Whyte 901 standover clearance

rico2
rico2 Posts: 4
edited March 2016 in MTB buying advice
Hi all. I'm considering getting a Whyte 901, but I'm a little concerned in regard to its standover height, which at 792mm (31in) seems a little high. I'm 5' 8" and have an average inside leg for my height (31in). This would put me in the 'M' category of 901 frames (5'7" - 5'10"). Certainly, all the other measurements seem bob on. My old Orange P7 has a standover height of 742mm (29in), and I know on several occasions I've been grateful for this clearance! I'm aware that frame geometry has changed significantly in recent years though (my P7 is a 2007 model), so I don't know if it's directly comparable.

Comments

  • cooldad
    cooldad Posts: 32,599
    As long as the bike fits it doesn't really matter.
    I don't do smileys.

    There is no secret ingredient - Kung Fu Panda

    London Calling on Facebook

    Parktools
  • The Rookie
    The Rookie Posts: 27,812
    Bike fit relates to pedals, saddle and grips, not stand over height which is irrelevant while you're riding.

    To me a small sounds right for you anyway, not a medium, you have relatively long legs for your height and thus a shorter torso which needs a shorter bike.
    Currently riding a Whyte T130C, X0 drivetrain, Magura Trail brakes converted to mixed wheel size (homebuilt wheels) with 140mm Fox 34 Rhythm and RP23 suspension. 12.2Kg.
  • rico2
    rico2 Posts: 4
    The concern I've got is when you come off the bike and end up straddling it.... Better to have more clearance in those situations surely?
  • Angus Young
    Angus Young Posts: 3,063
    rico2 wrote:
    Better to have more clearance in those situations surely?

    Definitely, though many around here think not. Guess they've never seen someone almost bleed to death through their cock after landing on the top tube.

    True story...
    All the gear, no idea and loving the smell of jealousy in the morning.
    Kona Process 134 viewtopic.php?f=10017&t=12994607
  • The Rookie
    The Rookie Posts: 27,812
    Standover is nice to have, but not at the expense of a bike that doesn't fit, that's the point.
    Currently riding a Whyte T130C, X0 drivetrain, Magura Trail brakes converted to mixed wheel size (homebuilt wheels) with 140mm Fox 34 Rhythm and RP23 suspension. 12.2Kg.
  • rico2
    rico2 Posts: 4
    Guess they've never seen someone almost bleed to death through their fool after landing on the top tube.

    Ouch! Never heard it called 'fool' before. We call it 'gooch' in my neck of the woods. Either way, it's not something you want to land on... Thanks for your views. Guess it's down to personal preference at the end of the day.
  • cooldad
    cooldad Posts: 32,599
    Fool is auto forum censor for fool.
    I don't do smileys.

    There is no secret ingredient - Kung Fu Panda

    London Calling on Facebook

    Parktools
  • nicklouse
    nicklouse Posts: 50,675
    rico2 wrote:
    The concern I've got is when you come off the bike and end up straddling it.... Better to have more clearance in those situations surely?
    You put both feet down?

    Mad.

    Clearance was something that you had pre suspension when you put both feet on the ground.

    Soon as suspension started to lift frame up into the air both feet on the ground stopped.

    Some companies tried to reduce this reduction by bending top tubes but they still need to attach to the head tube.

    Forget about it.
    "Do not follow where the path may lead, Go instead where there is no path, and Leave a Trail."
    Parktools :?:SheldonBrown
  • The Rookie
    The Rookie Posts: 27,812
    If you are in a position to genteelly put both feet down, you don't need any clearance, if you are coming off in a hurry (falling off) your likely to end on your arse anyway!
    Currently riding a Whyte T130C, X0 drivetrain, Magura Trail brakes converted to mixed wheel size (homebuilt wheels) with 140mm Fox 34 Rhythm and RP23 suspension. 12.2Kg.
  • Angus Young
    Angus Young Posts: 3,063
    edited March 2016
    rico2 wrote:
    Guess they've never seen someone almost bleed to death through their fool after landing on the top tube.

    Ouch! Never heard it called 'fool' before.

    Ah... that supposed to be cöck!
    The Rookie wrote:
    Standover is nice to have, but not at the expense of a bike that doesn't fit, that's the point.

    Nobody said it should be at the expense of a bike that fits.
    All the gear, no idea and loving the smell of jealousy in the morning.
    Kona Process 134 viewtopic.php?f=10017&t=12994607
  • Angus Young
    Angus Young Posts: 3,063
    nicklouse wrote:
    rico2 wrote:
    The concern I've got is when you come off the bike and end up straddling it.... Better to have more clearance in those situations surely?
    You put both feet down?

    Mad.

    Clearance was something that you had pre suspension when you put both feet on the ground.

    Soon as suspension started to lift frame up into the air both feet on the ground stopped.

    Some companies tried to reduce this reduction by bending top tubes but they still need to attach to the head tube.

    Forget about it.

    Nonsense. I have about a mile of clearance between my gentleman's relish and the top tube on my Kona.
    All the gear, no idea and loving the smell of jealousy in the morning.
    Kona Process 134 viewtopic.php?f=10017&t=12994607
  • me-109
    me-109 Posts: 1,915
    cooldad wrote:
    Fool is auto forum censor for fool.
    Does it really auto-correct 'cock'?

    (After checking preview, it does!)