Norco optic sizing.

PB Forum :: Norco
Norco optic sizing.
Author Message
flag PG-23
O+
Posted: Jan 29, 2021 at 11:31 Quote
In normal time I could of got a test bike, to see. What I could get is specialized test bikes. so from the rides on them, I worked out my preferred reach for the new bike. Which was medium for me.
flag bedell99
FL
Posted: Jan 29, 2021 at 12:11 Quote
I’m 5’10.5” and went with a large. Was super scared it was going to be big. Fits like a glove. Couldn’t be happier with the sizing. For the guy who is 174cm, I would go with a medium.
flag R-M-R
Posted: Jan 29, 2021 at 12:19 Quote
For one more data point, I'm 6' (183 cm) and on a different model with very similar geometry. I'm happy with its size, which is between the Optic's Large and XL.
flag BH-SHOOTER
Posted: Feb 19, 2021 at 14:17 Quote
I realize the OP went w/ a different model completely, but I thought I'd chime in - given I'm 5' 8-3/4" and right in between Optic sizes M/L. I have a 32" inseam (crotch to floor) and a 71" wingspan from middle fingers. Rode on both, but I went with the medium Optic

I only have about 2-1/8" exposed dropper tube on the medium, and when engaged, is parallel with the bars. Looks normal. Feels fine...I did move the saddle back 3/4" to the end of the markings, and tweaked the handle bar cant a little. I also adjusted the height of the bar, only going with one small spacer between the frame and the stem. SOH became an issue, where I'm at (pushing my tailbone against the front of the saddle) I'm rubbing the frame pretty good w/ the crotch middles. The large felt fine, but raised some concerns mostly with an additional .7" of stand over. As you read, I had zero issues setting the Medium Optic to fit a guy like me, who's right in between sizes.

I'd entertain that larger bike, sizing up if my purpose was more street/commute riding, but we're talking about a trail bike. When I first throw my foot over the medium Optic, yes it "feels" short to me when i put my foot on the pedals, BUT when the saddle is up, and my hips are pushed forward (tucking the tailbone) and the rest of my body is in an aggressive position, I think the fit is pretty darn good, possibly perfect. IF I was 5'10" however - I'd be playing with the large.
flag mtskibum16
O+
Posted: Mar 13, 2021 at 8:20 Quote
BH-SHOOTER wrote:
I realize the OP went w/ a different model completely, but I thought I'd chime in - given I'm 5' 8-3/4" and right in between Optic sizes M/L. I have a 32" inseam (crotch to floor) and a 71" wingspan from middle fingers. Rode on both, but I went with the medium Optic

I only have about 2-1/8" exposed dropper tube on the medium, and when engaged, is parallel with the bars. Looks normal. Feels fine...I did move the saddle back 3/4" to the end of the markings, and tweaked the handle bar cant a little. I also adjusted the height of the bar, only going with one small spacer between the frame and the stem. SOH became an issue, where I'm at (pushing my tailbone against the front of the saddle) I'm rubbing the frame pretty good w/ the crotch middles. The large felt fine, but raised some concerns mostly with an additional .7" of stand over. As you read, I had zero issues setting the Medium Optic to fit a guy like me, who's right in between sizes.

I'd entertain that larger bike, sizing up if my purpose was more street/commute riding, but we're talking about a trail bike. When I first throw my foot over the medium Optic, yes it "feels" short to me when i put my foot on the pedals, BUT when the saddle is up, and my hips are pushed forward (tucking the tailbone) and the rest of my body is in an aggressive position, I think the fit is pretty darn good, possibly perfect. IF I was 5'10" however - I'd be playing with the large.
I really hate being right on the edge of sizing. So I'm 5'9.5", 33" inseam, but 68.5" wingspan - long legs, short torso/arms. Riding a medium Transition Scout now which has identical reach and an ETT within a few millimeters. I haven't ever ridden a larger bike and the jump in reach/ETT/wheelbase for the large Optic seems significant.
flag njcbps
Posted: Mar 18, 2021 at 22:47 Quote
velostein wrote:
R-M-R wrote:
PG-23 wrote:
[ ... ] my height is medium for all other bike company.

Don't worry about the nominal size. There have been examples of one company's XL being smaller than another company's Small. The reach measurement will always be your starting point - but remember to account for stack by adding or subtracting about 40% of the difference to the reach when comparing bikes. (More stack → more reach.)


velostein wrote:
I started finding that as seat tube angles began to get steeper in last couple years the enormous reach numbers started to actually feel more cramped.

This is only the case if you allow your hip position to change. If you were to slide your saddle around to keep a consistent hip position over the BB, longer reach (after accounting for stack) will always feel longer.

The only reason old bikes felt anything other than short is because we tolerated the lounge-chair seating position. You could still do that with a modern bike, if you like, and it will feel super long.

Modern bike designers are looking to push the rider further over the center of the bike with not as much regard to Knee over pedal spindle or (hip position) and sometimes maintaining the same setback compared to a slacker bike is impossible. The difference between a 73 and 76 degree seat tube angle is very significant and can be more of a difference than can be accommodated with a saddle rail adjustment. This is especially true for taller riders who show significant amounts of post.

Indeed. I'm 183cm / 6'0" riding an XL 2020 Optic. I've had to push the seat backwards so that I can get a reasonable knee to peddle axle position, because it was weird to feel so pushed forward. I'd be interested to try a large to see if that might be a better fit, as I feel a bit stretched with a 510 mm reach
flag mitch148
O+
Posted: Aug 20, 2021 at 14:52 Quote
Anyone on here riding a medium at 174cm?
Norco suggests large but I feel looking at the geo medium will be good
flag A-Hammer
O+
Posted: Aug 31, 2021 at 14:26 Quote
mitch148 wrote:
Anyone on here riding a medium at 174cm?
Norco suggests large but I feel looking at the geo medium will be good

I am 174 and on a medium. I rode a large and it felt a bit stretched out but that could also be coming from 2015 geometry so might be different to you if you are coming from something else long. Have been on it for over a year and still happy with the medium though.
flag mitch148
O+
Posted: Sep 2, 2021 at 3:16 Quote
A-Hammer wrote:
mitch148 wrote:
Anyone on here riding a medium at 174cm?
Norco suggests large but I feel looking at the geo medium will be good

I am 174 and on a medium. I rode a large and it felt a bit stretched out but that could also be coming from 2015 geometry so might be different to you if you are coming from something else long. Have been on it for over a year and still happy with the medium though.

Got the medium and its feels absolutely spot on I think the large would have been terrible for the intended purpose of the bike
Thanks mate
flag kvin
Posted: Oct 31, 2021 at 10:33 Quote
Just ordered a 2022 sight a1. I’m 5’9 and went with the large. I fought between the two sizes. Always been a medium. Coming off a four year old bike a lot has changed. The medium sight I tried felt very small. Took the large out for a day on my local trails. It just works. Until your on it riding, it’s very hard to imagine it working. I know a few others who are the same height on a large and they agree. The bike is long, but the advantages are there.
flag njcbps
Posted: Oct 31, 2021 at 23:20 Quote
kvin wrote:
Just ordered a 2022 sight a1. I’m 5’9 and went with the large. I fought between the two sizes. Always been a medium. Coming off a four year old bike a lot has changed. The medium sight I tried felt very small. Took the large out for a day on my local trails. It just works. Until your on it riding, it’s very hard to imagine it working. I know a few others who are the same height on a large and they agree. The bike is long, but the advantages are there.

I'm 6' and ended up on XL Optic (510mm reach, 1274mm wheelbase). It's long, but it's handy to have the length for stability through choppy and unpredictable sections. Although next bike I'd like to try something a bit shorter on both reach and wheelbase (maybe 490 and 1250).
flag jloosener
Posted: Nov 1, 2021 at 14:42 Quote
IMHO Norco's sizing charts are on crack, but also bicycles sizing is very much specific to the individual and using overall height is silly. I'm 181cm tall with an 78cm inseam and a 183cm wingspan. Relatively short legs for my height. Norco put me between a L and XL frame. I'm comfortable on a M frame. The calculated RAD for the M with the stock 45mm stem is within 10mm of my body's natural RAD and doing the step stool test the grips come up right to the base of my thumbs - pretty much perfect. I couldn't imagine riding something 30 or 60mm longer.
flag razzle
O+ FL
Posted: Nov 2, 2021 at 6:44 Quote
jloosener wrote:
IMHO Norco's sizing charts are on crack, but also bicycles sizing is very much specific to the individual and using overall height is silly. I'm 181cm tall with an 78cm inseam and a 183cm wingspan. Relatively short legs for my height. Norco put me between a L and XL frame. I'm comfortable on a M frame. The calculated RAD for the M with the stock 45mm stem is within 10mm of my body's natural RAD and doing the step stool test the grips come up right to the base of my thumbs - pretty much perfect. I couldn't imagine riding something 30 or 60mm longer.

Interesting when I put your height in(181cm), it clearly recommends a large?!!!
flag jloosener
Posted: Nov 2, 2021 at 9:45 Quote
razzle wrote:
jloosener wrote:
IMHO Norco's sizing charts are on crack, but also bicycles sizing is very much specific to the individual and using overall height is silly. I'm 181cm tall with an 78cm inseam and a 183cm wingspan. Relatively short legs for my height. Norco put me between a L and XL frame. I'm comfortable on a M frame. The calculated RAD for the M with the stock 45mm stem is within 10mm of my body's natural RAD and doing the step stool test the grips come up right to the base of my thumbs - pretty much perfect. I couldn't imagine riding something 30 or 60mm longer.

Interesting when I put your height in(181cm), it clearly recommends a large?!!!

Oops, my height is 183cm not 181. 6'0" in freedom units.
flag ZSchnei
O+
Posted: Nov 2, 2021 at 13:08 Quote
I was able to get my hands on an XL Optic for a week of riding, as I search for a nice all day trail rig. After ride #2 I'm not sure how I feel about it. I'm 6.0'/183 cm so I'm on the very edge of the L, but within the range of an XL.

I have mixed feelings on it. It's felt good for some of the ride, and too long on some of the ride (mainly when seated climbing). Descending has been pretty predictable and I surprisingly feel fairly centered on the bike (long chain stays I suppose), allowing me to move my weight where/when needed. My first ride on it was a night ride, and it is a predictable enough bike to get out and let it eat a little.

One feeling that I've had a couple of times over the last two rides -- for a shorter travel aggressive trail bike, it feels too big to be super nimble and playful. I am by no means a big jumper/stylish rider, but I know how to move a bike around and stay light. This does not feel (size XL) like I should be sized on an XL, but more so a L.

More to come as ride different trails the remainder of this week.

 


Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.020507
Mobile Version of Website