Thanks. I tried them i a store but to be honest whoever assembled the bikes I tried had no clue. The bars weren’t the right way up, etc. so the reach on the 20 wasn’t representative.
Thanks
Having never had a real mtb before, the fit is difficult for me to judge, and there don’t see to be many anecdotes about (like, on a road bike, can you see the front hub or is it blocked from sight when you’re in position, that sort of anecdote).
When I do (light) off road, I ride a 2003 trek hybrid with a 22.5 inch frame on 38c tyres. In fact I was tempted to DIY it into a full 29er until I saw the current price on the Bizango! I found what looks like the geometry for the trek online and the effective top tube length is 591, so 4cm shorter than both of these BUT it then has a 110 long stem on it. At a guess, the bizango has a 60 stem so the larger frame bizango probably has the same or slightly less reach as my hybrid. But then, I bought the hybrid in a large as it was for road use primarily. These days the sunday best road bike is the main road machine, again nice stretched out fit — I’m wondering if thats not really what you want with an mtb.
I’ve read comments like “get the smallest one you can if you want to do lots of downhill”. Is that driven more from standover height / ability to drop the seat than reach.