Newbie Mountain Bike Sizing Question



Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Colin

Guest
Hi all,

Good day. I would appreciate if you can give me some feedback on the sizing question I have for a
new mountain bike. I am looking at a 2004 Kona Kikapu Deluxe and they come in 16" & 18" sizes (NO
17"). Top tube lenght are 22.1" & 23.1" (horizontal C-C), and stand over heights are
29.7" & 30.8" respectively. Other dimension seems to be the same, except head tube is 0.6" longer on
the 18" bike.

My height is 5'8" with inseam of 32" (170 lbs)and based on my findings, a 17" size will be "best"
fit. However, looking at the above 2 choices, which one would better fit me?

I do plan to do some off-road cross country (20%) & technical riding (30%), and also some on-road
touring(50%).

Also, is it true & proven that a slightly smaller frame size is more suitable (better control,
manuverablity) than a larger one?

Thanks in advance.
 
[email protected] (colin) writes:

> Hi all,
>
> Good day. I would appreciate if you can give me some feedback on the sizing question I have for a
> new mountain bike. I am looking at a 2004 Kona Kikapu Deluxe and they come in 16" & 18" sizes (NO
> 17"). Top tube lenght are 22.1" & 23.1" (horizontal C-C), and stand over heights are
> 29.7" & 30.8" respectively. Other dimension seems to be the same, except head tube is 0.6" longer
> on the 18" bike.
>
> My height is 5'8" with inseam of 32" (170 lbs)and based on my findings, a 17" size will be "best"
> fit. However, looking at the above 2 choices, which one would better fit me?

The geometry of different makes of hill bikes is so different that simple guidelines don't work. One
of my hill bikes is 24 inch, another 19, and I've ridden a 17 inch bike which fit me well. Which one
feels more comfortable when you ride it? That's the one to get.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/ Windows 95: You, you, you! You
make a grown man cry...
M. Jagger/K. Richards
 
i tend to prefer slightly larger frames so i could get better extension on the road touring... just
make sure your balls clear "colin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hi all,
>
> Good day. I would appreciate if you can give me some feedback on the sizing question I have for a
> new mountain bike. I am looking at a 2004 Kona Kikapu Deluxe and they come in 16" & 18" sizes (NO
> 17"). Top tube lenght are 22.1" & 23.1" (horizontal C-C), and stand over heights are
> 29.7" & 30.8" respectively. Other dimension seems to be the same, except head tube is 0.6" longer
> on the 18" bike.
>
> My height is 5'8" with inseam of 32" (170 lbs)and based on my findings, a 17" size will be "best"
> fit. However, looking at the above 2 choices, which one would better fit me?
>
> I do plan to do some off-road cross country (20%) & technical riding (30%), and also some on-road
> touring(50%).
>
> Also, is it true & proven that a slightly smaller frame size is more suitable (better control,
> manuverablity) than a larger one?
>
> Thanks in advance.
 
colin wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Good day. I would appreciate if you can give me some feedback on the sizing question I have for a
> new mountain bike. I am looking at a 2004 Kona Kikapu Deluxe and they come in 16" & 18" sizes (NO
> 17"). Top tube lenght are 22.1" & 23.1" (horizontal C-C), and stand over heights are
> 29.7" & 30.8" respectively. Other dimension seems to be the same, except head tube is 0.6" longer
> on the 18" bike.

I would concentrate on the top tube length, as either of them will give you enough standover
clearance. First get the saddle in your preferred position (I'll avoid all the KOPS arguments). Then
put the point of your bent elbow on the nose of the saddle and you should have about an inch between
the tip of your middle finger and the bars. If neither frame gives you this sort of distance and you
really like the bike, get the stem swapped.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.