Bike sizing question. All info i have supplied.

Re-Cycle

Unfortunately I do not have a local Commencal dealer so I am struggling to find out if I would be a medium or a large. So I have been trying other bikes for fit and then trying to compare the geometry against the Commencal meta AM29er.
One bike I have tried is a medium 2013 Giant Trance X0 29er the link to the geometry is

http://www.giant-bicycles.com/en-gb/bik ... /#geometry

A medium in this is a good fit and a large would defiantly be to big, more in stand over than reach.

The link for the Meta AM 29er geometry is

http://www.commencal-store.co.uk/PBSCPr ... D=12501276

I have some extra details of the Meta in a large which are as follows

The junction between the head tube and the top tube is 94cm from the ground. The top of the seat tube is 80cm from the floor. The lowest point of the top tube is 71.1cm from the floor and the distance in a straight line from the back of the stem to the front of the seat post is 57.2cm approx.

At 5'11 with a 31inside leg I just fall into the large on the meta size chart (also on the same link as the geom) what I cant work out is were Giant get there stand over height from as looking at both bikes the Meta top tube looks a lot lower.

What I would like to know is would I be better of on the large and to get a shorter stem or to stick with a medium?
Please could I ask that any advice offered is kept to the size issue i.e large or medium. I have decided that its a Meta AM 29er that I want after all it is a so called free country. Thanks in advance for any sensible replies.

nicklouse

first question.

do Giant and Commencial measure the same way? there is no standard.

Re-Cycle

This is the problem i am having that why i have tried to post as much info as i can when i have measured the claimed stand over distance of the giant website up my inside leg it seems a lot shorter than what i actually had when i was stood over it. The other bike that i have tried and found a good fit size wise was the orange gyro
http://www.orangebikes.co.uk/bikes/gyro_s/
Again it was the medium i found a better fit reach wise. Top tube and clearance wasn't an issue.

Bikerinthesand

If your buying off the internet don't the distance selling laws allow you to send the bike back if it doesn't fit?

So order the size your best estimate comes up with and return it if it doesn't fit.

slickmouse

Bikerinthesand wrote:

If your buying off the internet don't the distance selling laws allow you to send the bike back if it doesn't fit?

So order the size your best estimate comes up with and return it if it doesn't fit.

they do, but I wouldn't recommend it as a strategy on something of significant value, as they have your money and may need quite a lot of persuading to return it.

OP your better with a bike that is SLIGHTLY too small rather than one that is slightly;y too big, as its easier to make fit, if your in the cross over point Id plump for a medium

As sad above, the makers use different standards to specify the size range and your height is only part of the formula, you also need to consider if you have '' average'' or long or short arms and legs.

For this reason and any amount of hassle; Ive had with good turning up not as described, damaged etal. I wouldn't risk more than I can afford to loose on an internet purchase, but then I'm a dinosaur who likes to be in a position to go round in person and throw it at them if it doesn't work.

Have you considered having a day off getting a cheap day return to somewhere that stocks them and bringing it back with you on the train, that way you take the gamble out of it fit wise

Re-Cycle

slickmouse wrote:

Bikerinthesand wrote:

If your buying off the internet don't the distance selling laws allow you to send the bike back if it doesn't fit?

So order the size your best estimate comes up with and return it if it doesn't fit.

they do, but I wouldn't recommend it as a strategy on something of significant value, as they have your money and may need quite a lot of persuading to return it.

OP your better with a bike that is SLIGHTLY too small rather than one that is slightly;y too big, as its easier to make fit, if your in the cross over point Id plump for a medium

As sad above, the makers use different standards to specify the size range and your height is only part of the formula, you also need to consider if you have '' average'' or long or short arms and legs.

For this reason and any amount of hassle; Ive had with good turning up not as described, damaged etal. I wouldn't risk more than I can afford to loose on an internet purchase, but then I'm a dinosaur who likes to be in a position to go round in person and throw it at them if it doesn't work.

Have you considered having a day off getting a cheap day return to somewhere that stocks them and bringing it back with you on the train, that way you take the gamble out of it fit wise[/

I have had experience of using the distance sales agreement act and to be honest until i started to cut and paste exerts of the legislation to a manager of the dealer in question he was quite matter of fact that i was not getting my money back. Needless to say a b*ll#cking later and i had my money back. Like you i am a bit of a dinosaur in the respect that
I would like to get a bike from an independent shop only prob is best two offers are from two different shops miles apart and one has a large and the other the medium. I may just have to bite the bullet and try to get to Llandegla as they have both a medium and a large just wish it was closer.

slickmouse

Re-Cycle wrote:

slickmouse wrote:

Bikerinthesand wrote:

If your buying off the internet don't the distance selling laws allow you to send the bike back if it doesn't fit?

So order the size your best estimate comes up with and return it if it doesn't fit.

they do, but I wouldn't recommend it as a strategy on something of significant value, as they have your money and may need quite a lot of persuading to return it.

OP your better with a bike that is SLIGHTLY too small rather than one that is slightly;y too big, as its easier to make fit, if your in the cross over point Id plump for a medium

As sad above, the makers use different standards to specify the size range and your height is only part of the formula, you also need to consider if you have '' average'' or long or short arms and legs.

For this reason and any amount of hassle; Ive had with good turning up not as described, damaged etal. I wouldn't risk more than I can afford to loose on an internet purchase, but then I'm a dinosaur who likes to be in a position to go round in person and throw it at them if it doesn't work.

Have you considered having a day off getting a cheap day return to somewhere that stocks them and bringing it back with you on the train, that way you take the gamble out of it fit wise[/

I have had experience of using the distance sales agreement act and to be honest until i started to cut and paste exerts of the legislation to a manager of the dealer in question he was quite matter of fact that i was not getting my money back. Needless to say a b*ll#cking later and i had my money back. Like you i am a bit of a dinosaur in the respect that
I would like to get a bike from an independent shop only prob is best two offers are from two different shops miles apart and one has a large and the other the medium. I may just have to bite the bullet and try to get to Llandegla as they have both a medium and a large just wish it was closer.

maybe, but why not go and see the medium and if it fits buy it

stand over the ''crossbar'' and check you have circa 4'' of clearance, you need to allow for a foot slipping halfway up a steep hill, get the seat to a height so you leg has a modest bend in it at the bottom of the stroke, then put your elbow on the point of the seat, your longest finger should reach about halfway down the extension to the handle bars ie about 2 '' shy of touching the bars. if it doesn't slide the seat forward or back. if they all line up, its a reasonable fit

cooldad

Not really.

Standover height is not really important, especially on a FS which will often have none. And presuming by extension you mean stem , that would mean approx a 100mm stem. A lot of bikes have much shorter stems. A way to measure a road bike maybe, but not an MTB.

The Rookie

If you want 4" of standover best buy a Dutch bike....I've got nowhere near 4" on my 16" frame (add BB height of circa 12.5" and that is 28.5", less 12 drop to the crossbar and despite my inside leg being 32" before allowing for the 'obvious' gap reducer - for 4" I need to be on a 14" bike at most and I'm 5'9" so that would be plain daft!)

Re-Cycle

So cooldad and the rookie would you say if i want to fit a short stem and wide bar set up anyway then i should just get the large. I have measured the height of the top tube of the large at its lowest point against my inside leg and i still have some clearance on the old crown jewels

coulddobetter

Personally I would not worry too much about standover height .I have had numerous falls but never hit my balls. You can bail out leaning the bike . The most significant lenth to me is top tube . As you say moving saddle and shortening stem can be used. However I would be wary of drastic stem changes as they could really mess up handling . I dropped 10mm on my bike something that was actually recommended in reviews . Actually prefer it with less weight on the front .

Re-Cycle

coulddobetter wrote:

Personally I would not worry too much about standover height .I have had numerous falls but never hit my balls. You can bail out leaning the bike . The most significant lenth to me is top tube . As you say moving saddle and shortening stem can be used. However I would be wary of drastic stem changes as they could really mess up handling . I dropped 10mm on my bike something that was actually recommended in reviews . Actually prefer it with less weight on the front .

Taking on board what has been said I think I am going to go with the large as the standard stem on the meta is 50mm and on my hardtail it's 90mm whilst both top tubes are the same length (straight line). So whilst the ht is a little on the large side I reckon if I put a 40mm stem on the meta that will give me a reduction of 5cm which will be like going a size down anyway and with a dropper to get the seat out of the way then it should be sorted

kajjal

You really need to test ride the bike to confirm which size and you may find you don't like the way the bike feels when you ride it. If you buy the large and there isn't any stand over height it will make the bike harder to ride. My wife has this with her previous MTB. Her new bike has loads of stand over height and she loves riding it.

slickmouse

cooldad wrote:

Not really.

Standover height is not really important, especially on a FS which will often have none. And presuming by extension you mean stem , that would mean approx a 100mm stem. A lot of bikes have much shorter stems. A way to measure a road bike maybe, but not an MTB.

Stand over height isnt important till your foot slips or goes down a gully and you bollock yourself, the size of the STEM isnt the issue, its your cubit being a couple of inches short of the bars that gives a fair indication of the length of the top tube against your arm length

slickmouse

The Rookie wrote:

If you want 4" of standover best buy a Dutch bike....I've got nowhere near 4" on my 16" frame (add BB height of circa 12.5" and that is 28.5", less 12 drop to the crossbar and despite my inside leg being 32" before allowing for the 'obvious' gap reducer - for 4" I need to be on a 14" bike at most and I'm 5'9" so that would be plain daft!)

but yousr isnt really a fair example, as its a pavement bike with some uprated bits.

BigAl

slickmouse wrote:

but yousr isnt really a fair example, as its a pavement bike with some uprated bits.

Ouch!

nicklouse

Re-Cycle wrote:

So cooldad and the rookie would you say if i want to fit a short stem and wide bar set up anyway then i should just get the large. I have measured the height of the top tube of the large at its lowest point against my inside leg and i still have some clearance on the old crown jewels

why, a short stem and wide bars puts yo in the same riding position as with a longer stem and narrower bars.

only changing one of the pair will change your riding position.

standover height generally went out of existence with the advent of suspension. your 4 inch of clearance went with the 4 inch of travel.

a low frame design does not help much as ones arse tends to push you forward as the nose of the saddle sticks in as you try to get both feet on the ground and your nuts meet the rising top tube.foot down on the up hill side and down hill side stays on the pedal. most people under 175cm do this out of self preservation.

Re-Cycle

slickmouse wrote:

cooldad wrote:

Not really.

Standover height is not really important, especially on a FS which will often have none. And presuming by extension you mean stem , that would mean approx a 100mm stem. A lot of bikes have much shorter stems. A way to measure a road bike maybe, but not an MTB.

Stand over height isnt important till your foot slips or goes down a gully and you bollock yourself, the size of the STEM isnt the issue, its your cubit being a couple of inches short of the bars that gives a fair indication of the length of the top tube against your arm length

I don't have an issue with the stand over height of a large its more the reach so the length of the stem is very relevant i thought??

Re-Cycle

nicklouse wrote:

Re-Cycle wrote:

So cooldad and the rookie would you say if i want to fit a short stem and wide bar set up anyway then i should just get the large. I have measured the height of the top tube of the large at its lowest point against my inside leg and i still have some clearance on the old crown jewels

why, a short stem and wide bars puts yo in the same riding position as with a longer stem and narrower bars.

only changing one of the pair will change your riding position.

standover height generally went out of existence with the advent of suspension. your 4 inch of clearance went with the 4 inch of travel.

a low frame design does not help much as ones ars* tends to push you forward as the nose of the saddle sticks in as you try to get both feet on the ground and your nuts meet the rising top tube.foot down on the up hill side and down hill side stays on the pedal. most people under 175cm do this out of self preservation.

Appreciate the comment about the stem and bar but when i say wide i mean what is becoming more the standard i wont be riding anything that resembles bull horns or the like. And as i have already said i don't have much of an issue with stand dover its not like im 5'6" trying to ride a large ( no offence to any 5'6" who prefer to ride large bikes). Going to do some measuring against my hard tail today and if the top tube is no higher then im going for a large as the reach is going to be 4cm shorter already even with the stock stem

slickmouse

Re-Cycle wrote:

slickmouse wrote:

cooldad wrote:

Not really.

Standover height is not really important, especially on a FS which will often have none. And presuming by extension you mean stem , that would mean approx a 100mm stem. A lot of bikes have much shorter stems. A way to measure a road bike maybe, but not an MTB.

Stand over height isnt important till your foot slips or goes down a gully and you bollock yourself, the size of the STEM isnt the issue, its your cubit being a couple of inches short of the bars that gives a fair indication of the length of the top tube against your arm length

I don't have an issue with the stand over height of a large its more the reach so the length of the stem is very relevant i thought??

im clearly not explaining my self properly

the length of the top tube is fixed. you can easily measure it, the effective length of the top tube is variable, so for example raising the seat height three inches, say, moves you further from the bars by a small amount on the horizontal plane, but by a lot more in arm reach due to your arm and body being the the other two sides of the triangle/

the length of the stem isnt the issue, what is is how far away the handle bars are away when your seat is correctly adjusted for height, some bikes have long top tubes and short stem or VV and its the cumulative distance of the two which is important

no matter which way you look at it, you are going to end up with a bike that is slightly too big or slightly too small and its which of the two that gives you the opportunity to adjust it for the best fit that should be your choice

Re-Cycle

Thanks to all who posted but having been on my HT this morning and with the extra measurements that the dealer gave me i am going to be a large. The think that really caused me so much bother is the way frames are described for example the frame of my HT is measured as 19 and the Meta AM as 19.5 when in reality the seat tube starts at the same height the top tube is the same length but then with the stem the Meta is actually 4cm shorter in reach. Never mind the debates about wheel sizes at least what ever you ride 29 26 or 27 at least they are all measured the same aren't they? Or is that another can of worms i have just opened? It would be nice if all manufacturers had to provide the same geometry details and that they were measured in the same way for a frame and complete bike.
Whilst i know that would not make up for test ride it would certainly help for a starting point.

slickmouse

Re-Cycle wrote:

Thanks to all who posted but having been on my HT this morning and with the extra measurements that the dealer gave me i am going to be a large. The think that really caused me so much bother is the way frames are described for example the frame of my HT is measured as 19 and the Meta AM as 19.5 when in reality the seat tube starts at the same height the top tube is the same length but then with the stem the Meta is actually 4cm shorter in reach. Never mind the debates about wheel sizes at least what ever you ride 29 26 or 27 at least they are all measured the same aren't they? Or is that another can of worms i have just opened? It would be nice if all manufacturers had to provide the same geometry details and that they were measured in the same way for a frame and complete bike.
Whilst i know that would not make up for test ride it would certainly help for a starting point.

some maker measure the frame size from the center of the bottom bracket and some from top of the BB housing.

nicklouse

what did I say at the start?

and you know that wheels are not the stated "size" dont you.

slickmouse

nicklouse wrote:

what did I say at the start?

and you know that wheels are not the stated "size" dont you.

indeed you did, but it seems to have been missed, so I thought it worth repeating

Re-Cycle

nicklouse wrote:

what did I say at the start?

and you know that wheels are not the stated "size" dont you.

What fo you mean about the wheel size are not the stated size?

cooldad

None of them actually measure what they are called.

Re-Cycle

cooldad wrote:

None of them actually measure what they are called.

Ok, maybe it was a bad paradox on my part.