Ok, I’m just starting to look at a new FS bike.

I currently ride a Gary Fisher Cake 2 of 2005 vintage. To be honest I have never really got on with it. It gives me back ache climbing. It also doesnt have the same racey feeling that I liked on my old Klein hardtails.

My trouble I think is that I am 5ft 7 with short legs and long torso. I’ve had a mess around on SC Superlights and imediately felt more comfortable on them, so probably a contender, however what other FS’ers are there that have a reasonably long top tub length and racey ish geometry.

Canyon look fantastic value for money, but looking at their geometry they do not look too different to my GF, and I wouldnt fancy spending £2k on one without riding it first.

Any ideas appreciated.

Try and get a test ride on a medium framed Giant Anthem. I’m the same height and rode a small Anthem for most of last year with a layback seatpost and 100mm stem.

I tried a medium and thought it would have been perfect with a shorter stem and inline post.

C’dale Rush, if they are still making them.

The Specialized ones are pretty long, Camber?

the weird trek sizes might help. Basically they use what they call virtual sizes. So mine is a virtual 21.5 i think, but really the frame only has a 20 seat tube but tug top tube of a 21.5. So if you buy a trek you can try the next size up for the top tube but be ok on same over.

Cube AMS 110 is pretty racey with what feels to me to be a longish top tube, you’d probably want a 16″ frame. I’m 5’9″/31″ inside leg and ride an 18″ 2010 AMS 100 Pro R1 & it’s at the upper limit of what I like sizing wise

The Cube AMS 110 range is superb value for money, well built, ride well and look a little blingy too

Turner DW Flux – cheap frames at CRC, or cheap full builds at merlin.

Looks like the CUBE is one to take a look at, the Turners look a bit out of my price range!

Any more suggestions?

ST4. Long top tube, 120mm fork. 16inch size. Fun trail bike, not Turner money but not cheap either!

Cannondale’s always seem to have long top tubes also I would second the giant anthem for top tube length. I didn’t like mine one little bit but seem to be very much in the minority on that front.

My Nerve XC is a large and reckon it comes out around a 59/60cm top tube, longer than my Epic in a large – thinking about putting a short stem on it (I’m 5’11”) and it’s got a 11 cm stem at the moment.

Lucien – I was going to look at Canyon’s as they are amazing vfm and get good right ups, but the head and seat angles look quite slack, more so than my current bike.

Having done a bit more digging it would appear that I prefer long ish top tube in steeper angles..

If I could test a Canyon any where I still would though…but unfortunately it doesnt look like you can.

What size SC Superlight did you try?

I would also look at the Blur XC. SC made the top tube longer than on the previous Blur Classic, and while I’m not sure what the current geo is, when the Blur XC first came out it had a relatively steep head angle compared to more modern stuff.

I ride a Blur classic as I get back trouble from long top tubes, but before that I had a Heckler and then a Superlight (in fact still have the SL as a “winter” full susser) and the Blur suspension is massively superior on the rough stuff, up and down.

OK short ish shortlist…. before I start going and trying to get rides on small/medium frames which often is harder than you think!

I think only after test riding one or two will I know if I want 100mm or 120mm….

SC Superlight – Would be the worst kit by far + need to upgrade shock to RP23!

Cube AMS 110 SL

Giant Anthem X2

Lappierre X Control 410

Trek Fuel EX 8

Canyone Nerve MR 8.0 – Cant test ride!

Canyon Nerve XC 9.0 – Cant test ride!

Scott Spark 35

Many of these are towards the 100mm mark, so what have I missed in the 120mm? Or what else should I be looking at?

Of those you mention, definitely would say the weird way that Trek size the Fuel EX lends it to having a long top tube for its size. The “17.5 inch” frame (actually a 16.5 inch seat tube) has a 23.2 inch top tube on it for instance. The next size up, labelled an 18.5 but actually a 17.5, has a 24 inch top tube on it! I’m 5ft 10 and a bit and I’d be on the 16.5 not the 17.5…

By contrast, most of the others are relatively short and tall, even if there are some great bikes you mention in your list (especially the Anthem X IMO)

About to sell my 07 Yeti ASR-sl frame. Ano black. New carbon rear end last October (under warranty as I managed to snag and rip off one of the rear gear cable stops). Bristol based if you want a test ride.

Effective TT 22.4″

or you could look at the new ones CRC are selling…

I’ve eventually gone for this 2011 Anthem X2

£550 off the retail price and delivered this coming Friday!

What size did you go for?

I’ve gone for a small. I sat on a medium and small in a shop (yep thats the best test ride I could arrange in the North of England) and the small just felt better.

I’ve come to realise that I prefer I slightly shorter, compact bike and if needs be will get a longer stem and lay the seat back, but it felt right in the shop. Odly the top tube felt longer than my current GF even though the top tube length is the same according to figures.

Been out for the first time on the new bike over the weekend, and so far I’m just amazed by the bike.

It rides like a hardtail, as in you dont feel like the energy you put in isn’t wasted in the suspension, like on any other full susser I have ever ridden. I’m not getting any suspension bob, and didnt even once consider locking the rear out, even on smooth long climbs, it just didnt need it. The front and rear suspension work very well together, it doesnt feel like its one shock at the front, and the other at the back doing a different thing, and the overall ride is very plush. On my old bike I would have to drop to granny ring on some climbs, but on the Anthem I can just power up in the middle ring.

My old bike was 130mm travel and the Anthem is only 100mm so I was concerned that it wouldnt cope as well on the rough stuff, but so far is 100% as good (if not better) over 99% of stuff, in fact technical climbing is even better. The only time I think I will notice the difference is on very fast bumpy decents where I think the front end ride became slightly more harsh. I can see why some may fit 120mm forks, but I dont live in the Lakes, so dont see the point.

The other thing people said to be careful about with an Anthem is the steep steering angle and quick steering. I have found this great so far and good to get back to a nimble chuckable bike, some thing I missed with a slacker angled bike. I think you have only ever ridden slack angled full sussers then the Anthem may feel twitchy, but for me its great.

I know Giant isn’t nearly niche enough for alot of folk on here, but I think its an amazing bike for trail/XC easy DH stuff.

Nice review – glad to hear you’re getting on with it, particularly as I pick mine up tonight!