Seat tube angle- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 32 of 32

Thread: Seat tube angle

  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,155

    Seat tube angle

    I am researching a new trail bike that I intend to keep for a while. I feel like I am doing myself a disservice not going with modern geometry
    eg. a steeper seat tube angle. Problem is, that discounts bikes like the Santa Cruz Tallboy and the Niner Jet 9 RDO just to name a few.

  2. #2
    Keep on Rockin...
    Reputation: Miker J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,859
    Steeper STAs are in place to "correct" the excessive sag that occurs on long travel bikes when pointed up hill. Short travel bikes sag relatively less so there's not much to correct.

    Also, shorter travel bikes are typically used on more "pedally" rides. Power transfer and in the saddle comfort on long pedally sections, IMO, is compromised by very steep STAs.

    All that said, even short travel bikes have STAs that have become steeper than we were seeing just a few years ago.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: minimusprime's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    808
    Demo bikes. I wouldn't buy a bike with a seat tube angle slacker then 74 degrees these days, but that statement comes from riding no less then 25 different modern/current bikes over the last 6 months. Not because I read a forum post by some random guy of unknown riding ability or experience or because i read some marketing lingo on a website.

    Some people really like steep seat tube angles and some other people don't care so much in either direction. As Miker J stated, on some short travel bikes it isn't as big of a deal (it still is for me on short travel bikes, but ymmv) and on some suspension designs that sit high in their travel, it isn't that big of a deal.

    The only way for you to know is to ride bikes. Do not purchase a bike just because it was cheap. Do not justify buying a bike without demo'ing it just because it's on sale. I can do that now, but only after I've ridden so many bikes that I have narrowed the geo numbers that fit my body with an accuracy of 5mm.

    Again, I am not some badass... this clarity and understanding of my body type and modern geo only came from riding all of the bikes.

  4. #4
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,285
    Quote Originally Posted by Miker J View Post
    Steeper STAs are in place to "correct" the excessive sag that occurs on long travel bikes when pointed up hill. Short travel bikes sag relatively less so there's not much to correct.

    Also, shorter travel bikes are typically used on more "pedally" rides. Power transfer and in the saddle comfort on long pedally sections, IMO, is compromised by very steep STAs.

    All that said, even short travel bikes have STAs that have become steeper than we were seeing just a few years ago.
    This.

    Steep STAs on short travel bikes are not helpful.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Death from Below.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    188
    Steeper seat tube angles had to happen with longer front centers on all bikes.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: minimusprime's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    808
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    This.

    Steep STAs on short travel bikes are not helpful.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    FWIW, completely disagree.... There are situations where they aren't quite as important, but I absolutely, could/would never make a blanket statement that they are not helpful on short travel bikes.

  7. #7
    Rollin 29s
    Reputation: isleblue65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    854
    As others have said, ride them. Ride for longer than an hour in different conditions. Ride your normal type of terrain. Ride flat sections and focus on pressure points like hands and saddle position.

    The Ripmo with 76 degree SP angle for example pushes the bottom bracket and cranks further back under the saddle. Especially on flat or slightly downhill riding thatís not steep enough to warrant dropping my seat post, this results (for me) in my upper body falling forward on my hands, resulting in a lot of hand pressure. Itís taken months to get used to the pressure, and I still switch between gripping the bars normally and thumbs on top of the bars to transfer the pressure points. Saying this, the handling and performance is far superior to my Jet-9, even though that bike is more physically comfortable to sit on.

    Thereís no way you can learn everything about a bike until you spend some significant saddle time. You may be able to clear a bike from your list based on initial impressions of handling that you donít like, but stay on the ones you do like for a while to evaluate how they feel after a few hours.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Whoever invented the bicycle deserves the thanks of humanity.
    - Lord Charles Beresford

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    293
    Quote Originally Posted by isleblue65 View Post

    The Ripmo with 76 degree SP angle for example pushes the bottom bracket and cranks further back under the saddle. Especially on flat or slightly downhill riding thatís not steep enough to warrant dropping my seat post, this results (for me) in my upper body falling forward on my hands, resulting in a lot of hand pressure. Itís taken months to get used to the pressure, and I still switch between gripping the bars normally and thumbs on top of the bars to transfer the pressure points.




    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Thats completely opposite of my experience. I had massive hand pain on the old bike with a flat handlebar. Bought a Ripmo and 30mm riser bar with it and I have not had one bit of pain since. Was it the steep STA and additional reach or the riser bar?

  9. #9
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,285
    Quote Originally Posted by minimusprime View Post
    FWIW, completely disagree.... There are situations where they aren't quite as important, but I absolutely, could/would never make a blanket statement that they are not helpful on short travel bikes.
    If you have very wide hips or abnormally short femurs, OK.





    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Death from Below.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    971
    It becomes more important the taller you are. I'm 6'7" and the slacker the seat tube angle, the more my weight is over the rear axle.

  11. #11
    Rollin 29s
    Reputation: isleblue65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    854

    Seat tube angle

    Quote Originally Posted by TooTallUK View Post
    It becomes more important the taller you are. I'm 6'7" and the slacker the seat tube angle, the more my weight is over the rear axle.
    True. Maybe this is the reason For my Ripmo hand pain. Im 6í4Ē which may mean more upper body length forward on the bars. I definitely had a much harder time keeping the front tire on the ground with the Jet 9, and with some of the other slacker SP bikes I demoíd such as the Hightower and Pivot Trail 429.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Whoever invented the bicycle deserves the thanks of humanity.
    - Lord Charles Beresford

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    154
    Quote Originally Posted by minimusprime View Post
    FWIW, completely disagree.... There are situations where they aren't quite as important, but I absolutely, could/would never make a blanket statement that they are not helpful on short travel bikes.
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    If you have very wide hips or abnormally short femurs, OK.
    I think it has less to do with travel and more to do with the other geometry of the bike. If you have a short travel bike with a 69* HTA and a short reach, you don't want a steep STA. But if you have a short travel bike with a 66.5* HTA and a long reach, you want a steeper STA. Those bikes didn't really exist years ago, now they do and you need the steeper STA. We're past the days of travel dictating geometry.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jeremy3220's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    1,580
    Quote Originally Posted by Yupstate View Post
    I think it has less to do with travel and more to do with the other geometry of the bike. If you have a short travel bike with a 69* HTA and a short reach, you don't want a steep STA. But if you have a short travel bike with a 66.5* HTA and a long reach, you want a steeper STA. Those bikes didn't really exist years ago, now they do and you need the steeper STA. We're past the days of travel dictating geometry.
    On the money. Stem length goes along with those differences also. On the shorter reach bike you'd probably be running a long stem which is going to shift your weight forward, especially if you're running a slammed stem. On a more modern aggressive hardtail the reach will be longer, the stem and bars probably higher, the stem shorter and probably shorter chainstays. That kind of hardtail or short travel FS will definitely benefit from a steeper STA.

  14. #14
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,285
    Quote Originally Posted by Yupstate View Post
    I think it has less to do with travel and more to do with the other geometry of the bike. If you have a short travel bike with a 69* HTA and a short reach, you don't want a steep STA. But if you have a short travel bike with a 66.5* HTA and a long reach, you want a steeper STA. Those bikes didn't really exist years ago, now they do and you need the steeper STA. We're past the days of travel dictating geometry.
    So, a 120mm bike run at 20% sag should have the same STA as a 160mm bike run at 35% sag?

    Despite the fact that those STAs, on a steep climb, will put the rider in VERY different positions relative to the BB?
    Death from Below.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    154
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    So, a 120mm bike run at 20% sag should have the same STA as a 160mm bike run at 35% sag?

    Despite the fact that those STAs, on a steep climb, will put the rider in VERY different positions relative to the BB?
    Less doesn't mean none, so I guess my question back to you would be; what are the HTA and reach measurements of those 120 and 160mm bikes?

  16. #16
    Barely in control
    Reputation: Schulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,459
    Well I run 25% sag on my 160mm bike and the climb mode on the shock makes it ride higher in the travel on climbs. 75 sta on the chart but I put a setback post so it's less. Never had a problem climbing; steep climbs are my favorite.

  17. #17
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,285
    Quote Originally Posted by Yupstate View Post
    Less doesn't mean none, so I guess my question back to you would be; what are the HTA and reach measurements of those 120 and 160mm bikes?
    Let's go with this:

    https://geometrygeeks.bike/compare/s...r-2018-medium/

    Intense Sniper Trail 2018 and Specialized Enduro 29 2019. Both in size Medium.

    I'd like someone to put forth a serious argument as to why the Intense should have a steeper STA than it does, taking into account the purposes of the two bikes and likely shock setups for each.
    Death from Below.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    154
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    Let's go with this:

    https://geometrygeeks.bike/compare/s...r-2018-medium/

    Intense Sniper Trail 2018 and Specialized Enduro 29 2019. Both in size Medium.

    I'd like someone to put forth a serious argument as to why the Intense should have a steeper STA than it does, taking into account the purposes of the two bikes and likely shock setups for each.
    Personally I'd be concerned the STA is too steep on that Enduro! The reach isn't very extreme for a size M nor is the HTA extremely slack. That's my point, it's not an all-or-nothing, one-size-fits-all situation here. You have to look at the geometry, TRAVEL :-), and suspension type all as a puzzle that needs the right STA as one of the pieces. Even the sag % isn't really the same on everything. As soon as you start pedaling up a hill your 35% sag DW-link bike isn't going to have you in the same place as your 35% sag Horst-link bike. As for the Sniper, I haven't ridden it but I think given all those pieces of the puzzle it's pretty dialed but could maybe benefit from a slight STA increase. Check YouTube for MTB Yum Yum, he HAS ridden the Sniper and specifically called out that he wouldn't have minded a steeper STA and he rides alot of bikes so he has a good base of comparison.

  19. #19
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,285
    Quote Originally Posted by Yupstate View Post
    Personally I'd be concerned the STA is too steep on that Enduro! The reach isn't very extreme for a size M nor is the HTA extremely slack. That's my point, it's not an all-or-nothing, one-size-fits-all situation here. You have to look at the geometry, TRAVEL :-), and suspension type all as a puzzle that needs the right STA as one of the pieces. Even the sag % isn't really the same on everything. As soon as you start pedaling up a hill your 35% sag DW-link bike isn't going to have you in the same place as your 35% sag Horst-link bike. As for the Sniper, I haven't ridden it but I think given all those pieces of the puzzle it's pretty dialed but could maybe benefit from a slight STA increase. Check YouTube for MTB Yum Yum, he HAS ridden the Sniper and specifically called out that he wouldn't have minded a steeper STA and he rides alot of bikes so he has a good base of comparison.
    Again, the funny thing about that is that I'm guessing the 74 degree STA, on a properly set up Sniper, is probably steeper than most of the other bikes MTB Yum Yum rides (despite their *steeper* STAs), on an actual climb.

    So, I have to wonder if his comments are based on reading a geometry chart, or his actual ride. I'm guessing that if he hadn't looked up the geometry beforehand, he would have had no clue, and no complaints.

    Also: he was riding with a guy in jeans. No offense to either of them, but I'm not going to base my opinion of a bike, how it climbs, or any changes that should be made to it, based on the commentary of a guy who was riding with a guy in jeans. I have nothing against riding in jeans, but it's indicative of the physical effort they were putting into riding, at least in the upwards direction: minimal.
    Death from Below.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    154
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    Again, the funny thing about that is that I'm guessing the 74 degree STA, on a properly set up Sniper, is probably steeper than most of the other bikes MTB Yum Yum rides (despite their *steeper* STAs), on an actual climb.

    So, I have to wonder if his comments are based on reading a geometry chart, or his actual ride. I'm guessing that if he hadn't looked up the geometry beforehand, he would have had no clue, and no complaints.
    That I couldn't comment on, but he seemed damn excited about that new Ripley he rode! (which has a 76* STA)

    One thing I can comment on with certainty is that I wish I got to ride all those bikes so I could give truth rather than opinion.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: JoePAz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    5,050
    Quote Originally Posted by minimusprime View Post
    FWIW, completely disagree.... There are situations where they aren't quite as important, but I absolutely, could/would never make a blanket statement that they are not helpful on short travel bikes.
    How steep is steep?

    Old days STA were 72. So going to 74 or 75 is not crazy for even short travel, but 76 and 77, or 78. Maybe too steep?

    Generally short travel bikes are expected to pedal well on flat ground or slight grades and corner well on flat ground too for short and long distances. As the travel gets longer the focus needs to be on steeper ups and steeper downs. This because you tend to pedal up and ride down.
    Joe
    '18 Specialized Epic 29", Vassago Verhauen SS 29", '13 Santa Cruz Solo 27.5", XC, AM, blah blah blah.. I just ride.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: targnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    4,883
    Who has their taint touching the saddle on descents!?

    STA makes do difference when heading down hill.

    When climbing, if you're a 'sit n spin' over 6ft in height rider - then STA will be a riding comfort factor.

    If you like to 'stand n mash' then STA again, shouldn't worry you too much.

    PS - I've never actually ridden a MTB on anything apart from 'Rail Trail' type fare ;-P

    'Born to ride!'
    "Mountain biking: the under-rated and drug-free antidepressant"

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: JoePAz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    5,050
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    Let's go with this:

    https://geometrygeeks.bike/compare/s...r-2018-medium/

    Intense Sniper Trail 2018 and Specialized Enduro 29 2019. Both in size Medium.

    I'd like someone to put forth a serious argument as to why the Intense should have a steeper STA than it does, taking into account the purposes of the two bikes and likely shock setups for each.
    The sniper is a "Modern Geo" XC bike. The Enduro is not the latest Geo like a Rimpo or even the new stumpjumper. My Epic in fact has a 74.75 deg STA and works fine for long rides.
    Joe
    '18 Specialized Epic 29", Vassago Verhauen SS 29", '13 Santa Cruz Solo 27.5", XC, AM, blah blah blah.. I just ride.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: minimusprime's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    808
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    Let's go with this:

    https://geometrygeeks.bike/compare/s...r-2018-medium/

    Intense Sniper Trail 2018 and Specialized Enduro 29 2019. Both in size Medium.

    I'd like someone to put forth a serious argument as to why the Intense should have a steeper STA than it does, taking into account the purposes of the two bikes and likely shock setups for each.
    If we are going to try and discuss seat tube in a vacuum, then yes, the sniper should 100%, for sure have a steeper seat tube angle. The sizing on the sniper puts the most commonly sized males in between sizes. In a size medium, it's ETT is 609 which is on the long side for most riders searching for a true medium. In contrast, their size XL is 660 which is too long for most riders in the 6'1" - 6'2" range, but too short for riders that are 6'3"+. Further compounding this issue, is the fact that their actual STA is rather slack, so a rider with long legs and a short torso, or one that is in between sizes, will be SOL with a massive ETT when they size up. So yes, one single change that I think could improve the sniper, would be steepening the seat tube angle. I think if they did this, they could squeeze an XXL into the lineup and truly support riders up to 6'6". Right now, I think their geo chart really only fits riders up to about 6'3", maybe 6'4".

    I own both a megatower and a giant trance 29. I am a 6'2" individual that rides XL sized bikes. I like an ETT around 650ish and a reach around 485-490. There is a very serious advantage in terms of position on the bike with a steeper seat tube angle that is noticeable for me and many other riders. The only place this isn't an advantage is in completely flat land pedaling, which out west, we don't do much of. Now, if I did do a lot of that or lived in the midwest, I'd likely be on a hardtail or short travel bike. For most of us however, we're either climbing or descending. We may spend a short amount of time fire roading or riding flat undulating terrain, but even then for me, there is no issue with a steeper seat tube angle. The knee over pedal spindle paradigm that was brought to mtb from road bike fitting, is phasing out in application, and academically as most modern mtb fitters are abandoning it.

    I digress... my anecdotal experience to answer your question is that my trance is nearly a perfect short travel bike. 66.5 hta, 480 reach, 652ETT, 74.5 ESTA. ALMOST because it would be perfect (for me) with a 75-75.5 seat tube angle.

    Buuuuttt... this is all subjective, and more importantly, it's not a number in a vacuum. All of the geo numbers play together to create a position on the bike that is specific to the intended riding style, rider preference and riding location. None of us are capable of making a blanket statement to the OP about a certain ESTA number. There could be biomechanical issues or limitations that dictate what a proper seat tube angle is for a person. There could simply be ergonomic factors that are impacting it... or it could simply be riding style, riding type and riding location that are dictating the desired fit.

    The only way to be sure what works for you, is to stop looking at geo charts and demo'ing bikes. Do yourself a favor and just go ride bikes, once you've had a chance to ride said bike. Come back, fire up geometry geeks and look at the numbers while you ponder what that particular bike felt like and what you liked about it. Only then can you start to hone in on what your need for your style and ride fantasy.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,093
    ^^^^This times a million. STA, HTA, front center, chainstay length, sag, linkage design, etc. all have an effect on how a bike will ride. These blanket statements by some people, who probably have never even ridden the bike they're discussing/trashing, are kind of pointless. The trend of shorter chainstays and longer fronts with slacker HA's kind of begs for steeper STA's to keep the balance proper. But it's still all a combination of all these factors. And it IS subjective. Everyone's not gonna agree nor should they feel compelled to.
    Yeti SB100
    Ibis Ripmo
    Ibis Ripley LS V3
    Ibis Ripley V4
    Ibis Mojo HD4
    Pivot 429SL
    Pivot LES SS
    Colnago C60 Disc

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jeremy3220's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    1,580
    Quote Originally Posted by targnik View Post
    Who has their taint touching the saddle on descents!?
    It's an XC technique. You pinch the tip of the saddle with your butt cheeks for more control. They call it "clipping in" I think.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Velorangutan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    257
    In 10 years we're going to look back and think what Odd bicycle geometry we had in 2019. Modern geometry will become vintage.

    Look at fork offsets. It was all about longer offset a few years ago. Now it's popular to have shorter offset.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: targnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    4,883
    Quote Originally Posted by jeremy3220 View Post
    It's an XC technique. You pinch the tip of the saddle with your butt cheeks for more control. They call it "clipping in" I think.
    Flats & baggies FTW!!

    'Born to ride!'
    "Mountain biking: the under-rated and drug-free antidepressant"

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jeremy3220's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    1,580
    Quote Originally Posted by Velorangutan View Post
    In 10 years we're going to look back and think what Odd bicycle geometry we had in 2019. Modern geometry will become vintage.

    Look at fork offsets. It was all about longer offset a few years ago. Now it's popular to have shorter offset.
    Yep, that happened in a bubble. There wasn't any reason they used longer offsets a few years ago. It's all just random trends.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,093
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    Also: he was riding with a guy in jeans. No offense to either of them, but I'm not going to base my opinion of a bike, how it climbs, or any changes that should be made to it, based on the commentary of a guy who was riding with a guy in jeans. I have nothing against riding in jeans, but it's indicative of the physical effort they were putting into riding, at least in the upwards direction: minimal.
    Spoken like a true roadie snob. That guy in the jeans was Tyler, who hauls ass up AND down the mountain. It happened to be cold AF that day and they were all giving him crap on Strava afterward for the jeans, but BFD, you can still ride hard/fast with jeans on. So you're negating somebody's opinion, who rides dozens of bikes a year and has a shit-ton of followers that rely on his judgment, cuz he was riding with a guy wearing jeans on a freezing cold day? ok...
    Yeti SB100
    Ibis Ripmo
    Ibis Ripley LS V3
    Ibis Ripley V4
    Ibis Mojo HD4
    Pivot 429SL
    Pivot LES SS
    Colnago C60 Disc

  31. #31
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,285
    Quote Originally Posted by BmanInTheD View Post
    Spoken like a true roadie snob. That guy in the jeans was Tyler, who hauls ass up AND down the mountain. It happened to be cold AF that day and they were all giving him crap on Strava afterward for the jeans, but BFD, you can still ride hard/fast with jeans on. So you're negating somebody's opinion, who rides dozens of bikes a year and has a shit-ton of followers that rely on his judgment, cuz he was riding with a guy wearing jeans on a freezing cold day? ok...
    Iím suggesting that the physical effort put into riding the bike was not what Iíd expect to be necessary to properly evaluate that kind of bike.

    Just like Iíd have a hard time accepting the opinion of someone evaluating an enduro sled, following a guy on an XC bike.

    Iím sorry I offended you with this assessment.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Death from Below.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,093
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    Iím suggesting that the physical effort put into riding the bike was not what Iíd expect to be necessary to properly evaluate that kind of bike.

    Just like Iíd have a hard time accepting the opinion of someone evaluating an enduro sled, following a guy on an XC bike.

    Iím sorry I offended you with this assessment.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Lol, nothing you could say would offend me. I don't value anyone's opinion that I've never met behind a keyboard enough to offend me. But not everyone needs to have bulging eyeballs at race pace to be able to evaluate a bike. In comfort fact, most people riding a Sniper Trail aren't gonna be standing and hammering up to go down Jacob's Ladder. In fact, most people would probably rather hear from riders that are closer to them in ability/fitness than somebody that only cares about every tenth of a second that it takes to get there, regardless of comfort, fun, etc.
    Yeti SB100
    Ibis Ripmo
    Ibis Ripley LS V3
    Ibis Ripley V4
    Ibis Mojo HD4
    Pivot 429SL
    Pivot LES SS
    Colnago C60 Disc

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 02-02-2019, 07:23 AM
  2. Slack Head Angle + Steep Seat Angle
    By motard5 in forum All Mountain
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 07-25-2012, 06:12 AM
  3. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-02-2012, 07:49 AM
  4. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 07-18-2006, 10:30 PM
  5. Is the top tube measurement relavent without seat tube angle?
    By kapusta in forum Bike and Frame discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-24-2005, 02:04 PM

Members who have read this thread: 200

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.