The chainstay length debate has been done many times, but there are a few bikes I've noticed with really long chainstays including on the smallest size. I can only imagine how difficult it would be to unweigh or lift the front of the bike for smaller and lighter riders.
Has anyone here under say 5'10" ridden anything with such measurements, and how was it?
These are 29ers for which 430mm seems to be about the shortest possible:
- Orange Stage 6 Evo - 467 chainstay, reach 468 medium
- Cotic Jeht and others - 447 chainstay, reach 444 small / 467 medium
- Deviate Highlander 1 - 450? chainstay at sag (440 static), reach 444 medium
Some comments about the large Orange in here.
https://theloamwolf.com/2021/11/30/release-first-ride-the-new-orange-stage-6-evo/
https://theloamwolf.com/2022/02/10/review-orange-stage-6-evo-se/
And for context the chainstays are 11mm longer than the Pole bikes that seemed so ridiculously long a few years ago.
I'm 5'9" and have a hardtail with 445mm chainstays in the middle of the sliding dropouts and 466mm reach.
Chainstay length is like any bike measurement where it doesn't mean anything in isolation and you have to work out how it fits in as part of the overall package.
With my frame, even with the chainstay at 450mm+ it is very poppy and playful... with slightly higher bars and a 35mm stem. If I run even a slightly longer stem and/ or drop the bars a bit then it becomes incredibly planted. Great for climbing traction and wheels on the ground descending but more cumbersome if you want to pop off stuff.
As I lengthen the chainstay I wish for the front wheel to be a bit further away to be more balanced and vice versa shortening the chainstay length too much.
The message I'm trying to get across is not to focus on one aspect of bike geo as the way a bike rides is the sum of its parts + how you position yourself on the bike.
I would love bike reviewers to review bikes without seeing a geo chart or marketing spiel first and I'd bet a fair amount of the time they would be way off guessing the details of the bike based on the ride 🙂
Ooh, I can contribute here.
I'm 5ft 8in on a good day and my preference is for chainstays around 450mm (on 29ers if that matters).
My current bikes are 445mm (with 485mm reach) and 443mm (with 460mm reach). I've just sold a frame that was 435mm (460mm reach).
I've previously ridden 450mm and 455mm extensively and found those bikes slighty better balanced (with a 460mm reach).
I'd be intrigued to try one of those Oranges, but I'd expect them to have a lot of stability vs. nimbleness and to work best in the larger sizes.
To elaborate on the stats above, I've just moved from an Orange Stage 4 to Stage Evo - and it's basically not so flicky in the corners but more stable everywhere and climbs even better.
Chainstay length is like any bike measurement where it doesn’t mean anything in isolation and you have to work out how it fits in as part of the overall package.
The message I’m trying to get across is not to focus on one aspect of bike geo as the way a bike rides is the sum of its parts + how you position yourself on the bike.
Agree generally but in extreme cases (of measurement and size spectrum) like the above it's almost certainly going to be a dominant factor.
would love bike reviewers to review bikes without seeing a geo chart or marketing spiel first and I’d bet a fair amount of the time they would be way off guessing the details of the bike based on the ride 🙂
Credit to the reviewer above for doing exactly that.
My current bikes are 445mm (with 485mm reach) and 443mm (with 460mm reach). I’ve just sold a frame that was 435mm (460mm reach).
I'm the same height as you and ride a 460 reach. 485 reach would be long but doable although I'd need a very steep seat tube angle for a comfortable seated position - like the 80deg on the Privateer 161.
My bike has 430 stays, I do notice its pros/cons. I've ridden 440 stay bikes but not enough to judge them.
I'm 5'8" on a good day and ride a Small Cotic Jeht, to me it seems really well balanced and I never feel too far forwards or backwards on the bike. I'd say the only thing I've noticed (or rather not noticed) is that you never accidentally get a bit of a power-wheelie pedalling hard out of corners which I occasionally have with other bikes, and the front doesn't feel like it needs weighting as much on climbs (and as a result you keep traction better).
Agree on looking at the whole picture though, I ran it with a Pike Ultimate at 140mm & 150mm and it felt super stable but not that chuckable, you had to consciously work to crank it over into turns/changes of direction. I changed to a 140mm Fox 36 and it's turned into the most agile bike I think I've ever ridden (27.5" bikes included). I think that maybe the Fox is shorter offset, but didn't think that would make such a huge difference especially at my skill level. I was planning to compare the axle-crown measurements on the two forks as well, but whatever the reason the bike has come alive.
It's often bike brands who say "you need to look at the geometry as a whole" when it's pointed out that their chainstays are a bit short or their head angles a bit steep.
Well yeah, but they have no idea how many bikes I've ridden (possibly more than them) and that I'm quite capable of isolating the effect of one geometry factor in how a bike rides.
And then the next model of the bike turns up with pretty much exactly the changes people were suggesting anyway (exactly what happened with the Stage 4 & Evo).
I’m 5’9 and have a Jeht. For blasting down trails the long chainstays make it very stable. For jumping or manualling stuff I’d prefer them shorter.
I'm 5'8, and to me it will be very dependent on the rear wheel size.
I demo-ed a full 29 e-bike with 455mm chain stay, felt great on open bike park trails, but terrible on tighter natural trails.
Also demon-ed mullets (one ebike and one normal) with 440/445mm chain stays, don't have issue moving it around. The 440mm didn't felt too balance (too much toward the rear) but it could be just the bike was not setup properly.
I’m 5’8″ on a good day and ride a Small Cotic Jeht, to me it seems really well balanced and I never feel too far forwards or backwards on the bike. I’d say the only thing I’ve noticed (or rather not noticed) is that you never accidentally get a bit of a power-wheelie pedalling hard out of corners which I occasionally have with other bikes, and the front doesn’t feel like it needs weighting as much on climbs (and as a result you keep traction better).
You must be more skilled than me at wheel lifts, hops, and manuals! And I definitely need to weigh the front of my 430mm CS bike on climbs.
And then the next model of the bike turns up with pretty much exactly the changes people were suggesting anyway (exactly what happened with the Stage 4 & Evo).
Surely they must know that they're being an outlier or behind modern expectations when they launch the first version of a model.
