Results 1 to 18 of 18
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mr_manny's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    147

    Tall headtube on new spectral - Large size

    Was reading a recent Canyon review of 2018 Spectral AL, I came across a comment about the bikes tall headtube.

    They referred to the size associated with Large Spectrals.
    Mediums have a 116 headtube
    Large headtubes are 147

    Anyone else feel it's height is on the awkward side?

    Link to review:
    https://www.outdoorgearlab.com/revie...al-al-6-0-2018

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Lone Rager's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    3,806
    I assume they arrived at this headtube length based on what they thought would best fit the majority of riders in that frame size. If it puts the bars at the right height for you, it's great. If you can't get the bars low enough for you, it's awkward.
    Do the math.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: David R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,910
    Seems crazy tall when people are often up-sizing to get a roomier fit, forks are getting longer and wheels are getting bigger. That alone would probably put me off buying one, I hated the tall head tube on my old Turner.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    260
    Lots of tall folks really struggle with a short stack on large sizes---and they end up with lots of spacers or a riser bar-----if you are long limbed you may like this but if your limbs are shorter it is an issue. It is 10-15 mm more than most large bikes.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: One Pivot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    7,205
    While it's taller than similar bikes, you can still run no spacers on the stem, flip the stem, run flat bars etc. Makes sense on a large. I doubt many would find they ran out of options to make it fit.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    112
    Quote Originally Posted by One Pivot View Post
    While it's taller than similar bikes, you can still run no spacers on the stem, flip the stem, run flat bars etc. Makes sense on a large. I doubt many would find they ran out of options to make it fit.
    I've been wondering about the tall stack on the 2018 spectral as well; it is taller than a lot of other trail bikes, but I had similar ideas as One Pivot. As long as I can get enough weight over the front wheel in steep climbs to prevent wheelies, I am not too concerned, but ideally I could test ride one, or another bike with a stack like that.

    The other odd bit of the geo is the long wheelbase. At 6'3", I'd get an XL, but I wonder what it will be like on switchbacks.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: One Pivot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    7,205
    The wheelbase goes with the long and slack thing.

    Most people agree that you get used to it on tight trails. Or what you do give up, it's worth it for everything else.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mr_manny's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    147
    I just measured my stache, and with spacers we are looking at a total height of 120mm.
    If you wearen't happy with the height, I guess a negative rise stem would be the answer?

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,329
    Quote Originally Posted by mr_manny View Post
    I just measured my stache, and with spacers we are looking at a total height of 120mm.
    If you wearen't happy with the height, I guess a negative rise stem would be the answer?
    I've got a short torso but long legs. I love a tall stack. I'm running a Large Stache with a conical 23mm stack headset preload cap, 9mm of spacer, 10deg Thomson stem, and 38mm rise bars. When I was running lower rise stem and bars, I was running 47mm of spacer under my stem.
    Tall headtube on new spectral - Large size-img_20180226_1624341b91-picsay.jpg


    My old setup:
    Tall headtube on new spectral - Large size-img_20171208_170057272-picsay.jpg


    It's never made sense to me that sizes of people vary from around a foot to a foot-&-a-half and head tubes only vary in mm. Sometimes (SeeDBR Mason and a few others) all head tubes are the same length... Stack is the same for a 5'5" person as a 6'3" person. Why would a taller person want the same stack as an Umpalumpa?

    Then there's crank length. Sammy Short Legs has an inseam of 28". Johnny long legs had an inseam of 35". The average difference in crank length is a mere 5mm? Seriously?

    I'm 6'1.5" and run 180mm crank arms because my measured inseam is 34.5.

    The Canyon head tube lengths make a great deal of sense to me.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mr_manny's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    147
    Bikeradar also mentions the tall headtube.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dh59hC4Rgb4&t=305s

    Maybe this is a new trend.
    No more spacers under your stem, and hope you remembered where you placed your non-riser bar

    Only reason why I'm looking at the large is because of the reach numbers.

    Sounds like the taller then average headtube isn't an issue.

  11. #11
    mbtr member
    Reputation: scottzg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    4,808
    I like short head tubes on all sizes because it gives us the freedom to choose the frame size based on desired handling rather than fit.

    I like scaled up head tubes because it forces us to set the frame up to be at its best when we use common popular parts.



    I've been around the block a few times, mostly ride frames i built, and i still can't look at a FS bike/frame and totally know what size to get or how it will ride without a test ride, and then riding it a few times to separate suspension behavior and frame geometry. To think otherwise is vanity or a testament to how good manufacturer size charts are.




    A tall head tube in isolation means nothing.
    "Things that are complex are not useful, Things that are useful are simple."
    Mikhail Kalashnikov

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: David R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,910
    Quote Originally Posted by mr_manny View Post
    If you wearen't happy with the height, I guess a negative rise stem would be the answer?
    Maybe back when you could run a 15* 150mm stem, but +/- 6* over 50mm is f-all really.

    At 183cm tall I run 23mm risers and a 10mm spacer on my L Knolly Endo (110mm HT), my bars are about the same height as the stack height on the Canyon. After riding a Turner with a similarly tall head tube and struggling with keeping the front on the ground while climbing steep stuff (not to mention the limited choice of flat bars out there) that HT length alone would be enough for me to write the Canyon off without a second thought. There's plenty of other good bikes out there, if you like the reach numbers but not the HT length then keep looking, if you like the tall HT then buy the Canyon. If you're in between M and L and looking to upsize then the tall HT may well be an issue.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    642
    I think that's where it'll really become an issue, when people try and "upsize". This trend might die off with newer models as manufacturers have started to lengthen their TTs generally and people start getting back onto the frame size designed for their height.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    112
    Quote Originally Posted by David R View Post
    At 183cm tall I run 23mm risers and a 10mm spacer on my L Knolly Endo (110mm HT), my bars are about the same height as the stack height on the Canyon. After riding a Turner with a similarly tall head tube and struggling with keeping the front on the ground while climbing steep stuff (not to mention the limited choice of flat bars out there) that HT length alone would be enough for me to write the Canyon off without a second thought.
    This is good info. Unless someone can tell us how hard it is to keep the front tire down while climbing steeps with a 2018 spectral (30% grade/15, or ideally more, with less than ideal traction, like loose over hard), I may have to write it off, unless I can find a test ride. It will depend on rider + bike fit, various other aspects of the bike geo, and technique of course, but since it has come up in the reviews, it seems like it could be a major weak point.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: One Pivot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    7,205
    My headtube is ~180mm. Its not a problem climbing steep stuff. Elbows down, pull towards your hips. I run a small spacer and low bars.

    I'd much prefer a shorter head tube, but I'd just increase my travel to bring the bars up anyway. Ends up a wash height wise.

    There's no way a 147mm headtube is stopping anyone from climbing anything.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: David R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,910
    Quote Originally Posted by One Pivot View Post
    There's no way a 147mm headtube is stopping anyone from climbing anything.
    Of course it's not going to make it impossible to climb steeper trails, there's ways around anything if you're a skilled rider. That doesn't change what I said though, the stack height of the Canyon would rule it out for me. Been there done that, I know what works for me and what doesn't.
    Others will have different preferences, that's cool too.

  17. #17
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    5,730
    Everyone is different and youll adapt to almost anything. Im tall with long limbs. I LOVE tall stack bikes.
    Just like a raindrop, I was born to fall.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vernondozier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    58
    Gosh I hope it is a trend, seems like tall head tube was always a main component in a bike fit for me personally. Always have to mess with spacers, stems, bars, and steer tube length to get my fit. In fact, I look for ht length and I think "stack" as well. I am old though, like it comfortable, not CC like...

Similar Threads

  1. Tall Rider + Tall Bike = Big Disadvantage on tight trail ?
    By Surfdog93 in forum XC Racing and Training
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 08-10-2016, 08:20 AM
  2. New book about tall stature, talks about cycling: Tall.Life
    By Tall Sam in forum Clydesdales/Tall Riders
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-28-2016, 01:36 PM
  3. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 09-10-2015, 02:02 PM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-20-2013, 11:19 PM
  5. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-17-2013, 02:37 PM

Members who have read this thread: 77

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

mtbr.com and the ConsumerReview Network are business units of Invenda Corporation

(C) Copyright 1996-2018. All Rights Reserved.