Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I am 6'1" and I am about to purchase a Giant Revel 1. The guy at the store said to get a large (20"). But I wanted to ask you guys what your thoughts were. I'm not really taking this bike on the road, just trails and stuff.

Thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
843 Posts
yeah I put stack, reach and TT length WAY over seat tube length... (which I doesn't really matter as long as your post fits and you don't rack yourself getting off). It's a bit of a personal preference, but I usually go on the small side.

are you intent on changing stem lengths or bars? because that makes a difference as well.

edit: I looked up the geo for the revel. The 20" has a TT of 23.3", which is reasonably short for the size. It doesn't say if it is effective TT or not, but if it is, and you don't have unusually long legs, I'd veer towards the 20 over the 18 (depending, of course, on your own preferences).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
yeah I put stack, reach and TT length WAY over seat tube length... (which I doesn't really matter as long as your post fits and you don't rack yourself getting off). It's a bit of a personal preference, but I usually go on the small side.

are you intent on changing stem lengths or bars? because that makes a difference as well.

edit: I looked up the geo for the revel. The 20" has a TT of 23.3", which is reasonably short for the size. It doesn't say if it is effective TT or not, but if it is, and you don't have unusually long legs, I'd veer towards the 20 over the 18 (depending, of course, on your own preferences).
You're right. When I went and looked at Treck he sized me up for a 19" and then for Giant they are "20" but tech. their dimensions are a little smaller than the Trek. I just wanted to make sure I was in the right "size bracket".

I'm going with the Large Giant for sure.
 

·
It's about showing up.
Joined
·
12,738 Posts
So you are perhaps a teensy bit long in the torso. Top tube size is the most critical for that as seat height is easy to manage even in a too small frame. With legs as long as yours I doubt that standover height is much of an issue. As such I would go a bit big rather than small.

The graph to which you refer is too gross a tool and too general. It would be good to know which bikes you were looking at. Even within the Trek HT line the sizing is different.

Also you might learn much from your current Virtual Top Tube size.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
So you are perhaps a teensy bit long in the torso. Top tube size is the most critical for that as seat height is easy to manage even in a too small frame. With legs as long as yours I doubt that standover height is much of an issue. As such I would go a bit big rather than small.

The graph to which you refer is too gross a tool and too general. It would be good to know which bikes you were looking at. Even within the Trek HT line the sizing is different.

Also you might learn much from your current Virtual Top Tube size.
Ok great. You have helped me make my final decision! I will go with the L (20") Giant. Thanks again!
 
1 - 12 of 12 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