[carolinaviking]

Hi all. I have fallen for the NRS and need to get one soon. However, I am a tad concerned about size. The small is 16.5", which seems to be the medium range of most manufacturers and the medium is 18.5" which seems too big for me where other bikes are concerned. I am 5'9" tall with an inseam of about 30-31". I am inclined to go with the small since most frames I fit are around 16 to 17.5" but figured I better get some advice from you people. Unfortunately, there is no Giant dealer within 3 hours of my location, so I can't just go down and try one out.

Also, I am assuming that the NRS2 frame is identical to the NRS1 except for the rear shock and that I can upgrade to the Fox rear shock in the future...is that correct?

Thanks for the help.

Carolinaviking

 

[Cyco-Dude]

i would get the small; you won't have any standover clearance with the medium (i'm about the same size as you and have test-rode the small and medium frames).

the frames for eash year are all the same as far as i know. unless the shock that comes on the NRS 2 really sucks (which i doubt), i wouldn't waste the money to "upgrade" it. save that for a nice custom wheelset.

 

[Speedub.Nate]

Can I ask, if you haven't demoed the NRS, are you certain that you want one? What type of riding do you plan on doing?

FWIW, I am 6'1" with a 33.5" inseam and comfortably rode their 18.5" 2001 frame.

 

[carolinaviking]

I knew when I posted that it wouldn't be long before someone asked that question, Speedub! I live in Europe, in an area where bikes are very, very expensive. The local dealer has high-end Bianchis, Scotts and Meridas, but no Giants. He is willing to order me a Giant NRS to demo, but I know it is expensive for him to keep high-end bikes in his shop without selling them. The thing is, I can get one from the States for over $1500 less than he will charge me, shipping and duties included, so I don't want to buy from him. I feel bad not supporting my local shop, but jeez, he charges over $3,500 for an NRS2! That is pretty standard pricing over here, too. I want an NRS1 and that is over $4500 here. If I do get him to order me one to try, I'll have to buy it and I don't have that kind of cash to burn. Besides, I'm looking to order a frame off of Ebay and that would be a pretty cheap investment for me even if I make a mistake and dislike the bike. I'm pretty sure I'll like it, though. I have read a lot about them and talked to lots of bikers that have them. We had our annual 67k mtb race last weekend and I saw no fewer than 15 NRSs and most of them passed my halfway check point in the top 50 riders. They were definitely the top duallies on the track. Everyone raved about them.

 

[Speedub.Nate]

Your screen name threw me off -- I figured you were stateside. I asked the question only because I see a fair share of riders, myself included, who purchased NRSs expecting them to be something other than what they are. It sounds as if you've done your homework.

 

[Reek]

I bought the small

Hi all. I have fallen for the NRS and need to get one soon. However, I am a tad concerned about size. The small is 16.5", which seems to be the medium range of most manufacturers and the medium is 18.5" which seems too big for me where other bikes are concerned. I am 5'9" tall with an inseam of about 30-31". I am inclined to go with the small since most frames I fit are around 16 to 17.5" but figured I better get some advice from you people. Unfortunately, there is no Giant dealer within 3 hours of my location, so I can't just go down and try one out.

Also, I am assuming that the NRS2 frame is identical to the NRS1 except for the rear shock and that I can upgrade to the Fox rear shock in the future...is that correct?

Thanks for the help.

Carolinaviking

I'm 5'9" and 31 inseam. I demoed the Small and the medium. I ended up with the small. And loved it! rode it for 2 years and sold it for the next "flavor of the month". I fall in the middle of med/small bikes it seems and can go either way for most bike companies. Still, the small NRS felt more agile than the medium. I had it set up with a 120mm stem and the top tube length was perfect for me. I assume if I had gone with a medium, I would have needed a 90 or 100 mm stem. I did get a longer seat post but nothing special (350 mm long). I'd recommend a small if you like the "flickablility" factor for single track.

REEK

 

[carolinaviking]

Your screen name threw me off -- I figured you were stateside. I asked the question only because I see a fair share of riders, myself included, who purchased NRSs expecting them to be something other than what they are. It sounds as if you've done your homework.

Yeah, I lived in Asheville, NC, for years but moved to Europe a couple of years back. I miss the mountains of Western North Carolina big time, but the trails over here in Sweden are very sweet. They are not hilly, and I miss the long descents, but they are smooth as glass and it is like riding a roller coaster through twists and turns and short ups and downs through trees and rocks. It is truly awesome riding here and very fast. Dual suspension is overkill for this area if you are racing, but I am wanting to just do all-day epics and be able to go to Switzerland or Germany or Italy whenever I want and need the versatility of a full-susser. The NRS is nice because it is good and stiff for the trails around here but able to take the rougher terrain of Italian mountains. It'll be my first dually, too. Here are a couple of pics of the terrain I ride here...

 

[allenpg]

I had this same dilemma, but ultimately decided on the medium. I have a small Gary Fisher, but the 18.5" NRS. The clearence is a little more on the Fisher, but my legs are a little longer. For some reason, I really like the 18.5". I guess it's a personal thing. I'm sure I would have been happy with a small, but I got it checked out by my local bike shop and they agreed a 18.5" fit. Good luck!