Frame size guidelines - golden rules..?

[Kuroblack350]

Hello all

Just wondering if there are any golden, fixed rules when it comes to frame sizes?

I ask because my last bike (1998 ish) had a 21" frame, but now this seems to be at the extreme end of the scale - 6' 6" and over!!! (I'm 5' 10" on a good day)

Speaking to one of the advisors at Evans, he's saying a 17.5" frame would suit my height best, obviously it's something you have to try in person, but I'm just after some initial advice before making the Trek... (Even the Evans website suggests 19.5" for 5' 10" 'ers!)

Is it as easy as just referring to height, or is there more to it?

Thanks all

BTW the bike in question will be a Trek 6 series, maybe a 6000 or 6300 2010 model.

[itsnotarace]

Anything between 17.5 and 19 would be fine for you, test ride test ride test ride test ride

[anonymous-user]

I have a 21.5" trek 6700 from 2007 or 8 can't remember I'm 6'2" and it is too big for me (last in the shop for a good discount)

It came with a massive 120mm stem on it though, I swapped that for a tiny race face one and have the seat as far forward on the rails as possible and it does the job fine.

The geometry might not be the same on the newer models but I'd say if I was going again I'd get 1 or 2 sizes smaller so a 19.5/18.5, so a try a 17.5 & 18.5 and see which one you're most comfortable on.

Some will say get the smallest frame you can because the frame can significantly affect the weight, however [correction pdV6] smaller frames will be more nimble or slightly more unstable depending on your perspective

Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 19th August 15:45

[Matt106]

As above make sure you test ride a couple of sizes and get them to size you up properly in the shop. All the staff in Evans SHOULD be able to do this if theyve been trained!
The last thing you want is an ill fitting bike which causes you aches and pains when riding.

[pdV6]

OneDs said:

Some will say get the smallest frame you can because the frame can significantly affect the weight, however small frames can be very unstable.

Others would substitute "nimble" for "unstable" - depends on the type of riding you intend to do I'd say.

[a11y_m]

Kuroblack350 said:

Is it as easy as just referring to height, or is there more to it?

It does basically refer to height, but as you've guessed there is more to it:

- type of riding
- the actual bike sizing (distance from bars to saddle is more important)
- personal preference
- body proportions, e.g. do you have longer legs compared to your height?

I'm guessing with the bike you're quoting you're looking at general MTBing and trail riding? I'm 6'1 with a 33" inside leg (about average for my height I believe) and ride a 17.5" for general MTBing. It does have a long "top-tube" (distance from bars to saddle, roughly). I tend to chuck the bike around a lot, hitting a few jumps too, hence preferring a smaller size. Most bike companies and shop's recommendations would place me on a 19" frame but I just prefer something smaller.

Sorry, not sure that's much help after all!

[snotrag]

There is only one golden rule.

Test Ride!


ETA - as a starter though - remember you are absolutely bang on 'average' male size at 5ft 10. So start with whatever each company has as thier middle size.

Edited by snotrag on Thursday 19th August 15:56

[jshell]

snotrag said:

There is only one golden rule.

Test Ride!

Agree with this as all manufacturers measure differently. I'm 6'5" and ride a Giant 22". It's a bit on the big side for me (5-bar gate) so short stem + forward saddle.

[anonymous-user]

Have a gander at the 10 point guide here about fitting, basically you can get a range of sizes and still get relatively the same position on the bike (so long as your prepared to do a bit of trial and error with different options & components), in the end the frame size comes down to the trade off's in point 9.

http://www.mountain-bike-world.com/mountain-bike-f...

Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 19th August 16:04

[Kuroblack350]

Folks, thanks for the helpful comments, very much appreciated!

Test rode a couple of Trek's this evening, 17.5 and 18.5 - went for the 18.5 as it somehow 'felt' right - odd but seemed so much more controllable and on the money.

Anyways, put a deposit down and picking up a 2010 6300 tomorrow afternoon - in 'rootbeer' Got a reasonable discount it being the 2010 version (2011 was nearer £1000!!) and ended up paying £740, which didn't seem too bad.

Thanks again for the advice all

[Mr Freefall]

Kuroblack350 said:

Hello all

Just wondering if there are any golden, fixed rules when it comes to frame sizes?

I ask because my last bike (1998 ish) had a 21" frame, but now this seems to be at the extreme end of the scale - 6' 6" and over!!! (I'm 5' 10" on a good day)

Speaking to one of the advisors at Evans, he's saying a 17.5" frame would suit my height best, obviously it's something you have to try in person, but I'm just after some initial advice before making the Trek... (Even the Evans website suggests 19.5" for 5' 10" 'ers!)

Is it as easy as just referring to height, or is there more to it?

Thanks all

BTW the bike in question will be a Trek 6 series, maybe a 6000 or 6300 2010 model.

http://www.wiggle.co.uk/h/option/bikesizeguide


Mr F