[Closed] Riders 5ft 4 and under, wheel size,scaled sizing,modern geometry?

Get an Xl and play some circus music to accompany you on your ride!

??????????????????

As you wobble along on a bike that's too big

Although I'm a little taller (5'6"), I have found similar issues. What sort of body shape (ie long torso or legs, arm length, shoulder width) are you? I'm relatively short in the leg and longer body and arms, so find the "new" geo works in my favour.

Personally I prefer the smaller wheel sizes, I feel like I can manouver the bike more easily; however ivI' only tried a small handful of 29'ers so there could be more suitable ones out there. The difficulty sometimes is manufacturers don't always make the 29 model in smaller sizes.

I'd be looking at brands like Bird that have small sizes available and where test rides are easy to organise.

?

My missus is 5'2" and rides a small Juliana Roubion (basically a small Bronson). 125mm dropper about 5 mm from the base of the collar and she loves it.

Riklegge cheers , not looked at Bird as a brand. Not for me but partner.

I think the newer crop might be better because they are lower. When I tried 29ers a few years back I found them to be ungainly at 5'8. Mrs Sims is your height and found the same with regular 650bs so we got a her a womens specific bike. She only rides on family outings so probably doesn't reflect the average STW rider.

Someone who actually knows about geometry might be along in a minute

Someone who actually knows about geometry might be along in a minute

Or somebody who thinks they do 🙂

my 13 year old son who is slightly smaller than you rides a 2015 transition scout with 26 inch wheels.  geo and size are great for him.  I ran into the same problem as you have in that a lot of the more modern bikes are actually too big for smaller riders.  The reach, ETT and WB (front back) are too long.

Katy Winton is 5'2" and rides a 29er Trek Slash. She does alright on it too 😉

Does the new geometry fashion, of long long and slack really aid smaller folk?

Fashion would suggest that it's going to go away. Longer bikes are more stable, but with other tweaks to chainstays, fork offset etc can be made to still be playful.

Slacker bikes have made the trails people are building more accessible for more people, which also means steeper, and more difficult trails make more sense to build.

Low bikes rail corners a lot better than bikes with a higher BB, granted if you live somewhere that's rocky it'll be a PITA, but for most folk it's the better option.

Things like offset/rake/trail, chainstay length, seattube angle, crank length, stack... They should all be altered to make the bike not difficult to maneuver.

The Orange 5-29 / Alpine Five / Stage 5/6 suffer a bit with this, as they have really long stays. And they don't change with the size of the bike, so the front center is short , but the backend is long on the small bike. This means its a bit of a handful in the corners, if you don't muscle it around - and smaller riders may well not do that. It's also a very linear suspension, so doesn't lend itself to being a poppy and playful bike compared to some others.

A good implemention of 29er format is the Orbea Rallon. That's a brilliantly well thought out bike. If you have the time, compare the geometry to the Orange to see what I mean. Lots of little tweaks.

I had discussed this recently with a friend who is quite tiny.  She rides a Rocky Mountain as they are one of only a few manufacturers who make really small frames.

Rickon, we have had a long look at the EWS bikes as a lot of smaller women riders there and Emily Batty as well,  the negative rise stem is currently being used and overall you have not the nail on the head re the Orange 29 it is a long long bike and tall with 140 fork,  my partner is bloody quick on the downs and sweeping stuff struggles with it climbing and nidy nadgy stuff.

Slack and low should work for her but it still seems really really long., will have a look at Orbea.

Rocky mountain are a great option but yet to see one in s/h  market in the right size, I miss my RM element.

Mrs_oab is 5'.

She is limited in who makes a teeny frame, and trying out 29ers was interesting. Most 29ers just felt huge, the rest were massively huge. I'm sure some (see Ms. Winton above) can make it work, but it wasn't for her.

A 27.5 has worked well, Trek Superfly in 13" flavour. I think Trek also make similar size in a few of thier FS models.

Being a short arse bloke (5') sizing has always been an issue for me. Top tube length and reach less so but seat tubes definitely as I'm longer in the torso and really short legs. This is even more an issue now with droppers, which is a must for me nowadays.

I've looked ar womens bikes before (I'm not too proud to ride a woemen's bike), but even years ago I found them all short and steep. I like to ride steep /techy stuff and enjoy jumps and drops so I've always sruggled to find bikes small enough but aggressive enough for my liking.

I'm very open to 29ers and will try and test some when new bike time comes but I can't see how I won't buzz my backside on a 29er and how I'll get the front end low enough with a short stem. As I said, I will try a few if I can but I can't see how I'd fit a 29er comfortably. Maybe I should have a chat with miss Winton!

in terms of recommendations, there are options out there nowadays, short seat tubes are coming more common to run longer droppers. New Ibis Ripmo 29 goes very small (their designer &is 5'2"). New transitions also look good, any of them really, scout, smuggler etc.

A bit of gemoetry geeking out and googling does bring up option, you and your mrs just need to have good idea of what type of bike (travel, geo etc) she's after.