Retro set up - if u rode mtbs in the early 90's, comment!

I'm odd!

I'm 6'1" with a 36" inside leg and gibbon length arms. I have been told that my limb length should be fitted to a 6'7"+ bloke. Always have had fitting problems when it came to having bikes. Ended up going custom but remember my fist MTB a 18" Dale series 3 with an incredibly long post. Felt good on a short blast through the woods but as I got fitter and the rides got longer the aches and pains got sharper. Found comfort by going custom but also emptied the bank in the process. Early 90's saw me trying some Konas as well. the 20.5 Konas felt initially good as did the undiscovered Trek 990 with the True Temper ox3 frame. My bike is now designed as long distance cross country machine so isnt so lively in the woods but I remember well the short top tube and 150mm 0 degree rise stems I used to race with. Just completed a short ride through the Julian Alps in Slovenia and finally feel ready to trim that steerer to length.....

Never realy thought about it. Most comfortable bike I rode was my Dyna Tech Quantum, 22.5" top tube and 135mm stem.

Have always bought bikes on a basis of top tube length and nothing else.

MTB: Should be x length and y angle from seat clamp centre to centre of bars.
Road Bike: Matching X and Y but to middle of a broom handle balanced on the lever hoods.

This always felt right, don't know if I am wrong or not...

The most comfortable bike i've ever had was a 1990ish Scott Peak. It was a 17" and i'm 6'2".
But now, my 18" Rockhopper is feeling pretty good. I don't think it would hurt to be an inch smaller, just as long as the top tube is the length it is now it would be fine.
I reckon the length of the frame is more important that the height for a good ride.

Stick Legs":3nz79zwy said:

Never realy thought about it. Most comfortable bike I rode was my Dyna Tech Quantum, 22.5" top tube and 135mm stem.

Have always bought bikes on a basis of top tube length and nothing else.

Click to expand...

Same here, anything 71-72 / 72-74 with a TT of 22.5 - 23".. Stick a 135mm stem on it and ya rockin'..

scant":3opeawlv said:

I dont know where the small frame, super long stem idea came from but it was a bad 1! get the "reach" from toptube (IE correct size frame) not stem. shorter stems just handle better. production set ups have changed for a good reason, they handle better. no argument.

Click to expand...

Have to agree.

Although I'm not that tall (a tad over 6') if I jump on anything with an effective TT of less than 23.5" it feels too small and a stem longer than 120mm makes for a bad ride in the technical stuff.

Running a lot of post is perfecetly acceptable but there is a point where it looks down right wrong - see readers bikes for some examples