Long Reach Mid-Travel 29er- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 68 of 68
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    372

    Long Reach Mid-Travel 29er

    Hi all,

    About 2 months ago an injury put me off the bike. Healing has been slow, and it may be another few months until I'm back riding. I've decided to try selling my current ride (Canfield Riot) as I won't be able to ride for a while longer.

    I've always had the desire to try out a super-long bike. I've really been liking the look of the Pole Stamina 140, especially since I can get a frame with an EXT Storia with the presale discount for 3.1k.

    I've also been leaning towards the XL (which seems to be close to Pole's other larges), with a 440mm seat tube, 520mm reach, 78 degree seat tube, and 64 degree head angle. My height is 5'10".

    Those numbers seem about prefect to me, but I was wondering if there was anything else out there with similar numbers that would be worth comparing. The Stamina platform is still pretty new (both in terms of suspension and frame construction), so I'm not 100% percent on the 140. I'm looking to stick to framesets with a budget of around 3k, so Yetis are out of the question. Alloy or carbon doesn't really matter to me, the geometry comes first.

    I'll be using the bike for mostly East Coast all-around riding, so no huge descents - mostly rooty/rocks trails with lots of ups and downs. However, in about a year I most likely with be spending a good while in the Seattle area, so bigger riding may be in my future. I used to really focus on outright pedaling efficiency, but after improving my riding I found that maintaining grip is in most cases more useful than pure efficiency.

    Thanks for any recommendations!

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jeremy3220's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    1,998
    SC Hightower in XXL (515mm reach)

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: David R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,361
    Seat tube might be a bit long, and not steep enough, for someone 5'10" wanting 500mm+ reach.

    Nicolai are the other brand that springs to mind if you want those sorts of numbers. The new Knolly Warden has 500mm reach for the large frame, but you said mid travel and 29ers so, yeah.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    372
    Yeah, unfortunately the Hightower just has way too long of a seat tube to be usable for me. My Riot is 483mm and I would not want to go over that. The Nicolai Saturn 14 does look like a nice contender, the XL has the same reach as the Stamina 140, with a slacker seat tube, longer seat tube, and steeper HTA.

    It is a bit cheaper, though not much, especially with the EXT on the Pole vs the Fox on the Nicolai. Definitely still one to consider, though. I do really like the way both bikes look, super nice welds and clean frame design on the Nicolai and CNC work across the entire frame on the Pole.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    170
    The short reach was one of the reasons l moved on from my Riot. Check out the process 134. It has very similar geometry with a longer reach and more bb drop.

    Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    372
    I do like Kona's stuff, but the large's reach is much shorter at 475mm and the XL's seat tube is on the long side at 485mm. Thanks for the recommendation either way.

  7. #7
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    6,487
    That reach — and the associated wheelbase — for a 5’10 dude riding East Coast singletrack? OK ...
    Just like a raindrop, I was born to fall.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    372
    I've been pretty happy with the Riot, I though if I were to try something else I might as well go off the deep and see how it is. Might as well satiate my curiosity rather than continue to wonder if I'd prefer a longer bike. Demos really don't make it out to my area, so I don't have a good way to try a significantly longer bike.

    If the industry keeps progressing as is, I'm sure stuff like the Pole or Nicolai will be trendy sooner then later. If I don't like the geo I'll just sell the frame and go back to something more conservative.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    562
    How about the Mondraker Foxy? 495mm reach and 470mm seat tube on the L. I don't think you're going to top Pole/Nicolai though if you want something extreme.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    372
    The Foxy doesn't look bad, though you're right, it doesn't look like there's much more extreme out there than Pole and Nicolai. I just saw Nicolai offers semi-custom geo on their frames, that also looks like something worth investigating.

  11. #11
    Wanna ride bikes?
    Reputation: *OneSpeed*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    6,904
    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix864 View Post
    I do like Kona's stuff, but the large's reach is much shorter at 475mm and the XL's seat tube is on the long side at 485mm. Thanks for the recommendation either way.
    I'm reluctant to comment on these threads when someone is attempting to go way outside the box, in your case on sizing. You're 5'10", you should be on a Medium or Large.

    I have the Kona Process 134 in XL, killer bike. I'm 6'3" and have a 210mm dropper with room to spare. My thought is if you were on the properly sized frame you could fit a big dropper too. Sizing up that much is unnecessary on modern geo IMO. And the wheelbase will be huge.

    You sound like you are willing to intentionally go too far, so good luck. I don't see what you have to gain though?

    Long Reach Mid-Travel 29er-img_8809.jpg

    Long Reach Mid-Travel 29er-img_8813.jpg
    Rigid SS 29er
    SS 29+
    Fat Lefty
    SS cyclocross
    Full Sus 29er (Yuck)

    Stop asking how much it weighs and just go ride it.

  12. #12
    Ride More - Suffer Less
    Reputation: TraxFactory's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Posts
    2,289
    Quote Originally Posted by *OneSpeed* View Post
    I'm reluctant to comment on these threads when someone is attempting to go way outside the box, in your case on sizing. You're 5'10", you should be on a Medium or Large.

    I have the Kona Process 134 in XL, killer bike. I'm 6'3" and have a 210mm dropper with room to spare.
    What dropper you running?

    Love my 9.8 200.



    Sent from my moto z3 using Tapatalk

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    108
    Geometron baby!


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  14. #14
    Wanna ride bikes?
    Reputation: *OneSpeed*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    6,904
    Quote Originally Posted by TraxFactory View Post
    What dropper you running?
    OneUp. It's great for the money, but if you're looking for top of the line, BikeYoke. I've ridden two demo bikes with the Revive post and it blew my mind. It's the best post I've used.
    Rigid SS 29er
    SS 29+
    Fat Lefty
    SS cyclocross
    Full Sus 29er (Yuck)

    Stop asking how much it weighs and just go ride it.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    372
    Quote Originally Posted by *OneSpeed* View Post
    I'm reluctant to comment on these threads when someone is attempting to go way outside the box, in your case on sizing. You're 5'10", you should be on a Medium or Large.

    I have the Kona Process 134 in XL, killer bike. I'm 6'3" and have a 210mm dropper with room to spare. My thought is if you were on the properly sized frame you could fit a big dropper too. Sizing up that much is unnecessary on modern geo IMO. And the wheelbase will be huge.

    You sound like you are willing to intentionally go too far, so good luck. I don't see what you have to gain though?



    Wow, a 210mm dropper is massive. Lots of spacers under the stem too. I know with the 483mm seat tube on the Riot I easily fit a 150mm post with 10mm or so of post sticking out. The Stamina 140 has got a 440mm seat tube, so I would expect to be able to fit a 200mm OneUp post no problem. One thing I really do like about the Pole is that the actual STA is very steep (77 degrees), so no matter how long your post is the STA will remain steep. I personally quite like a steep STA for where I ride - it really helps to keep the front planted on steep climbs. I can't say I'm looking to gain anything specific or to address a certain problem I've been having, just looking to try something entirely new vs the incremental changes most bikes have over the Riot.

    Quote Originally Posted by cachaulo View Post
    Geometron baby!


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Thanks for the recommendation, I'll definitely look into them.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    2,171
    The 153 is on my radar. It has really short stays, just a little longer than the Riot. With the 66° HT angel the bike is kept shorter in wheel base which I prefer for East Coast stuff. But the reach is longer. In the larger sizes.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    372
    Quote Originally Posted by Cerberus75 View Post
    The 153 is on my radar. It has really short stays, just a little longer than the Riot. With the 66° HT angel the bike is kept shorter in wheel base which I prefer for East Coast stuff. But the reach is longer. In the larger sizes.
    Both the 153 and 134 look to be really similar in terms of geo, kind of strange that they share the same HTA, 66 degrees on something like the 153 is on the steeper side today. I've also been looking at the Ripmo AF, overall another nice looking bike with great value, but the geo is not quite the same as the Stamina 140.

  18. #18
    Wanna ride bikes?
    Reputation: *OneSpeed*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    6,904
    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix864 View Post
    Both the 153 and 134 look to be really similar in terms of geo, kind of strange that they share the same HTA, 66 degrees on something like the 153 is on the steeper side today. I've also been looking at the Ripmo AF, overall another nice looking bike with great value, but the geo is not quite the same as the Stamina 140.
    The 153 is 3 (?) years old I think, the 134 is brand new and much more modern in pedaling platform, tire clearance, heal clearance, etc. Even cable routing is more refined.
    Rigid SS 29er
    SS 29+
    Fat Lefty
    SS cyclocross
    Full Sus 29er (Yuck)

    Stop asking how much it weighs and just go ride it.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    2,171
    Quote Originally Posted by *OneSpeed* View Post
    The 153 is 3 (?) years old I think, the 134 is brand new and much more modern in pedaling platform, tire clearance, heal clearance, etc. Even cable routing is more refined.
    The 134 would be a sure win if the stays were longer. Probably ok for most but I'm 5'6.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    372
    Quote Originally Posted by Cerberus75 View Post
    The 134 would be a sure win if the stays were longer. Probably ok for most but I'm 5'6.
    If the stays were shorter? If I'm reading the geo chart correctly aren't they only 2mm longer than the 153?

  21. #21
    Wanna ride bikes?
    Reputation: *OneSpeed*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    6,904
    Quote Originally Posted by Cerberus75 View Post
    The 134 would be a sure win if the stays were longer. Probably ok for most but I'm 5'6.
    If what stays were longer? The chainstays? Why is the current configuration a bad thing for someone who is 5'6"? I would think the shorter the better for someone who rides a small or medium.

    Usually as frame sizes get bigger the chainstays get longer, depending on the manufacturer. The Process doesn't have overly short chainstays IMO. I'm 6'3".
    Rigid SS 29er
    SS 29+
    Fat Lefty
    SS cyclocross
    Full Sus 29er (Yuck)

    Stop asking how much it weighs and just go ride it.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    2,171
    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix864 View Post
    If the stays were shorter? If I'm reading the geo chart correctly aren't they only 2mm longer than the 153?
    Hmm, I read somewhere they were 440mm. But if 427 I might have to get one!

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    2,171
    Quote Originally Posted by *OneSpeed* View Post
    If what stays were longer? The chainstays? Why is the current configuration a bad thing for someone who is 5'6"? I would think the shorter the better for someone who rides a small or medium.

    Usually as frame sizes get bigger the chainstays get longer, depending on the manufacturer. The Process doesn't have overly short chainstays IMO. I'm 6'3".
    Not an issue with smaller wheels butI prefer 29er bikes. But if the stays are 17" or more I have a hard time getting the front wheel up for drops and hops. In the slower speed stuff I ride.

  24. #24
    Wanna ride bikes?
    Reputation: *OneSpeed*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    6,904
    Quote Originally Posted by Cerberus75 View Post
    Not an issue with smaller wheels butI prefer 29er bikes. But if the stays are 17" or more I have a hard time getting the front wheel up for drops and hops. In the slower speed stuff I ride.
    The chainstays on the 134 measure 427mm on all models, 27.5 and 29, carbon or aluminum.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cerberus75 View Post
    The 134 would be a sure win if the stays were longer. Probably ok for most but I'm 5'6.
    This is why I was confused, you said you wanted LONGER chainstays?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cerberus75 View Post
    Hmm, I read somewhere they were 440mm. But if 427 I might have to get one!
    When in doubt, go to the source. https://www.konaworld.com/platform_process.cfm
    Rigid SS 29er
    SS 29+
    Fat Lefty
    SS cyclocross
    Full Sus 29er (Yuck)

    Stop asking how much it weighs and just go ride it.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    2,171
    Quote Originally Posted by *OneSpeed* View Post
    The chainstays on the 134 measure 427mm on all models, 27.5 and 29, carbon or aluminum.



    This is why I was confused, you said you wanted LONGER chainstays?



    When in doubt, go to the source. https://www.konaworld.com/platform_process.cfm
    Haha, I wanted to type weren't longer than the 153. See how that was confusing. Do you think 150mm fork would work well? Puts it in the Fugitive LT range which would be perfect for my area.

  26. #26
    Wanna ride bikes?
    Reputation: *OneSpeed*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    6,904
    Gotcha, yes a 150 would work great.
    Rigid SS 29er
    SS 29+
    Fat Lefty
    SS cyclocross
    Full Sus 29er (Yuck)

    Stop asking how much it weighs and just go ride it.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    58
    XL Ibis Ripley is 470mm seat tube 500mm reach. Ripmo is 470/493, AF is 470/495

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    372
    Quote Originally Posted by KennyWatson View Post
    XL Ibis Ripley is 470mm seat tube 500mm reach. Ripmo is 470/493, AF is 470/495
    I really do like the pricing on the Ripmo AF, what I just don't get is the massive jump in seat tube length between the large and the XL. 419 to 470 is ridiculous. If the XL's seat tube was shorter it would be a top contender for me.

  29. #29
    Wanna ride bikes?
    Reputation: *OneSpeed*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    6,904
    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix864 View Post
    I really do like the pricing on the Ripmo AF, what I just don't get is the massive jump in seat tube length between the large and the XL. 419 to 470 is ridiculous. If the XL's seat tube was shorter it would be a top contender for me.
    It's pretty simple really, the XL is designed for people taller than you. Besides, the Ripmo is not a long bike in the Reach department. I thought that was a deal breaker?
    Rigid SS 29er
    SS 29+
    Fat Lefty
    SS cyclocross
    Full Sus 29er (Yuck)

    Stop asking how much it weighs and just go ride it.

  30. #30
    Short-Change-Hero
    Reputation: gregnash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    6,412
    Quote Originally Posted by *OneSpeed* View Post
    It's pretty simple really, the XL is designed for people taller than you. Besides, the Ripmo is not a long bike in the Reach department. I thought that was a deal breaker?
    I am still really confused as to why someone 5'10" is looking for something with such a long reach??? While I understand that the east coast riding is rooty and chundery, how does that reach translate when you are trying to go up/down that stuff?? I would feel like it is attempting to pitch me way forwards. Can you explain (@phoenix864) what it is that you feel needs to be adjusted with such a long reach?

    I can understand not wanting something that has your hands by your knees, I get it I have a way longer torso and arms than legs. For me the reach of the GG The Smash ends up being perfect and for many has felt on the "long" side. I normally ride a large in most bikes so doing something like what you are suggesting and jumping up to a XL or XXL would feel absolutely ridiculous, like the short 10yr old kid riding his 6'+ tall dad's road bike.

    Question is, have you actually tried demoing something with such a long reach in the past? I know you are on the bench right now on the injured list but just curious.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,661
    So let me get this right: You have a Canfield Riot, a very short reach bike with ultra short chainstays AND you want to get a Pole, a very long reach bike with very long chainstays?

    So I'm not gotta tell you're wrong, but seriously, you might want to shoot for a bike that bridges the difference between a super short bike and a super long bike.

    Then there's the East Coast riding thing, where the trails are tight, bitchy, short ups and short downs, speed and stability are less important than agility and flickability, a place where shorter bikes are the rule.

    Yeah, so, it's nice to dream, but I'd get a bike that won't actually suck for where and what you ride, something like the Kona 134 or my fav, the Guerilla Gravity Trail Pistol(a).

    FYI, Seattle riding is not the place to get a super long bike either .... just saying.
    Guerilla Gravity Shred Dogg
    Fezzari Signal Peak (For Sale)
    Pivot Shuttle (wife's)

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    372
    Quote Originally Posted by gregnash View Post
    I am still really confused as to why someone 5'10" is looking for something with such a long reach??? While I understand that the east coast riding is rooty and chundery, how does that reach translate when you are trying to go up/down that stuff?? I would feel like it is attempting to pitch me way forwards. Can you explain (@phoenix864) what it is that you feel needs to be adjusted with such a long reach?

    I can understand not wanting something that has your hands by your knees, I get it I have a way longer torso and arms than legs. For me the reach of the GG The Smash ends up being perfect and for many has felt on the "long" side. I normally ride a large in most bikes so doing something like what you are suggesting and jumping up to a XL or XXL would feel absolutely ridiculous, like the short 10yr old kid riding his 6'+ tall dad's road bike.

    Question is, have you actually tried demoing something with such a long reach in the past? I know you are on the bench right now on the injured list but just curious.
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    So let me get this right: You have a Canfield Riot, a very short reach bike with ultra short chainstays AND you want to get a Pole, a very long reach bike with very long chainstays?

    So I'm not gotta tell you're wrong, but seriously, you might want to shoot for a bike that bridges the difference between a super short bike and a super long bike.

    Then there's the East Coast riding thing, where the trails are tight, bitchy, short ups and short downs, speed and stability are less important than agility and flickability, a place where shorter bikes are the rule.

    Yeah, so, it's nice to dream, but I'd get a bike that won't actually suck for where and what you ride, something like the Kona 134 or my fav, the Guerilla Gravity Trail Pistol(a).

    FYI, Seattle riding is not the place to get a super long bike either .... just saying.
    It sounds like it may be best to not bother going with quite so much reach. I was basing my sizing off Pole's other bikes, where the XL Stamina 140 is closer to a large Stamina 180 or Evolink 140. I have puttered around on a XL and L Process 153 in a parking lot and on some stair drops, unfortunately I was unable to take either on the trail.

    Shops around me only really stock Salsa, Trek, and Specialized, so trying out longer stuff is pretty hard to come by. My main reason for being interested in the longer reach is because there was a significant difference in feel between my Riot and the XL Process. In the parking lot, the L Process didn't feel too far off in terms of size.

    I've been pretty satisfied with my Riot, so I though if I were to sell it I might as well move to something significantly different. Otherwise, I might just gain 15-20mm of reach, loose a degree off the head and seat angle, and length the chainstays by 20mm. Pretty small changes in the scheme of things. With the Pole, I gain 80mm of reach, loose 2.5 degrees off the head angle, and gain 1.6 degrees on the seat angle - much more significant changes. That said, if those changes would only be negative, perhaps it would be best to just stick with the Riot.

    Thanks for all the advice, it's good to have this discussion before I drop change on a new frame, rather then after.

  33. #33
    Wanna ride bikes?
    Reputation: *OneSpeed*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    6,904
    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix864 View Post
    Otherwise, I might just gain 15-20mm of reach, loose a degree off the head and seat angle, and length the chainstays by 20mm. Pretty small changes in the scheme of things. .
    I'd argue that 20mm anywhere on your bike is a HUGE amount.
    Rigid SS 29er
    SS 29+
    Fat Lefty
    SS cyclocross
    Full Sus 29er (Yuck)

    Stop asking how much it weighs and just go ride it.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Salespunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    5,744
    I have gone through most of the sizing progression as an average size rider @5'10". I go way back so think sub 400 mm reach bikes in the 90's, but more recently a Nomad 3 which had a "long" reach at 445 mm and "steep" SA at 73*. Riding that bike showed what a difference the geometry could make on steep/rough climbs. The amount of energy required to keep the front wheel down was significantly less than my previous setups (Mojo HD, Intense Tracer, etc). From there I kept going longer/steeper with very good results. 445>460>475 and SA 73>74>76 are the numbers so far. My experience shows nothing but neutral/positive outcomes in every situation. Even tight technical switchbacks are not an issue. Body position is significantly better since you feel more balanced in the wheelbase. As a side note, I am currently on a SJ Evo as my every day driver which is a 475 reach, 445 chain stays and 63.5 HA.

    For the OP, why not take the risk on the Pole? They are in such high demand that resale should be very good. I have yet to see a single negative review anywhere. Just understand it is going to take a month or two to adapt your riding style. As long as you are open to that I say go for it. One thing I would really recommend would be to go practice turns somewhere that has a hard base with a loose top. Think DG paths, baseball diamonds, etc. Then just practice your turns while changing your body position from front to back. You will figure out very quickly where you should be on the bike and this is actually a great drill for anyone on any bike.

    For those that say it won't be good for East Coast style riding, I would argue it is a place where it will excel. The long wheelbase and slack HA will keep the rider from getting pitched over the front in the rocks. You can stay in a neutral position in almost every situation rather than having to ride the back wheel which takes away power and control.

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    2,171
    Quote Originally Posted by Salespunk View Post
    I have gone through most of the sizing progression as an average size rider @5'10". I go way back so think sub 400 mm reach bikes in the 90's, but more recently a Nomad 3 which had a "long" reach at 445 mm and "steep" SA at 73*. Riding that bike showed what a difference the geometry could make on steep/rough climbs. The amount of energy required to keep the front wheel down was significantly less than my previous setups (Mojo HD, Intense Tracer, etc). From there I kept going longer/steeper with very good results. 445>460>475 and SA 73>74>76 are the numbers so far. My experience shows nothing but neutral/positive outcomes in every situation. Even tight technical switchbacks are not an issue. Body position is significantly better since you feel more balanced in the wheelbase. As a side note, I am currently on a SJ Evo as my every day driver which is a 475 reach, 445 chain stays and 63.5 HA.

    For the OP, why not take the risk on the Pole? They are in such high demand that resale should be very good. I have yet to see a single negative review anywhere. Just understand it is going to take a month or two to adapt your riding style. As long as you are open to that I say go for it. One thing I would really recommend would be to go practice turns somewhere that has a hard base with a loose top. Think DG paths, baseball diamonds, etc. Then just practice your turns while changing your body position from front to back. You will figure out very quickly where you should be on the bike and this is actually a great drill for anyone on any bike.

    For those that say it won't be good for East Coast style riding, I would argue it is a place where it will excel. The long wheelbase and slack HA will keep the rider from getting pitched over the front in the rocks. You can stay in a neutral position in almost every situation rather than having to ride the back wheel which takes away power and control.
    I upsized my Riot and cut the seat tube. Slammed the stem and use riser bars. So my reach is 440mm, I'm 5'6" with a long torso. I actually find getting the front wheel up easier than when my reach was 421mm on same model bike when I want too and it stays planted when I want it to. There is a point that the reach will go to far and you're stuck rolling drops. I don't think long reach is an issue on the East Coast tighter trails, but wheel base is more of the problem.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    372
    Yeah, the wheelbase on the Pole is definitely getting up there. My main reason for trying it is to go with something massively diffenet then what I have. That said, what would be the best second option? Process 134 and Ripmo seem to be pretty highly rated across the board. Onespeed - I probably am understanding how much 2 cm affects reach, unfortunately I've had a hard time getting out and trying bikes in the 475-490 range. LBSs near me really don't stock much interesting to try.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: KRob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,069
    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix864 View Post
    I really do like the pricing on the Ripmo AF, what I just don't get is the massive jump in seat tube length between the large and the XL. 419 to 470 is ridiculous. If the XL's seat tube was shorter it would be a top contender for me.
    The Ripm AF in XL is the one I thought of as well. STA is a little slacker than you specified at 76 (still pretty steep though), but the ST length is actually shorter than your Riot at 470.

    I also wonder about your requirements given your height and riding terrain (twisty, tight, up and down east coast riding). To each his own, but doesn't sound like a good match. Definitely demo something with those numbers on your local terrain before buying.

    Edit/disclaimer: I haven't ridden in East Coast conditions much at all. I did ride a Fezzari LaSal Peak (pretty long reach, 78 deg HA, and long wheel base) on some pretty tight and twisty SW Utah trails and was surprised at how well it handled that stuff. So what Salespunk says makes sense.
    I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth...
    Isaiah 58:14

    www.stuckinthespokes.com

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    8,275
    The direction you're going is going to put a ton more weight on your hands.

    I had a Riot, never had a problem- tried a Ripley V4- cause hand/wrist pain- sold it.

    I definitely notice a difference in my area between bikes with 47''-48'' WB and something with a 45'' WB. I can't imagine riding something with 50''+ WB through our woods.
    Last edited by TwoTone; 3 Weeks Ago at 05:17 AM.
    Ripley LS v3
    OG Ripley v2 handed down to son

  39. #39
    I live to bike
    Reputation: Jwiffle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,356
    A large Reign 29er might fit the bill.
    Stop in at Element Sports. www.elementsport.com
    Get Out! Have Fun!

  40. #40
    Wanna ride bikes?
    Reputation: *OneSpeed*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    6,904
    Quote Originally Posted by Jwiffle View Post
    A large (insert bike here) 29er might fit the bill.
    Fixed
    Rigid SS 29er
    SS 29+
    Fat Lefty
    SS cyclocross
    Full Sus 29er (Yuck)

    Stop asking how much it weighs and just go ride it.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tkblazer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,467
    I’m 5’9” and was riding a medium riot, but it was a little short for me even with a 50mm stem and 780 bars. I probably should have sized up to a large frame. I have about five rides so far on my medium stamina 140 with a 35mm stem and the fit feels really good. I spent three days riding in st George and it was nice to not have to lean forward on steep climbs even compared to the riot which still has a steep sta. It is way more composed and stable on longer downhills, but still has pop and playfulness. I still need to figure out how much sag to run and am swapping tires around to find a combo I like

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dude!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    2,182
    Quote Originally Posted by tkblazer View Post
    I’m 5’9” and was riding a medium riot, but it was a little short for me even with a 50mm stem and 780 bars. I probably should have sized up to a large frame. I have about five rides so far on my medium stamina 140 with a 35mm stem and the fit feels really good. I spent three days riding in st George and it was nice to not have to lean forward on steep climbs even compared to the riot which still has a steep sta. It is way more composed and stable on longer downhills, but still has pop and playfulness. I still need to figure out how much sag to run and am swapping tires around to find a combo I like
    Love to hear more about the Stamina 140! Bike piques my interest.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    2,171
    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix864 View Post
    Yeah, the wheelbase on the Pole is definitely getting up there. My main reason for trying it is to go with something massively diffenet then what I have. That said, what would be the best second option? Process 134 and Ripmo seem to be pretty highly rated across the board. Onespeed - I probably am understanding how much 2 cm affects reach, unfortunately I've had a hard time getting out and trying bikes in the 475-490 range. LBSs near me really don't stock much interesting to try.
    I'm looking into if the 134 can be long shocked like the 153. Depending on where you ride "East Coast" in Pisgah and the Frederick Watershed I like 140/150 on the Riot. But its overkill for something like Patapsco. I think I'd like the 134 with a 150 fork and over shock for big stuff.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    94
    Quote Originally Posted by Jwiffle View Post
    A large Reign 29er might fit the bill.
    I would agree. Reach on L is 493, which is bigger than most brands, and seat tube is only 464mm.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    2,171
    You ride Ptap? I just rented the Evil Offering. Its capable enough for Pigha but fun and can boost of small features (I hate the term poppy) in Dupont. Dupont is a lot like Ptap just longer climbs and down hills.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    8,275
    Quote Originally Posted by Cerberus75 View Post
    You ride Ptap? I just rented the Evil Offering. Its capable enough for Pigha but fun and can boost of small features (I hate the term poppy) in Dupont. Dupont is a lot like Ptap just longer climbs and down hills.
    Where did you rent one around here?
    Ripley LS v3
    OG Ripley v2 handed down to son

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    2,171
    Quote Originally Posted by TwoTone View Post
    Where did you rent one around here?
    I'm on vacation in WNC I don't know were in MD you can rent on. My wife demoed the new Hightower. Since Santa Cruz is set up here today. The Offering feels a little more efficient the HT feels better plowing through stuff. But the difference is subtle.

    The new Ripley doesn't sag enough for such a steep STA IMHO.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix864 View Post
    The Foxy doesn't look bad, though you're right, it doesn't look like there's much more extreme out there than Pole and Nicolai. I just saw Nicolai offers semi-custom geo on their frames, that also looks like something worth investigating.
    The Foxy has the long geo w/o going overboard on BB height and HA, while also being very efficient and also very light. It's what I ride.

    What it doesn't have going for it is value. In the end I paid a couple of hundred extra for what I consider a superior frameset and built the rest of the bike to my liking so the extra frame cost is no biggie imo.

    Heard of too many issues both secondhand and firsthand with Poles to consider one but I do dig what they have going on.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    8,275
    Quote Originally Posted by Cerberus75 View Post
    I'm on vacation in WNC I don't know were in MD you can rent on. My wife demoed the new Hightower. Since Santa Cruz is set up here today. The Offering feels a little more efficient the HT feels better plowing through stuff. But the difference is subtle.

    The new Ripley doesn't sag enough for such a steep STA IMHO.
    I jumped on a new closeout V3 for $1700 since I unloaded the V4, but still interested in trying some other bikes that strike a good compromise between 'old' and 'new' geo. Learning more an more how all the numbers play together. Riot has 77 STA but never bothered my hands/wrist- the V4 with a 76 STA killed them. All I can come up with it the longer reach and TTL which puts you more leaned over position when seated- so more weight.
    Ripley LS v3
    OG Ripley v2 handed down to son

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    372
    TKblazer - Love to hear more about the Stamina 140 as well. Obviously it's one of the bikes that has my interest piqued right now.

    Cerberus75 - Yes, I make it out to Ptap as much as I can - Fairland and Ptap is probably 99% of my riding. The Offering looks interesting, but the seat tube is rather long (470 for the large). I can't quite see a clear edge over the Ripmo AF.

    Jwiffle - I'm actually rather intrigued by that Giant. Pretty reasonable bike all around, and actually aesthetically looks half decent. If the rear brake rub has been fixed then it's definitely one on my short list. Seat tube is longish at 464, but it might just be short enough to squeeze a 200mm dropper.

    Suns PSD - the Foxy is definitely a nice looking bike, but for the money I think a Ripmo AF or the Trance might be a better option.

    TwoTone - The hand pressure issue is definitely a problem. If I could ride, I would seek out whatever longer bikes LBSs had in stock to see if I experience the same thing. However, since I can't ride for the foreseeable future I need to think about how to mitigate it.

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    372
    I was poking around the Geometron website and took a closer look at the G1. It's got far more travel than what I want, but the geometry looks to be pretty nice with a seriously slack HTA: 62.5 degrees! Pole actually doesn't seem to have gone overboard with the 64 degree HTA on the Stamina 140. I checked the G1's pricing and was pretty surprised: $3850 for the frame alone. While it's a high quality frame and a high quality shock, that's crazy for what still is a welded alloy frame.

    At this point I've narrowed down my list to about 4 bikes: on the more conservative end the Ripmo AF, then the Process 134, Reign 29, and then the Stamina 140.

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Salespunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    5,744
    Quote Originally Posted by TwoTone View Post
    The direction you're going is going to put a ton more weight on your hands.

    I had a Riot, never had a problem- tried a Ripley V4- cause hand/wrist pain- sold it.

    I definitely notice a difference in my area between bikes with 47''-48'' WB and something with a 45'' WB. I can't imagine riding something with 50''+ WB through our woods.
    This is patently false. Next gen geometry actually puts significantly less pressure on your wrist and hands when done correctly. It is true that stretching the reach alone will put more weight on your hands, but a steeper SA puts you farther over the front wheel and shortens the TT when seated. When standing you are balanced between the wheels without having to exaggerate your body position to the rear of the bike when descending.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Salespunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    5,744
    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix864 View Post
    I was poking around the Geometron website and took a closer look at the G1. It's got far more travel than what I want, but the geometry looks to be pretty nice with a seriously slack HTA: 62.5 degrees! Pole actually doesn't seem to have gone overboard with the 64 degree HTA on the Stamina 140. I checked the G1's pricing and was pretty surprised: $3850 for the frame alone. While it's a high quality frame and a high quality shock, that's crazy for what still is a welded alloy frame.

    At this point I've narrowed down my list to about 4 bikes: on the more conservative end the Ripmo AF, then the Process 134, Reign 29, and then the Stamina 140.
    Curious why the SJ Evo did not make the list? 140/150 bike, 63.5 HA in low setting and 475 reach on an S3 (large equivalent) . The reach could be longer for riders over 5'10" for sure. Hopefully they will make an S4 and S5 sometime soon like they have with the Enduro.

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    8,275
    Quote Originally Posted by Salespunk View Post
    This is patently false. Next gen geometry actually puts significantly less pressure on your wrist and hands when done correctly. It is true that stretching the reach alone will put more weight on your hands, but a steeper SA puts you farther over the front wheel and shortens the TT when seated. When standing you are balanced between the wheels without having to exaggerate your body position to the rear of the bike when descending.
    It's not patently false. That's the thing, most of these steep STA frames are also increasing the TTL at the same time. I mentioned in another thread, I have ridden larges forever and with the new crop of bike I'd be looking at medium- he's talking about going to XL frames as 5'10 person. The top tubes are longer even with the steep STA.

    The V4 Ripley had a 1.2'' longer Top Tube and 3/4'' longer reach., that why it bothered me and the Riot didn't.
    Ripley LS v3
    OG Ripley v2 handed down to son

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Salespunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    5,744
    Quote Originally Posted by TwoTone View Post
    It's not patently false. That's the thing, most of these steep STA frames are also increasing the TTL at the same time. I mentioned in another thread, I have ridden larges forever and with the new crop of bike I'd be looking at medium- he's talking about going to XL frames as 5'10 person. The top tubes are longer even with the steep STA.

    The V4 Ripley had a 1.2'' longer Top Tube and 3/4'' longer reach., that why it bothered me and the Riot didn't.
    You are comparing completely different bikes and the geometry on the Ripley v4 is not progressive at all. In addition the Riot has a freakishly short TT measurement that would be very uncomfortable for most people.

    Why don't we instead look at the previous and current gen Hightowers;

    HA 66.5 vs 65.5 (not really that progressive)
    SA 73.4 vs 76.7 (pretty good)
    Reach 443 vs 473 (standard now)
    TT 626 vs 618

    So the Reach grew by 30 mm, but the TT shrank by 8 mm.

    Some bikes will show a small increase in TT by a few mm. On a size L Pole Stamina with a 500 mm reach (5'10" starting height recommendation) has a TT of 630 mm which is only 4 mm longer than a size L previous gen Hightower with a 445 reach.

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    372
    For the SJ Evo - I just didn't feel that it was anything special. 475 reach, 450 seat tube, 75.6 STA, 450 ST length, $1700 alloy frame - nothing really special besides the crazy slack 63.5 HTA. In addition to that, reading PB's suspension analysis further turned me off the frame. For $1900, the Ripmo AF has similar numbers (besides the HTA), comes with a nicer shock (DVO Jade vs DPX2), and has a better suspension layout. Plus it's not a Specialized.

    TT vs reach looks to be a good way to estimate how much weight might be on my hands based on the geo chart. The Riot does has a ridiculously short TT, probably due to the steep STA and not terribly long reach. The L Stamina 140's TT is right in line with other bikes (despite its longer reach), the XL's is about 20mm longer.

    Side note - did Ibis slightly change the Ripmo's suspension for the Ripmo AF in order to make it function better with coil shocks? I remember reading that the Ripmo was not approved for use with coil shocks. The Ripmo AF has 2mm more suspension travel and a degree slacker HTA, so it seems Ibis may have made more changes than just copying the carbon version in alloy.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    8,275
    Quote Originally Posted by Salespunk View Post
    You are comparing completely different bikes and the geometry on the Ripley v4 is not progressive at all. In addition the Riot has a freakishly short TT measurement that would be very uncomfortable for most people.

    Why don't we instead look at the previous and current gen Hightowers;

    HA 66.5 vs 65.5 (not really that progressive)
    SA 73.4 vs 76.7 (pretty good)
    Reach 443 vs 473 (standard now)
    TT 626 vs 618

    So the Reach grew by 30 mm, but the TT shrank by 8 mm.

    Some bikes will show a small increase in TT by a few mm. On a size L Pole Stamina with a 500 mm reach (5'10" starting height recommendation) has a TT of 630 mm which is only 4 mm longer than a size L previous gen Hightower with a 445 reach.
    I was trying to keep in the context of the OP who is 5'10'' saying he wants to go to XL frames- you may disagree but I think it's a bad idea.
    Ripley LS v3
    OG Ripley v2 handed down to son

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Salespunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    5,744
    Quote Originally Posted by TwoTone View Post
    I was trying to keep in the context of the OP who is 5'10'' saying he wants to go to XL frames- you may disagree but I think it's a bad idea.
    Sodyy I missed the part where he said XL at 5'10". Agreed it will probably be too much at that point.

    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    372
    My main reason for looking at the XL Stamina 140 is because Pole's other frames in size large seem to be similar to the XL 140. The Stamina 180 large has 510 reach, 645 stack, and 420 seat tube. The large Evolink 140 has 510 reach, 640 stack, and 480 seat tube.

    The large Stamina 140 has 500 reach, 608 stack, and 420 seat tube. With it's shorter reach and way lower stack the large Stamina 140 will definitely feel smaller than the large Stamina 180 or Evolink 140. The XL Stamina 140 has a stack of 618 with a reach of 520 - I would expect it to feel closer to Pole's other size large frames.

    I'm not sure why Pole felt the need to do high stacks on all their frames and then drop the Stamina 140's stack down massively, to the point of being on the low side of other similar bikes. The S3 SJ Evo has a stack of 623. The large Ripmo AF has a stack of 629.

    What is very weird is that the Stamina 140's head tube is not especially short - 120mm on the large and 135 on the XL. That is way longer than the S3 SJ Evo's 105mm head tube. However, both the L's and XL's stack is really low. Maybe a mistake in the geo chart?

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tkblazer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,467
    I think the point you are missing is the different a-c lengths on each bike you are comparing. The stamina 180 is designed to run a 180mm form where as the 140 is designed to run a 140mm with the option to run up to a 160mm fork. The evolink 140 is also designed to run a 160mm fork so final stack height will depend on the fork you run. Also effective top tube length is a better measure for fit on these newer geo bikes if you are trying to figure out seated fit. At 178cm you are on the upper end of a medium and that’s what Leo rides. You could go for a large if you do a lot of high speed trails and want the stability. In the end, compare what you have now to what you have tried and decide from there.

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dude!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    2,182
    Bike fit and handling...

    I have owned and ridden a plethora of the newer bikes. FYI..I am 5' 8.5".

    This may or may not be obvious. I find there are three types of geometry - shortish old school geometry, intermediate, and new long and low.

    Shortist old school - more rearward body position, this is most bikes folks discuss. In general, I find this geometry too short for me these days, but there are few bikes that are longer and more comfortable but still ride like more old school. Ibis Ripley V4 and Druid are good examples. They are easy to ride without much thinking as it is easy to weight the front and rear wheel and maintain traction. They tend to be playful. For me, the Ibis Ripley V4 - feels like 29er BMX bike.

    Intermediate sized bikes (Evil Offering, Yeti SB130, SB140, SC bikes) - I actually find these difficult to ride. I have to actively think about my riding position and weighting the front end in corners and steeps. I think a lot folks grabbing these bikes or bikes with a relative sizing in this class may encounter difficulty riding these bikes. Though longer and transforming your body position to more of forward position - they are not long enough and find they are blurring the lines between old and new.

    very long bikes (Specialized Enduro, Pole, etc) - The Enduro is so much easier to ride and feels more balanced. Riding it is more natural and comfortable and I wouldn't have expected this based on riding the intermediate size bikes. I am riding this bike more and more on my pedaling trails because of its comfortable riding position and liking the long geometry with no downsides in cornering.

    I find I can ride the Ripley V4 and Enduro back to back with no major adjustment in my comfort. The Druid feels small even compared to the Ripley V4. In general, I can fit most of the bikes in the saddle without too much issue. Out of the saddle, I am in a different position because of my position in finding the balance point which is associated with differing front center affects their respective handling.

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    372
    TKblazer - that is true, 180 fork on the 180 will raise the stack. Though even if I assume that the geo chart for the Stamina 140 was done with a 140 fork, adding 20mm gives 628 for the stack on the large, still 10mm lower than the Evolink 140. The XL stack would be in line, though.

    Interesting thought on the TT - I'll also start looking closer at the TT numbers as well. I may just be overly set on an XL Stamina 140, but to be fair the reach isn't much longer than Pole's other size larges, the stack is about in line if not less, the seat tube is plenty short, and the top tube isn't ridiculously long (L Evolink 140 has a TT of 644, XL Stamina 140 has a TT of 650). In addition, the XL Stamina 140 is not too much longer than other bikes - the L Reign 29's TT is 640 and the L Ripmo is 632.

    Dude! - Interesting thoughts on bike length - this is kind of what is tempting me to try a longer frame.

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dude!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    2,182
    Quote Originally Posted by Phoenix864 View Post
    TKblazer - that is true, 180 fork on the 180 will raise the stack. Though even if I assume that the geo chart for the Stamina 140 was done with a 140 fork, adding 20mm gives 628 for the stack on the large, still 10mm lower than the Evolink 140. The XL stack would be in line, though.

    Interesting thought on the TT - I'll also start looking closer at the TT numbers as well. I may just be overly set on an XL Stamina 140, but to be fair the reach isn't much longer than Pole's other size larges, the stack is about in line if not less, the seat tube is plenty short, and the top tube isn't ridiculously long (L Evolink 140 has a TT of 644, XL Stamina 140 has a TT of 650). In addition, the XL Stamina 140 is not too much longer than other bikes - the L Reign 29's TT is 640 and the L Ripmo is 632.

    Dude! - Interesting thoughts on bike length - this is kind of what is tempting me to try a longer frame.
    Thanks! I am really interested in the Stamina 140 owing to my experience with the 2020 Enduro. Since the 2020 Enduro is longer and more travel -ts hard to separate some of the ride characteristics. I would love to ride a similar geometric version of Enduro with less travel and the Stamina 140 is the closest bike to this notion.

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Salespunk View Post
    This is patently false. Next gen geometry actually puts significantly less pressure on your wrist and hands when done correctly. It is true that stretching the reach alone will put more weight on your hands, but a steeper SA puts you farther over the front wheel and shortens the TT when seated. When standing you are balanced between the wheels without having to exaggerate your body position to the rear of the bike when descending.
    I just want to 2nd this. Old geo bikes are awful actually.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    8,275
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    I just want to 2nd this. Old geo bikes are awful actually.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
    Depends on your riding, I'll take the BMX bike with big wheels over the plow bikes any day.
    Ripley LS v3
    OG Ripley v2 handed down to son

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by Salespunk View Post
    This is patently false. Next gen geometry actually puts significantly less pressure on your wrist and hands when done correctly. It is true that stretching the reach alone will put more weight on your hands, but a steeper SA puts you farther over the front wheel and shortens the TT when seated. When standing you are balanced between the wheels without having to exaggerate your body position to the rear of the bike when descending.
    You're ignoring the position of the pedals relative to the seat, though. Imagine a bike with a 45 degree seat angle, the pedals would be way out in front of you like you're in a lazyboy recliner. No weight on your hands at all.

    Now go to the other extreme and consider a 120 degree seat angle with the pedals way behind you. You'd be topped way forward.

    Biomechanically, your pelvis angles as needed for your legs to work properly with the pedals. Steeper sta tips your pelvis forward towards the bars and that has a tendency to tip your whole upper body forward along with it.

    That happens regardless of TT length. So the sensation of greater hand pressure with deeper seat tube angles is real, especially when on flatter terrain.

    Personally I find the best way to fight this is with more stack height.

    I'm 5'11" with a long torso and ride a L ripmo AF and a L latest version chromag rootdown. The rootdown has a 76 degree sta before fork sag, so effectively the seat tube angle feels very steep on flat ground. It gave me lots of wrist pain at first. 25mm of spacers and 35mm rise bars made all the difference. I run about the same on the ripmo. I did not need such crazy bar height to feel comfortable on my xl Bronson v2 (which actually had the same reach as my current 2 size L bikes but a 73.5 STA (160 fork).

    At any rate I'm of the opinion that the fact that the vast majority of bikes in size L, meant for riders around 6'0" +/- a couple inches have about 475mm of reach is not a coincidence. I worked out that was a good reach for me back when I bought my Bronson, which is why back then I was sizing up.

    Long story short - if the steep STA bikes are giving you wrist/hand pain, try more stack.

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    2,171
    Quote Originally Posted by KennyWatson View Post
    You're ignoring the position of the pedals relative to the seat, though. Imagine a bike with a 45 degree seat angle, the pedals would be way out in front of you like you're in a lazyboy recliner. No weight on your hands at all.

    Now go to the other extreme and consider a 120 degree seat angle with the pedals way behind you. You'd be topped way forward.

    Biomechanically, your pelvis angles as needed for your legs to work properly with the pedals. Steeper sta tips your pelvis forward towards the bars and that has a tendency to tip your whole upper body forward along with it.

    That happens regardless of TT length. So the sensation of greater hand pressure with deeper seat tube angles is real, especially when on flatter terrain.

    Personally I find the best way to fight this is with more stack height.

    I'm 5'11" with a long torso and ride a L ripmo AF and a L latest version chromag rootdown. The rootdown has a 76 degree sta before fork sag, so effectively the seat tube angle feels very steep on flat ground. It gave me lots of wrist pain at first. 25mm of spacers and 35mm rise bars made all the difference. I run about the same on the ripmo. I did not need such crazy bar height to feel comfortable on my xl Bronson v2 (which actually had the same reach as my current 2 size L bikes but a 73.5 STA (160 fork).

    At any rate I'm of the opinion that the fact that the vast majority of bikes in size L, meant for riders around 6'0" +/- a couple inches have about 475mm of reach is not a coincidence. I worked out that was a good reach for me back when I bought my Bronson, which is why back then I was sizing up.

    Long story short - if the steep STA bikes are giving you wrist/hand pain, try more stack.
    This has been my experience as well. You can get the bars to far that higher stack wont fix, but most the time raising the bars will help.

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    2,171
    So the wife and I have been testing a lot of bikes. She just bought a used rental Evil Wreckoning. After trying all the new bikes her reasoning was it peddles just as well as everything she tested but on a 15 mile ride her hands and wrist feel fresh. The other bikes she didn't gel with.
    The STA was the slackest we tried.

Similar Threads

  1. Any mid/long-travel 29er deals?
    By DETarch in forum Where are the Best Deals?
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 09-10-2019, 11:13 AM
  2. Rigid fork for a mid/long travel hardtail?
    By rusty904 in forum Bike and Frame discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-20-2017, 05:01 AM
  3. Mid/Long travel 29er size small.
    By Cerberus75 in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 11-13-2016, 09:00 AM
  4. Short travel 29er or mid travel 27.5?
    By bikerfisher11 in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-29-2015, 09:48 AM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-03-2014, 05:25 PM

Members who have read this thread: 302

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

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.