Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 51 to 53 of 53
  1. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    250
    Quote Originally Posted by ghost_03 View Post
    Careful, not all frames are measured that way (link).

    Revisionist Theory of Bicycle Sizing

    It could be that Felt is measuring to the center of the top tube. I would compare the other measurements to make sure.
    Yep, understood....I just picked up a 16" Felt for my wife...I had that in the garage so I measured from center of BB to top of seatpost tube and it was spot on 16".

  2. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    495
    FWIW, I think one of the most overlooked figures in bike geometry is the seat tube angle. For a given effective top tube length (ETT), a bike with a steeper STA will have a longer reach than a bike with a slacker STA. In other words, a bike with a 74 degree STA and a 610mm ETT will be just as long in reach (horizontal length) as a bike with a 73 degree STA and a 620mm ETT. Just something to keep in mind when comparing bikes and geometry numbers. Like some others here have said, it is more useful to go by reach and stack numbers when comparing bikes for fit. Most manufacturers publish these values now.

  3. #53
    going downhill silly fast
    Reputation: KBuc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    44
    Took my 17.5 On the same trails as I've taken out the 15.5 and felt much better on the 17.5. I felt the most difference in being able to hold a good line and not over correcting under correct. There is certainly not Nearly the amount of clearance I would like when standing But I do not see that it's going to be a real issue.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •