It seems lots of manufacturers (eg Pace, Pipedream, 18 Bikes) are now happy to recommend a reach of about 460 for folk of my height (5’6″). Some even longer. However, although I’ve always liked a long bike, and generally ridden medium sized frames, until quite recently that still meant much shorter than this. My full suss reach is 433 and while I think I’d be happy with another 20mm on a full suss (and perhaps should’ve even sized up on mine), I’m not sure I could go much longer than that and as a hardtail sags reach is increased. 460 feels a shade on the long side although I’m also a believer that you need quite a few rides to settle into a bike, so I can’t say that with certainty.

I’ve also got some other fairly particular wants from a frame. Key ones are 27.5, a slack head angle and some kind of singlespeedable dropout design or EBB. I’d also prefer steel although I’m less clear about a burly steel frame on the basis that I suspect it won’t give me the feel I’m used to. I loved my old Soul 26 for its feel and this drives my preference, but I presume those I’m looking at are built much stiffer. They’re certainly a chunk heavier.

I’d like to spec it with a 140/150 fork and keep a HA of about 64 sagged with that. I’d like a 27.5 back wheel, because I’m short legged and I already hit my back wheel often enough. Essentially I figure 27.5 is my 29. I would like slack because I’m used to it and I see no real downside for me, and I ride some steep stuff, but I wouldn’t call my use “enduro” and I don’t think it needs the strength to take the hits associated with that. Plus I do still care about it being reasonably “chuckable” and I ride a lot of tight, twisty and fairly slow stuff.

Pace RC627 would look pretty ideal except there isn’t a smaller size and I am uneasy about going up to 467 reach. Other than that it would be very appealling.

Moxie has a lot of geometry similarities and goes to a smaller size, but its numbers are static on a much longer fork so I think I might have a BB height issue with it. It’s quoted as good for 27.5, 27.5+ or 29 but it’s got the lowest BB out there on 27.5. Plus the head angle would steepen a hell of a lot on a 140 27.5 fork. Then again, I’ll be putting 165 cranks and a 2.6 rear tyre on it, and I could choose to spec a slightly longer fork, or even a 29er front wheel.

These two frames also appeal for their dropouts and both are really well thought of and look nicely made. And they’re available soonish.

18 Bikes No7 doesn’t suit for other reasons, but it’s interesting that their sizing chart would put me on a 475, even if I specced a 50mm stem. That’s a massive increase in effective reach compared with what I’m used to.

And demos aren’t really happening for the foreseeable.

So…

Anyone else my sort of height got much experience of these kind of reach numbers?

Are there other frames with sliding or swinging dropouts I’ve missed, that also have similar angles on a c.140 fork?

Am I getting this wrong? Am I asking too much?

What would you do?

What would you do?

i didn’t read your post as i’m lazy, but if the long reach is a result of a steep seat angle and not just a really long top tube, the bike will be a similar size when sat down. this can be fine tuned with different stem lengths and sliding the saddle forwards.

edit. i’ve now read your post. it is a quandary, especially the want of chuckability. i have a friend who is a very poppy, swoopy and flicky rider. he had a go on my murmur and was surprised/shocked and the effect of the long stays had on his style of riding.

one consideration could be a custom. if you’re super-flush you could go custom using one of the builders that make the kind of bike you’re looking for.

if less flush a merino is an option. i have no idea if he could advise you on geometry to the same extent, but you could go for what you feel would be right for you.

with a 140/150 fork and keep a HA of about 64 sagged

That’s a big ask, looking for around a 62.5′ unsagged HA is pretty bonkers, happy to be proven wrong but I think you’ll maybe need to factor in an angleset to achieve this.

P.S. go custom?

If you’re reasonably proportioned I’d go for around 450, I’m a few inch taller and wouldn’t go to 467, around 450 is the perfect chuckable size for me, dont think I’d personally go over 460.
64° sagged is an odd one.

18 Bikes No7 doesn’t suit for other reasons, but it’s interesting that their sizing chart would put me on a 475, even if I specced a 50mm stem.

Unless I’m misunderstanding you, reach doesn’t include stem length. Stems also come in 35mm so may help, particularly with a 64deg sagged HA.

Maybe I should revise my 64° sagged. My full suss is 64° and because it’s full suss that’s true both static and sagged, but perhaps not when pointed downhill. It doesn’t feel anything other than just normal to me and I suspect a degree slacker wouldn’t either. 65° sagged might be just fine though, and I think I’d be minded to be led by a manufacturer like Pace in this regard anyway. I’m not inclined to think I have the experience to say seasoned designers are wrong. I just don’t see the point in much steeper for my purposes/preferences.

Unless I’m misunderstanding you, reach doesn’t include stem length. Stems also come in 35mm so may help, particularly with a 64deg sagged HA.

Reach doesn’t include stem length. I just thought it interesting that 18 bikes frames are so very long, but it needs to go alongside the point that for a given rider height they propose two frame sizes, depending on whether the rider would fit a short or longer stem. No reason I can’t fit a very short stem, and the bars I have are 40mm narrower than those on my FS. So those points can perhaps take up about 20mm. If I was an inch taller and had a 25mm stem, they’d recommend a 500mm frame though, which sounds crazy to me.

Oh, and I’m not sure a 25mm stem exists but it’s what they quote and the debate in my head is about bigger numbers than a few mm here and there.