[Closed] Geometry... again

In simple terms, the one on the right is longer and higher.

everything else is pretty similar.

By my calcs the left has a reach of 388 and the right has 395.

Or put another way, if the the right had the same length headtube (140), i.e. the same height at the front, then the reach would be even more: 405, so the right frame would feel about 15mm longer, so about one size bigger.

Have a look here: https://www.bikegeocalc.com/

Thank you reggie. That is very helpful.

Appreciate it.

I suspect the answer to your question will not help you find the bike you like best.

Does tyre size effect these calculations at all? I guess not as it will all be relative to the cranks.

Mostly, the only ones in that list that depend on tyre size are standover and trail, but many of them assume equal diameter wheels front and rear. The effect of tyre size on trail can be ignored I think. ETA also steering behaviour is affected by tyre width as well as by trail anyhow.

I own the bike on the right. I find it a smidge too long reach. So I am looking for something a smidge smaller.
I have the opportunity to buy the frame on the left, hence I can't try it for fit. But I have all the parts to build it up.
I am 6" tall, 31" inside leg and ape index of 0.95.
I am at the maximum recommended height for the steel frame.

Why do you feel the reach of your existing bike is too long, and when do you experience it?
I just want to point out the obvious... That reach has little to do with distance between saddle and handlebars.

at 6 foot tall (not inches...) I suspect you might be a tad big for the left bike.

Can you not just fit a shorter stem to the right/current one?

I feel I am putting a lot of weight on my hands/wrists and it flares up my carpol tunnel syndrome resulting in numb hands.
Thinking it will result in a little more upright position moving weight off my hands.
I tried a slightly lower seat height but that didn't help at all, causing knee pain.

the left frame is shorter but it's also lower at the front, so you may end up with the same problem - too much weight on you hands. Unless you fit a high rise stem. That seems to be the obvious tweak.

Either fit a shorter/higher stem to the right frame, or buy the left frame and make sure you have lots of spacers and/or a high rise stem?

I had the same issue with weight on the hands. I had a bike fit and ended up with the saddle all the way back, down a bit and with a setback seatpost. This meant I was rotating around the BB and pedalling then pushed me back onto the saddle, not forward onto the bars. I could then extend the reach with a longer stem. I've always ended up with the next size up frame than recommended since, apparently a lot of this is due to relatively short legs compared to height.

No point I throwing money at a problem and ending up back where you started.
I've got a 60mm stem I can try but think that will make the bike twitchy. At least if that eases things I can buy an 80mm and cross my fingers.

That's interesting scruffy, I tried lowering the seat but about 15mm but it started to cause me knee pain.
I never tried seat back and seat down tho.

Think about rotating around the bottom bracket, the straight line distance between the saddle and the bb stays the same. Just going down shortens that distance. You may have to get a layback post to go far enough back, I forget the measure of what was far enough but each pedal stroke should push you back onto the saddle. I'd recommend a bike fit before splashing out on a new frame, and then you'll be able to work out what geometry will suit you on any potential new frame.