16 or 18 inch frame at 5'7" 1/2?

16" if it is a real MTB,
18" if used on the road with slicks. 😉

Strumpetto said:

Hi all:

Looking to get a new bike that comes in 16 and 18 inches. I ride an 18 inch now, and the bar is pretty much right on my stuff. A 16 inch would work ,too, from what I understand. Can anyone else offer any insight? Thanks A smaller frame would make technical riding easier, would it not? What about efficiency (though that is goverened by seat height?) Thanks!

A short wheel base is what makes it better on technical stuff. a 16" frame just gives you better knee clearance. So if you want better slow technical get the shorter wheel base if theres any differance, likewise get the longer if you want faster,

Insaneclimber said:

A short wheel base is what makes it better on technical stuff. a 16" frame just gives you better knee clearance. So if you want better slow technical get the shorter wheel base if theres any differance, likewise get the longer if you want faster,

I plan on racing XC with this bike, so I want fast, fast, fast, fast. I'll check to see if the wheelbase is different. . . I do think that I would be more comforatable on a smaller frame. Thanks for your time.

gclark8 said:

16" if it is a real MTB,
18" if used on the road with slicks. 😉

I do most of my training on the road. However, there are some very steep, technical trails around that I simulate racing on.

It's funny how I rode every day for 5 years at one point in my life, and never bothered to learn the technical aspects of a bike. I just rode them.

Thanks

I recognize the name brand components. However, not very familiar with FSA/Vuelta. Hot or not?

[font=Arial]Frame[/font] [font=Arial]Kinesis Kinesium Butted Aluminum 2.7lbs, 2xH2O Bosses, replaceable rear derailleur hanger[/font] [font=Arial]Fork[/font] [font=Arial]RockShox SID Race - 80mm travel Pure Delite Dual Air suspension with External rebound adjust[/font] [font=Arial]Crankset[/font] [font=Arial]FSA Afterburner Integrated spindle[/font] 22/32/44T [font=Arial]Bottom Bracket[/font] [font=Arial]FSA MegaEXO External Bearing System[/font] [font=Arial]Pedals[/font] [font=Arial]n/a[/font] [font=Arial]Front Derailleur[/font] [font=Arial]Shimano XT FD-M761A[/font] [font=Arial]Rear Derailleur[/font] [font=Arial]Shimano XTR 2007 RD-M971 Top-Normal[/font] [font=Arial]Shifters[/font] [font=Arial]Shimano XT RapidFire Plus 27 speed SL-M760 with push-pull release[/font] [font=Arial]Cassette/Freewheel[/font] [font=Arial]Shimano Ultegra cassette 9 speed 11-27T[/font] [font=Arial]Chain[/font] KMC[font=Arial] super narrow X9 speed[/font] [font=Arial]Hubs[/font] [font=Arial]Black Anodized Vuelta XRP Team Edition, Precison Bearing[/font] [font=Arial]Spokes[/font] [font=Arial]Round Double Butted Stainless steel, black finish with alloy nipples[/font] [font=Arial]Rims[/font] [font=Arial]Vuleta XRP Team SuperLite Disc, doublewall aluminum/eyelets[/font] [font=Arial]Tires[/font] [font=Arial]Kenda Klimax Lite 26 x 1.95 Kevlar, presta valve tubes[/font] [font=Arial]Brakes[/font] [font=Arial]A[/font][font=Arial]vid Juicy Carbon, 160mm rotor 6 bolt IS mount (standard)[/font] [font=Arial]Brake Levers[/font] [font=Arial]Avid Juicy Carbon[/font] [font=Arial]Headset[/font] [font=Arial]FSA Orbit XL II cartridge bearing for threadless[/font] [font=Arial]Handlebar[/font] [font=Arial]Ritchey Pro Double butted 2014 aluminum[/font] [font=Arial]Stem[/font] [font=Arial]Ritchey Pro aluminum[/font] [font=Arial]Tape/Grip[/font] [font=Arial]Ritchey WCS Hex foam[/font] [font=Arial]Saddle[/font] [font=Arial]Skye Turbo saddle, CrN/ Ti rails[/font] [font=Arial]Seat Post[/font] [font=Arial]Ritchey Pro Aluminum 27.2x350mm[/font] [font=Arial]Seat Post Clamp[/font] [font=Arial]Super Light Polished Aluminum[/font]

When I buy a bike I look at the horizontal top tube length as this has more to do with correct fit than seat tube length.
Sloping top tubes means that seat tube length no longer means much, also different manufacturers measure seat tubes differently. Some measure centre to centre and some measure centre to top while others measure differently to the numbers quoted.

cruisin said:

When I buy a bike I look at the horizontal top tube length as this has more to do with correct fit than seat tube length.
Sloping top tubes means that seat tube length no longer means much, also different manufacturers measure seat tubes differently. Some measure centre to centre and some measure centre to top while others measure differently to the numbers quoted.

The 16 inch frame has a 21.5 top tube length, and the 18 inch has a 22.5 ( measured center to center). The stand over height, which I'm looking to reduce to feel more comforatable, is 26.75 for the 16 inch, and 28.5 for the 18 inch.

If the top tube length of the 16 inch does not fit me properly, could I not get a shorter or longer stem? thanks again. ( I'm 5'7 1/2)

Strumpetto said:

The 16 inch frame has a 21.5 top tube length, and the 18 inch has a 22.5 ( measured center to center). The stand over height, which I'm looking to reduce to feel more comforatable, is 26.75 for the 16 inch, and 28.5 for the 18 inch.

If the top tube length of the 16 inch does not fit me properly, could I not get a shorter or longer stem? thanks again. ( I'm 5'7 1/2)

Yea FSA make top [censored], looking through your list of goodies there id say that bike is definitly up to race standard, the weight of the bike is of major concern for XC, i spent ages trying to get mine down to 10kg which i consider a good weight. the stem length will greatly effect your handeling if it gets too long. shorter is definitly better but you have to check that your knees wont hit the bars while climbing or sprinting. if you want to do long 100km+ raceing then make it longer and set yourself up more like a road bike, for shorter 40km or so races keep it short and assume a more upright position. most important though do it your way and have fun.

Insaneclimber said:

Yea FSA make top [censored], looking through your list of goodies there id say that bike is definitly up to race standard, the weight of the bike is of major concern for XC, i spent ages trying to get mine down to 10kg which i consider a good weight. the stem length will greatly effect your handeling if it gets too long. shorter is definitly better but you have to check that your knees wont hit the bars while climbing or sprinting. if you want to do long 100km+ raceing then make it longer and set yourself up more like a road bike, for shorter 40km or so races keep it short and assume a more upright position. most important though do it your way and have fun.

Hi, thanks for the info. Yeah, the bike with the above specs is 21 lbs. For another 300 you get the same frame with full xtr and a carbon team crank, which comes in at 19.1. Below the 21 lber is a sub 22lber, which is xt rear , lx front, lx shifters, lower fsa crank, NO DISCS and it's 21.5. All without pedals.

My question is this: Yeah, it would be nice to have full XTR and a carbon crank. Hell, you're riding a 19lb hardtail. However, I was originally going to get the 21lber xt xtr, because it's a step up in components from my stumpjumper. However, for 300 less I can have a 21.5 lb hardtail anyway. Sure, it's only going to be xt lx components, but it still has a sid race and is only slightly ( in my opinion) heavier than the more expensive bikes. I want to be to keep this bike for at least 5 years with potential to race it at all levels. So, my question is this, ulitmately:

Full XTR carbon crank (discs): 19.1lbs @ +300
XTR/ XT(discs): 21lbs@-300
XT/LX (no discs) 21.5lbs @-300 (-600)

I'm a firm believer that its the rider and not the bike, to a certain extent. So, let's say my fitness level is high enough to race with guys who all have very light bikes. If I do get the xt/lx which will likely come in at over just 22lbs with pedals, will I be at a disadvantage? I could afford the full xtr bike, but I feel as if it isn't too necessary. Does XTR really offer suprior performance, or is it simply weight? Likewise, is XT that much better than lx? I'm only saying this because if I get the least expensive bike, I can also afford a 29er. On the other hand, i don't want to sacrifice performance, because I plan on racing seriously in the future. thanks for your time. i appreciate it.

P.S. All three bikes have the same frame. Simply different components. Thanks!

Strumpetto said:

Hi, thanks for the info. Yeah, the bike with the above specs is 21 lbs. For another 300 you get the same frame with full xtr and a carbon team crank, which comes in at 19.1. Below the 21 lber is a sub 22lber, which is xt rear , lx front, lx shifters, lower fsa crank, NO DISCS and it's 21.5. All without pedals.

My question is this: Yeah, it would be nice to have full XTR and a carbon crank. Hell, you're riding a 19lb hardtail. However, I was originally going to get the 21lber xt xtr, because it's a step up in components from my stumpjumper. However, for 300 less I can have a 21.5 lb hardtail anyway. Sure, it's only going to be xt lx components, but it still has a sid race and is only slightly ( in my opinion) heavier than the more expensive bikes. I want to be to keep this bike for at least 5 years with potential to race it at all levels. So, my question is this, ulitmately:

Full XTR carbon crank (discs): 19.1lbs @ +300
XTR/ XT(discs): 21lbs@-300
XT/LX (no discs) 21.5lbs @-300 (-600)

I'm a firm believer that its the rider and not the bike, to a certain extent. So, let's say my fitness level is high enough to race with guys who all have very light bikes. If I do get the xt/lx which will likely come in at over just 22lbs with pedals, will I be at a disadvantage? I could afford the full xtr bike, but I feel as if it isn't too necessary. Does XTR really offer suprior performance, or is it simply weight? Likewise, is XT that much better than lx? I'm only saying this because if I get the least expensive bike, I can also afford a 29er. On the other hand, i don't want to sacrifice performance, because I plan on racing seriously in the future. thanks for your time. i appreciate it.

P.S. All three bikes have the same frame. Simply different components. Thanks!

LX components are a bit on the heavy side but work fine and are very reliable. XT has a great reputation for perfect opperation and have a reasonable weight. XTR is just light and very shiny and expensive, so in my opinion its not worth paying for xtr but i would pay for XT, the wheels are where most weight is saved, they are also where most money is spent.

Insaneclimber said:

LX components are a bit on the heavy side but work fine and are very reliable. XT has a great reputation for perfect opperation and have a reasonable weight. XTR is just light and very shiny and expensive, so in my opinion its not worth paying for xtr but i would pay for XT, the wheels are where most weight is saved, they are also where most money is spent.

Thanks a lot. I appreciate the advice. What kind of racing do you do ?

Strumpetto said:

Thanks a lot. I appreciate the advice. What kind of racing do you do ?

Long distance XC, which is why im so parinoid about weight, it makes a bigger differance on the long rides. And at my age (35) i need every advantage i can get just to make it to the end lol.

Insaneclimber said:

Long distance XC, which is why im so parinoid about weight, it makes a bigger differance on the long rides. And at my age (35) i need every advantage i can get just to make it to the end lol.

How many miles are long distance xc races, and what kind of strategy do you apply?

Also, do you know of any good sites with race listings?