Powered by Outside

6ft riding a medium ??

  • Previous Page
Author Message
flag skinnerz88
Posted: Apr 21, 2020 at 14:04 Quote
So im looking to buy a new long travel enduro . Previously i have rode a medium downhill bike but now looking for an enduro as more pedaling is involved in my riding these, days but not sure for medium or large as i do prefer to have the bike slightly smaller for jumping etc but will the medium affect me on pedaling up hill etc ?? Im buying second hand so bit harder to be trying the bikes out in shops etc ..
do any of you guys ride mediums at 6ft??
flag R-M-R
Posted: Apr 21, 2020 at 14:18 Quote
Two things to consider:

1. Old bikes are smaller than new bikes.
2. Nominal sizing is all over the map, with examples in the past of an XL from one company being smaller than a Small in another. The "reach" dimension is a better indicator of size than the nominal size.

At 6' myself, I can't imagine being satisfied with the fit and handling of a Medium from a few years ago. Depends on the model, but I think Large is a better bet.
flag skinnerz88
Posted: Apr 21, 2020 at 14:27 Quote
My last bike was a specialized pitch pro medium .. but now looking at trek remedy/ transition patrol or santacruz nomad all 2019 models.

Im new to newer bike geomatry! How can you measure your reach against the reach charts for bikes ?
flag HaggeredShins
Posted: Apr 21, 2020 at 15:01 Quote
Lol ^^

OP, bike sizes mean almost nothing anymore. My "large" Murmur is practically an XL fitwise for most brands and my large '18 Furious is squarely in more of a modern medium fit. Trying bikes is extremely important, but knowing what kind of reach and stack work for you and your type of riding is helpful, along with knowing how effective seat angle will position you in the cockpit for pedally activities.

At ~5'10-11 I've learned I generally prefer bikes (of relative stack height) between 450-470 reach for having the most fun and 470+ for race oriented geo. There are very few mediums that fall into that range and if I were a little bit taller, if I were a baller, the entire range of mediums would be out as it practically is already.
flag friendlyfoe
Posted: Apr 21, 2020 at 15:03 Quote
Reach number will be in the geometry chart.

My large 2014 Giant trance has a 439mm reach whereas the 2020 medium is 435mm. Some companies their mediums are as long as 450mm reach so depending on the company at 6'0 I may be on either a medium or large.

DH bikes are generally a little bit shorter and as such have a shorter reach. I've never understood why this is.

Also keep in mind that reach is + whatever length stem you use, so shorter/longer stems will change the fit of a bike.
flag R-M-R
Posted: Apr 21, 2020 at 15:12 Quote
friendlyfoe wrote:
Some companies their mediums are as long as 450mm

The longest Medium is 502 mm, which is longer than most XLs up to MY2019. Sizing is all over the map.


friendlyfoe wrote:
DH bikes are generally a little bit shorter and as such have a shorter reach. I've never understood why this is.

The fits of trail bikes have to accommodate climbing and descending. DH bikes accommodate only descending. A higher front end and shorter reach works when the bike is expected to be tilted downward. Also, DH bikes have long front-centres due to the slack head-tube angles, so they don't need as much reach to get a decently stable wheelbase.


friendlyfoe wrote:
Also keep in mind that reach is + whatever length stem you use, so shorter/longer stems will change the fit of a bike.

We should separate "reach" from "butt-to-bar". "Reach" refers only to the horizontal distance from BB to top of the head-tube. I use "butt-to-bar" to describe the actual span the rider will feel.
flag HaggeredShins
Posted: Apr 21, 2020 at 15:39 Quote
R-M-R wrote:
friendlyfoe wrote:
Also keep in mind that reach is + whatever length stem you use, so shorter/longer stems will change the fit of a bike.

We should separate "reach" from "butt-to-bar". "Reach" refers only to the horizontal distance from BB to top of the head-tube. I use "butt-to-bar" to describe the actual span the rider will feel.

Agreed. Perhaps I'm one of few people to feel this way and I suspect its the product of growing up riding bmx and dirt jumping (i.e. for all intents and purposes, not a real "mountain biker"), I'm quite sensitive to stem length and I prefer to measure my bikes exclusively by frame reach, using stem length on its own to dial in handling.

Might not be as important a factor for everyone, but worth considering that stem length isn't a completely viable way to make up for a bike that's too short!
flag R-M-R
Posted: Apr 21, 2020 at 15:46 Quote
No need to be so polite, as you're absolutely correct! A short bike with a super long extension (stem + handlebar + hoods) is exactly how road bikes are meant to fit, but that kind of extension would be a disaster for off-road applications. Similarly, a long bike with short stem can be great if the steering geometry has enough trail to make it work. A fashionably short stem wouldn't work if the bike is short and/or if the bike has very low trail - you wouldn't want a 32 mm stem on a XC race bike with short reach and 69° head-tube angle, for example.

These parameters all have to work together and have to be applied to the right fit and terrain.
flag friendlyfoe
Posted: Apr 21, 2020 at 15:52 Quote
R-M-R wrote:
friendlyfoe wrote:
DH bikes are generally a little bit shorter and as such have a shorter reach. I've never understood why this is.

The fits of trail bikes have to accommodate climbing and descending. DH bikes accommodate only descending. A higher front end and shorter reach works when the bike is expected to be tilted downward. Also, DH bikes have long front-centres due to the slack head-tube angles, so they don't need as much reach to get a decently stable wheelbase.



Doing a quick search most DH bikes do seem to have larger stack numbers and shorter reach giving a more upright riding position, and the opposite being true for the same companies Enduro bike.

Except for Commencal who is doing the opposite lol.
flag R-M-R
Posted: Apr 21, 2020 at 15:54 Quote
Keep in mind that stack factors into reach. If two bikes have the same reach, but different stack, the one with larger stack is the bigger bike by a margin of ~40% of the difference in stack.
flag friendlyfoe
Posted: Apr 21, 2020 at 15:57 Quote
R-M-R wrote:
Keep in mind that stack factors into reach. If two bikes have the same reach, but different stack, the one with larger stack is the bigger bike by a margin of ~40% of the difference in stack.

Wouldn't that be the opposite. While larger stack means the bike is taller/physically larger, it also means you don't have to bend as far forward (assuming the same cockpit and reach numbers), so the bike would feel shorter.
flag R-M-R
Posted: Apr 21, 2020 at 16:02 Quote
No. Try drawing it for yourself and let me know how you get on:

Draw a front triangle. Now overlay another drawing that has the same reach and same head-tube angle, but more stack. Notice how the front-centre is now longer.
flag friendlyfoe
Posted: Apr 21, 2020 at 16:07 Quote
Had to think about that for a minute but it makes sense. If you took a given bike and increased stack it would decrease reach. So to have the same reach you'd need to move the head tube forward.
flag R-M-R
Posted: Apr 21, 2020 at 16:09 Quote
Well ... not exactly. If you increased stack, reach would stay the same, but the head-tube moves forward, increasing front-centre. Try drawing it and you'll see.

A thought experiment I sometimes use to illustrate this:

Imagine a bike with long reach, but zero stack. Impossible, I know, but imagine. Head-tube down at BB height. The rider will need a colossal stack of spacers to get the bar to an acceptable height. The important thing to visualize is the spacer stack is not vertical; it goes up at the head-tube angle. By the time you've added a metre of spacers, the bar is in your lap, despite the long reach.

This is why I calculate a variable I call "normalized reach", which compares reaches at a constant stack. Doesn't really matter what stack you choose, as long as it's consistent.
  • Previous Page

 


Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.008536
Mobile Version of Website