trek 69er ss sizing- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    132

    trek 69er ss sizing

    Bit of a subjective question really esp as ive ridden my mate's 19 inch frame a few times and thought it was a bit long with 100mm stem but what are most folk who are 5' 10 riding? Maybe a medium with a layback post would suit better, damn why didnt they make an 18.5?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    143
    I was in the exact same position as you. I am 5'10" but somewhat torso long with a 30" pant inseam. I went with the 19. Stock, it is a little long for me, I need to get the shorter stem, but once I do that it will be all good. Depends on what you are looking for, I am able to bomb the downhills pretty good with the larger frame, but climbing might be better on the size down. I like the taller head tube though and felt like it was always sliding my ass way off the rear when I tested the 17.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: boomn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    10,022
    Yep, nothing wrong with running a shorter than stock stem. With a 100m stem and a standard sweep bar my bike feels too long as well, but with 75mm stem it fits great. That 25mm difference in stem length is a actually larger than the difference in top tube lengths between most frame sizes. If you have an opportunity to try his bike with a slightly shorter stem that would be best. If you are going to get the bike from a shop see if they will help you out by letting you test it with a different stem.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    132
    just wish there was something in between, med is prob a bit short (havent ridden one for ages) and large is well a bit large. maybe 100mm stem and layback on med would give the best of both worlds

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    132
    c'mon peeps more responses! 2 sellers one with a med and one with a large, decisions decisions

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: boomn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    10,022
    Personally I don't think relying on a layback seatpost to add reach is the right way to go about it. If you need a layback post to get proper saddle to paddle position then do it, otherwise you should deal with the reach using the top tube length and stem length.

    Also regarding layback posts.... it would be worth finding out what seatpost comes with the bike. If by layback posts you are thinking of the Thomson you should know that is actually has less offset than many common seatposts with different clamp styles
    Last edited by boomn; 11-10-2009 at 11:53 AM.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    132
    the problem is a large 69er top tube is bout the same as an old rig large top tube, ie longer than id want but a medium 69er tt is same as a SMALL old rig tt so i think smaller bike with layback might be bit more fun than bit stretched out, neither is ideal to be fair.

    use a thomson layback on my ferrous so prob use a shim to start with if got a med. if got a large id use inline and stick a 70/80mm stem upfront instead of the 100 thats on there. With the 100 its just a bit too long really but id be worried a 70/80 might cock up the handling. as i said its not an ideal scenario and id prob be better off avoiding them but i just love em


    i reserve the right to complain how my 69er doesnt fit me in 6 months

  8. #8
    pap
    pap is online now
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    44
    I am also in the same boat as the two of you. I am also 5'-10". I ended up going with a Large. I was a little nervous going with that size but it seems to be working really well for me. I am also using a 100mm stem. Makes me think, maybe I was going with too small of frames before. An added bonus to the large is you get an extra bottle holder

    Pap

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    20
    I am about 5' 11" and could of gone either way:

    Medium for quick handling, j-hoping etc...

    Large for stability and...the above aforementioned skills came too, in time.

    I think Trek's sizing is a unique. Perhaps a "Large" ie 19.5 is really a "Medium Large" when compared to other companies sizes. To each his own.

    I too was hesitant to ge the large as I like a quick handling bike. But, with an aluminum (stiff as all get out) hardtail frame, and moderate length chainstays designed for 26" rear wheels you still get a pretty great handling bike that you can still "throw around" once you get used to it (like most anything else).

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    132
    yeah i think im going to hold out for a medium although someone has a large frame, post, seat clamp and king headset for 300 which is a pretty sweet deal

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.