Printable View
I'm 5'8" on a medium. If all you do is flowy trails, a large would be fine. I notice the long wheelbase on really tight corners already, so would not recommend sizing up if that's what you usually ride (unless you have really, really good body/bike control).
I'm 5'9" and very happy with the medium.
I find it hilarious that inherently longer, slacker, and lower bikes designed around 30 mm stems, bigger wheel diameters, and wider tires that result in an ever more stable, planted ride leads to sizing up instead of sizing down.
I don't ride a transition but like to follow this thread because I like their bikes.Quote:
Originally Posted by reckless toboggan
So... I'm 5'7" and have always ridden mediums. However I bought a Pivot Firebird 29 in small, per their recommendations. Small goes to 5'9" and medium starts at 5'8". It's a hudge bike, made sense. Actually felt a bit cramped on the bike in steeper stuff. Demoed a Medium and knew I'd made a mistake. Bought one and sold the small. Feels much better even though it is more to handle climbing. Just took a bit of getting used to and now it feels so right.
So I sized up, sorta, on a hudge bike, hahaha. They changed the sizing for the Firebird 29 because it is so long but they do say most people can potentially go up or down a size.
This is just what bikes are now. And they're awesome!
Steeper seat tubes lead to sizing up.Quote:
Originally Posted by reckless toboggan
I can ride a bigger bike on the way down, no problem. But if the top tube gets too long, my back hurts on long climbs. Steep seat tubes solve that.
I agree, it’s a bit funny. There are definite benefits to the steep seat angle for keeping a slack front end under control on climbs, but then wheelbase starts growing. The sweet spot can vary, but maybe long reach with steep seat angle combined with short chainstays and a slightly steeper head tube angle is a good combination for a bike with modern fit that doesn’t feel like a boat.Quote:
Originally Posted by reckless toboggan
I think the large Sentinel was a bit past where I want to be on wheelbase, but trying it out made me aware of a different perspective on sizing. Reach matters, but so does having a long enough top tube.
The top tube on the large Sentinel is similar to that of my medium Norco Range 29, which I find quite comfortable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by reckless toboggan
Not in my house
Preach it brother.
One of these days people will remember a little thing called wheelbase when it comes to how a bike actually handles where it matters. And why professional dh racers still talk about it, but not the mtbr dwids.
edit: ^D(C) knows
I should add to the above, I did not try a large Transition, only the medium, but I did try some other bikes with longer reach and it wasn't for me. I could ride them for sure, and they were very stable, but I lost a lot of playfulness and maneuverability that I wanted to retain.
I don't think there's a right or wrong answer here, short seat tubes and long dropper posts mean that most people can choose between two or three sizes based on how they want the bike to feel. At 5'9" I could certainly physically fit on either the medium or large, probably even the small, but the medium felt right to me.
I wish I had a bike that would extend or contract an inch in the toptube and downtube.
I don't even need a button, I'd deal with a quick release option.
5’ 10 1/4” Large carbon Smuggler. Not too slack.
Edit to add*
I haven’t noticed the bike being more slack (compared to my 2016) while climbing. I notice the change in geometry big time once the seat is down and the bike is fully out in front. Which is quite nice.
Current bike 62.5 ha and a 1275mm wb, bb 315mm, and 445mm chainstays
Next bike 62 ha and a 1290 wb, bb 335, and 445mm chainstays. So more longer, more slacker, but less lower. Inch closer and closer to being a disciple of the church of Geometron.
FWIW I crapped on Transition in the /rant thread for how they handled a previous warranty claim of mine. In short, my pivot bearings were toast after < 15rides (2017 Patrol) in CO dry conditions. They didn't want to replace them under warranty and fought me on it, but ultimately relented after much kicking and screaming.
Almost 2yrs later I noticed some cracks near the BB are on my Patrol. I got a wide range of opinions from different Transition dealers on the severity of the cracks, and decided to contact Transition directly. End result was a new front triangle on my doorstep 3 days after starting the inquiry and providing photos. Their response in this case was much faster and more generous than I was expecting, so suffice to say I'm back on the side of "Transition CS is legit."
Funny going back and reading thisQuote:
Originally Posted by kidwoo
You can actually do this with the new guerilla gravity plastic frames. Don't even need to take the stem off to rotate the headset cup inserts. Who knows if I'll ever do it regularly mid ride but I'm all talk anyway.
North: just fyi those bearings in transition frames are cheap cheap cheap and any bike shop can/will have them. Super easy to switch out too.
Woah, really? How much do they have to lift out of the frame to spin around?Quote:
Originally Posted by kidwoo
I was going to suggest S&S couplers with an extra section of tube to stick in the middle but the headset thing sounds better. :D
But...why? Short for the up, long for the down? Trying to understand this in the context of your comments on wheelbase, which if I understand correctly you're of opinion that they've gotten too long?Quote:
Originally Posted by kidwoo
To generalize, yes. That's fine for mach silly but not all trails let you go mach silly. It's funny watching 5'6" women riding 29ers with 31" wide bars and wheelbases that equal a lg dh bike. I mean it kind of makes sense in the way that the bike needs to just roll over stuff better cuz god help her if she needs to actually lift the front wheel over something.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dantheman
As far as why would I switch? I'm not sure it's a mid trail ride thing as much as just going between different kinds of trails. On tight stuff go shorter to whip it around easier.......faster wide open go longer for tron cycle. I'm not one of the people that thinks there's one magic reach number for your body size. We can competently ride bikes that are 4-5 inches apart in front-center measurements. People seem to forget that. My dirt jumper is way shorter than any trail bike I've ridden in the last 10 years and I'm fine on that thing doing stuff most endurpadurpers would never do on a 'flow' trail. At a certain point you get stuck. Bars too wide, stretched out too far over the front end......you can't move around the bike anymore. My GG is pretty long so I cut the bars down so I can get over the back wheel a little easier.
Maybe half an inch each. They're really wide and long machined aluminum bits but they're not that deep. I can just back out the stem cap slide up the stem a little and rotate one at a time. It's kind of neat.Quote:
Originally Posted by HAB
They ended up sending me the Enduro brand bearings so I'm all set parts-wise. What do you recommend for pressing new ones in? I figured I could rig up a ghetto press with bolts/nuts/washers but if there's a more elegant solution I'm all ears.Quote:
Originally Posted by kidwoo
I used my headset press and rubber mallet (gently!)Quote:
Originally Posted by North
Some threaded rod, nuts and washers work too.
bearingprotools.comQuote:
Originally Posted by North
They will have a set of pullers and presses for your particular bike (all the 4 different size bearings). Cost me 65 GBP (I think that's like $75). Beyond that, you'll need a pair of wrenches, a hammer, and a bolt small enough to fit through the center of the bearings.
That is neat. Can't see myself ever swapping around mid-ride, but still nice that it's easy.Quote:
Originally Posted by kidwoo
Bro, you can go from Shred Daddy to Crush Dog while your bro shotguns a beer at the top. There’s a mid-geo setting for maximum hike a bike performance called the Schlep Hesher too in case you need it. 3 bolts, prolly 2 sizes, but it’s mega dog.Quote:
Originally Posted by kidwoo
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
anybody seen joe around?
Somebody in denver got ahold of his account.
I do this as well, and add a socket to the mix if the size is right.Quote:
Originally Posted by kidwoo
Yeah, that I could see. Though, my GG is quite a bit longer than my Reign was and still navigates tight switchbacks better than the Reign ever did. Sorcery may be involved. I've also never used the GG in anything other than Gravity mode. I might try Trail mode if the wife wants to ride something like Gooseberry or Guac where you never descend for more than 10 seconds, but other than that....Quote:
Originally Posted by kidwoo
Guess I'm of the mindset that you can't go too long or too slack you just need to find trails that match the bike on fun factor. Considering a Pole Stamina 180 for next year. Keep a hardtail in the stable for longer rides or ones that might not suit a bike that likes to party that hard.
I’m going through this right now trying to set up my large Devinci Troy, which has a 30 mm longer reach than the medium Norco Range it replaced. I’ve been playing around with a few things, but moving the grips in to a position equivalent to 760 bars (after riding 780s forever) is the first thing that has felt like it really brought back my ability to be dynamic on the bike. As you described, with long reach and wide bars, I felt stuck.Quote:
Originally Posted by kidwoo
Heh, the reach on the Medium GG Pedalhead I'm building is 451mm compared to 403mm on my Medium v1 Bronson.
And the Pedalhead is gonna have a head angle of 64 degrees with a 150mm fork, appropriate to the title of this thread ...
I'm gonna run a 35mm stem, but we'll see how these 800mm bars feel for my 5' 8" / 32" shirt sleeve length sized body after I get 'er all built up!
(my guess is my hands will move in to 780 or 770 ...)
I've been doing some reading about reduced offset forks. My current theory is that a reduced offset fork needs to be paired with a 1-2 degree slacker head angle or the front centre will just feel to short.
This has been prompted by about 6 months on my Devinci Troy GX Ltd., which came with a 160-mm 42 mm offset Lyrik. Even with the fork bumped up to 170, which pushes the head angle to 65 degrees, I am feeling like I can't drive the front as much as I'd like when it gets steep and/or rough. Similarly, it feels like there is not enough front wheel in front of my bars to push against in fast corners.
The overall feeling is of a bike with too steep a head angle for the type of riding it should be capable of. Never did I think I would find a 65 degree head angle to feel too steep. I rode a Norco Range with 65 degree head angle a 30 mm shorter reach for a couple seasons before and never had issues. I am blaming the short offset fork, which I think is ill-suited to more moderate head angles. I would bet that the Troy feels great with a 51 mm offset fork.
So I have ordered a 1.5 degree Works headset. We'll see if my theory is correct. Hopefully the bike won't feel like too much of a boat with a 63.5 degree head angle.
I swapped a fork onto my mega tower from a hightower lt... it has a bigger offset, I'm wondering how much I'll notice it.Quote:
Originally Posted by D(C)
Other than a bunch of MTBR folks opining on what they think the bennies are, where have you read about it?
I've been wondering and haven't had time to do so much on the google machine yet.
It would be interesting to hear what you notice after you ride your bike.Quote:
Originally Posted by grskier
This review of the Gen 1 Ripmo describes something quite similar to what I've been feeling: https://nsmb.com/articles/2018-ibis-ripmo-reviewed/
"The shorter offset calms the front wheel in a number of situations — climbing and cornering in smooth terrain being two noticeable areas. I still found it to exhibit a nervous demeanour when going for it in aggressive terrain. On flatter, bermed trails, the geometry complimented an energetic rider. It made time where it didn’t seem any existed and danced down the trail with ease. Tip it down a steep grade where comfort at speed is key, or put it through terrain with lots of root and rock, and the bike wasn’t as comfortable. Repeatedly I found it required more rider input in these situations, compared to similar bikes. As a tall rider, I found myself having to push the front of the bike further ahead when coming into rough sections, moving the front wheel further away from my mass."
This article also has some interesting (and conflicting) opinions: https://nsmb.com/articles/short-fork...whats-it-good/
Anyone using one of these Cascade Components linkages? Thinking about throwing one on my 19 Patrol. http://cascadecomponents.bike/v3-patrol-lt-link/
Looks pretty sweet...
I would have gotten one for my Sentinel, if I hadn't already decided to replace it. I have friends with Cascade links on their Bronson and Stumpjumper, and they both love it. Seems like a no-brainer upgrade.Quote:
Originally Posted by meter-man
Interesting. I almost never use full travel on my patrol so the bit about more bottom out resistance runs counter to what I’d want to change
Maybe thats for a coil idk?
I checked in because i miss my scout. The new ones look even better. Wouldnt mind even having a smaller sized one, with coil, for just playing around. Im too fragile to call it jibbing but just riding slower and poping off stuff and taking shitty lines. Maybe i want something lighter though. My scout was anything but light
Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app
Check out the leverage curve. The linkage also gives you more leverage ratio early in the stroke (i.e., the wheel has more leverage over the shock stroke), thereby giving better small bump compliance. That's what I'm mostly interested in. The improved mid-stroke support looks good too. Improved resistance at bottom-out, and increased travel, is nice but less important for my purposes.Quote:
Originally Posted by North
Definitely makes the suspension curve more progressive, thereby lending itself better to a coil. The stock suspension curve is relatively linear, so favors the air shock. As far as I understand it anyway!Quote:
Originally Posted by grinch
I don't know much about suspension, so if I'm totally off, someone please correct me.
That's pretty much it. Stock curve will pedal better and work better with the natural progression of an air shock. New curve will have better small bump sensitivity and work better with the linear rate of a coil shock.Quote:
Originally Posted by meter-man
sweet thanks toast and others.
I'll give it a whirl and report back.
Will be interested to hear your feedback. Are you still running the stock DPX2?
I switched my 19 Patrol over for a MRP Hazzard coil with the progressive spring and generally love it. Small bump sens is massively improved, and I still never bottom it out (granted I only weigh a buck fiddy and don't huck bigly). Pretty sure I don't NEED the linkage but getting back some of the midstroke support I lost by switching to the coil might be nice.
How did you choose the MRP? I am not familiar with that brand and their shock line-up, but will check it out.Quote:
Originally Posted by adrenalated
Yeah, still on stock DPX2 (Performance Elite, not that it matters...). I was thinking about going to a Float X2 or a DHX2, but only because I don't know very much about shocks.
Float X2 looks awesome, but haven't heard a ton of positive responses on that shock on this bike. I would probably lean to the X2 since I am not familiar with coils (aka I'm scared) and the bigger aircan looks more big-pressive than the DPX2.
I've never ridden a coil, but I'm #CoilCurious. DHX2 now stocked on the Patrol has a custom tune (bottom-out spacers?) but not sure where to get those custom tuned DHX2s.
One person's review said that the CC linkage with the stock DPX2 addressed all of the owner's prior complaints. I figure I can give the linkage a whirl since it is less than half the price of an X2/DPX2. So I figured it is a good first step to try the linkage. If I'm still looking for more, I can try a different shock.