You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Out riding this week my mate commented on my genereously endowed seatpost
[img] 
[/img]
Seat height is set up for in pedalling in the pic.
This is as a result of being freakishly long legged and also enjoying the chuckability of a smaller frame.
Anyone better it?
Are you a clown?
yes
you need a flashing red light on that, how many people does a passenger airliner carry? there are lives currently at risk!
the chuckability of a smaller frame.
One of the most overused phrases in cycling perpetuated by men who think they like a bike thats too small for them.
I don't have a pic, but my dialled alpine with GD seatpost looks pretty similar. My legs are also pretty long and since I spend more of my time messing around on jumps or downhill's with the post dropped I can put up with it looking silly on the infrequent climbs and flats. My bike looks good with the seat dropped, silly with it raised, but gates look like gates 100% of the time.
I'm only 5'11", but even my 19" commuter has a silly long seatpost.
[img] 
[/img]
makes mine look ok
No pic but my mate who's 6'5" with very long legs had USE do him a custom post that was silly long at something like 60cm on the agreement that there was no warranty if it bent. It went on his Whyte which made it even more fugly...
[img] 
[/img]
Geewavetree have you bought Rob's bike? 😉
Bez was king of the long seatpost if i remember, found this though
[img] 
[/img]
from [url= http://www.stewartpratt.co.uk/showarticle.php?path=articles/mountainbiking/mybikes/&id=inbred ]stewartpratt.co.uk[/url]
My bike looks good with the seat dropped, silly with it raised
Image more important than performance shocker!
It went on his Whyte which made it even more fugly
Man forces bike that is evidently too small to 'fit' shocker!
you don't need a longer seatpost, just a larger frame;
[img] 
[/img]
TooTall - read my post again - "mostly used for jumping and DH". Function over form.
Tootall there are some people with long legs and short (for their height) upper bodies. Agree with you on "Image more important than performance shocker!" tho, see a lot of that - not necessarily aimed at bagstard.
GeeWaveTree is that near darwen tower?
Surely you must all have fukt backs having to stoop to the bars like that??
with my new forks the bars are 20mm higher so spot on
the next size up giant is too big 🙁
[img] 
[/img]
The angle of the shot makes it look even longer but it's basically 4mm shy of the minimum insertion mark on the bike...Just arrived from shop and was the first thing I did (hence the flat pedal bits still attached).
[img] 
[/img]
Pretty much all my bikes have a lot of seatpost showing...I'm a lanky streak of p...
Frigging hell! I'm soundly beaten by Bez and Dick Barton I think.
TooTall what's your point re: small frame chuckability?
Go and ride a big MTB. Then go and ride a BMX. The BMX will no question feel more 'chuckable' - i.e. changes direction quicker, easier to throw around, easier to hop/jump. OK this may be somewhat to do with geometry, but part of it definitely the physical size of the fame.
For me, erring on the small side for frames is just a less extreme version of this phenomenon.
I heard Bez had ordered a custom 10" Inbred and a 600mm seatpost.
Am I the only one who wants to see pics of you all actually sitting on these bikes?
That is indeed a long seat post. Quite why you had to park your bike by the local 'glory holes' is beyond me.
[url= http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3066/3022345465_fd82f3279a.jp g" target="_blank">
Not mine
IU'm 5.10 and ride a 16 frame, with wide bars and a layback seat post, why? because its a hoot, a larger frame may be a more "correct fit" but to me a larger frame would only really feel better on long long distance XC where as I am more of a fan of hooning around in the woods and a like where a smaller size bike does seem to instill a bigger grin factor than a proper grown up seriously fitted bicycle. moo.
if ever there was a case for a 36er then dicks bikes are it 😉
Go and ride a big MTB. Then go and ride a BMX. The BMX will no question feel more 'chuckable' - i.e. changes direction quicker, easier to throw around, easier to hop/jump. OK this may be somewhat to do with geometry, but part of it definitely the physical size of the fame.
Yes - the difference between a MTB and a BMX are rather large - hence the choice of tool for job. However, the difference between a L and XL in a frame are so minimal on the 'chuckability' front that it can't be more than a couple of hundred grammes difference. Example - Turner 5 Spot geometry:
[url= http://www.competitivecyclist.com/mountain-bikes/frame/2010-Turner-5-spot-5190.html ]2010-Turner-5-spot[/url]
Those numbers are not that far apart, the contact points are going to be similmar distances apart, the wheel base will be similar. So, between a S and an XL there might be a decent difference, but there is almost nothing between L and XL.
I get 'chuckability', when it is the difference between a BMX and a MTB. I don't get it when people claim the differences up or down a frame size. The numbers aren't different enough.
This was a custom build for Nightfire (as he was on here) by Raoul. Don't know if he still has it but I can't imagine it fitting many others !
[img] 
[/img]
i win?:
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
😆
Can't compare with any of these
[img] 
[/img]
What's with all the people with saddles pointing up in the air? You like smashing your perineal nerves to bits or something? You're meant to sit on your sit bones, not your soft delicate perineum.
"The BMX will no question feel more 'chuckable'"
A BMX has 20" wheels and about a 75 degree head angle.
[img] [/img]
/p>
what size wheels on this?
Dick Barton relaxes with the paper after a ride
[img] 
[/img]
🙂
@dick barton
Maxed out seat posts and all those spacers would indicate to me that you are buying the wrong size frames.
What size are they?
"what size wheels on this?"
Looking at the chainset, i'd guess they were 700c, which makes the whole thing pretty scary.
"what size wheels on this?"Looking at the chainset, i'd guess they were 700c, which makes the whole thing pretty scary.
They look like 700's, which would make the seat and top tubes somewhere over 85cm by my rough reckoning. Must be a build for someone 7' plus. A true candidate for 36" wheels...
Like these, but in a bike to fit the guy who rides the Kelly, would look pretty much proportionate.
[img] 
[/img]
I bought my frame small as it was the last in the lbs and the large i "need" was online and i couldn't wait!
Anyone ridden a 36er?
Maxed out seat posts and all those spacers would indicate to me that you are buying the wrong size frames.
My bikes look a bit like that. However, I have long legs for my height, so the frame size is fine. Larger frames are too long for me.
Kingtut - not sure it is the wrong size - reach feels perfect (the larger frames felt very stretched out) and when standing on the floor, I've got 2" clearance between top tube and groin...but yes, they do look like they are too small - if you buy into the thought process that the stem needs to be flat against the headset...
[img] 
[/img]
Ridden at Laggan...
Sweet baby Jesus and the orphans, there's some seriously FUGLY bikes on here! 😯
🙂
Move over...
[img] 
[/img]
Smaller frames are definitely more chuckable and generally more comfy going downhill (imo). There's a huge difference in feel between my old 19" and my current 16".
lol worst photoshopping ever 😀
Youd have to have arms that dragged on the floor when you walked too 😀
I find this interesting, because I ride a small Cotic Simple.
I am 175cm (5' 9"), right on the edge between a 16" small and the 17.5" medium. I have about 27cm of seatpost sticking out, which is quite a bit.
But even on the small I find the top tube quite long and I don't think I'd want the extra length of the medium. I run a 70mm stem. I find manualing the Cotic more difficult than other, shorter bikes I've owned. I've not owned enough different bikes though to make a good comparison I suppose.
Those numbers are not that far apart, the contact points are going to be similmar distances apart, the wheel base will be similar. So, between a S and an XL there might be a decent difference, but there is almost nothing between L and XL.I get 'chuckability', when it is the difference between a BMX and a MTB. I don't get it when people claim the differences up or down a frame size. The numbers aren't different enough.
My point re the BMX / MTB is that there is a demonstrable difference due to frame size.
I agree with you that the differences between L/XL numbers aren't great. However the numbers don't have to be that big in magnitude to make quite a difference to the feel of the ride (at least to me).
This week I slid my saddle forwards by <1cm to get me more over the front of the bike for climbing, and it has definitely made a difference to the way the bike rides seated on steep climbs.
The other way of looking at it is, if only a cm or so on the tt makes no difference then why do they bother making both an L and an XL? Or is this just marketing?
FWIW I started off riding gates at my dad's insistence. Since choosing my own bikes I have realised I prefer a small frame - I have experience of both ends of the frame sizing spectrum.
6'1 and usually ride a 17, I own a 19-20" and find I can't move it around under me quite the same.
Open call to nearly everyone on this thread -
Your bike is too small for you!!!!!
adstick - Member
Open call to nearly everyone on this thread -Your bike is too small for you!!!!!
That depends on what you are doing on it. If you follow road bike sizing, with seat post at maximum pedalling efficiency height - that works great for XC thrashing/touring. I've owned a 20" Inbred that rode like a proverbial gate - it was dull, dull, dull. Now ride a medium BFe, with a long post when climbing, and it's a hoot (although will never climb as efficiently as the longer, duller Inbred)
If you are doing DH or tougher riding, then the whole game is different.
There's a huge range of styles of riding, each requiring different set-ups and equipment.
This week I slid my saddle forwards by <1cm to get me more over the front of the bike for climbing, and it has definitely made a difference to the way the bike rides seated on steep climbs.
Yeah I just slid my saddle forwards a cm or two and it makes a huge difference. Thought I'd try it moved back a bit as its usually a bit too cramped on climbs, but feels horrible being so far over the back for everything else. I'll never get why people run lay-back seats, I have to have mine right forward otherwise it feels like I'm way too far over the back wheel.
Saying this I could probably do with a proper bike fitting as mine really doesn't seem right for XC but I find it comfy because I'm used to it. The smaller frame works great for jumping/dh as well!
[IMG] 
[/IMG]
22cm ish out of the frame, looks almost normal compared to most here 😆
If you are doing DH or tougher riding, then the whole game is different.
whys that thn ? best tell steve peat to get that seat down - its pretty high ...
Exactly.
adstick - MemberOpen call to nearly everyone on this thread -
Your bike is too small for you!!!!!
+1
el_boufador
I have experience of both ends of the frame sizing spectrum.
Just so you know where I'm coming from. I used to think this was the most comfortable thing in the world:
[IMG] 
[/IMG]
Then I got this and discovered a whole new world of how things should be:
[IMG] 
[/IMG]
and finally, I have this - the monster truck that can do anything I can, only better:
[IMG] 
[/IMG]
The first two bikes are both 21" frames - the Turner is 23". I still maintain the difference between a L and XL in the same bike will be tiny in handling performance - the length of the top tube might be relevant, but the axle to axle, angles and BB height will be pretty much the same. Or are the big blokes with kiddy bikes just making excuses for their inability to move a bike around?
LOL'ed my head off at Takisawa2's piccy!
trail_rat - Member
If you are doing DH or tougher riding, then the whole game is different.whys that thn ? best tell steve peat to get that seat down - its pretty high .
🙄
So, how did you hear about that, by watching this website?
Do you do much DH riding?
Just interested, because if you do, and you keep your saddle at full pedalling efficiency height then fair play, I'd be happy to hear about it.
Can't compete with some on here, but here's my collection of seatposts...
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
no gavin i dont ride downhill - never have - its a complete wild stab in the dark .....
[img] 
[/img]
oh and i ride a full on xc bike now with the saddle at full height where ever i go.
Sorry, but can't really see what height your seatpost is at there, Trailrat.
So, you didn't have your saddle at full height when doing that jump (which looks cool btw), but you ride Xc with your saddle at full height?
Cool - we agree!
Must say that saddle looks pretty low to me!
Steve Peat may run his post a bit higher than most, but it's a long way off XC pedalling height. Oh and how tall is he...?
but by you lots rules that means his frame is too small 😉