Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
Cancel
Create thread New Forums

Your bike is (probably) too big for you.

Jump to Latest
221 - 240 of 434 Posts
#221 ·
Suns_PSD said:
I think you should have just stood up and continued pedaling up the hill.
I'm not 6'5" but climbing was the sole strong point of short chain stays for me due to high traction. I don't feel 10-15mm of CS length is going to make that much difference when it comes to your center of gravity location over the axle while on climbs. I mean you can easily shift your CoG 100mm just by slightly leaning forward.

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
wouldnt it be nice if i didnt have to.
 
#222 ·
I'm not quite sure I'd know what to do if I wasn't riding the rivet on steep climbs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ptor
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#223 ·
LMN said:
There is absolutely bias in fitting. Your height, riding style, regional trail characteristics bias you towards a certain type of fit.

There is nothing wrong with this, but a good fitter should know their bias.
Click to expand...
Asking a person who is in a position of control and is supposed to be an authority, to have the insight to know their biases, yeah.

Maybe for a new rider they could seek fitting from multiple sources before buying, but for an experienced ride it's probably better if they develop their own fitting skills.
 
#224 ·
singletrackmack said:
I think most are just asking for balanced bike with proportional chainstays. The problem we have run into is the front end seems to be getting the modern touch, but the back of the bike is still old-school and and is staying the same.

Fine for the the smaller sizes, but when going to the bigger sizes and the front gets longer, the back end needs to get longer too in order to have a balanced bike. Many companies are still stuck on the old Gary Fisher Genesis geometry concepts from the early 2000; longer front end and short rear end. It’s 2021 now, we know better.
Click to expand...
You're making up rules here, there's no evidence that a proportional change in chain stay length is better.

People need to decide for themselves, ideally by trying different bikes.
 
#225 ·
Nurse Ben, I just don't agree with you. The bikes handle poorly with too short of chainstays compared to the front end length.

Riders have preferences and styles, sure. But no professional racer (in any sport) is going to intentionally choose a poor set up that pushes the front end constantly due to their 'personal tastes'.
 
#228 ·
Suns_PSD said:
It's not that long chain stays aren't needed, it's just that wheeling up hill suggests a technique problem more than anything.
Click to expand...
One of the problems is that seat tube angles are almost never designed for tall people. Seat tubes originate far forward of the bottom bracket and slant back at a shallow angle. The taller you are, the more that's exacerbated, and they aren't ever adjusted forward for larger frames, so even slamming the saddle forward is never enough. Santa Cruz is particularly awful for that.

This is the best video I've ever seen on the subject: VitalMTB short-travel 29ers - stated vs. actual seat angle. It's one of the reasons I just bought a Banshee.

I'm only 6'-2" and most bikes put my ass closer to the rear axle than the bottom bracket. You know what fixing that 'technique problem' entails? Ramming the nose of the saddle up your ass. That's for someone who's not that much taller than average. Things suck for the über-talls.

Suns_PSD said:
5'10".

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
All due respect for your other contributions, but your opinions about the bike fit issues of someone who's 'edge case' tall don't hold water.
 
#229 ·
Tall people say they loop out because their seat is too far back, short people say they loop out because their bars are too high.

Blaming equipment instead of technique is a constant regardless of height.
 
#231 ·
jeremy3220 said:
Makes sense because having a poor fitting bike isn't a technique issue.
Click to expand...
IMHO reasons people loop out in order of priority
1. Technique
2. Seat too low
3. Suspension too soft
4. Saddle too far back
5. Bars too high

Most of the time it is technique. A rider with good technique will not loop out no matter how poorly their bike is set up. They will complain about the setup making it harder but will adjust for it.
 
#232 ·
Try riding a gen 1 Evil Following up a steep grade at 6'2" and tell me it's technique. Of course technique compensates for the fact that you're behind the rear axle but it doesn't make it any fun or less taxing.

Sent from my Pixel 4a (5G) using Tapatalk
 
#234 ·
LMN said:
IMHO reasons people loop out in order of priority
1. Technique
2. Seat too low
3. Suspension too soft
4. Saddle too far back
5. Bars too high

Most of the time it is technique. A rider with good technique will not loop out no matter how poorly their bike is set up. They will complain about the setup making it harder but will adjust for it.
Click to expand...
To be fair the real issue is rarely looping out but rather the effort spent to avoid it.
 
#235 ·
schnee said:
One of the problems is that seat tube angles are almost never designed for tall people. Seat tubes originate far forward of the bottom bracket and slant back at a shallow angle. The taller you are, the more that's exacerbated, and they aren't ever adjusted forward for larger frames, so even slamming the saddle forward is never enough. Santa Cruz is particularly awful for that.

This is the best video I've ever seen on the subject: VitalMTB short-travel 29ers - stated vs. actual seat angle. It's one of the reasons I just bought a Banshee.

I'm only 6'-2" and most bikes put my ass closer to the rear axle than the bottom bracket. You know what fixing that 'technique problem' entails? Ramming the nose of the saddle up your ass. That's for someone who's not that much taller than average. Things suck for the über-talls.



All due respect for your other contributions, but your opinions about the bike fit issues of someone who's 'edge case' tall don't hold water.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. Worth noting that I'm long legged though.

OCNLogan posted in the CS length thread that he is 6'1" tall and runs his pedal to seat height at 36.5".

I run mine at 36" on the dot on every bike measured with my handy yardstick. I also run 170 cranks which although not making my inseam longer, does in fact raise my entire body 5mm over 175 cranks.

The 'wheelie problems' just seems a bit overexaggerated but I acknowledge, you don't know till ya know. And I'm not that tall so can't compare directly.

GL

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk
 
#236 ·
LMN said:
A rider with good technique will not loop out no matter how poorly their bike is set up. They will complain about the setup making it harder but will adjust for it.
Click to expand...
This is simply not true. My XL Santa Cruz blur XC was way too short for me with a super short CSL. It was impossible to stay seated on a steep climb. My seat was too far back, but it had to be. I loved that bike and the weight distribution while cornering was excellent even if it was 40mm too short.
If you're 7 foot tall NO amount of technique will keep you from looping out on a slack seat tube with ultra short stays.

I'm only 6'5".

edit
It's like me saying that toe overlap doesn't matter and a good ride will just ride around it. :)
 
#237 ·
Suns_PSD said:
Fair enough. Worth noting that I'm long legged though.

OCNLogan posted in the CS length thread that he is 6'1" tall and runs his pedal to seat height at 36.5".

I run mine at 36" on the dot on every bike measured with my handy yardstick. I also run 170 cranks which although not making my inseam longer, does in fact raise my entire body 5mm over 175 cranks.

The 'wheelie problems' just seems a bit overexaggerated but I acknowledge, you don't know till ya know. And I'm not that tall so can't compare directly.

GL

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
slide your seat back until you butt lines up with the rear axle, then go for a climb.

seriously. not joking, just experiment for a little bit on trail. something to try and session.


also concentrate on a natural relax body position where you dont compensate to leaning forward at all. see how high you make the climb.

then repeat w sat forward and your body shifted and compare the differences.


please report back and let us know what you find. post a couple pictures

challenge goes out to everyone here.

fwiw my seat is at 40"
 
#238 ·
Nurse Ben said:
You're making up rules here, there's no evidence that a proportional change in chain stay length is better.

People need to decide for themselves, ideally by trying different bikes.
Click to expand...
you really need to think about this comment.

if a proportional change in front center makes a bike better for a tall rider. m vs xxl frame.

how is it that the exact same rear center is perfect for both riders?

lost some cred there on that one ben
 
#240 ·
Suns_PSD said:
Fair enough. Worth noting that I'm long legged though.

OCNLogan posted in the CS length thread that he is 6'1" tall and runs his pedal to seat height at 36.5".

I run mine at 36" on the dot on every bike measured with my handy yardstick. I also run 170 cranks which although not making my inseam longer, does in fact raise my entire body 5mm over 175 cranks.

The 'wheelie problems' just seems a bit overexaggerated but I acknowledge, you don't know till ya know. And I'm not that tall so can't compare directly.

GL

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Interesting, despite being a good 3in shorter than me, you've got nearly the same saddle height. And I thought I was relatively leggy when my buddy who is 6'2", had to drop my saddle to test ride my bike :p.

Personally, I can't say I've ever "actually" looped out while climbing, even with short chainstays and a slack actual STA. Usually I run out of energy, gearing, or traction first, at least when actually mountain biking.

But, the effort put into NOT looping out at times, is absolutely non-trivial, even if its not huge. Like I said, sometimes I'm literally hitting the chin bar of my helmet on the stem/handlebar, as I'm actively trying to pull my chest as far forward/low to the ground as I can on some of those steeper climbs. And if the steep section is longer, that does drain you a bit (or, at least me).

For what its worth, my personal desire for chainstays being longer is mostly for when I'm riding downhill, not for climbing.

In terms of bike sizing, it seems its just becoming harder to know how to size things. As I bet most people have an ETT, and reach number they have felt comfortable on for a while. And with bikes getting larger, and seat tube angles getting steeper, you get to decide if you want to size based on your current ETT (and probably get a way longer reach), or buy based on reach (and get a way shorter ETT).
 
221 - 240 of 434 Posts
About this Discussion
433 Replies
96 Participants
Last post:
s0ckeyeus
Mountain Bike Reviews Forum
posts
16M
members
534K
Since
1990
A forum community dedicated to Mountain Bike owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about bike parts, components, deals, performance, modifications, classifieds, trails, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
General Discussion Downhill - Freeride California - Norcal Shocks and Suspension Passion