27.5 Vs 29 Recommendations/Suggestions for new bike

you might just need to go to a different brand if you want crazy standover
the el mariachi is 74.4 in a medium
the kona honzo is 67.5! in medium
the niner ros9 is 73.0 but I don't think that's a good bike for NJ

I wear 30" inseam pants and am 5'9 on a good day. the small frames are just too small. you don't have room to open up and breath or really crank down and make power.
I would have bought a steel kona honzo if I knew anyone around me that sold them. but I"m super super happy with the el mariachi and really its 2cm difference between the standover of the small trek and the medium el mariachi.
 
I don't know if this is still the case but from what I remember Trek utilizes a "virtual" size at least it did on my fuel, I would look at the actual frame size number on their website.
 
Will you be using clipless pedals? If you are, you're going to have cleats on and will not have to worry about a ball tap every time.

Here is the geometry of my bike.
image.png


I also have a few stems and Bars to choose from. It's a custom build you can say and it's a great bike at all of these parks.
 
Standover not the most important. When you dismount, you angle your bike sideways. It's pretty hard to bust your balls when you dismount, even if they touch the top tube when standing up straight. You also spend 99% of your time riding the bike not standing or dismounting, at least I would hope so. When you crash you are mostly falling on your side or going over the bars, not your balls into top tube.

As matty said the top tube length is most important. You don't want to be too strethed out or too upright. You want it to be just right. It can be adjusted to an extent with different length stems and offset seatposts, but not as simple as moving seatpost up and down. This will have most impact while you are actually pedaling the bike for hours and hours. Your short legs leads me to believe that you have a long torso, which may benefit from longer top tube.

Another problem with a smaller frame may be the height of your handlebars. You may find that you have to use a lot of headset spacers, angled up stem and hi-rise handlebars to get it up to a comfortable level. At some point this will affect bike handling.

That said if I could help it, I would try to get a bike that doesn't have my balls touching the top tube.

I would go to a few more bike shops and get some secondary opnions before deciding. If the only thing that the bike shop guys tells you when he sizes you is standover, find another guy or shop.

Its not to say you have a very strange body geometry and small is really the right size for you. Stranger things have happened like @woody at 6'+ riding medium frames better than 99% of NJ. Its just that 90% of people your height ride a medium so thats why everyone is suggesting what they are suggesting.
 
Last edited:
gtluke said:
You'll regret going with the smaller bike. Get the 17.5 and put a 50mm stem on it for now. And move the seat forward. You'll eventually swap back to the a 90mm stem and push the seat back once your posture corrects from putting miles on a mountain bike.
And yes, hard tail 29er f
Click to expand...


This is what I did when I first bought this bike, I was new to the 29er also and as I developed the better riding posture I had to change up how I set the bike up.
 
soundz said:
Standover not the most important. When you dismount, you angle your bike sideways. It's pretty hard to bust your balls when you dismount, even if they touch the top tube when standing up straight. You also spend 99% of your time riding the bike not standing or dismounting, at least I would hope so. When you crash you are mostly falling on your side or going over the bars, not your balls into top tube.

As matty said the top tube length is most important. You don't want to be too strethed out or too upright. You want it to be just right. It can be adjusted to an extent with different length stems and offset seatposts, but not as simple as moving seatpost up and down. This will have most impact while you are actually pedaling the bike for hours and hours. Your short legs leads me to believe that you have a long torso, which may benefit from longer top tube.

Another problem with a smaller frame may be the height of your handlebars. You may find that you have to use a lot of headset spacers, angled up stem and hi-rise handlebars to get it up to a comfortable level. At some point this will affect bike handling.

That said if I could help it, I would try to get a bike that doesn't have my balls touching the top tube.

I would go to a few more bike shops and get some secondary opnions before deciding. If the only thing that the bike shop guys tells you when he sizes you is standover, find another guy or shop.

Its not to say you have a very strange body geometry and small is really the right size for you. Stranger things have happened like @woody at 6'+ riding medium frames better than 99% of NJ. Its just that 90% of people your height ride a medium so thats why everyone is suggesting what they are suggesting.
Click to expand...


Tons of good advice in here
 
I am 5-10" and I buy pants in a 30" length. That being said, I am mostly torso. I might have 1/2 an inch of stand over, but the length of the cockpit on a lg works for me.

My advice would be to stare at the reach #'s vs the TT length. This is actually the more important #.

http://www.cervelo.com/en/engineering/thinking-and-processes/geometry-and-fit.html

Although this link is about road frames, it does a great job of explains why reach is the vital #.
 
Thanks for all the advice. I decided to blow my budget and went with a full suspension Salsa Spearfish. It's a small, but somewhat larger than the 15.5" Trek. distance from the center of the handlebars to the center of the seat is within 1/2" of the bike I have been riding for the last 10 years.
 
Last edited:
Enjoy it. Totally fun bike that will open some doors for you. Have a blast.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom