Big Bike Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cheers for the answers, when I mean it felt too small the wheels felt small, my knees were way to bent, everything about the bike just felt like I'de out grown it, which I have.

Nix - I'll measure the frame tomorrow when I'm not in danger of loosing my life hurdling boxes in the garage

Petriodet - The sort of thing I'de use the bike for is downhilling, so I think a hardtail would be okay. I'm guessing it's cheaper to buy a whole bike than build it, if so which are the good ones to buy. Ideally under £600
 
Supercow said:
I'd say the opposite - but that's possibly just personal prefs.
For a DH bike, it's best to have it longer and therefore more stable at higher speeds.
Click to expand...

Whilst I'm inclined to agree with you for that very reason, is it not true that many (I only have the XC myself) riders seem to go for slightly smaller frames with highly extended seatposts and extended stems, etc. - some say as small as 15-16" when they're >6ft themselves when the recommended is around 19-21" - due to the reason that they want a little leeway in terms of hurting themselves?

Not having a pop, genuine question.

What size frame do you go for yourself for full sus/DH?
 
Nix said:
riders seem to go for slightly smaller frames with highly extended seatposts and extended stems,
Click to expand...

Irrelevant to DH. For XC I'm sure that's the case, not for DH though.
You seldom sit on your DH bike, so seatpost are always low as possible and stems don't really go longer than 55mm.
 
Then why is it that many riders - even many posters on here - seem to have smaller frames than they should have, judging by how high they have their seatposts?
 
Nix said:
Then why is it that many riders - even many posters on here - seem to have smaller frames than they should have, judging by how high they have their seatposts?
Click to expand...

Not many DH bikes on here, can only think of a handful. Lots of trail/AM/XC bikes though.

There is a line of thought that a slightly smaller frame is more "chuckable" than a bigger one. Can't say I've seen many pictures in here where I've thought "wow, thats a lot of seatpost" either, and definetly not so many long stems, most people prefer a shorter stem.

Seat height isn't so important in sizing anyway tbh, more important is the top tube length.
 
andi said:
Not many DH bikes on here, can only think of a handful. Lots of trail/AM/XC bikes though.

There is a line of thought that a slightly smaller frame is more "chuckable" than a bigger one. Can't say I've seen many pictures in here where I've thought "wow, thats a lot of seatpost" either, and definetly not so many long stems, most people prefer a shorter stem.

Seat height isn't so important in sizing anyway tbh, more important is the top tube length.
Click to expand...

There's been quite a few I've seen around - mostly on bike websites et al. where I've thought just that.

I base this on the fact I've got the correct size frame for my own with the seatpost a fair way up for comfort in the riding position too. Any further - and I also have quite long legs - I wouldn't be able to touch the pedals. Some pictures I've seen, riders easily have 5"+ on their seatpost compared to my own. That's where I've got the comparison.
 
Nix said:
Oh, you're being pedantic. Explains that one.

Forget DH was mentioned, talk full sus.
Click to expand...

Not being pedantic or picking a fight, but you seem to have this idea in your head and that it's the case for all riding disciplines. What's "good" for one discipline, is not necessarily the case for the other.

For example: DH bikes, stems will be short. XC Bikes - stems tend to be on the longer side. I can't comment on how XC racers prefer their frame sizing, but for Dh racers, it will err on the longer side. Here and there you will find someone who likes their bike on the smaller side, but that's not the norm.

Here's a full sus XC race bike
MorewoodFullBike.gif


....perfect for riding like this
1994_l.jpg


XC, youd want your front end to be twitchy and responsive.


Here's a full sus DH race bike
4916787048_92f74794ae_b.jpg


Perfect for riding things like this
6413_245589785166_786205166_7980071_7236288_n.jpg

You'd want your front end to be stable/point and shoot.

You can't normalise your argument .. is my point, it has to be discipline specific
 
Last edited:
I got the two confused. Still no need to jump down my throat about it.

I wasn't normalising it, I was simply confused as to why riders of full sus XC seem to have smaller frames than they need - which I have definitely seen. I mentioned DH because in my brain somewhere I still assume full sus equals DH although I do know it's a different discipline. It was an honest slip. You need to remember I'm still relatively new to the terms, so you need to give me leeway. However, that aside focusing on non-DH I believe my point still stands.

Incidently, that Zula is lovely.
 
Last edited:
Nix said:
Then why is it that many riders - even many posters on here - seem to have smaller frames than they should have, judging by how high they have their seatposts?
Click to expand...

How are you defining a frame as being too small? Having a bit of seat post extrude from the frame? :)

A frame is very Rider and type of riding specific. I NEED the 5" of seat post and more due to my long legs, and that's on my xc hardtail and do-it-all full sus (for going up), both are lowered for going back down to make the bike more chuckable.
 
I don't think he meant to jump down your throat or have a go, it's just a lot of people seem to confuse downhill riding with riding a bike down hills. Downhill is a really specific and unique sport within cycling.

Even in other disciplines, the seat height isn't that important, thats what a seatpost is for, you can adjust it to get it right, as long as the seatpost isn't passed the minimum insertion mark, its fine. The more important thing is top tube length, you can tell if someones on too small a frame because they look hunched up over the bike rather than stretched out. You can adjust this in some part with a stem, but that makes a big effect on the handling.

I've probably got a good 6"+ of seat post showing, but any bigger a frame and I'd feel too stretched out and the frame would feel massive (I'm on a 20" frame already).

Plus it'd look like a gate :D
 
rhysduck said:
How are you defining a frame as being too small? Having a bit of seat post extrude from the frame? :)

A frame is very Rider and type of riding specific. I NEED the 5" of seat post and more due to my long legs, and that's on my xc hardtail and do-it-all full sus (for going up), both are lowered for going back down to make the bike more chuckable.
Click to expand...

Relatively, taking into account I have long legs too. It's based on the normal 'on paper' measurements of the frame-size to height, then with the 'expected' amount of seatpost to be out (30cm of the seatpost showing I'd consider normal). I'm not talking 5" of seatpost from the saddle touching the frame, I'm talking 5"+ on top of where I'd imagine the seatpost should be if the sizing is roughly correct; we end up seeing the seatpost alarmingly high.

Am I making sense? Take the Zula above, that's normal taking into account the frame style. Another 5-10" on top of that, you'd suspect the frame is too small, no? For simplicity, just imagine that seatpost out twice as much. :p

Admitedly, it's less so on these forums and it may also be a case of 'out of the box', but I've definitely seen said pictures floating around somewhere.

But above all, take into account I am still new to all this so could well be unintentionally talking out of my rear.
 
Last edited:
10" more would be a long seatpost yes!

That Zula looks a bit short actually.

Another thing to look at is bar height v seat height. Most people are comfortable with the seat slightly higher than the bars for XC.

Like rhysduck says, frame fit is very individual, and size guides are just that, a guide. Someone with longer legs and a shorter body will probably prefer a smaller frame and longer seatpost than someone with short legs and longer body, even if they're the same height, despite a guide saying they should be on the same size frame.
 
The Midlands XC race tracks have down sections as steep and technical as any of the Cannock DH tracks. Riding those in race conditions on a 100mm travel, 580mm bar, very light bike is quite scary.
 
Supercow said:
I'd say the opposite - but that's possibly just personal prefs.
For a DH bike, it's best to have it longer and therefore more stable at higher speeds.
Click to expand...

What Sillycow has said there is a little confusing, he is not saying that all DH riders buy a bike that is to big for them but that the geometries of DH bikes are very different to other full suss ones.

You still get a frame size that fits you be it small/medium/large but these will tend to have a longer top tube and wheel base/slacker head angle than say an XC bike for the extra stability when sledding down the mountain.

Nix said:
Do these seem like good gloves?

http://www.wiggle.co.uk/giro-bravo-long-finger-gloves/#more
Click to expand...

They are expensive you can get gloves a lot cheaper than that.
 
Nix said:
Very nice. I like the style of frame on that, looks very light.

Dare I ask how much you paid? I could google, but I like new-toy enthusiasm better. :D

New to MTBing Thundy or do you have other toys?
Click to expand...

It's my first new toy Nix. :)

I originally ordered a 'Claud Butler' but after reading some reviews it would seem that they're in the "cheap budget brand" I ended up ringing up and changing my bike choice, this bike was £60 more expensive but due to lack of stock and making me wait longer for delivery they waived the extra £60 :D

So I ended up paying £539.99.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom