Sizing vs reach

[cammas]

So toying with the idea of a frame up build like I did with my Salsa, as I do have some bits like XT brakes, 35mm cockpit and just grabbed some 29er wheels from Chain Reaction. As I’m currently injured I’m in no rush to get one, it also has given more time to trawl the net and have looked for a trance frame or even a tall boy frame. Then I looked at the Ibis Ripley AF frame as I’m not interested in no more the 120mm of rear travel as it will be waste as I’m not interested in riding anything that really needs more than that.
Then I looked at Marino frames and I know there’s a few people on here with the, was just thinking of grabbing the geo from either a trance or Ripley or the like and getting Marino to build one, weight doesn’t bother me but was just wondering how the suspension platform would ride then what would be a good shock to run on something like this?

 

[wkkie]

Have a look through some of these, there's a fair bit of info...

Search results for query: Marino

 

[CHEWY]

Have a look at the Carbonda frames

 

[cammas]

Have a look through some of these, there's a fair bit of info...

Search results for query: Marino

Now that would be the logical thing to do thanks @wkkie cant see the forest through the trees sometimes.

 

[beeb]

Now that would be the logical thing to do thanks @wkkie cant see the forest through the trees sometimes.

Make sure you see the posts about how Marino seems to typically take an axle-to-crown dimension as “axle-to-crown at sag” and end up with slacker than intended head-angle.

 

[cammas]

Make sure you see the posts about how Marino seems to typically take an axle-to-crown dimension as “axle-to-crown at sag” and end up with slacker than intended head-angle.

Thanks Beeb just reading that now, how are you finding your carbonda frame? What model was yours and how was the pricing?

 

[wkkie]

Make sure you see the posts about how Marino seems to typically take an axle-to-crown dimension as “axle-to-crown at sag” and end up with slacker than intended head-angle.

With my frame orders they've assured me that they're being built to static requested dimensions.

But time will tell, if they ever arrive.

That's one thing with Marino for sure, they're not quick and there doesn't seem to be a logical order they build and ship them in.

 

[wkkie]

I paid the deposit for 2 frames around the 21st of December and I've received a photo of 1 of them fully welded, but no paint and no cable guides.

That photo was sent to me on the 7th of April, nothing since.

 

[shiny]

With my frame orders they've assured me that they're being built to static requested dimensions.

But time will tell, if they ever arrive.

That's one thing with Marino for sure, they're not quick and there doesn't seem to be a logical order they build and ship them in.

I believe this is Marino‘s ordering system. Hope you get some updates soon.

 

[Isildur]

I believe this is Marino‘s ordering system. Hope you get some updates soon.

View attachment 389514

So true... Or at least they have some kind of tie to emails... both frames of mine I've been super patient, but only when I emailed them after 3 months within a few days I've had the raw welded picture, then a week or so later the painted finished picture... So I think it pays to wait a bit, but then definitely follow up so that they can start your order.

 

[cammas]

Okay so I’ve been eyeing off a few trances whilst I look for a frame, which there seems to be none about, so I’m thinking of getting a trance then upgrade as I go along ie break shit.

Now at 173 and preferring an in the bike feel so do I go a large and run 40mm stem, anyone of similar height running a large if so how are you finding it?

 

[birddog69]

With my frame orders they've assured me that they're being built to static requested dimensions.

But time will tell, if they ever arrive.

That's one thing with Marino for sure, they're not quick and there doesn't seem to be a logical order they build and ship them in.

These couple of YT vids might interest you:

Apparently he waited 1 year for his Marino frame.

 

[Chriso_29er]

Help, so confused by this new school sizing!
I'm 176cm

Current trail bike: Medium, 435mm reach, seated top tube 610mm
Also a large XC bike with seated top tube 630mm. Both ride great, but obviously feel quite different to ride.
Probably prefer seated position on the XC, but happy to do big k's on both. Cant really compare standing position as bikes are used for very different riding.

Bike I'm looking at: Medium, 455mm reach, top tube 593mm. Large, 485mm reach, top tube 621mm.
I'm more concerned about standing performance with this one, is a more descent focused bike.
Manufacturer has me on the lower end of a large in their size chart.

Large felt great for seated and not bad standing, but was only a flat carpark test. Did feel long.
Medium, definitely felt a bit cramped seated, but felt almost the same as current trail bike standing.

To get the best out of this new long geometry, should I be sacrificing seated position or taking a leap to the super long reach.
Is a jump from 435mm to 485mm reach too much?

I thought riding the bikes would give me a clear direction, has just made me even more confused lol.
Any other in between size riders, what did you go with. Did you make the right decision?

 

[Litenbror]

Help, so confused by this new school sizing!
I'm 176cm

Current trail bike: Medium, 435mm reach, seated top tube 610mm
Also a large XC bike with seated top tube 630mm. Both ride great, but obviously feel quite different to ride.
Probably prefer seated position on the XC, but happy to do big k's on both. Cant really compare standing position as bikes are used for very different riding.

Bike I'm looking at: Medium, 455mm reach, top tube 593mm. Large, 485mm reach, top tube 621mm.
I'm more concerned about standing performance with this one, is a more descent focused bike.
Manufacturer has me on the lower end of a large in their size chart.

Large felt great for seated and not bad standing, but was only a flat carpark test. Did feel long.
Medium, definitely felt a bit cramped seated, but felt almost the same as current trail bike standing.

To get the best out of this new long geometry, should I be sacrificing seated position or taking a leap to the super long reach.
Is a jump from 435mm to 485mm reach too much?

I thought riding the bikes would give me a clear direction, has just made me even more confused lol.
Any other in between size riders, what did you go with. Did you make the right decision?

I'm 175cm and the new bike has a 484mm reach and I'm loving it. I did find there was a bit of a transition getting used to the longer reach but it was worth it.

 

[fjohn860]

Help, so confused by this new school sizing!
I'm 176cm

Current trail bike: Medium, 435mm reach, seated top tube 610mm
Also a large XC bike with seated top tube 630mm. Both ride great, but obviously feel quite different to ride.
Probably prefer seated position on the XC, but happy to do big k's on both. Cant really compare standing position as bikes are used for very different riding.

Bike I'm looking at: Medium, 455mm reach, top tube 593mm. Large, 485mm reach, top tube 621mm.
I'm more concerned about standing performance with this one, is a more descent focused bike.
Manufacturer has me on the lower end of a large in their size chart.

Large felt great for seated and not bad standing, but was only a flat carpark test. Did feel long.
Medium, definitely felt a bit cramped seated, but felt almost the same as current trail bike standing.

To get the best out of this new long geometry, should I be sacrificing seated position or taking a leap to the super long reach.
Is a jump from 435mm to 485mm reach too much?

I thought riding the bikes would give me a clear direction, has just made me even more confused lol.
Any other in between size riders, what did you go with. Did you make the right decision?

Not sure if this helps at all, but I went from a medium 26" 2008 Giant Reign X1 (the recommended size at the time for my 182cm) with a wheelbase of 1120mm and a reach of around 390mm to a large 29" Transition Smuggler I ride now with a wheelbase of 1213mm and reach of 475mm.

According to Transition I was on the transition (pun intended) between medium and large. I just went with the general consensus which was to size up if you were between sizes.

EDIT: I should also add that although I could've bought a medium Smuggler, I feel like the large was definitely the right choice. Especially with the steep seat angles these days, the seated position can feel ever so slightly cramped.

 

[ozzybmx]

Help, so confused by this new school sizing!
I'm 176cm

Current trail bike: Medium, 435mm reach, seated top tube 610mm
Also a large XC bike with seated top tube 630mm. Both ride great, but obviously feel quite different to ride.

Bike I'm looking at: Medium, 455mm reach, top tube 593mm. Large, 485mm reach, top tube 621mm.

To get the best out of this new long geometry, should I be sacrificing seated position or taking a leap to the super long reach.
Is a jump from 435mm to 485mm reach too much?

Also 175-176 and these are the numbers I look at on bikes, ETT, Reach and Stack.

My Deviate and Spur.

Still leaves me questioning my decision each time I buy a bike. Saying this, every bike I have bought in the past ~10yrs (since bothering to look at geo) has been round the 600mm ETT.

I had a large Santa Cruz Hightower LT before these around 2019 and looked at the numbers between the Large and Med, decided bikes were getting smaller and bought a large then ran a 33mm stem. This bike felt great, the longer ETT with shorter stem was perfect.

What I didn't realise was I was pushing the front wheel further away from my weight centre, also not helped by a 51mm offset fork. The 33mm stem then moved me back.

After 3 big crashes involving losing the front wheel, I sold the bike and my painful analysis over the Deviate frame size made me realise that with the longer reach on these bikes, I needed me to modify my attack stance as the standing over the pedals as I did on older bikes and this was putting all my weight over the back wheel.
The SC was a longer ETT and I was not compensating by moving forward a little bit to get more grip on the front.

These days I have got used to leaning forward more, knees bent, arms bent, getting my weight distribution more balanced and grip on that front. I was slower at first until I got used to it... haven't hit the ground since.

 

[Chriso_29er]

Not sure if this helps at all, but I went from a medium 26" 2008 Giant Reign X1 (the recommended size at the time for my 182cm) with a wheelbase of 1120mm and a reach of around 390mm to a large 29" Transition Smuggler I ride now with a wheelbase of 1213mm and reach of 475mm.

According to Transition I was on the transition (pun intended) between medium and large. I just went with the general consensus which was to size up if you were between sizes.

EDIT: I should also add that although I could've bought a medium Smuggler, I feel like the large was definitely the right choice. Especially with the steep seat angles these days, the seated position can feel ever so slightly cramped.

That was quiet the jump John!

 

[beeb]

Also 175-176 and these are the numbers I look at on bikes, ETT, Reach and Stack.

My Deviate and Spur.

View attachment 390715

Still leaves me questioning my decision each time I buy a bike. Saying this, every bike I have bought in the past ~10yrs (since bothering to look at geo) has been round the 600mm ETT.

I had a large Santa Cruz Hightower LT before these around 2019 and looked at the numbers between the Large and Med, decided bikes were getting smaller and bought a large then ran a 33mm stem. This bike felt great, the longer ETT with shorter stem was perfect.

What I didn't realise was I was pushing the front wheel further away from my weight centre, also not helped by a 51mm offset fork. The 33mm stem then moved me back.

After 3 big crashes involving losing the front wheel, I sold the bike and my painful analysis over the Deviate frame size made me realise that with the longer reach on these bikes, I needed me to modify my attack stance as the standing over the pedals as I did on older bikes and this was putting all my weight over the back wheel.
The SC was a longer ETT and I was not compensating by moving forward a little bit to get more grip on the front.

These days I have got used to leaning forward more, knees bent, arms bent, getting my weight distribution more balanced and grip on that front. I was slower at first until I got used to it... haven't hit the ground since.

When did your 3 big crashes occur @ozzybmx? I’m assuming while descending? Standing or seated?

 

[ozzybmx]

When did your 3 big crashes occur @ozzybmx? I’m assuming while descending? Standing or seated?

All 3 standing in attack stance on fast corners.

I had quite a few near misses on that bike too, all losing the front wheel. I was actually growing to hate it... didnt know what was wrong with it.

Did coil conversion on the front, ran harder and softer springs on the back. Changed tyres a few times from Minion DHF to DHR to Assegai's and a few combos of those.

I actively thought about my position on the Deviate, still doing it, getting more over the front and keeping weight on the front knobs. Feels a bit strange but working so far.

 

[beeb]

All 3 standing in attack stance on fast corners.

I had quite a few near misses on that bike too, all losing the front wheel. I was actually growing to hate it... didnt know what was wrong with it.

Did coil conversion on the front, ran harder and softer springs on the back. Changed tyres a few times from Minion DHF to DHR to Assegai's and a few combos of those.

I actively thought about my position on the Deviate, still doing it, getting more over the front and keeping weight on the front knobs. Feels a bit strange but working so far.

In that case, ETT doesn’t have anything to do with the issues you were having because it’s a measurement that refers to seated fit.

From memory, was the Hightower LT overforked as well?

Interesting that you (I assume) like the balance If your Spur, because the geo numbers on that are very similar to the old Hightower LT, and in theory the fractionally longer front and shorter rear would suggest a slightly more rearward weight bias on the Spur (ie: it should exaggerate the unweighted front tyre/loss of cornering grip issues you were having with the H-LT, but doesn’t in practice). I suspect some of that is the more predictable feeling of the linkage on the Spur compared to the H-LT, and probably also different intended riding(?).

The Deviate having longer chainstays than both will inherently put more weight on the front wheel and leave you feeling more centred in the bike, but honestly it sounds like the main difference has been the focus on technique. Bikes at the long end of a rider’s comfort zone really have to be ridden quite ‘deliberately’ to exploit the perks of the more progressive geometry IMO, and it’s effective but not necessarily all that fun at times either.