Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    11

    19 inch versus 21 inch

    I ordered a '09 Mission 1, dealer came back said sold out
    I ordered a '09 Mission 2, same deal sold out
    I ordered a '10 Mission 1, wont be in for 2 more months

    So now im stuck with this dilemma

    '08 Diamondback Mission 2
    $1,299.99
    or
    '08 Diamondback Mission 1
    $1,099.99

    Spec wish id much prefer the mission 2. Problem is the bike was on made in 15,17, and 19 inch models. I was really set on a 21. Im 6'1 250 with a 32 inseam and think a 20-21 is where I should be. Since im ordering online I cant ride it first, but at the same time its a really good deal. My budget was $1600 and the Mission 2 is well under that.


    so any thoughts on whether or not the 19 will be too small?

  2. #2
    There's no app for this.
    Reputation: JimC.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,371

    You must figure out

    the correct top tube length you need, never mind the frame size. If you get that ETT wrong, you're on the wrong bike.

    Figure out what you ride now and the effective top tube (ETT) and then order the bike that comes closest to that.

    Jim

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nagatahawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,189
    top tube is too short. You will be sitting higher and your seat post will be extending way to far, making tendendcy to go over the bars easier.

    I should be riding a medium frame but I opted for the small frame thinking my legs are short. However I am now sitting a more upright, not the greatest position for trail riding.

  4. #4
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    5,567
    Guess I disagree. When in doubt, I go for the smaller frame that's in the right ballpark. I'm 6'2", 190, with long arms and legs. I generally ride a top tube that's around 24 to 24.5 inches. I don't know the specific measurements on that bike, but if they're "normal" I'd be buying the 19.

    I much prefer a more upright position for trail riding.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nagatahawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,189
    Quote Originally Posted by Blatant
    Guess I disagree. When in doubt, I go for the smaller frame that's in the right ballpark. I'm 6'2", 190, with long arms and legs. I generally ride a top tube that's around 24 to 24.5 inches. I don't know the specific measurements on that bike, but if they're "normal" I'd be buying the 19.

    I much prefer a more upright position for trail riding.
    I agree, to disagree.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chrissa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    149
    specv,

    I'm 5'10" with a 32" inseam, and I would have probably started looking at the medium 17" frame myself. I'm lucky in that everything designed around the ideal medium person seems to fit me like a glove.

    You've got 3" of body length on me. You might be able to get away with a 19". I have friends who are 6' 3", with 34" inseams, and they wouldn't think twice about only getting the 21" frame.

    Honestly though, you really need to get to a local shop and see one in person. More importantly, you need to ride one up an incline under power. You'll know right away if it'll work or not.

    Chris.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Fix the Spade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,726
    I'm 6'4" and ride an 18" hardtail with a 50mm stem (a Diamondback uk Axis), the effective top tube is shorter than a larger frame but that works very well, especially on steeps where I can dangle off the back.
    If all other things remain equal, a longer top tube puts your weight further forward relative to the bike's wheelbase.

    I used to ride a 21 and had some nasty crashes where the front would wash and I'd be too stretched out to catch it. I also had two massive otbs, one of which put me in hospital for a 4days, both because I couldn't get far enough over the back wheel.
    Shorter tt gives you more scope to move around, the upright position's great for slinging a frame about underneath you, but it's not so great for pedaling, my 21" was definately easier to climb on.

    What I'm trying to say is there's no set in stone rule. You have to experiment a bit and see what works for you.



    Diamondback's have pretty long top tubes, on instinct I'd say you would be fine on a 19" but really you need to sit on the bike, it would be well worth your time tracking down a shop with one.
    Either way the effective top tube is way more important than the seat tube length, the 19inch Mission has a 24in top tube, the large is 25.
    Both have a 72 seat angle and a 100mm stem as stock, which by my (admittedly shady) maths gives the 19 an effective tt of around the 26-27in area and the 21 a 27-28in depending on the seat height.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    11
    thanks for the advice guys

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

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