for technical downhill. This makes good sense too considering, all else being equal, the smaller wheel will be lighter, stronger, lower to the ground, and cranks of the same length will provide more leverage.
Now there’s also obviously a point where smaller is not better. A 19” uni for example would lack the speed or roll over ability most would find necessary for muni.
Just wondering what the rest of you think of this. Are 26” or 27.5” really as good or better than 24” for technical muni, or is it just a matter of they now have the best parts available and the compromise of using a larger wheel is less than the compromise of using inferior parts? Or did riders in the past just ride 24” because that’s what the Schwinns and Torkers were and it took a decade or so to discard old habits?