Not much on at work today so put together a spreadsheet with geometry for the following bikes, conditional formatting and all other fancy stuff. The figures relate to 19″ish sizes, but obviously is all relative and gives a good comparison between bikes of any size.

[/img]

Disclaimer: The info is as accurate as I could find on google and manufacturers sites, some bits missing, Cotic don’t give a wheelbase for the Rocket for example

Like! Can I get a copy 🙂 ben@birdmtb.co.uk… Ta!

I’ll email it to anyone interested tomorrow from work.

Ben, the far right column is a ‘forward geo factor’ (ett x wheelbase)\(ha x chainstay x bb height) and the Bird scores highest! Probably doesn’t actually mean anything but hey

Lacking in my bike; process 153 !

Reach and stack would be good if you have another quiet day at work, especially since STA/ BB height/ etc is so variable 🙂 ta!

awesome work! love to take a closer look if you could email to dekerk30@gmail.com. thanks in advance

Knew I might have missed a few bikes out! Would be interesting to see how the process 167 compares as well.

If I get time I’ll add reach and stack but it’s alot of work, some companies make it hard work to find geo charts. My thinking was seat tube dictates how low I can get the saddle and ett is the stretch when sitting, I never have trouble with reach once standing or standover personally.

Come to think of it with a bit of creative trig I should be able to calculate reach and stack, watch this space..

I wonder how my Patriot compares in terms of geometry. Can’t find specs online. I may measure it up. If it’s enduro enough I might be able to take it to an event.

Met a lad on a Patriot at Mega this year, he smashed it! The race not the bike

No, these are 27.5 wheels, it’s an optical illusion, honestly.

Lol. The bike marked tee right at the top is mine by the way. 26 also

I have sadsheet with specs of suspension reverb brakes gears etc…I like the factor!

Oh go on then send a copy to motnworb at gmail ~dot~ com

If I get time I’ll add reach and stack but it’s alot of work, some companies make it hard work to find geo charts. My thinking was seat tube dictates how low I can get the saddle and ett is the stretch when sitting, I never have trouble with reach once standing

Thing is reach is massively different on some of those bikes due to huge changes in seat angle.

Each degree is around 10mm at the top-tube, 15mm at the seat height. Its important.

[note; i dint think youve got some details right, the Rocket for example says 71 but its offset, 73.5 at average seat height]

I’ll do some trig tomorrow and add reach and stack if I have time.

Good spot on the Rocket, I’ll amend before emailing out!

Missing my bike too (Orbea Rallon) 😉

I did a chart for reach and stack earlier this year. I neglected to put model-year on but they are mostly 2015 or older. Might help someone.

No headangle/seatangle info either, but mostly pretty obvious.
Ive sent the excel to the OP incase he wants to add to his sheet.

[url=https://flic.kr/p/BrSvpK]Reach chart[/url] by Richard Elsdon, on Flickr

What’s with all you lanky types and her XLs just do a medium for us lazy Mr averages

(ett x wheelbase)\(ha x chainstay x bb height)

is that a real thing ?

Scaredypants: not at all! Just me messing about with the data. Basically higher values for ett and wheelbase and lower for ha, chainstay and bb height make it more of a forward geo type thing and just wanted to see if I could quantify that somehow. Probably all invalid as the bikes are all slightly different sizes anyway, just picked the size that would fit me best (6’2″ with long legs)

Cheers Stato, will use that tomorrow!

Will also add Kona and Orbea

I suspect the most useful number for “forward geometry score” would be front-centre x reach. You can calculate reach if you have ETT, HA, SA and either stack or A2C and head tube length and BB drop. And front centre is reach + (A2C+headtube)cosHA + offset. Simple! 😉

Exciting stuff, can’t see me doing much work tomorrow!

Good work! The info on the Whyte G150 is a bit off though. Actually, 216x63mm shock, 66.5 degree HA, 1189mm wheelbase and 425mm chainstays. Also, the G-160 is out now, which is much longer (Mondraker sort of length).

Clearly the next step is to draw them all up in CAD software… 😛

Could I get a copy too?

Colin DOT woof AT hotmail.co.uk

🙂

Getonyourbike, think I may have the 2015 g150 data there, another one to amend, cheers!

Chiefgrooveguru, and then 3d print out the best one!

chrishc777 – Member
Getonyourbike, think I may have the 2015 g150 data there, another one to amend, cheers!

It looks like you’ve got the data for the 2014 bike, with the exception of a random shock size. Would be interesting to see the G-160 on there to compare, because it is a very long bike indeed.

Why is a 170mm fork a con?! 🙂

Cos I don’t have one!

Email sent to all who asked, I haven’t added Reach and stack as I don’t have the time at the moment, will send out an updated version if I do find time. Concluded not to calculate them with trig as different top tube slopes, seat heights and offset seat tube angles all influence the figures. I have added a few more bikes and corrected a couple of errors too.

I love these types of charts, I did similar when trying to decide on a new bike last year, just makes comparisons so much easier. What would be really great though is if all the data could be stuck into a database and then not only could you make the comparisons but you could, for example, give in some key characteristics that you feel are important and see which bikes come out as best.

It’s an excel sheet so you can sort and filter by any parameter you want!

Thanks Chris – Received!

Of course if you’re comparing different wheel sizes you might want to consider trail as well as head angle – a steeper HA will give the same handling on a 27.5 (although not much steeper as they’re practically the same wheel size – I’m assuming you’ll run tyres of the same width).

this needs web-ifying into a sortable table and allowing user submissions (with review)

if I wasn’t busy…

These are all 650b bikes in this case, don’t think 29ers qualify as #duro bikes do they?