Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2

    Fly Team 29er titanium sizing - 19" or 17.5"?

    I am 6ft with 34in inseam and avg arm length. Has anyone with similar measurements bought a Fly Team titanium 29er 19" bike and then realized it was to big for them, either in reach or stand-over? Or has anyone bought a 17.5" and thought maybe they should have gone with the 19"?
    Last edited by musmtrb; 11-23-2010 at 03:51 AM.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    4
    I'm basically the same size as you and I went with the 19". I'm hoping it works out, we'll see...

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2
    Yes! Please let me know if you think the reach is too long or the stand-over too high for you and maybe the 17" might have been a better pick. The bikes I've tried at the lbs with a 24"-24.5" effective top tube (Fly team ti 29er 19" is 24.5") seemed to long in the reach for me and they were usually 21" frame sizes. I like a slightly upright position with arms bent at elbows in a relaxed position. In-addition, on the bikesdirect website for the fly team ti 29er, there is a note to add .75" to stand-over (just below the "add to cart" button). This would bring the 19" stand-over to 31.15" if true. When you get your bike could you measure eff. top tube and stand-over (referencing bikesdirect geometry chart) and post . I would really appreciate that, thanks.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: globewyre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    62
    I am 6' with 32" pants inseam. I went with a 19" . My seat post is very high out the bike. If you have a 34 inseam leg room may be a problem.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ozhoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    47
    I'm 5'11" with a 33.5" inseam and have a 19". I went with the 19" because I prefer a 24.5" TT. To make it fit my riding style, I ended up going with a 410mm post, pulling all the stem spacers, changing out the 120 stem for a 100mm and flipping it to get the bars down.

    Standover height is an issue. If I were to do it all over again, I'd go with frame that has a bent TT. I've put loads of miles on the bike over all types of terrain and have yet to hit the boys but I'd still prefer to have more clearance.

    O

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: h2o-x's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    103
    Will one of you guys with a 19" measure the stand over height and tell us what size tires you are riding?

    Thanks.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ozhoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by h2o-x
    Will one of you guys with a 19" measure the stand over height and tell us what size tires you are riding?

    Thanks.
    Standover is 32" running 2.2 Geax Saguaros.

    O

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    760
    Quote Originally Posted by ozhoo
    I'm 5'11" with a 33.5" inseam and have a 19". I went with the 19" because I prefer a 24.5" TT. To make it fit my riding style, I ended up going with a 410mm post, pulling all the stem spacers, changing out the 120 stem for a 100mm and flipping it to get the bars down.

    Standover height is an issue. If I were to do it all over again, I'd go with frame that has a bent TT. I've put loads of miles on the bike over all types of terrain and have yet to hit the boys but I'd still prefer to have more clearance.

    O
    OP...for the record, standover will be tight with this frame. I am 6'1" and like to ride with the bars up around saddle height and stretched out. The Large is barely long enough for me. I run an offset Thomson post and a 130mm stem. I am long legged with 35" cycling inseam...size 34" pant inseam and NOT a lot of extra standover even with my long legs.
    Frame geometry for the Moto Fly is cloned from Gary Fisher. One option is you can reduce shock travel from 100 to 80mm...Rebas are adjustable internally with spacers to replicate the 80mm travel of the Fox shock on GF's...to lower standover.
    So..if you have shorter legs than mine, a Large will be tight for standover. I too run a 400mm Thomson post which is stuck out pretty far. Now...if you don't like to ride stretched out, get the 17.5". You may need a long seat post but should be able to find one to work.
    I couldn't ride a 17.5 because the bike would be way too short for me.
    Yes...this underscores why 29ers are many times offered with a bent top tube...standover is tight to derive enough seat tube length...but you won't find a better Ti hardtail value than the Moto Fly IMHO....great bike.

    A last note about reach. The reason I like to ride stretched out and require a long TT is because on a mtb, I don't like a lot of drop. Some riders prefer drop. More drop generally requires a shorter top tube for the same net reach to the handlebars. So your set up preference has a lot to do with what size frame you prefer. Dave Weins and Lance's bikes are pictured below. Dave Weins rides massive drop and Lance rides what I can a recreational setup...no drop and lots of horizontal reach which requires a larger frame size...he rides a Large and is 5'10"...note however his Trek is CF with contoured seat tube allowing for improved standover.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Fly Team 29er titanium sizing - 19" or 17.5"?-lances-mtb-2010-resize-ii.jpg  

    Fly Team 29er titanium sizing - 19" or 17.5"?-dave-weins-09-leadville-bike.jpg  


  9. #9
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,785
    I'm 5' 7" on a 15.5" Moto Fly 29 Ti. There's practically no extra standover for me, standing just in front of the saddle. My handlebars are higher than my saddle, but that's how it is for 29er hardtails with 100mm travel fork for shorter folk.

    The 17.5" would be on the small side for a 6' person, I'd imagine. From experience riding a GF Rig (17.5) that stretched me out more than I would've preferred, I'd say it'd be a tight fit. 19" would likely be the best choice, I'd imagine. I have a friend that's around that height and felt cramped on both my bikes.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    64
    I'm 5'7" as well - how do you like your Moto 29er, Varaxis? I've been thinking about getting one, but am a bit leary since I don't know how well they would fit me.

  11. #11
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,785
    Quote Originally Posted by dstedman
    I'm 5'7" as well - how do you like your Moto 29er, Varaxis? I've been thinking about getting one, but am a bit leary since I don't know how well they would fit me.
    It fits me okay except for the handlebar and saddle height issue. It needs quite a few upgrades to get just right.

    Handlebars, Ritchey 540mm width - I took it off before I even gave it a chance and upgraded to 660mm carbon risers to keep the weight around the same. I would've preferred flat bars, but couldn't find an inexpensive $60~ option around that width and weight.

    Seatpost, Ritchey 27.2 350mm - Too short for efficient pedaling, but around the height I like for semi-technical riding at minimum insertion (29.5" inseam). I rode it a half a dozen times, but I usually ride to the trails and my ass was getting sore on the road. If it were higher, more weight would be on my wrists. I upgraded to a carbon 400mm seatpost $90 (Easton EC90), but if I did it again, I'd consider the $60 J&L Ti one on eBay. The little markings on the back of the Easton is handy, the "2" mark is just above the circle part of the slot under the seat clamp for my road riding height. I drop it down to "3" for trail riding, and drop it all the way for technical stuff (doesn't go down too far before hitting the h20 mounts).

    Stem, Ritchey 110mm +/-6d - A bit too long for my tastes. 90, 70, 50 is more my style. I have 90mm with 6d drop ATM with a 0 setback post and reach seems spot on and seems to be stable for steep technical climbs which tolerates some rear wheel slip.

    Cranks, FSA Afterburner 170mm - I usually rode 175mm, but I've not really noticed any significant difference.

    Grips, Ritchey Foam - I prefer lock-ons. I went with Ergon GX-1 Leichtbau, but the downsides kind of make it not so great. Not cushy like Oury, my hand seems to have moved away from my controls, and my wrists still sometimes ache on some rides (no clue what causes it... only happened once or twice recently and then noticed the weather is getting bad).

    Other non-fit issues:

    Tires, Kenda Small Block 8 - terrible for the NY Catskills area. Once wet, it slips off rocks, leaves, everything. Rocks shredded the rear's sidewalls with a tiny bit of sidewall dmg up front.

    Wheels, Vuelta XRP Team - front not very strong. It got wobbly on me on a descent I went through slower than usual on, one I've ridden many times before. The rear is stiff and has a lot of engagement points... I can ratchet no prob to avoid pedal strikes. The rear tends to jump and fall into place and pinch flat a lot with 30-35psi.

    -- It's hard to find a sweet spot for tire pressure. The front does okay with under 30 psi, but the rear... I tried to upgrade to ghetto/stan's rim strips but sidewalls are too shredded. I just ordered a pair of Maxxis Ikon EXOs for $105 to help solve it. I'm still riding the wobbly front--bike shop got it straight as it could get and twisted some of the bladed spokes and recommended replacing it.

    You'll need pedals. I had some 747s that were 12 years old or so, but figured I'd upgrade since they were feeling a bit loose.

    Ride quality:

    - I don't feel the magic ti ride, coming from a Schwinn Homegrown Factory XT and GF Rig 29er SS (both alum bikes with relatively small tubing diameter--no larger than the Moto). It feels stiff, but doesn't accelerate like my bro's old Cannondale Killer V.

    - It descends worse than the Rig--not very stable; hard to keep it smooth; doesn't like to be "let go"; you need to pick lines (straight as possible) and commit and push and pull it to be "smooth" rather than "float". The Homegrown only did poorly on descents since I had some cheap tektro V-brakes on it and I couldn't "let loose", else I wouldn't be able to stop for turns and what not. Not sure why it handles so differently compared to the GF Rig, geo is similar except for almost 1-2" off the TT and wheelbase and longer travel fork.

    - The Reba fork tends to lose air if it compresses during lock-out (no remote pop-loc) or anywhere in between full open and lock-out. Make sure you get a shock pump for that. The brake dive seems much more pronounced; takes a few rides to get used to. I've had to change my habits--I don't use the brakes to slow down *just before* hitting bumps or turns; I slow early (not sure why, it gives me some frame of mind to be prepared I guess) and roll into them or pedal over/through.

    - When it hits a patch of sand, you get the feeling of being thrown over, since it slows down sharply.

    - The chain's too long from the factory. Need to take a couple links out else the chain will flap off the front rings onto the crankarm, even on the road, or shift from big to small on rocky descents.


    I recently moved to SoCal (Riverside) from NY catskills, and got puncture flats on each ride, even on road rides. I learned my lesson about riding through the brush now. The stock tubes come slick and thin and my new thicker powdered tubes even got punctured. Now I know why people say that turning the handlebar is bad (a habit I had from dodging bowling ball sized rocks)--lots of sand out here which the stock Fly29 doesn't like. Going to attempt Stan's Rim Strips tubeless with the Vuelta wheels once my Ikons come in and check out Sycamore Canyon.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    64
    Wow - thanks for all of the information!

  13. #13
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,785
    Seems my "instability" is might due to the wheels and tires. I had some more aggressive fat tires and some beefy wheels before.

    Another 29er rider reported the same thing: Light wheels too much of a good thing?

    I haven't read the whole thread, but it makes sense. I need something much beefier than SB8s for sure.

  14. #14
    Lucky Flyer
    Reputation: aaronutah2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    58
    Do you want a long seatpost and a low handlebar- smaller frame will handle more nimble.
    Do you want short seatpost, higher handlebar set more forward and more stable handling.
    I like a taller-longer frame. I don't mind steering a logging truck. I got a shorter stem to bring the bars back. Xl fly team ti @ 6' 2.7" tall

  15. #15
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,785
    I'd prefer the more stable bike over the nimble one. It's one reason you go for a 29er--to eat up obstacles much better and to perform better than a 26er HT on descents on such.

    Go for the bigger size for the longer wheelbase. Leave the nimble stuff for DJ, BMX, Trials, etc. Nimble bikes bounce off rocks more... which is a good thing if you like to use the bumps as a ramp to catch some air, but you'd be better off with a 26er if you like that. Get a shorter stem and wider handlebar for even more control.

    And GL getting a Ti 29er in stock. Demand is much higher than supply. Pre-order is your best bet.

Posting Permissions

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