Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

1 - 4 of 4 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
183 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I have a 2014 wfo9 on order, waiting on the second batch to hit here in a few weeks.

I started questioning my size choice a bit and was wonder what others who own them have experienced.

I currently have a JET9 RDO and a 2010 RIP9 in size large. Both those bikes fit me well. I'm just a hair (1mm) under 6' tall, but could also probably fit on a medium. I saw someone riding a 2014 WFO9 in size large the other day (first one I have seen in person) it was a large and it looked bigger than I expected.

I'm now wondering if a medium may be a better choice considering I plan to do more jumping, downhill... with it. This bike is replacing my RIP and I will keep the Jet. The RIP has served me well, but I want something slacker and more playful with a bit more travel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
106 Posts
The new WFO has a much shorter TT and reach. It feels much more cramped than the RIP and the old WFO. You will like the large. I am 6 ft and am considering getting the XL. I have very long legs (long Femur). The reach on the XL is nearly half inch shorter than the old Lg WFO and the TT is only .1 in longer.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
183 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Thanks for the info. I remember hearing it was more compact (which is what I want for this type of bike), but then this one I saw looked spread out. Maybe the rider was just small.... I did not get a chance to get a good look.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
110 Posts
I'm 5' 9" and the M fits me perfect.
Go for the L, it's true that the TT is short...2 cm shorter than my old Commençal Meta AM29 (same size) and 1cm less than my TallboyLTc.

I think "little is better for DH (or DH oriented) bikes" is a big mistake,and much more if you need to pedal uphill.
 
1 - 4 of 4 Posts
Top