Giant Trance X (again!) - sizing dilemma
idiotdogbrain
Posts: 181
Hello all!
Right, here goes:
I'm 33, 6' tall, 34" inside leg in skate shoes, currently ride a 19" fully original '92 Marin Eldridge.
After riding Afan/Cwmcarn on it recently I decided to make the jump to FS, especially as the more upright position on modern bikes would help my back.
Having never ridden FS before, I went to a couple of LBS, did some reading, and ended up with a weekend's test ride of a Trance X3, which I hammered round Tunnel Hill and Leith/Holmbury.
Wow. It's a revelation how a good modern FS rides!
However, the demo bike was a medium and:
1. The front was lifting easily on steep climbs - would a large be less likely to or is it a change in technique that's required?
2. How upright/short is a 5" travel trail bike meant to feel?
3. How do Giants stack up against the competition geometry/size-wise?
I think what I'm really asking is whether I should size down and keep it chuckable (to get proper leg extension I had the seatpost at maximum) or size up and risk losing that to get a less upright position?
It's annoying that 6' seems just too tall for the medium but too short for the large. Any advice?
Thanks!
Right, here goes:
I'm 33, 6' tall, 34" inside leg in skate shoes, currently ride a 19" fully original '92 Marin Eldridge.
After riding Afan/Cwmcarn on it recently I decided to make the jump to FS, especially as the more upright position on modern bikes would help my back.
Having never ridden FS before, I went to a couple of LBS, did some reading, and ended up with a weekend's test ride of a Trance X3, which I hammered round Tunnel Hill and Leith/Holmbury.
Wow. It's a revelation how a good modern FS rides!
However, the demo bike was a medium and:
1. The front was lifting easily on steep climbs - would a large be less likely to or is it a change in technique that's required?
2. How upright/short is a 5" travel trail bike meant to feel?
3. How do Giants stack up against the competition geometry/size-wise?
I think what I'm really asking is whether I should size down and keep it chuckable (to get proper leg extension I had the seatpost at maximum) or size up and risk losing that to get a less upright position?
It's annoying that 6' seems just too tall for the medium but too short for the large. Any advice?
Thanks!
::'11 Pitch Pro::
0
Comments
-
The next size up would be more upright, as the headtube is longer (taller) on a large than it is on a medium, however, I'm pretty sure the stem is also longer which will keep your front wheel more planted, but will make the bike less chuckable.
If you felt cramped on the medium or were constantly hitting your knees on the bars during climbs, then you more than likely need the large.
Ideally, it would be good if you could try a large and a medium on the same test loop.
Most people I know who are 6' go for a large and sometimes put a slightly shorter stem on to make the bike more agile.0 -
That's the thing - I did feel upright but I didn't feel cramped and I wasn't hitting my knees off the bars on climbs. Unfortunately their test bikes are all medium as they need to cater to the average size I suppose - anyone in Surrey got a large Trance X they want to let me try?
::'11 Pitch Pro::0 -
I am 5'10 and have a Trance X5 in medium (18inch) and it fits me well (with one spacer ontop of the bars) at your hight I would guess a Large would be needed.0
