What chainstay length do you like, and for what type of riding style/trails? I hear talk about "short chainstays"...but what does that mean? 417? 425? 435? Seems like 440+ may be what many consider "long"...
what about you?
what about you?
Chainstay Length
1 - 20 of 60 Posts
done. BTW I read the article in your sig link last night. Good stuff
Joined
·
18,073 Posts
There is no relationship between BB height & CS length.
The poll doesn't make sense because the proper CS length is dependent on the front center length. They need to be proportional otherwise the bike just doesn't handle correctly. For a L/ XL bike proportional means in the 445-450 mm range.
The poll doesn't make sense because the proper CS length is dependent on the front center length. They need to be proportional otherwise the bike just doesn't handle correctly. For a L/ XL bike proportional means in the 445-450 mm range.
Joined
·
2,869 Posts
435mm seems to be about the max length I like, for my height and riding style. 430mm seems ideal. Not sure I've ever ridden a bike with too short CS, but definitely a few that were too long. Too much work to lift the front end, or get the back to snap around. Not really worried about stability at speed around here.
I'm just under 5'11" tall with a 32" cycling inseam. I can understand a taller/shorter person wanting something different, or someone who rides big steep mountains.
I'm just under 5'11" tall with a 32" cycling inseam. I can understand a taller/shorter person wanting something different, or someone who rides big steep mountains.
Your dimensions really don't tell us much. If you ride a 455 reach bike with a 66' HTA & 120mm travel 430 might not be such a tragedy in the turns.
But if around the same height (as I am) you ride a 498mm reach, 160mm fork, 63.5' HTA, 430 mm CS are effing atrocious.
Joined
·
7,463 Posts
My lithium is 475 reach, 430 chain stays, 64,5° HTA, 150/160 and I like it. My paradox is pretty close to that too, come to think of it, just a 140 fork.. But you know, that HTA just steepens.
Joined
·
4,290 Posts
I think that the front center to rear center ratio should be 1.75ish MAX. Past that it's too hard to get weight on the front wheel.
If my reach is 520 and front center is 868 then the rear should be 496. Let's just round up to 500mm. I'm not joking.
Trust me, I will still be able to leverage over the rear wheel to get the front wheel up.
If my reach is 520 and front center is 868 then the rear should be 496. Let's just round up to 500mm. I'm not joking.
Trust me, I will still be able to leverage over the rear wheel to get the front wheel up.
Joined
·
5,145 Posts
It matters a lot less to me than the discussions here would lead me to believe if I didn't already have my own experience to draw upon. I notice the differences but find it pretty easy to adjust within a decent range of FC/RC ratios within an hour or so of changing bikes.
Joined
·
2,869 Posts
I ride 140mm/130mm bike with 460mm reach, 66º HA, 425mm CS. Love it. It's also a 27.5 bike.
Most of the hard tails I’m looking at are well above 1.75. Honzo, Big Al, etc. My current bike is a 1.62
Joined
·
4,290 Posts
Hardtails reduce the ratio when the fork compresses. Full suspension don't change as much and can get bigger depending on weight transfers.
Joined
·
1,813 Posts
I like sliding drop outs. I have 435mm to 450mm slides right now and really like that range. Wouldn’t mind something a little longer, maybe 440mm to 460mm would be perfect. I am also 6’3 so don’t have a problem with longer back ends as I have never been on a bike I couldn’t manhandle into where is want it to go. However, I have had many unbalanced bikes with shorter back ends that were squirly and harder to control in corners.
Joined
·
12,781 Posts
This is like asking "what's your favorite headtube angle?"
I can't vote on the poll, the answer depends on the bike.
I can't vote on the poll, the answer depends on the bike.
I love the idea of sliding dropouts. Especially since I’ve only really ever rode one bike thus far
1 - 20 of 60 Posts
