Reach figure for tall riders trail bikes

Hi

Would be very helpful to know what range of reach (bb horizontal to centre headtube) taller folk are riding out there .

I have come to the realisation that I have never had a bike that fit. I was in the 440mm reach range and ive seen now that it should have been 470 minimum for my 6 foot 2. I took that sketchy over the bar sensation as part of mtb but am now wanting to try a much longer bike and possibly a 29 as I hear its good for the tall .

Your inputs are much appreciated.

I’m 6’3″ and I think 500mm reach is a minimum

I’m 6ft and find my Large Bird
AM9 spot on at 500mm.

6’3 and never felt totally comfortable on a bike until I rode a Geometron, circa 520mm reach. Of course other factors like head/seat tube angle and chain stay length influence things.

6ft 3in and my bikes have been 495mm and 510mm, I’d consider something down to 480mm but it would need to be a ‘playful/agile’ orientated bike. I’d be happy riding something right up to 535mm reach if it had a steep ST angle.

Don’t forget that a long reach will feel much shorter when sat down with a steep SA, on my 2 bikes the one with the 15mm longer reach actually has a 5mm shorter ETT.

6’4″ and have replaced both my bikes in the last 9 months due to the realisation that the reach numbers were too short.

New 29er Hardtail is 507
New 29er full suss is 500

500 would be a minimum for me now, new bikes have been a bit of a revelation

475mm for the FS and 487 for the HT. would happily have gone a bit longer but both were as big as I could go while fitting in a 150 mm dropper (I’m 6’ 2” but have tiny little legs with a 32” inseam).

472mm on my Bird Zero, and that was a revelation (I’m 6ft tall). Massively confident where my FS would’ve had me grabbing handfuls of panic-brake.
When Bird reveal the 29er version of the new Aether, I’ll be getting one.

6”4 here,

520 reach on my geometron g13
520 reach on my on one hello dave

I no longer bang my knees on my handle bars 😀

188cm and 480mm reach with a steep STA.

It’s all a bit of a balancing act, I have come to the conclusion around there is about the sweet spot for me, but I prefer something with shorter chain stays, having tried a big bike with longer stays, I found whilst it climbed well, and was amazingly stable when hauling, it made the bike a real handful on the tight, twisty stuff, which makes up a lot of my local riding & even racing.

I’m 6’5″ with 510mm reach and 60mm stem, I love it. My previous bike had a 420mm reach so it’s a big change but would now never go below 500mm

6’2″ and 29ers here. Reach needs to be 480-500mm with a stack height over 630mm.

To add some balance 😀 I’m 5’7” and have settled on a reach figure of 460-470mm. Anything less feels too short to me…

5ft 7in? That’s almost midget status isn’t it? 😜

Anything under 6ft is “short” to me. 😁

6’6” and ride a Whyte 150s XL though couldn’t tell u what reach figure is. Comfortable.

6’4″ and liking my new 29er Flaremax at around 510 reach.

Been struggling to get a bike that feels right for years.

I’m also not hanging right over the back wheel either which means that getting your weight back doesn’t take all of the weight off the front wheel as your weight is more centred.

Thanks for the replies , I can see I have been on bikes way too short at 440 reach , now to find an afordable 29er that big , I was looking at a vitus nucleus xl coming in at 470 for reach bur even that may be too small going by this advice

I was looking at a vitus nucleus xl coming in at 470 for reach bur even that may be too small going by this advice

Not necessarily – it depends what riding you are doing. Yes longer reach makes the bike more stable and puts you in a position where you’re not hanging off the back of the bike. But massive reach doesn’t necessarily suit everyone / every terrain. I have one bike just over 440mm reach and one at 481mm reach (I’m 5’9 and 32” inside leg but with short ish arms). They’re very very different bikes – I prefer the shorter one for rolling bermy swoopy pedally stuff as it wants to manual and pop off stuff all the time. I also like it for steep / slow tech as it’s very manoeuvrable.

The 481mm reach bike is better on big / fast / rocky terrain – so it really excels at BPW / BMCC / Antur Stiniog etc. I don’t do enough of that stuff so I’m looking to sell that frame (stealth ad – it’s in the classifieds – Bird Aeris) and get something a bit shorter / smaller. Really fancy a Bird Aether 7 or Transition Scout – in Medium size.

So be realistic about what you ride and what you want. You defo want more reach than you’ve got at your height but try test riding some of the longer reaches on terrain similar to the stuff you ride the most.

I’m pretty sure I don’t have E.T. legs, yet at 6’1″ I feel that my 438mm reach is perfect for me. In fact, I had a loan of a LLS 500mm reach bike for a few weeks and couldn’t get on with it for the majority of my riding*

So, as above, definitely think about your type of riding before committing.

*some commuting, some XC, lots of trail/hooning in the woods/jumps berms etc

6ft 2″

FS is 500mm

Hard tail is 480mm

6’4” and my transition sentinel is 515mm reach and I run a 50mm stem. Wouldn’t want anything shorter and having a bike that fits is ace!

“So be realistic about what you ride and what you want. You defo want more reach than you’ve got at your height but try test riding some of the longer reaches on terrain similar to the stuff you ride the most.”

Would ityou be fair to say then that longer reach = more stable less sketchy sensation and shorter = more whippy playful bike

Yes, generally – you’ll find a bike with longer reach will normally have a longer wheelbase. Other factors obviously affect the handling, like chainstay length, HA, BB height etc. But normally a shorter bike will be more agile than a longer one.

468mm on my XL Orange Segment, 650mm ETT. I’m 6’2″ and it fits me perfectly.

6ft3 and ride an xl 2016 stumpy with 50mm stem and Riser bars with a few spacers

Similar set up on an xl on one scandal

now to find an afordable 29er that big ,

Calibre sentry?
More enduro than trail with 160f/150r travel but certainly affordable at £1700 for the base model. £2200 for the incredibly well spec’d pro model. (Although only got medium left on the website- might be worth checking in store)
I’m 181cm and on a large with 487 reach. Comes with a 150 dropper but room for a 170. It’s heavy but pedals better than my previous bike (a blur 4x with 160 lyrics so that’s not saying a lot!)
The xl has 506 reach. (And the pro model has a 170 reverb.)

https://www.konaworld.com/kahuna.cfm

I’m thinking mayby kona kahuna the xl has 500mm reach the L has 465 , Im leaning toward the XL , read an interesting article that advised to get the biggest bike that you can manage up until standover heigh t becomes an issue

6′ 2″ to 6′ 6″ = 470mm to 510mm reach

The above recommendations may startle some people who are used to traditional advice. Then again, there will also be more progressively minded folk who think that we’re being conservative with the reach numbers here and would recommend even longer reach numbers for each rider height.

Broadly speaking we’d recommend getting the largest frame size that still affords you an acceptable amount of standover.

Even if you’ve “always ridden a Large”, don’t be surprised if you find yourself ending up looking at XL or even XXL size bikes. That’s just how it is. Things have changed. Frame sizing has always arguably been incorrect.

What mountain bike frame size should I ride?

I’m just over 6 foot 2, running a Giant Reign XL at 495mm reach. Also have a YT Tues XL at 470mm reach.

I guess the Reign at 495 is not as long as some on here. But I’m not sure I’d want to go too much longer due to handling on tight sections

520 ish here, can’t imagine being on something shorter now (6’5”)

ETT is important too, as do have to sit and pedal quite a bit too (680 ish good for me)

Someone mentioned stack, I find this also important for tall riders. With my saddle at pedalling height, the drop to the bars can be mental on bikes with silly short head tubes.

See also effective seat tube angles Vs actual.