Forum menu
I am keen on changing my Dartmoor Hornet frame out for something a little livelier.
I have been suggested a Stanton Slackline.
From riders experience how do the sizes affect the ride style?
I like to bomb about and skip and jump of off anything about, but i'd also like to put the occasional 12-15miler in.
I'm 6'2", dark hair and really like to Party.
Is a 16.5" going to be horrendous to ride about?
I'm sure a smaller frame would be more fun for jumpy stuff.
Not quite the same but at 6’2” my 18” Switchback was only just big enough.
well, im 'only 5'8" and the 16.5" fits me perfectly...dont fancy your chances at 6'2".
Wouldn't the 18" switchback suit you more?
5'10" and on a 18" Slackline. Quite roomy but wouldn't want it any smaller.
If you want playful/jumpy the Switchback has shorter chainstays, which might be better suited?
The one I had was 18" (26" wheels though) and I'm 6' 1. I loved riding it and was brilliant for messing about and trails, struggled with anything that involved pedalling for more than an hour or so though. Did a few full days riding on it but always felt like I needed it to be a bit longer.
I'm 5'7" and have the 16.5" MK2 Slackline and its a good fit for me.....so for you much too small.You may squeeze into an 18" but I would of thought the 19.5" is the way to go at your height.
I'm 5ft 10 and have a 17in Sherpa. I debated sizing and think I'm really in between the 17 and 19, I have long legs and short torso, so went smaller which I normally do with road bikes. If getting a slack line I think the 18 would be perfect. At your height I definately would go bigger than 16.5.
incidentally, if anyone is after a 16.5" slackline frame the Pedal Addiction chaps have just listed this
Slackline vs Hornet...
🙂
Thanks Guys, great info.
Robertgray that is a diamond site!
The reach figures on that site don't seem correct, the reach on 16.5" Slackline has been revised to 424mm, and the head angels to 67°
https://www.stantonbikes.com/product/slackline-853-next-gen/
I had the 26" slackline - at 6 foot I found the 18" way too small and changed it for an Orange P7
The reach figures on that site don't seem correct, the reach on 16.5" has been revised to 424mmhttps://www.stantonbikes.com/product/slackline-853-next-gen/
I could never get my tape measure to agree with the "official" Stanton figures on my 18" slackline - it was way smaller than their site suggested it should be.
I like to bomb about and skip and jump of off anything about, but i'd also like to put the occasional 12-15miler in.I'm 6'2", dark hair and really like to Party.
Is a 16.5" going to be horrendous to ride about?
I'm sure a smaller frame would be more fun for jumpy stuff.
I ride a large (18") slackline and at 6' its fine for all that stuff, but I think the reach on the current slacklines are about 20mm more than on mine.
Alternatively you can get the switchback in long and regular lengths. I've been having bad thoughts about a 16.5" in long with a long dropper post.
Are you looking at the 26 inch or 650b Slackline?
The old 26 ones were pretty short - I'm just under six foot and found my 16 inch frame diddy to ride (it was fun though).
The new one is a fair chunk longer but it's not as long as a Bird. They're lovely to ride as well - I was really taken with the one Dan leant me last year.
More good info.
Stevet, that's what I am considering.
Mindmap, have you ridden the bird much ? is it playful or more stable?
The reach figures on that site don't seem correct, the reach on 16.5" Slackline has been revised to 424mm, and the head angels to 67°https://www.stantonbikes.com/product/slackline-853-next-gen/
You're right, they're different. Looks like they revised the published figures to be the 'sagged' numbers. I've added them to the site 🙂
https://geometrygeeks.bike/bike/stanton-slackline-853-mk2-2017-1/
@nwmlarge - thanks. Started building the site a year ago with a friend coz I was fed up of spreadsheets. Now have >2,700 bikes listed!
Nice site Robertgray,whats the 'standard' way for bike manufacturers to release their geometry figures though-sagged at riding height or un-sagged. If there is indeed a standard way ?.
If they don't say how they are measuring then it's really hard to compare ie my Slackline has just become 10mm longer and 5 mm lower than when I bought it .
Nice site Robertgray,whats the 'standard' way for bike manufacturers to release their geometry figures though-sagged at riding height or un-sagged. If there is indeed a standard way ?.
Full-sus, always unsagged. Hardtails, it's a bloody mess. Sagged makes more sense for comparing with full-sus bikes but only a handful of manufacturers do that (and don't always quote A2C length or fork travel and sag %).
I’m struggling to get the sizing right for a Kona Honzo at the moment. However I found at interesting article on Transistion Bikes Web Page, defo worth a read.....