Reach and stack based sizing for mountain bikes

Dec 18, 2008
by Luc 'Acadian' Albert  
News Source: Transition Bikes
In a joint effort between Turner and Transition bikes, a new standard for mountain bike frame sizing has been introduced. This new standard is based around reach and stack measurements, and is intended to clarify bike fit across bike models and brands.The evolution of mountain bikes has made the old system of top tube and seat tube based sizing irrelevant. The wide range in seat tube angles and bottom bracket heights can create a situation where one bike could feel longer or taller than another frame with the same measurements. Once a rider is in a standing position, the fit and feel of their bike’s cockpit is determined exclusively by the handlebar and pedals. Finding the specific geometric relationship between those two points is the only way to accurately compare the fit and feel of different bicycle frames.

“I was really stoked to get the call from Sam at Transition Bikes regarding a new method of measuring mountain bikes, especially those used for technical riding like our DHR. For years I have not listed a top tube measurement for the DHR as I knew it was irrelevant in comparing the fit of our bike with other brands,” says David Turner. “The great thing about this sizing method is that anyone with a piece of string with a weight on it and a measuring tape can accurately measure their current bikes. The rider can then compare their current bike to any brand using Reach and Stack and know exactly how it will fit without even riding it.”

The horizontal distance from the bottom bracket center to the top of the headtube centerline is referred to as reach. The vertical distance between these two points is known as stack. By comparing the reach and stack on different frame models, the rider is able to identify exactly how their bike will fit and feel on the trail. This system eliminates any uncertainty created by the seat tube angle, and forever drops the need for “actual” and “effective” top tube measurements. The reach and stack of a frame is the most important sizing information for a freeride or downhill rider but it is extremely valuable for trail riders and XC racers as well.


“I was aware that Turner was using the reach number to size their DHR, but under the name cockpit; so I approached David Turner with the idea that this should be an industry standard measurement,” said Sam Burkhardt from Transition Bikes. “Dave expressed interest in adding a vertical component and going forward with an industry standard. We chose the terms reach and stack after Kris Wehage from E.13 Components pointed out the use of the same measurements in the Time Trial and Triathlon communities. Rather than create a new name, we felt it would be easier for manufacturers and riders to adopt the system using existing names.”

Turner and Transition bikes encourage all mountain bike manufacturers to include these numbers on their specification charts for consistency in the industry, and to aid rider’s looking for the best possible fit for their body type and riding style.

For more information on reach and stack, or help in understanding the new sizing standard please visit:

www.turnerbikes.com
www.transitionbikes.com

Posted In:
Press Releases



189 Comments

  • + 18
 That will be so sweet for us who work in shops..
  • + 4
 Good news, but I'm guessing the sizing will only apply on turner and Transition bikes for now!
  • - 2
 Yes! It's about time someone did this! The distances that truly matter when it comes to rider weight bias! Trials frame makers should have come up with this long ago! It would be tough to factor in sag on bikes with different travel front/rear though.
  • - 6
flag realityloop (Dec 18, 2008 at 14:56) (Below Threshold)
 IT WILL WORK FOR EVERY BIKE - READ THE ARTICLE BEFORE YOU POST PLEASE!!!!!!
  • + 7
 Never said it wont, I said it is only Turner and Transition using it!
  • + 2
 finaly, i always thoght to my self of such a mesuring system...cuz i aleways check for the TT mesuraments, but they go from the bar to the seat, wich i think its dumm, cuz thats not where you put your weight, the correct is bars-pedals...so that there is no influence by the seat angle...good!!
  • + 1
 I can picture all these tape-measure plum lines hanging from the bike shop ceilings next to repair stands all across the nation. Just line 'er up then measure the reach.
  • + 14
 I advise everyone who is reading to not continue below this as it is a complete waste of your time.
Its just a lot of people arguing about whether or not it works and how it will change with different components, and most are complete idiots.
  • + 4
 man i hope this becomes the std
  • + 8
 based on the "positive props" for people who think fork/build don't affect reach/stack... and the "negative props" for people that are trying to explain how it does.... the average intelligence of Pinkbike readers is much less than average.
  • + 0
 Yeah!
  • + 2
 Ironically, I think those people are the target for this new sizing. I mean, if they don't get simple shit like that, do you really think they can understand the current geometry charts manufacturers provide? This is simple sizing for simple people. Oh, and from a DH standpoint it makes more sense to give this measurement when compared to the "virtual top tube" lengths so many manufacturers use.
  • + 0
 Agreed.
  • + 0
 Welcome to pinkbike.com, where Grammar is used by few, and opinions become facts.
  • + 8
 hey guys, this is kyle from transition. just to clarify a few things...

1) we're not trying to re-invent the wheel here. the point of this is to have all manufacturers standardize the way they disclose bike/frame geometry. the point is to level the playing field a bit to make it ultimately easier for the consumer/bike shop employee/etc. to know the geometry of bikes and be able to compare across different sizes of between different models/manufacturers.
2) Don't worry, we're not saying we want to "replace" any other way of measuring bikes/frames. we're only stating that traditional methods don't always tell the entire story. most manufacturers report their geo numbers in different ways. this is just one step closer to having all manufacturers report in the same way for apples-to-apples comparing. our only real goal here with this is to get other manufacturers to list reach and stack along with all the other measurements currently being given. we're not replacing anything, just adding more info for those that can benefit from it.
3) of course you need other measurements in order to make reach and stack meaningful. fork height being of ultimate importance. i guess one way we could have made this "press release" better would be to have listed that fork height is really what determines the reach/stack measurements. every frame/bike was designed around an axle-to-crown measurement so obviously this plays a huge part in determining reach/stack. you simply can't have one without the other. our bad for not including the a-to-c in the drawing above.
4) the point of getting all manufacturers to report the numbers the same way is to aid in comparing "same use" bikes against each other. for example, if you're in the market for a slopestyle bike you really would want to look at all the bikes in the market for that use and compare the sizing. reach and stack help in determining what the actual size is (meaning, the relationship of BB to the handlebar position given the a-to-c and fork angle). Obviously you could misuse this information by comparing dis-similar bikes (ie: a DH bike with a DJ bike) which would make for utterly meaningless comparative info.
5) in all honesty this is not a "standard" so much as it is just a call to other manufacturers to start listing this information. we're not claiming we've come up with this new way of measureing (as noted in the press release, this measuring system is commonly used in other cycling disciplines). our point is to help drive adoption as we believe (as does Dave Turner) that it will ultimately help the consumer in understanding how a bike will fit them. The more info the better!

Hopefully this helps clarify the intent of this press release. To all the other manufacturers reading, hopefully you understand our intent here and don't feel daunted by the task of spending a few minutes and opening your drawing files, taking the measurements, and posting to your respective websites. i would think that disclaiming bike geometry to its fullest would be equally important for everybody in the business of selling bicycles.
  • + 1
 well put
good job
strange that it's been so hard to clarify this to these people.
too many concussions? i don't know
it all makes sense
  • - 6
flag grandmastere (Dec 21, 2008 at 17:07) (Below Threshold)
 Push all manufacturers to publish weight data first. That is much more important than this.
  • + 0
 are you retarded? seriously. you care more about what your bike weighs than how it fits you?
the cockpit length of your bike is one of the most important things about the way your bike rides. that and bb height and chainstay length.
the way most companies measure the size of their bikes really tells you nothing about the actual length of your bike, because the seat angle is never the same. therefore, without doing a bunch of math, you can't tell how a bike will fit you.
read the rest of the posts about this, the only people against it are the ones who obviously don't know what their talking about. talk to pro's about how important the effective length of their cockpit is.
  • - 1
 The current standard of measure provides all the info required to properly size any bike. You might be suprised by how valuable many serious cyclists think having accurate weight info is. I'd guess that if you took an average group of cycling enthusiasts that was a representative sample of the community and asked them if they'd rather have this measurement available or frame (and/or complete bike) weight available, the vast majority would choose to have the weight. Glad to see someone buys into the hype though, keep up the good work!
  • + 0
 you're obviously too dumb to understand
i've been as clear as i could possibly be. top tube length doesn't tell you how long your bike actually is. length of your bike= very important too how it rides.
oh, maybe thats it. you couldn't tell the difference how a bike rides anyways. you're too busy weighing your bike parts too ride them
  • + 1
 ^^Yeah, this dude's pretty much the industry standard when it comes to defining the word "tool."
  • + 0
 so you'd also rather know how much your bike weighs than how big it actually is?
you're stupid too
  • + 0
 No good buddy, I'm on your side. I'm referencing the grandmastere. You and I both agree that size and fit are likely the most important measurements on a bike and that reach and stack provides another way to compare frames.
  • - 1
 @bigtard-I'm not talking top tube length. I'm talking effective top tube length. Big difference. Read carefully.

@ds68698 + bigtard-The current measurement standard is perfect for all types of bikes. Want proof? Check out two years from now to see how many manufacturers are using other measurements. My money is on zero. Then, check out how many manufacturers list the weights of their products. It'll be more than zero. Don't worry, you'll have lost interest by then. Most people that have been cycling seriously for more than a season or two care about weight no matter what the discipline. Maybe we'll talk in 2 years when you each have 2.5 years of experience. Until then-enjoy the ride and leave the thinking to the qualified people.
  • + 8
 so smart! now that's a measurement that makes things alot easier
  • + 2
 I like it. It will help all the people with extra long limbs, I see guys with big gorilla arms riding an XL frame because, they thought that was what they needed for their long reach. Meanwhile, the stand over height is crazy huge. It boils down to helping the customer choose. A kid at a bike shop that knows a customer knows sweet fu@k all about biking. He will sell him anything the customer looks at and thinks he wants with a huge price tag. It's our right as consumers to know what were buying and this is another helpful tool to make a better informed purchase.

I'm in no way saying every bike shop sells bikes without giving guidance, I have just seen it happen. A kid and his father walk in to "Western Cycle" ( Edmonton, Alberta ) the kid looks at the most expensive, colorful and shiny free ride / DH rig(This just so happens to be a Devinci 8 FlatCool . I have been there for awhile looking at bikes, getting in shit for riding the bikes around and messing around with a set of stairs in the shop. They told me to stop riding the bikes, I told them I will take my business and blank cheque somewhere else(who buys a bike they haven't ridden). On my way out I see the kid has had his father produce a credit card and "swipe", the kid now has a bike he has no idea how to ride. When he guessed the size he said "well I think a small will do", the guy at the shop said nothing during the sale. He knew the kid would either have the bike stolen or he wouldn't like it and would in fact sell it. What did he care though? It wasn't his hard earned cash.

I think this will catch on because the old system just can't cut it the rapidly advancing technology in cycling. Change is as good as the rest. Good job Transition and Turner on bringing this to light!!!
  • + 1
 +1 to all of that.

Oh and can I sig "Welcome to pinkbike.com, where Grammar is used by few, and opinions become facts"?
  • + 0
 Go ahead man...
  • - 1
 Effective top tube length and seat tube length/angle already report this information in a more relevant manner Enduro06. Nice platform to rant off topic though.
  • + 0
 not with all frames, because with an interupted seat tube, the BB often isn't inline with the seat tube angle. The significance of this reach-stack measurement is the relationship between the BB and Handlebars... wich is most important for DH/FR, which is mostly up and out of the saddle... i.e. standing up and holding on, not sitting down and pedaling like xc/road/tt
  • + 2
 This is stupid. They should be trying to improve their bikes instead of wasting time on this. Its not any better a system. The best way to get fit for a bike is to test ride one. Things like stem length, crank length, leg & arm length , headtube angle and personal taste dictate what the best fit is.
  • - 2
 Agreed. However, when you catalog order stuff, you're limited in what you can do to improve you're products. So you end up filling you time with antics like this.
  • + 1
 it looks like a really good method for determining the ride height and the top tube length if your trying to compare frame geometries. this is going to be very useful when comparing hardtail frames or bmx frames. too bad theres not a more simple way for rear end measurments..... cough cough Sam and Dave!!!!!!
  • + 1
 Wow, so after all that, how 'bout I throw in this monkey wrench; what about that chainstay length? You could have two bikes with the exact same reach and stack, with totally different chainstays, and they would ride totally different. I guess it's just about the fit, though? Also, all this talk of different fork changing it (which it would), is kinda silly really, cuz it's only gonna change noticably if you put WAY TOO BIG of a fork on, then you risk snapping your headtube, and paying for your dentist's chrismas presents for his kids.
  • + 1
 There is one flaw to this measurement...the bike must be built! It doesn't mean a whole lot unless we are dealing with completes.

Also we must have some sort of idea about the reach and stack of bikes we already ride before we are able to compare to this suggested standard.

How do we know what reach and stack is ideal for us? If you take all of the current frame measurements and layed out a sketch on paper, you could draw the exact frame, right?. Could you do this with stack and reach?

I think this will be more confusing and complicated to the consumer instead of clarifying and simpler. I also feel like many of you underestimate the knowledge and abilities of the consumer.
  • + 1
 THIS IS GOOD. QUIT QUIBBLING ABOUT IT. IF YOUR MILDLY INTELLIGENT, THIS WILL HELP YOU FIGURE OUT THE ACTUAL SIZE OF A BIKES COCKPIT. THIS COMBINED WITH ALL THE OTHER MEASUREMENTS, WILL HELP PEOPLE SIZE BIKES AND FIGURE OUT HOW A BIKE WILL FIT THEM. THATS ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW
  • + 1
 just to say, fork size would affect both, if you have 200mm forks on a jump bike, then the length of the reach would be shorter, but the stack would be higher, im assuming people are dumb enough to put a set of boxxers on a 24seven substance, this is affected becuas the stack is measured frm the central of the bb, perpindicular (at right-angle to) the chain stay if the frame was stood on a table and levelled, if you get me.
  • + 1
 This is going to be so much easier for people who are trying to sell the bikes, try explaining that even though one bike is 15.5" and another 16" that the 16" frame is smaller when you're talking to a mother who's buying a Christmas present.
  • + 1
 It's only a fixed frame measurement if you assume a constant head angle and a verticle rider position.

Rotating your computer monitor, as Sngltrkmnd put it, changes the H/A and the Verticle line which represents the rider position simultaneously. Therefore the reach and stack measurements don't change.

In the real world forks come in all sorts of different lengths. Changing the forks Axle-To-Crown changes the bikes head angle which (assuming we don't change the verticle stack line) changes the reach and stack measurements.

I hope that makes sense. Seems pretty obvious too me
  • + 3
 Thats an amazing idea,
+1 for the guy who said it would make bike shop employees lifes' a lot easier
  • + 0
 I think it is.. for example a bike with a really slack seat tube angle will have a long effective top tube, but it will not feel or ride long when you're out of the saddle... which is most of the time on a dh bike. I know my V10 feels fine when I sit on it, but i think it's a bit too short for me when i'm up and riding.. to me this "reach & stack" paints a clearer picture of the important relationship betweeen BB and bars. In addition though, I would still want to know HT angle, BB height, and chainstay length (for a given build of course!)
  • + 0
 The stack and reach would are based on the designer's head and seat tube angles, therefore they are fixed points. Do whatever you want to the bike it doesn't change the intended use, or design. This system simply allows designers to compare apples to apples not oranges or bananas. It allows them to speak the same language in a way that we can understand. What would be nice is to have a chart that compares body type (hieght, inseam , arm length and maybe weight), riding style (XC, DH BMX...), and ability (beginner, novice, elite...) to reach and stack, which would allow a shop to fit people more accurately.
  • + 3
 thank god it cuts out all the mumbo jumbo and just gives u the direct facts!
  • + 0
 Dear Boys and Girls,

I am not trying to muddy the waters but just lend some of what has helped me. I started using the reach measurement a year, ago, and it has MOSTLY been helpful when working from a bike that I know fits me very well and trying to find something else that will fall in that ballpark. I can measure a bike and know, definitively, when the reach will be outside of my range. Having said that, I have found that Front Center (from front axle to center of cranks) and Rear Center (chainstay) are easier measurements to take and almost just as pertinent as reach, although comparisons can only be done when frame angles are similar. The bottom line for me is that of the bikes I have gone through I keep a database of frame measurements (with Reach, Front Center, and Rear Center, along with a couple others), and classic top-tube or seat-tube measurements are meaningless.
  • + 0
 Perhaps they have anticipated this, but Sam and Dave owe it to the industry to publish figures for a lot of other bike frames. How does an Intense customer know how the Gran Mal will fit if he doesn't know the reach and stack figures for his Uzzi? No big deal, it's just apples to apples. When those figures become more commonplace, they will make more sense to everyone.
And I think we all know better than to put a 40 on a P1 or an XC400 on a V10. Count on a 1' HA change for a 1" change in fork length, right?
  • + 1
 I don't think that particalur example is very important. An uzzi to a gran mal? Are you serious? That's like requesting that Ford make it easier for consumers to compare an F430 Ferrari to a Taurus.
  • + 0
 being that I don't know a whole lot about measurements, I don't have a lot of input for this one. looks to me like this bike is a ride it up, ride it down kinda thing. maybe I don't know what I'm talking about, but at least I can admit to that.
  • + 0
 This doesn't appear to be very useful for any sort of bike that you would sit down on to pedal. It leaves the seat location out of the equation, which is quite important in XC and all mountain applications. As pointed out above, top tube length isn't always an accurate measurement because of serveral 'standard' ways of measuring it. Old school geometry does however get a person close enough to choose from the available sizes in a more accurate method than just measuring the horizontal distance from the bb to the top of the headtube and the resultant vertical measurement. Proper sizing of a bike that will be sat upon goes well beyond just frame size.
For DJ/street bikes, it may be handy if it catches on. Most jump and street bikes are fairly similar in geometry and run similar length forks. And from what I can tell, there isn't a lot of dirt jumping going on with people sitting on their seats. If the system is designed just to describe how a bike fits while standing up, then yes I can see it working (if it catches on). The geometry charts will continue to describe the riding characteristics of a frame and proper fit. And as pointed out above, the only way to truely check the fit is to sit on the bike and go for a ride.
  • + 3
 Summary: you should ride before buying
  • + 0
 favorit cycle dude: don't worry, this definitely still helps size an xc bike. because your seat should still be in a relative position to the bb. there's kind of a formula for that. anybody who knows about bike fitting should know this.
from there you decide stem length based on how long the frames cockpit length is
old school measuring is crap, it has no relativity at all. this can at least be standardized.
  • - 1
 Thanks bigtard. I hope that I know a thing or two about fitting bikes, or a lot of people are in trouble.
  • - 1
 if you did you wouldn't have been so stupid as to say it doesn't work for xc bikes. seriously, that makes you sound stupid. i would be worried about you fitting people on bicycles if you can't figure that out
  • - 1
 A bit hot under the collar about this one hey?
  • + 0
 i'm just tired of hearing people who think they know it all, saying stupid things on pink bike. but carry on though. you probably like to think people take your word as rule just because you own a bike shop
  • + 1
 Mr. bigtard, if you're sooooooo tired of hearing stupid people say stupid stuff, why are you on Pinkbike? I only come here to make myself feel good about my vast knowledge of everything... it's much easier to impress the groms around here than my real customers. Personally, I don't like to think that anyone takes my word on anything. It's much safer that way. I assume that half the people out there think I'm stupid and I think the other half is stupid. It all works out nicely.
  • + 0
 perfect, we're all getting exactly what we want out of pink bike. you get to say stupid shit. you get to hear other people say stupid shit. and i get to abuse whom ever i want about the stupid shit everyone says. other people get to abuse me for abusing them for the stupid shit people say. i love this shit there's so much love in the world merry christmas
  • + 0
 The Stack dimension makes some sense, but no frame angle/measurement is unaffected by fork length, shock sag, wheels or tyres. Not to mention seat height and seat post angle. The ONLY way to know if a bike is right for you is to ride it.
  • + 0
 its for comparing shit in a comparable way blue tird
  • + 2
 it's about time something like this came along, i think it's a good idea.
My bike measures 430/630 (reach/stack in mm) - this is easy!
  • + 1
 sorry to change the subject but,,,,,if bike companys want to standardise something then please could it be tyre size!!!!!give us two measurements one for the casing an another for tread width
  • + 2
 They do that, its called ISO measurements
  • + 0
 cool cool,never seen it before(in the uk)
  • + 0
 So if you want to creae a new standard, how about standardizing your measurements to metric. Bike components measure most items in metric except the frame and head tube. Turner and Transition are no different. It would be a lot easier for consumers to have all manufacturers using the same measuremants.
  • + 0
 So, change all the standards again? Or just re-measure in metric?
  • + 0
 On your first point, with conventional bike measurements, the bike must also be built to determine head tube angle, seat tube angle, bb height, and effective top tube, so there is no difference there.

On your second point, you're right, but that's only relevant as long as reach and stack is "new".. and it is easy to measure anyways.

Yes, with conventional, detailed measurements you could basically build the frame... but I think the point here is that instead of looking at 6, 8, or 10 numbers... it all boils down to 2 numbers that define the BB relative to the handlbars.
  • + 0
 Valid points...is it really an easier, better measurement than say, eff. tt and seat tube?
  • + 0
 That looks PHOTOSHOPPED!!! There's no way that's real! PHOTOSHOPPED!! PHOTOSHOPPED!!! PHOTOSHOPPED!!! PHOTOSHOPPED!!! PHOTOSHOPPED!!! PHOTOSHOPPED!!! PHOTOSHOPPED!!! PHOTOSHOPPED!!! PHOTOSHOPPED!!!
  • + 0
 Sorry, didn't read everything, but there's nothing new about it.

Nevertheless, the very good news is that 2 manufacturers agreed on the same name, and hopefully many others will follow!

Nice one guys Wink
  • + 1
 finally someone came up with this Big Grin i hated the fact that toptube lenghts didn't say much about the length of the frame because of the angles
  • + 3
 Now that makes a helluva lot more sense than the current system!
  • + 0
 I hope they will still measure frames the old way as well as this way. I liked how almost every angle and length was shown. It made my life a bit easier when buying my current frame.
  • + 0
 this will be really good for taller riders like me, cause the only measurment that really changes the feel of the bike is the pedal to bar length and companys never use that as a guideline.
  • + 0
 at least some guys out there are trying to make stuff simpler for us guys..... keep up with the hard work, greatly appreciated as i work in a bike shop!
  • - 1
 Seriously, forget bike shop employees!!!! Make the consumers life easier!!! Anyone who doesn't think the consumer is the most important part of the equation is the reason people end up doing mail-order (for shame according to bike shops).
  • - 2
 All the geometry angles and measurements in the world won't tell you how a bike will fit you(unless they are identicle to the bike you are currently riding), at best they will get you in the ballpark, enough so that you know which dealer to visit to "test ride" your new bike.

Since suspension bikes necessitated interrupted seat tubes that no longer originate from the BB, Seat tube angles mean very little and Effective top tube measurements even less (unless you ride with your seat at headtube height all the time)

This new "standard" will work well for DH and FR bikes where you stand 90% of the time, for AM and Trail bikes however, it becomes important to know where the Seat tube angle will position your seat when you are sat down pedalling. Hard to tell from a brochure, hence the need for test riding!

I like Dave Turners idea of leaving off Eff top tube length on DH bikes (its irrelevant and confusing to customers!)
  • + 1
 Well done guys! It seems to me that there was always something missing in frame's geometry description. Thanks Wink
  • - 2
 I would like some to take the computer they are staring at right now, and rotate the screen while looking at the schematic above. To the left, or right, I don't care. Tell me how much the measurements change as the bike frame senses the change in horizontal. For crying out loud, people, THINK ABOUT IT.
Science = good. Ignorant banter on pb = bad.
Props to PearlJamSoCal, and to Sam Burkhardt, who know WTF they are talking about. Sheesh, props to TRI BIKE manufacturers who actually know what THEY are talking about. (Even if their bikes are laaaaame.)
  • + 2
 I would like you to rotate your monitor and observe how that line indicated "reach" is no longer horizontal and the line indicated "stack" is not longer vertical. No imagine adjusting both of the lines to horizontal and vertical, resepectively, and observe (if you can) how the location of their new intersection will change, thus changing the reach and stack dimensions. Please acknowledge schoolage once you grasp this simple concept.
  • + 0
 If these numbers aren't on the frame how do you measure it with 2 hands and a tape measure, if there's any easy way to do it I'd like it.
  • + 0
 Agreed. I'm thinking about it, and I just can't think of how to measure accurately without a second set of hands. However, this is still a real smart way to measure frame sizes. For DH/FR, when you spend pretty well all you time off of the saddle, this makes sense. For the XC/AM crowd its also good, but I would think they would still want to know the Seat Tube Angle, since those folks will actually be using their saddles.
  • - 2
 Stupid, stupid, stupid. I guess I should expect something this stupid and gimmicky from a 'company' like transition.

So in their (small) minds, each type of bike will be measured differently? If DJ bikes are to be measured this way, what about XC bikes? It is absolutely asinine to think that this measuring system can replace the existing measurements for XC/AM bikes. So if the idea behind this is to 'avoid confusion', how can that happen with different measuring systems used for different styles of bike?

All you need is seat tube angle, length, and effective top tube length. Those are the important cockpit measurements. Sorry Transition and Turner, but you're stupid. Not stupider than the people you're trying to sell too ('cause they buy into it) I guess, but that's not saying much now is it? Did you guys know that some people are taller than 6 feet, and actually peddle their bikes? Crazy thought, eh?
  • + 0
 it's just another mesurement to help sizing a frame. not the end all be all. and it's not a gimmick it's a great idea.
  • + 1
 shutup... the only thing you would need to add to the reach and stack measurements would be the seat tube angle. finding the ett length is a pain in the arse if you're not already given the info on the frame. finding the reach and stack would be a very simple process. don't hate on transition just because they go single pivot. sounds like you're being just a little bias
  • - 2
 Nice one Sam!! Makes total sense. Lots of haters already. Sam...you're taller than 6', so is Mike, shoot Kevin is over 6' too?!! I think you guys pedal....oh and make kick ass bikes too!! Cheers!! Way to reach out to Turner and get something going!!
  • + 0
 Lots of haters? You mean a few people that think about things. Kick ass bikes? Come on!! That kind of money for what essentially amounts to a catalog frame? Without brand name/formed or even butted tubing? The entire thing reeks more than a Santa Cruz Bullit. How many Bullits would have sold if they were branded Huffy (at the same price)?

They are trying to build an image, which is essentially the only way a company like that can survive. Stick to that and you may do fine. Overstep their bounds, pretend to be innovators or influential members of the industry, and we'll see what happens.
  • - 1
 lets talk about what you ride.... a Norco, who Pays for the FSR link system from Specialized every year. Transition ride nice and they are an smart company for their size. shit the day they bring out this press release they also release a inexpensive bearing press/removabe tool for their bikes. the company listens to it's rides and responds.
  • + 0
 That's a hijack, but okay, let's talk about what I ride. It's not a norco. Specialized, Surly, Litespeed. Now let's talk about what's better: lisencing a breakthough idea (like the Horst Link, VPP, DW Link), or settling on a heavier catalog single pivot frame for more money. I'm not saying Transition bikes are weak or bad, I'm simply saying I don't think you get what you pay for, that's all. I used to ride norco because the bikes were quite good for the money, but that has changed in my opinion in recent years. So, as a thoughtful person, I used my open mind to evaluate the marketplace and make an informed decision based on more than hype. Again, this must seem crazy to many members of this board. Crazy, eh?

My main issue with this topic is that I think this is a prime example of change for changes sake, and not only is it not needed, but we would actually be better off without it. If it were to catch on (which I can guarantee it won't), it would simply add confusion/clutter to the process. Image based companies often have to create change for changes sake (and confusion/hype), so I understand the choice to pretend like they are really on the ball and plugged into the industry, but come on...how about actually doing something meaningful and/or worthwhile?
  • - 1
 c'mon buddy, theres a lot of bikes out there that are hard to judge size wise. this gives you a perfect way to compare them. it's not about change or anything else you were babbling about. it's about clear, understandable information. i agree with some of the other shit you were babbling about. but transition really does try hard to give people what they want. small companies are good at that. it's the best thing they have going for them. street cred
  • + 0
 Yay more measurements to confuse the f*ck out people and create more "wrong/right" arguments
  • + 1
 wow. this is big! standardizing frames sizing! crazy.
  • + 0
 Well, they said that they are trying to make this the standard, so far only Transition and Turner have agreed. I like the idea though I agree with whomever below said they should still provide both ways of measurement
  • + 0
 @ free ride big island
Theyre not making it so the manufacturers have to make them to set sizing regs.
Its just going to be a change in the way the size is measured.
Companies will still have the freedom to make the bike whatever size they want, but they will use this system to measure the sizes
  • + 1
 yeah. i realize that. it's just cool to see some form of standardized sizing in the industry happening. one of my biggest annoyances in the industry is how hardly anything is standardized. this is a small step in a good direction.
  • + 0
 idk, i like the individual measurements better, but this looks helpful too

maybe both?
  • - 1
 Looks like a very useful tool for sizing and comparison.
BTW Some posters need to learn to read a schematic. Hilarious posts!
Let's call this "Pinkipedia".
  • + 1
 kind of like the old system
  • + 0
 not at all. The old system worked, but it was to inconsistent. On some bikes, 18inch would be a large, whereas on other bike 20inch would be a large. That just makes it confusing for the buyer, ecspecially if they have only a basic understanding of mountainbiking. this doesnt get stuffed around by angles aswell. (i have stopped ranting now)
  • - 3
 i agre with transition on this the top tub langth is totaly rong way to mesher a bike up for some one. and it dose not chang but can be alterd with difrent parts. by a very smal amount. like if you had a hard tail with monster t's it will bring you closer to the bars but buy half an inch or so its pivit pount is off the rear wheel as the head tub angel will change with biger fork but still better way to mesher
  • - 3
 and no i don't believe the fork will matter, if you think about it the top of the headtube always stays in the same spot comparder to the bottom bracket, except for maybe mongoose and gt who have floating bottom brackets. The fork will change HT angle and many other things but not "reach" and stack"
  • + 1
 I disagree. A longer fork would change both the reach and the stack. The reach would decrease and the stack would increase but the combined measurement (reach + stack) would be the same. This is because the reach seems to be horizontal to the groud and have a 90 degree angle against the stack.
  • + 0
 The reach and stack are "frames sizing measurements". How does buying a bigger fork change the size of the frame? It doesn't. If you throw a bigger or smaller fork on your ride, it will affect the angles like the head tube angle and the seat tube angle. A frame is a frame, it doesn't matter how you slice it. If you were correct, I could buy a FOX 40 for my P3 and the reach would decrease to a perfect fit.... Duuuuuuhhhhhhhhhhhh.
  • + 2
 Yes, this method is a 'frame size' measurement, but it's dependent on what you consider 'horizontal'. Generally horizontal is achieved by putting a fully built bike on level ground and taking measurements. If you put a 40 on your P3 and properly take these measurements, you'll find that the reach measurement is shorter and the stack measurement is a longer than if you had a 4 inch travel fork mounted up. There is no way to accurately use with method with just a frame... if you do, you can make these measurements what ever you want... and that's not much of a standard. Companies can supply this information when they ship a frame, but it has to be based on a particular set up much like head angles, seat angles and bb height. They all change when you mount up a different length fork.
  • + 2
 This is a "frame size measurement"(how many times do I need to reiterate that), they are saying, if you read, you can compare your present frame, to a frame you wish to purchase using these guidelines to see how it will stack up. Anyone with any sense, and or experience at all can figure out how the change in frame size will work out for them. If not, then go to a bike shop and actually ask questions, no matter how big of a noob you feel like.

Quote:
“The great thing about this sizing method is that anyone with a piece of string with a weight on it and a measuring tape can accurately measure their current bikes. The rider can then compare their current bike to any brand using Reach and Stack and know exactly how it will fit without even riding it.”

Welcome to pinkbike.com, where Grammar is used by few, and opinions become facts.
  • + 1
 So should I go to my own bike shop and ask questions? I could ask my mechanic questions I suppose. Or maybe I could ask the young kid that sweeps the floors for me. I mean, I do feel like a noob sometimes for sure... I'll be the first to admit it. And it would sure save some time if we dumbed down frame measurements a bunch. Too bad you don't live closer endur06, I might give you a job.
  • - 4
flag enduro06 (Dec 18, 2008 at 8:09) (Below Threshold)
 Ooooh, You own Favorit Cycles in Cranbrook, BC. "Here you go sir, I present you with a cookie".

I looked at your profile half wit, I know you own a shop. I was generalizing the "go to a bike shop and ask questions" comment, not telling you to go to a shop, It's obvious you know allot about bikes. I wouldn't tell a squirrel to collect nuts. A job, haha, I make probably 3 times what you could pay... I'm flattered, I really am, you know how to use sarcasm, how sweet. Buh-bye sweet heart.
  • + 1
 enduro you are making yourself look like an ass - This is a "frame size measurement"(how many times do I need to reiterate that), - and later in your reply - The rider can then compare their current bike to any brand using Reach and Stack -, your bike, not frame bike. It will be affected by the size of your fork, the bigger fork you put on the less reach you will have because the head angle changes and the bars/stem get closer to you, the bar/stem will also be higher compared to before(obviously) so your stack becomes greater, i cannot see anyone puttting a huge fork on a hardtail meant fo dj or a tiny fork on a dh rig so this shouldn't be an issue and i think its a pretty good idea, this mesurement is affected by fork length though
  • + 0
 I have never commented on one of these before but this is mind numbing and amusing at the same time Smile I don't understand why people can't grasp what enduro06 and others are trying to explain...this is a FRAME measuring system not a measurement for you standing over an assembled bike !? Since it is FRAME measuring system ONLY you could put a springer front end from a 1960 Harley Davidson on the bike and the stack and reach of the FRAME would not change kids... we are talking about the frame NOT you standing on the ground over the frame...make sense now ? imagine yourself sitting on the top tube of the frame and reaching for the head tube...you could do a flat spin 360 tailwhip bike flip to bar spin and the geometry between your b*tt, shoulders and hands is not going to change unless you heavy fork the landing and crack the top tube and bend the head tube closer to you Smile This is a very smart and very universal system that everyone should be applauding because it takes all of the angles out of the equation and gives you a true cockpit size so you will not have to do any geometry to figure out how different frames are going to feel...just a simple right angle that gives you just two dimensions that sum up the " feel " of the cockpit. If this still does not make sense please realize that college is very important and sign up for a few geomerty classes...it will even help you build better jumps too Smile
  • - 2
 I'm making myself look like an ass.... Hahah, heed your own statement my friend. Allow me to elaborate...

Lets think of it this way, you have a DJ set up sitting in your garage. You want a new "frame", for your "bike". So measure the "frame" of your current "bike" as described above. Then go to your local bike porn shop, measure the "frame" for your "bike" you wish to purchase. Then, here is the best part, compare the measurements. Yaaay.

Where can you buy these "frame bikes" your talking about, do you have a contact, I want one? I didn't know you can have a bike without a frame, they must be made in China or somewhere.

The components will change the geometry of the bike, yes, I never said it wouldn't. Reading comprehension, that's two words, and yes, one is 13 characters long.

Yeah, who would put a DH fork on a DJ bike? Me? Totally, why not, or, we have something called SARCASM we use in the English Language.

Quote: (from the above provided reading material)
"The great thing about this sizing method is that anyone with a piece of string with a weight on it and a measuring tape can accurately measure their current bikes (Bikes have frames). The rider can then compare their current bike(with a frame) to any brand using Reach and Stack and know exactly how it will fit without even riding it."

"Bikes have frames champ". In case you didn't know.

You need to learn two things, reading comprehension, and what sarcasm is. Many doors will open for you, hang in there sport.
  • + 0
 PealJamSoCal, your the man.
  • + 0
 Hee hee. He called me a half wit.
  • + 2
 Let's not even get into stem-lengths and riser-bar sweeps. Sometimes having a longer travel fork raises the front stack forcing the rider to lean forward to provide any pedaling power. Without changing any actual measurements in the top tube, this would be definitely be perceived as a shortening of reach. Ever notice how that "reach" shrinks really quickly when you're climbing on your favorite steeps?
  • + 1
 Enduro06, I believe that you wanted to use "you're" not 'your.' There is a difference.
  • - 1
 I can rely on you for spell check from now on, is that what your saying. Sweet... I'm adding you as a friend. Would this be the wrong time to ask for some deals when I come visit my gf's parents in Cranbrook?
  • + 0
 this is a cool new tool! if you understand it, and i see thats been hard for a couple ppl. bigger fork goes on = reach getting shorter, the key is the 90 degree angle you make when you measure it from "bottom bracket center to the top of the headtube centerline ". so as the top tube becomes raked out from a larger fork the angle at which the bike sits is slacker then before the center line of the headtube has moved in and the bottem bracket center has moved forward, so now the length of your reach has decreased and your stack has increased makes the bike ride differently. just like most bike mesurments this is just based around a "standard" fork size for the bike, companies design a bike with a certain amount of travel in mind for the front. i would imagin you could talk one of your nerdy buddies they could make a formula to figure out what the different reach and stack each fork will have on a different bike.

i have felt what this differce in forks does since at one time i had a P.2 on a DJ then a triple drop off, this made my reach rly short but my stack taller then before. these measurements rock! they makes researching sizing a bike so much nicer!
  • + 1
 Well said. That "decreased reach" with the longer fork is especially noticeable on flats and uphills. Only proper way to increase the reach folks, point her down a steep hill and let 'er rip. Shalom, and Git 'r' dunn.
  • - 1
 ok, so i've been proven wrong. And enduro06, just let it go, i hope by now you've realized that the measurements do change. But I think that companies should publish these measurements, not with a specific fork in mind, but a standard H.A. for differents style bikes, ex. all "reach" and "stack" measurements for DH race bikes should be done with the HA at 64.5 degrees. So that you can truly compare the different bikes without being there.
  • - 1
 I know on a complete bike the measurements change you tool, I don't need to come to a realization of anything. I was agreeing with you, obviously reading comprehension is left out of the Ontario education curriculum. Bicycle manufacturers do post the geometry of their bikes. You need basic math skills to figure out angles and measurements. Stay in school....Kiddo.
  • - 1
 ok, calm down. Just scanned through your comments quickly and didn't realize that you had agreed, sorry. and for one thing I still am in school and am doing better than you probably did. And I obviously know that bike companies publish fricken geometries, but all I was saying was that they should have a standard HA when they calculate reach and stack because as you know if I measured them with a fox 40 and then with a boxxer they would be different for the exact same bike. This would ensure that you could really compare the two frames just by looking at the reach and stack.
  • + 2
 LOUD NOISES!!!
  • + 1
 You are all ridiculous! I have a physics degree and a math degree. To make a perfectly accurate measurment, the "frame" needs to be measured when assembled, fork and all. Although, the same measurement could be made if they included the headtube angle, which they do. A simple reduction equation could be used to alter the ratio to exactly what it would be if it were assembled. But... I have gone over this equation several times with different forks, frames, headtube angles, etc. and to my amazement(because I thought this was bullshit too) , the original reach/stack measurement is quite accurate, keep in mind I factored in the headtube angle. Just using the given example of the picture in this article, it is hard to tell where to measure from. I won't explain completely but, I would suggest using a base to start from, like the headtube and then branching off from there. This would give a true standard, that no one could argue with. Concluding... I think this measurement is helpful if you are new at bikes and just need a ballpark, but if you are experienced in choosing a bike it can be kind of a hokie measurement. I do not believe this should be a standardized measurement. I think things like thread counts, headtube diameters, hub spacing, etc. should be standardized.
  • + 0
 enduro 06 beleive me we are on the same page if yes you are just mesuring the frame and totally ignoring the components it wont change but if you are doing it for a complete bike it will, but why would they make the mesurement for just the frame size without the components, that means everytime you go to look at a new frame as you were talking about you are just going to totally dissasemble your bike so that you can get a mesurement then look at new frames and decide if you like one, besides why would you want a mesurement that tells you what a frames cockpit will be like when it has know components. personally(just my opinion) i would prefer to ride a bike thats has wheels and a fork and things like that, but thats just me, so it kinda makes sense that this mesurement will tell you what your bike will feel like when its assembled instead of sitting in your closet with no parts
  • + 0
 these measurements totally make sense, why didn't we think of this sooner?
  • + 0
 Because something that works better is already in use. Same reason no one is going to start selling coal powered cars next year.
  • + 0
 nothing new just diffrent definition and name.
  • + 0
 this frame looks like the author exe
  • + 0
 what happened to the transition bikes website???
  • + 1
 great system here!!
  • + 0
 This is good for people who know nothing about frame dimensions.
  • - 1
 props - i've been measuring bikes in a same way for some time now, it's so much better!
  • - 1
 So much better way to measure bikes! Great idea! Hope every other brands will use this maesurements too!
  • - 2
 wat do u do if u want to put forks like 150 mm on it then it will be like riding a chopper
  • - 1
 don't put forks that are too long on your bike and you won't have to worry about it.
  • - 2
 hmmm not convinced.so much more to consider like fork legnth,head angle seat angle, stay lenght
  • + 3
 It's not like they are going to stop telling us the geometry, so I think this is a good idea.
  • + 0
 thats cool
  • - 3
 i dont see this catching on....
  • - 2
 Great... another standard Frown
MTB's don't already have enough of those!
  • - 2
 the only bike i can think of that not workin on is the chase soft tail lol
  • - 2
 my mate justgot a bottlerocket
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2019. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.103680
Mobile Version of Website