My height is on limit between small and medium

Home Forum Bike Forum My height is on limit between small and medium

Viewing 24 posts - 1 through 24 (of 24 total)
  • My height is on limit between small and medium
  • lcfmonkey
    Member

    For an enduro bike should I go for the larger of the two or the smaller? At 5’7″ I’m pretty much on the cusp of every size chart going!

    Cheers

    Kuco
    Member

    Same height and in recent year personally found it better to go medium. But try before you buy if you can, what bike?

    Kuco
    Member

    Same height and in recent years personally found it better to go medium. But try before you buy if you can, what bike?

    andyl
    Member

    hmm, nothing worse than a bike that’s too big but you also don’t want to have to fit a long stem to make a small bike fit. I like short stems so would probably go medium and short stem and inline post.

    Go try some out. Only way to be sure.

    mark90
    Member

    I’m 5’7″ and I don’t think there is an enduro bike (or any bike really) that I’d go for the small. Previous bike I had (which was more XC) was small as I was borderline between small and medium, in hindsight this was a mistake.

    Edit: Just seen it’s an Escarpe. Modern longish geometry, similar to my current medium enduro bike. The small is longer than my old small XC bike, and would be ok to ride probably with a 60mm stem, but personally I would still prefer the medium with a 40mm stem. All depends on what your preferences are and what you want from the bike.

    lcfmonkey
    Member

    I have an XC hardtail for my local trails on the South Downs but the new bike would be for Welsh Bike Parks, the Alps and possibly the Megavalanche if I can grow the balls!

    Premier Icon nuke
    Subscriber

    Id go small for you…heck, id go small for me too and im a bit taller; its got a long reach plus you don’t want too much seattube length or you could find running a decent length dropper an issue.

    mark90
    Member

    433mm seat tube on the medium isn’t that long. I could run a 150mm reverb with that. Easy enough to work out what you could run based on current bike seat height. That’s the advantage with a lot of these new frames with long reach and shorter seat tubes it gives you the option to go either way on the sizing depending on preference. To be fair the small escarpe is as long as some medium bikes that’s haven’t taken up the long, low, slack thing.

    My xc bike is a medium and feels good. The enduro is also medium but “women specific” so a slightly shorter reach. I’m 5’6″.

    Premier Icon kayak23
    Subscriber

    I’m same as you. On the cusp of sizes. I’ve always gone medium and got on well..

    Premier Icon vincienup
    Subscriber

    I’m 178cm and thus I’m permanently on the line between Med and Large. I’ve regretted every Large I’ve ever bought no matter how okay it felt to begin with. I’ve also bought its that were too small for me. I do run a lot of post when seated, though.

    TBH, I’m of the opinion that for mountain bike riding, frame sizes based on seat tube length are bollocks. Maybe not for actual XC/XCO, but for anything else where you’re spending a lot of the time standing/crouching/whatever then the space between the pedals and bars is more important – although as you’re not in a fixed position, you don’t have a meaningful way to measure that without nailing the hip position to a single point on an arc of travel so I’m not completely clear what a better basis for size as sold would be – possibly ETT?

    sillysilly
    Member

    Depends if your height is in the legs or upper body. I’m the same height and fine on either, but short legs with high seat post are always more of an issue than length.

    I find small is easier to have fun with on flow trails / jumps, while medium is better for steep technical enduro style trails.

    Im exactly the same im 5″7 and find some mediums are too big and some smalls are too small . Currently i have a small (16″) cube xc hardtail and a 17″ onza hardcore hardtail and both fit me fine.

    i think it depends on the manufacturer i wouldnt buy a 15.5 ” small frame or a 17.5″ medium frame as they wouldnt fit me. Reach is the most important thing i find, ive got pretty short arms so really long bikes feel wrong as i cant get my wieght back properly.

    Premier Icon convert
    Subscriber

    Is there some law like the toast landing buttered side down that means every type of kit you buy is a compromise between two sizes. Oh to be exactly in the middle of a size range when buying stuff.

    From a road background I find bikes with too short a toptube odd – prefer to be stretched if possible. So I would always go longer then shorten with a smaller stem than the other way around. Can’t think of a modern bike or a type of riding where toptube and nadger clearance is ever an issue and as head tubes are pretty much universally short now it’s much easier to fit on a bigger bike than ever.

    Premier Icon senor j
    Subscriber

    I’m the same height with short legs so stand over is always my guide. The rest can be adjusted imo. I had a medium but changing to small gave me more control over the bike.

    I always size up these days, with tendency for short stems wide bars I’d rather go large and shorten stem/ push seat forward than the reverse. So large for me when years gone by it would have been mediums. I’m usually on cusp of both at 5’10. Have owned lots of bikes/frames where I wish I’d gone next size up to a large. Now I own lots of large size bikes never felt too big. All personal choice. Standover and reach what’s important as M of one brand can be similar to an L in another.

    I’d go medium, I’m the same height as you and run a medium 29er Enduro and apart from standover being a bit tight it’s perfect. I wouldn’t want anything smaller.

    belugabob
    Member

    @sillysilly said…

    Depends if your height is in the legs or upper body. I’m the same height and fine on either, but short legs with high seat post are always more of an issue than length.

    This is the non-silly response, as simply using height as a guide to bike size is , frankly, misguided.

    There are other factors at play – i.e. Leg length, body length, arm length, preferred riding position, etc.

    You really do need to try the two different sizes, if possible, to allow you to make an informed decision.

    Speaking as a 6 foot tall man, with a 29 inch inside leg and gibbon arms, who falls smack in between sizes, for a lot of bike manufacturers, I feel your pain.

    Premier Icon on and on
    Subscriber

    ^ this.
    It’s totally irrelevant what others would do. They arent you and don’t have the same body make up or flexibility.

    Tim
    Member

    Same with my YT. I’m your height and went for medium and the Escarpe would be the same

    Only thing you need to bear in mind is whether a dropper will work. I had to swap my reverb for a smaller drop version

    Premier Icon joebristol
    Subscriber

    As above it depends on your proportions.

    I’m 5’9 with a 32″ leg and short arms. I’m on a bike with a reach of 481mm, a seat tube of 440mm, standover of 700mm and an ETT of 630mm.

    All feels great – mine is a long modern bike with fairly slack geometry. The manufacturer has kept seat tube and stand over height pretty low across most of the models so you can fit on 2 or even maybe 3 sizes but pick the one with the reach you want.

    So it depends on leg length and arm length but I’d be tempted to go with the medium from what you’ve said so far.

    If you can find at least one of the sizes to stand over and see how it feels that would be ideal, but possibly tricky given the brand.

    Maybe find another bike that is similar in proportions but that you can see one in the metal to at least sit on.

    I’am between sizes as well.

    Coming from road biking: first mtb I bought was the “bigger size”.
    Was a mistake. Was like trying to get a ship through the woods.

    New mtbs bikes since: I pick the smaller size.

    For a beginner: the bigger size might lower the danger of going over the bar? But a too big mountain bike is no fun.

    Danger so: every mountain bike brand is different. Their size recommendations are strange sometimes. Best to find some pals where you are able to borrow the bike for a couple of hours..
    Then you know.
    (But I know: difficult to do.)

    Premier Icon garage-dweller
    Subscriber

    Also a between sizer (but Medium-Large in my case). I’m more torso than legs in terms of body shape.

    With my last bike I went large for reach as I hate being cramped and bum up head down. It seems counter intuitive to me that with short legs I’d go for the big frame but I think with MTBs the reach is key to good balance.

    Upside is the front is a bit taller, the reach and balance is right for climbing and for wheels on the ground riding it’s stable and well balanced.

    Downsides – I’ll never get a 150mm dropper on it and as I’m shit at drops and jumps I notice the extra size even more.

    And it looks a bit gate like under me!

    This isn’t an enduro weapon

Viewing 24 posts - 1 through 24 (of 24 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.