Trek Sizing
 

[Closed] Trek Sizing

7 Posts
8 Users
0 Reactions
1,452 Views
Posts: 4078
Free Member
Topic starter
 

Hi, just a quick question regarding trek bike sizing.
Looking at buying a Medium (17.5) Hardtail. I have an inside leg of 32" which puts me at the M/L not the M according to Trek, but looking at the measurements Trek gives its a bit odd...
Trek - Reach 418mm Top Tube 601mm Seat Tube length 419mm
These should suggest a M will fit me but according to Treks website I should be on a M/L
I would go and try one, but nowhere local has either size, so I'm looking online...its a bloody nightmare
So I'm wondering if anyone has any experience of Trek sizing (its for an X Caliber Hardtail)
Thanks


 
Posted : 30/09/2021 10:25 am
Posts: 1771
Free Member
 

modern sizing isnt based on standover, its based on reach
at just under 5'9 i ride mediums or m/l depending on intention (longer bikes usually better as sleds)
in theory, my current sonder signal, i could have chosen medium or large as they essentially have the same standover, depending if i wanted to size up or not, i didn't, my Bird aeris is a long bike, i kept the hardtail sensible length for all round duties


 
Posted : 30/09/2021 10:30 am
 LMT
Posts: 543
Free Member
 

Just got a trek x caliber 7 as my work commuter, and I got the M, I’m 5ft6 30” inside leg, I’ve got the seatpost at an inch above the min line, it feels small compared to my old commuter an Orange speedworks but the reach is perfect. In hindsight an m/l would of been better for commuting.

It seems the in thing is massive seatposts! But like I said the reach and top tube length is spot on.


 
Posted : 30/09/2021 10:47 am
Posts: 1635
Free Member
 

Could be apples and oranges, but I ride a Slash with a 32" leg. Mine's a large. I'd be very wary of a medium.


 
Posted : 30/09/2021 11:46 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I am 5"8 and my treks are 17.5" perfect fit have ridden them for years.


 
Posted : 30/09/2021 1:34 pm
Posts: 12103
Full Member
 

S/M/L etc. don't really mean much. I have small, medium, and large sized frames that are only about 1 cm different in top tube length. Most modern bikes have fairly low standover height so the important thing is the length.

Your leg length isn't that important, your torso and arm length are much more important. Different people have different body proportions, so two riders of the same overall height will often feel comfortable on different sized bikes.

The reach figure will give you an indication of how long the bike will feel when crouched for descending. The effective top tube length will give an indication of how long it will feel when seated for pedaling. Ultimately, you have to try riding them to find what works for you.


 
Posted : 30/09/2021 1:38 pm
Posts: 0
Full Member
 

I'm 5ft 8 with a 31.5 inch inside leg in bare feet.

I've got a 2021 Procaliber in M/L.

I run a seat height of 75cm from the centre of the bottom bracket to the top of the seat running the tape measure along the seat tube.

With this seat height, the tip of the seat to the centre of the handlebars is 52cm. This is running the tape measure from the tip of the seat diagonally down so it touches the bars.

I run a Bontrager stem 70mm / -13 degree / 20mm spacers below and 720mm wide flat bars.

Hope that makes sense and helps.

If you email me at andrewthomasbeirneATgmailDOTcom I can send you a picture of the bike with this set up.


 
Posted : 30/09/2021 2:05 pm
Posts: 1259
Free Member
 

Reach is much more important than leg length.
I'm 6 ft tall with a 29 inch inside leg (yes - gibbon arms) and ride a 19 inch Trek Marlin (about 10 years old)
You really need to sit on one to judge these things, unless you can make sense of geometry chart, and have another point of reference.

Good luck - Trek make great bikes, and the right size one will give you years of smiles


 
Posted : 30/09/2021 2:35 pm