Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 51
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    35

    which size Gary Fisher 29er, 19 or 21. I am 6"1'

    My inseam is maybe a 33 but im not sure, could be an inch or two either way. Anyway I am purchasing the Trek Mamba. I am a beginner and never had a bike before so when I test rode both of these, i didnt really know how they are supposed to feel. Even though the 21 inch touched when i stood over it, I could still pull the bike up about an inch before it smashed my pelvic bone. I guess turning on the 21 inch was a little rougher. The 19 gave me more clearance.

    The guy at the Trek shop said these specific Trek frames are made bigger than usual, is this true?
    Is it also true that if you get a 29er you should move down a frame size than if you bought a 26?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    494
    ride them both. I'm about the same specs and didn't like the upright feel of the 19" rumblefish. I'd be too hunched over the front on climbs trying to keep the wheel down. 21" fits pretty darn good, just flipped the stem and was on the trails happy.

    BTW my Hardtail is a 19" but not its a trek.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    35
    I rode them both. Felt like i could control the 19 on turns better but i will be doing road riding as well. I heard it was uncomfortable and bad for your back when you're road riding if you go a size smaller.

  4. #4
    Rides the Desert
    Reputation: ltk1144's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    255
    I am 6'1" and ride a 21" Trek Mamba. Feels great, but I like the feel of longer top tubes for a more aggresive XC geometry

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    35
    hmm so that's 2 people for the 21". Maybe I should go test ride that 21 again

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    79
    I'm 6' 1" with a 35" inseam and ride a 19" X-Cal, feels good to me. Never tried a 21" so nothing to compare with.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    5
    I'm 6'1" and ride a 19 trek x-cal.

  8. #8
    Is dang happy!
    Reputation: Mr. Doom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,115
    I think 29er G2 geometry might work better with a slightly smaller frame. Weighting the front wheel was a chore on my 19" and I am 5'10.
    The wheel is a extension of the foot

  9. #9
    Dozer
    Reputation: yeahdog31's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    381
    I'm 6'2" and rode my wife's 17.5 GF Cobia all last summer with a longer stem and seat post jacked all the way up. It actually felt pretty good. I used to have a GF Piranha (26") size 21, and I never cared for the super long top tube.
    I now have a 19" 29er and find it to be a good fit.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    57
    Just got a GF Wahoo 17.5 and I'm 6'1 but have short legs lol.

    Feels good for me though!

  11. #11
    Rod
    Rod is offline
    Endorphin Junkie
    Reputation: Rod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    4,273
    I am 6'0 and I ride a 19 inch giant XTC. You made it sound like you liked the 19 inch better. On a 21 inch bike I cannot use a setback post at all and I have to slide the seat pretty far forward to get my fore aft position right. Get the bike shop to fit you to the bike. It's hard to tell in a parking lot test. You could always get a little longer stem if it was needed.
    There is not much choice between rotten apples.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    332
    i would go with the smaller one. i'm about 5 10 or so and i have the 17in i think. i'm a bit more upright than typical xc riders, but it was the first bike i got, and definitely prefer it to the taller size. my other bike is a bit bigger and more stretched out, a typical xc position really, but i still prefer being a bit more upright.

    as a beginner, i would recommend you get the smaller size since it will be easier to flick around, more relaxed position, and greater stand over height to protect the jewels.

    its easier to stretch a bike out if you find out its too small, as opposed to making the cockpit more campact if it is too big.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    35
    OK all these new posts are making me lean towards the 19" again. And yeah it did seem to handle better for me on turns in the parking lot test. Felt like i had to stretch a little on the 21" on turns

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    332
    and definitely go with what feels right to you instead of what people on a forum say. (or even people in the shop to an extent) your going to be the one riding the bike, and the best way to know what works for you is by jumping on as many bikes as you can, and picking your favorite

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: reydin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,012
    I'm 6' even with a 33" inseam and a 19 with a 90mm stem, 11% sweep flat bar and the seat set in the center of the rails fit me perfect. At your hight you are well within the adjustment range of a 19" frame set. If it were me I'd find a Trek dealer with a knowledgeable fit personnel and facilities and see what they recommend, but thats just me.
    This may be a total waste of time but I can't help but think that you might amount to something someday.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    35
    how do i measure my inseam and be exact about it. Ive read different things, about putting a pillow underneath to a hardback book etc.

    Also just an FYI, the top tube length for the mamba 19" is 24.5 inches. Is this considered more of a longer top tube for a 19" frame?

    http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en/model...er_sport/mamba

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    35
    Quote Originally Posted by pecsokak View Post
    i would go with the smaller one. i'm about 5 10 or so and i have the 17in i think. i'm a bit more upright than typical xc riders, but it was the first bike i got, and definitely prefer it to the taller size. my other bike is a bit bigger and more stretched out, a typical xc position really, but i still prefer being a bit more upright.

    as a beginner, i would recommend you get the smaller size since it will be easier to flick around, more relaxed position, and greater stand over height to protect the jewels.

    its easier to stretch a bike out if you find out its too small, as opposed to making the cockpit more campact if it is too big.
    so going with the smaller one means more comfort? I might be doing a good bit of straight road riding as well. It would be more comfortable on those long road rides?

    So upright and XC are two different positions? Im guessing upright means its better for your back and not leaned over as much.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    494
    find a hill near the LBS and try both bikes out, it doesn't have to be a paved hill either or a long one. Just enough where you have to shift your weight around.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    51
    I'm 6'2" with a 36" inseam and long arms, too. I started out on a 19.5" (L) Trek 26" bike in 2005. The bike shop said I could go either way, but after I gained some experience I realized that the L never fit me and I should be on an XL. I've now had a couple of 21" Gary Fishers and they fit me great.

    All that is to say that fit is very personal and hard to judge from a few numbers. Ask the bike shop fitting you to explain why they lean towards one or the other. If they say it's mostly based on your height, be skeptical.

    Some shops will have demo programs where they'll rent you a bike for a deposit that can be applied toward a purchase. If you're sure you'll buy and you like the shop, it's definitely worth it.

    I now judge a bike's fit for me mostly by looking at the effective top tube length. Then I look at the seattube length only to figure out what seatpost I would need

    check out these links:
    Revisionist Theory of Bicycle Sizing
    Fit Calculator - Competitive Cyclist

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,027
    6,1" and ride 19" bikes, but I only have a 32" inseam.

  21. #21
    Warrior's Society
    Reputation: mtnbikej's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    5,219
    What was the recomendation of the shop where you are buying this bike?

    They would have a better idea.....seeing as they could actually see you on the bike.
    I crashed hard enough on my Tallboy to break my leg,
    The carbon is way more durable than most people.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    550
    I'm the same height and inseam. My bike shop def said 21. I was thinking 19, and they said no way.

    But that was a HiFi. Not sure how the different bike changes it.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    35
    the HiFi one are smaller than the GF 29ers from what i read. The recommendation was both a 19 and a 21. There were 2 guys there and both seemed to not agree

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    87
    I'm just a little over 6', and ride a new 21" Trek. I rode the 19", but just felt too small with lots of seat post. Before I bought my Trek, I like the XL Giant and XL Scott, Cannondale was a bit in between. The 21" Specialized was huge, but the 19's felt too small.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    35
    Quote Originally Posted by R900 View Post
    I'm just a little over 6', and ride a new 21" Trek. I rode the 19", but just felt too small with lots of seat post. Before I bought my Trek, I like the XL Giant and XL Scott, Cannondale was a bit in between. The 21" Specialized was huge, but the 19's felt too small.
    Which trek though? the GF 29ers have bigger measurements, top tube specifically

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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