Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I debating on what size Gary Fisher Paragon to get. I rode both and I think either may work. I'm 5'11" with a 31.5" inseam. I have a longer upper body and shorter legs. The bike shop recommended the smaller size. I ride a 56cm road bike, any suggestions?

Thanks
- dan
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
Beware bike shop's advice....

With the best intention LBSs are often wrong and a half. Most are judging you by standing over the bike as the be all and end all guide.

If you are anything like me (my span/reach is 4" more than my height and allied to short legs) you'll be needing the 19. Don;t even think about putting a longer stem on the 17.5. Ironically my cx bike is a 54.5cm.....

Standover on the Paragon is 30 1/2". As you are no novice, I think you'll be fine. I've been riding 'oversize' bikes to get the top tube I need for years and never had a standover problem.

The Paragon is beautiful value for money. Enjoy.

Velo
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·

·
Rohloff
Joined
·
1,600 Posts
I had the same debate with a medium or large GF HiFi 29er. I'm 5'9" with a 30" inseam and ride a 54cm. I too am a little long in the torso and short in the legs. I had the opportunity to rent both size bikes and take them out on the trail. They both worked fine with me. Having a strong road riding background, I kind of liked being stretched out on the large, but everyone was telling me to go with the medium. I ended up going with the medium, and I think it was the right decision. That said, I'd think you need the large.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,077 Posts
I am the same height with the same inseam and I ride a 19" Paragon. I ride it with a 90 mm stem, a 11 degree sweep bar and a set back post. With that set up the bike fits perfect. Your results may vary. Get the 19
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
When I plug my measurements in at wrenchscience.com it actually says I fit the 17.5 better. The recommended cockpit size or overall reach is 675mm which is closer to the 17.5's geometry.

http://www.fisherbikes.com/bike/model/paragon/geometry

WS Recommended Sizes
Frame Size center-to-center: 17 in
Frame Size center-to-top: 18 in
Overall Reach: 67.50 cm
Saddle Height: 72.89 cm
Handlebar Width: 46 cm
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20 Posts
I'm 6' 2" 34" inseam and I own the 17.5" 2005 Paragon. I would normally fit a large 20" frame. The ETT geometry of the Paragon is the same as my large 19/20 inch mountain bike. I thought I'd save weight by going a size down and getting a longer seat post. I wound up getting an 400mm Thompson offset seatpost (to get more weight over the back) and a 120mm stem. I have about 10-11 inches of seatpost out. I wish I'd gone with the larger size unlike the other poster (Tallsilver1) who's about my size who wanted more standover clearance. I feel with the jacked up seat-post that I'm more off balance. The bike is perfectly rideable but I find myself having to "correct" my position on the bike.


This from the GF web site:

"In general, if you are torn between sizes, we always recommend going with the smaller size as it is easier to create a larger fit out of a smaller frame rather than the reverse. Fitting is a very important process when determining the ride quality and comfort of a bike.

I have a Genesis Geometry Fisher. Can I put a different length stem on it without affecting the handling?

A. Yes, changing stem lengths is fine, within reason. The idea behind the geometry is to keep the rider's weight centered farther back between the wheels. If you get too small a frame, and try to compensate with a really long stem, you'll negate the benefits. As long as you are fit properly to the bike, changing stem length by 5-10mm to fine tune your position is fine."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
After running all the numbers I think I'm leaning towards the 17.5. I could always put a 100mm stem on to compensate a bit. I rode both, however it's so hard to tell in a parking lot. The bike shop said I looked fine on the 17.5 and didn't think I needed the 19. I just wanted to be sure since the Paragon has the new G2 geometry.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
I think you'll love the feel of a 60-80mm stem.

I urge you not to compromise the steering :nono: which you use 100% of the time just in order to have standover you really need twice a year..... maybe you need it when you need it though :eek:

Velo
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,271 Posts
i'm pretty much the same size as you. 5'11", with a 32" inseam. This is sort of apples to oranges, but...test rode a redline d460 the other day (planning on getting a monocog-flight 29er) and the 19" fit me PERFECT. In comparing the numbers, the redline has a higher standover is much higher on the redline (the 17" d460 has about the same standover as the 19" paragon)

however, standover isn't everything. the top tube numbers on the d460 19" and the Paragon 17.5" are pretty close: 23" vs 601.9mm (23.7") respectively.
I think you might feel better on the 17.5 GF honestly.

Off-topic: totally fell in love with the ride and geometry of the redline d460, which has nearly identical geo as the monocog-flight. Love the feel of that rigid fork too!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
I just checked my 56cm Scott CR1 road bikes effective top tube and cockpit. Its 560mm (22") + a 110mm stem, which puts the cockpit at 670mm (26.3"). This is closest to the 17.5 Paragon 692mm (27.2") cockpit. I think I may feel too stretched out on the 19, since my road bike is a perfect fit. Should road and mountain top tube length be similar when considering fit? I would normally think you would want to be further stretched on a road bike for aerodynamics.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
You shouldn't be comparing road to mtb cockpit lengths as bar heights and drop reaches and widths all interfere with the outcome. As does saddle position behind BB.

Hence competitive cyclist's fitometer won't help you AFAIK.

If you're happy on a 56 top tube on a road bike with a 110 stem and a conventional drop bar, I really think you sound like a longer reach boy than me. My MTB cockpit is 710mm with a conventional (280mm long) saddle's tip 60mm behind the BB. You could just achieve that with a 100mm stem on the 17.5 depending on your saddle position.

Where's your saddle behind the BB? How have you set it?
 

·
Rohloff
Joined
·
1,600 Posts
baxtr said:
Should road and mountain top tube length be similar when considering fit?
Fitting a road bike and a mountain bike is very different. The standard road fitting rules don't apply. Compared to a road bike, your mountain bike will feel short in the TT and more upright, and the saddle goes a little lower. This allows for more wiggle room, so you can bring your weight forward going up a technical climb, back over the saddle on a steep drop off and left to right as you maneuver around obsticles.

It's hard to get over this feel at first, but getting fit advice from a number or people may help. As I said before, my mind wanted a large, but most everyone on this list and at the bike shops said medium was the right size for me. I bought it and have become real comfortable on it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
131 Posts
I'm about your height, but slightly shorter in the torso and longer in the legs. I had to make the same choice when shopping for a Fisher X-Cal last summer. I went for the larger bike because at the time I'd mostly been riding a road bike, and so a more stretched out position felt right to me.

In retrospect, I should have gotten the smaller bike; The 19in works great for me on fire roads and fast open trails. But in slow technical stuff (which is mostly what we have around here) I wish I was more upright. I rarely ride the X-Cal any more since I got another bike that's a better fit for me and the trails I ride.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
406 Posts
After running all the numbers I think I'm leaning towards the 17.5. I could always put a 100mm stem on to compensate a bit. I rode both, however it's so hard to tell in a parking lot. The bike shop said I looked fine on the 17.5 and didn't think I needed the 19. I just wanted to be sure since the Paragon has the new G2 geometry
ack, too late. i was gonna chime in and say large. i am roughly the same size as you, and have a 19" rig and a 19" hifi 29, both g2. and a 19.5" inbred and 20" kona. i like to be stretched out a bit, and i think part of the g2 philosophy is to lengthen the tt and shorten the stem.

that said, two people could have identical measurements and still prefer different sizes, so enjoy your ride; your body will adapt to the bike.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top