Norco Aurum Sizing advice

[chocko]

As with almost every bike I purchase I seem to sit between medium so large and looking for a bit of advice from Aurum owners out there. Norco don't seem to have a guide on thier site so I am a little in the dark.

I thought I was settled on medium carboom Aurum but now having 2nd thoughts. I am about 178cm and have read a few reviews stating that large may suit a rider of my height a bit better.

Comparing the reach and effective top tube to my large Banshee Rune (2015) it's a bit shorter.

Rune ETT - 610mm
Rune reach - 441mm

Aurum ETT - 571mm
Aurum reach - 413mm

So just curious if anyone else has agonised over sizing of the current Aurum range could offer a little of advice?

 

[padams10003]

I'm 182cm and have a M 2014 Aurum which is a good fit.

Though looking at the specs the M 2014 Aurum has a reach of 421mm and a ETT of 617mm so not sure how much help that is.

 

[jarrod839]

Hi

Sizing on bikes these days is alot different to a few years ago. Best thing is to have a sit on a large and medium and compare the two. Frames have become a bit more slacker and stems have become shorter.
Also need to take into consideration your riding style if u enjoy throwing the bike around alot and popping off everything then go a medium as will be more playful but a large will be less playful but be more stable and controlled through the rough stuff.

I am 180cm and have just came off a medium YT TUES onto a large banshee legend and even though the banshee is less playful it smashes the rough stuff better and is more stable which suits my riding style better.

 

[chocko]

Thanks guys, appreciate the feedback.

I was kinda leaning towards a large as I am certainly not entering any whip contests and need all the stability I can get!

I also read the original nsmb review which I cannot ignore: http://nsmb.com/norco-aurum-c7-1-review/

The wheelbase (1245mm on the size large) created a nice base of support and the cockpit (Reach 432mm) gave me all the space I wanted to move about without making radical weight shifts fore and aft. But I have to admit that if I was any taller, the size large (the largest Aurum Norco produce) would likely to be too small. I’m 5’10” and I wouldn’t ride a size smaller, and I don’t know how anyone much taller would get on with the Aurum.

I realise these guys are pro's but its a pretty good indication from someone way more experienced than me.

 

[DJR]

If the sizing is like other brands you are probably right between an M and an L - hopefully you can find a shop that has both and try them. As other posters have said, M for more playfulness and tighter handling in tight features eg. switchbacks, L for more stability.

One thing to remember with the Aurum is the chainstay length gets longer as you step up in sizes, whereas a lot of brands have the same chainstay length - it's only 10mm between M and L but that will make a somewhat noticeable difference to the feel (the shorter chainstay will feel more playful/poppy, and the longer less so and more planted ). They don't publish chainstay length but Rear Centre which is effectively the same thing.

Personally looking at the geometry chart and comparing with my L size glory (i'm 183cm) i'd be leaning towards the M personally but you might still want the L e.g. if you have longer arms than normal

 

[chocko]

Thanks mate

I rolled around the carpark on a medium and as soon as I stood up and got into riding position I felt like I was too far forward and cramped. Even looking at where my knees where in relation to the handle bars when sitting down made me think I need the extra length (thats what she said). My wingspan is a little out of proportion to my height so its possible that is playing a part in me feeling cramped.

Im sure medium wouldnt be a terrible fit but I think I will benefit from the extra cockpit space and stability.

Thanks for the help guys, I really hope the large feels right!

 

[hazza6542]

I've ridden a medium on track and it felt great, but car park ride on a large felt a lot better. I'm 6'2" and I would choose the large just from the car park test.

 

[chocko]

Just in case anyone is going through the same thing:

I've spent a lot of time on the large now and for me it's the right size. I really appreciate the extra length (that's what she said) and stability and it's certainly not too big for me.

Im sure if I was the kind of person that was brave enough to get massive air and whip it good I may feel better on the medium but that's not the kind of riding I do.

Here she is after a few mods on some random trail

 

[Duane]

Go the Large.
I was the mechanic for Life Of Bikes Norco Gravity Team last year. Only our shortest riders went the Medium. Our 5'10+ riders all went Large and were happy with their choice.

 

[chocko]

Go the Large.
I was the mechanic for Life Of Bikes Norco Gravity Team last year. Only our shortest riders went the Medium. Our 5'10+ riders all went Large and were happy with their choice.

Yep I did, thats my bike in the picture above It was the right choice I agree.

 

[travvyB]

Nice bike mate. How do these things ride BTW? With the addition of an XL in the 2017 range this bike is now a serious contender for my next purchase.

Trav.

 

[chocko]

It rides really well mate. Mine came with a cage shock and boxxer fork originally, the cage shock was average so it was the first think I replaced. It took me a while to get the air shock feeling right but now I have the correct number of volume spacers and the correct setup it feels pretty amazing.

The boxxer it came with also felt pretty average however after a trip mtb suspension centre in Sydney it felt 10 times better. New seals fresh oil etc made the world of difference. The fox 40 upgrade was a want not a need

The large is fantastic for me BTW.

 

[travvyB]

Awesome man, glad you're happy with it. I went ahead and ordered an XL - should pick it up next week!

Trav