Sizes for Fantom 29Pro- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 16 of 16
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: xor.io's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    6

    Sizes for Fantom 29Pro

    Hello,

    I need advise for the sizing of 2x Fantom 29Pro.
    My height is 5'10'', inseam 34 in.
    Suggested fit by calculator competitivecyclist.com is:
    Standover Height Range 32.1 - 32.8 inches (Which I think is tough)
    Virtual Top Tube Length 23.8 - 24.4 inches

    I'm thinking of 17'' Fantom 29Pro. Have been riding Scott Scale 70 M size, which is seams like 17.3'' center to top and it was just a bit smaller that I wanted it to be.


    My wife is:
    5'5'', inseam 30.7 in
    suggested by calculator:
    Standover Height Range 29.3 - 29.9 inches
    Virtual Top Tube Length 21.8 - 22.2 inches

    Because of the effective top tube length we are thinking about 13'' Fantom 29Pro, while by standover 15'' is 29in and it might work.

    Please advise!

  2. #2
    AZ
    AZ is offline
    banned
    Reputation: AZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    19,198
    Size by ETT lengths.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: xor.io's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    6
    Just ordered 13" 2010 29Pro SL and 17" 2011 29Pro.
    Hope it will fit.
    Good-bye... and hello... as always!
    Victor

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: SuperJETT's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    540
    My wife is 5'6" and rides a 15", with the original long stem and has plenty of standover. I know you already ordered, but I'd possibly think about changing the order if it hasn't shipped already.
    KHS
    Motobecane
    Fisher
    Kona

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: xor.io's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by SuperJETT View Post
    My wife is 5'6" and rides a 15", with the original long stem and has plenty of standover. I know you already ordered, but I'd possibly think about changing the order if it hasn't shipped already.
    Thanks.

    Got sizing suggestions from BD this morning (asked them on Monday): 13 and 17 -)

    The differences between 13" and 15" are:
    1. Seat tube 2" (not relevant due to seat posts)
    2. EFFECTIVE TOP TUBE LENGTH 0.2" (0.5 cm)
    3. WHEEL BASE 0.11" (3mm)
    4. Stand over 31mm = 1.2" 'cause of top tube angle

    So the only real diff is the 0.2" cockpit length and 1.2" bigger stand over which will not hurt.

    Anyway, just got the shipment notice.
    I think I will not regret the sizing. It's mountain bike overall and a bit smaller is better then a bit bigger. I'll post update once I'll test it.
    Good-bye... and hello... as always!
    Victor

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: SuperJETT's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    540
    With those small differences, you're probably right.

    You're probably dead-on with the 17" for you. I'm 5'10" as well and my wife's 15" is a little on the small size, but I can swing it so a 17" would be my size too.
    KHS
    Motobecane
    Fisher
    Kona

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: xor.io's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    6

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by SuperJETT View Post
    With those small differences, you're probably right.

    You're probably dead-on with the 17" for you. I'm 5'10" as well and my wife's 15" is a little on the small size, but I can swing it so a 17" would be my size too.
    Yepp, I used 2005 Scott Scale 70 M
    I've found only latest geometry:
    17.3" seat tube and it's been just a bit smaller then I wanted for regular XC, but have been a hair smaller to great in AM and technical trails.
    This is 29er, so I think it will fit better, specially because Scott measure horizontal to seatpost line
    23.0" see line C


    and seams like moto measure to the projection to the seat tube top according to their small image and it is 23.6"
    see C2





    For the 13" - I also asked katalinagirl (5'6" on 13" 29PRO SL) there is her response https://forums.mtbr.com/showpost.php...&postcount=321

    Therefore, I think (hope) we are fine. -)

    Can't wait for the bikes, I want'em NOW! hehe.
    Good-bye... and hello... as always!
    Victor

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1

    Sizing Question

    Quote Originally Posted by SuperJETT View Post
    My wife is 5'6" and rides a 15", with the original long stem and has plenty of standover. I know you already ordered, but I'd possibly think about changing the order if it hasn't shipped already.
    I know this forum is a little old, but I am wondering if you could tell me your wife's inseam. Mine is 29 and am worried I wont have enough stand over room on the 15". Also, could you tell me what you mean by "plenty" of standover. Really appreciate any response. Thanks.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    18
    [QUOTE=xor.io;8098395]
    My height is 5'10'', inseam 34 in./QUOTE]

    interesting, i am 5'10" also, 32in inseam without shoes (but i tend to ride my saddle a bit higher and more forward position), and i was a bit afraid that i will face some troubles with the height of the seat-tube and seat-post.

    can you post a picture or yours with the saddle adjusted? how far does the saddle-post go into the seat-tube? (and the length to the top of the saddle?)

    i am thinking about the 19", as i prefer to have my saddle position a bit more forward and dont want to have a to short frame. i prefer going uphill so leaning more forward isnt a disadvantage.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    8
    I'm 5'9 with a 31 inch inseam and I ride the 15" but I prefer a smaller bike and the top tube was about the same as my Trek Fuel. If I was you I'd get the 17", and you'll be replacing the seat post no matter what, it's extremely short 250mm I think. I run with a 400mm at I have it as high as it can go. I'm afraid if you got with the 19 you'll feel like it's a boat!

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by dcmielec View Post
    I'm 5'9 with a 31 inch inseam and I ride the 15" but I prefer a smaller bike and the top tube was about the same as my Trek Fuel. If I was you I'd get the 17", and you'll be replacing the seat post no matter what, it's extremely short 250mm I think. I run with a 400mm at I have it as high as it can go. I'm afraid if you got with the 19 you'll feel like it's a boat!
    I'm 5'9" with a 31" inseam and I ride the 2010 15" fantom pro29 as well. Only thing I changed was the seatpost as well, went with a 400mm with 25mm layback for some saddle adjustability. So far I've put 50 trail miles on her an run the saddle as far back as possible. I'm still in the saddle when other people are standing on climbs Having the saddle so far back puts a little more of my 170Lbs on the rear tire on climbs.

    I would have picked the 17" frame, but all they had available when I ordered was 15" and 19". 19" is too big for me and the 15" frame ETT was only 1/2" difference. So far I'm glad I went with the smaller frame. The cockpit is cozy, but not too small. The small frame handles very nicely.

    Hope you enjoy yours as much as I've enjoyed mine so far

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    54
    5'4 with a 29" inseam and I too have the '10 15" Pro29. I like sitting a touch stretched so I went to a 5* stem with flat bar and a Thomson set back seatpost (an extra .66") and it's perfect. Love this bike... Really can't think of another upgrade I want to do until something breaks.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    302
    Appreciate any help I can get here. I'm settled on the Fantom 29 SL Pro. I'm a little over 5'9" with a 33 inch standover. I'm thinking the 17.5" frame is right but the 15.5" might also work. Do these bikes run a little big? I ride a 55 road bike if that helps.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: SuperJETT's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    540
    My wife rides a 15" from last year (I guess they changed the sizing by .5") and I'm 5'10" (ride a 54cm cross bike) so based on how I feel on her 15", I'd say you will want the 17.5".

    You can probably make either one work.
    KHS
    Motobecane
    Fisher
    Kona

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    302
    Quote Originally Posted by SuperJETT View Post
    My wife rides a 15" from last year (I guess they changed the sizing by .5") and I'm 5'10" (ride a 54cm cross bike) so based on how I feel on her 15", I'd say you will want the 17.5".

    You can probably make either one work.
    Thanks for the help. In comparing the sizing charts for the 2012 vs the 2011, the 15.5 is actually closer to the 2011 17 than the 15. ETT is about half an inch shorter but stand over and overall geometry are about the same. The 2012 is obviously a completely different frame. Does anyone own a 2012? It's a bit confusing.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    302
    Quote Originally Posted by SuperJETT View Post
    My wife rides a 15" from last year (I guess they changed the sizing by .5") and I'm 5'10" (ride a 54cm cross bike) so based on how I feel on her 15", I'd say you will want the 17.5".

    You can probably make either one work.
    Thanks for the help. In comparing the sizing charts for the 2012 vs the 2011, the 15.5 is actually closer to the 2011 17 than the 15. ETT is about half an inch shorter but stand over and overall geometry are about the same. The 2012 is obviously a completely different frame. Does anyone own a 2012? It's a bit confusing.

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.