Hello there. Is a 430 reach too short for 171cm??

[James7475]

Hey.

Having researched forever (massive understatement), I’m after a few first hand thoughts regarding reach. At 171cm, and because I’ve got short 30.5inch legs and super short arms (ape index of -3inch) is a new enduro/trail full suspension ebike at 430mm reach (620 stack) too short? My current normal FS mtb is 430 (610 stack) and I’m comfortable on it, I just don’t know if it’s optimal. My RAD (LeeLikesBikes) at a 60degree angle is pretty much spot on on it.

I’ll be using this new ebike (160mm travel) for any steeper downhill I come across and therefore may require a slightly larger cockpit right? But what’s about my super short arms??? Arrrrrghhh ???. I’m at an intermediate level probably.

thanks in advance for your time and thanks for reading this far ???

 

[flash]

I'm 178 and ride medium bikes (440-443 reach with 760 bars). So I think you'll be fine. Long, low and slack is stable at speed but shorter is more nimble, generally. It's up to you where the sweet spot is.

Comfortable is comfortable. Not everybody enjoys a super long bike.

Gordon

 

[James7475]

I'm 178 and ride medium bikes (440-443 reach with 760 bars). So I think you'll be fine. Long, low and slack is stable at speed but shorter is more nimble, generally. It's up to you where the sweet spot is.

Comfortable is comfortable. Not everybody enjoys a super long bike.

Gordon

Hi Gordon. Thanks for your comment

 

[ggx]

There are no short/simple answers, and not only reach makes a bike! In past I usualy gone for short, now I prefer bit longer. Flash as a good point. You can go longer if you prefer stability.

 

[Billybopsbasher]

5'9"/175cm here with 28" inseam.
Always preferred a slightly longer reach ie 460-480. I personally think the front centre, seat tube length and stack height matters moreso than reach as the latter can be adjusted a fair bit with seat for and aft position as well as different stem lengths.
Currently riding a large focus jam2 6.7 nine and purely as I got it a instead of money owed to me and the geo is fine for trail riding but feels nervous to me on the steeper, faster terrain.
St 480
Reach 445
Wheelbase 1235
Chainstay 470 which leaves the front centre as 765

 

[James7475]

5'9"/175cm here with 28" inseam.
Always preferred a slightly longer reach ie 460-480. I personally think the front centre, seat tube length and stack height matters moreso than reach as the latter can be adjusted a fair bit with seat for and aft position as well as different stem lengths.
Currently riding a large focus jam2 6.7 nine and purely as I got it a instead of money owed to me and the geo is fine for trail riding but feels nervous to me on the steeper, faster terrain.
St 480
Reach 445
Wheelbase 1235
Chainstay 470 which leaves the front centre as 765

Cheers. Good to hear a different point of view. I suppose it’s my short arm length that I’m most concerned with. You obviously have a long torso due to your leg length and would you mind me asking if your arms are long too? Thanks

 

[Billybopsbasher]

Cheers. Good to hear a different point of view. I suppose it’s my short arm length that I’m most concerned with. You obviously have a long torso due to your leg length and would you mind me asking if your arms are long too? Thanks

Quite honestly I wouldn't know haha.. Not something I've ever measured.
All I know is that I run a 55mm stem and 800mm bars on my current bike. I'm waiting for my next bike (medium giant reign e which has better geometry more suited to me)

 

[Gary]

Nope.

I feel like a giant replying to this thread at 181cm and 33" inseam but my two main mtbs are 420mm reach (both 26" wheel) , and my Eeb is 435mm (27.5)
It's entirely up to YOU what size bike you prefer riding. Longer is definitely more stable but the flipside is shorter being more nimble.
FWIW I do prefer more reach on 29" wheel bikes. But i don't find those particularly nimble in any size.
Ebikes have tons more stability than normal bikes anyway so there's less need to go super long

Ps. why are we randomly switching between metric and imperial measuring units?

 

[Billybopsbasher]

Nope.

I feel like a giant replying to this thread at 181cm and 33" inseam but my two main mtbs are 420mm reach (both 26" wheel) , and my Eeb is 435mm (27.5)
It's entirely up to YOU what size bike you prefer riding. Longer is definitely more stable but the flipside is shorter being more nimble.
FWIW I do prefer more reach on 29" wheel bikes. But i don't find those particularly nimble in any size.
Ebikes have tons more stability than normal bikes anyway so there's less need to go super long

Ps. why are we randomly switching between metric and imperial measuring units?

Couldn't agree more?... Regarding the measurements I suppose in my case I used to be a glazier/and window fitter/glass cutter and got used to being given measurements in both languages.. Its kinda stick I guess? apologies if it's annoying

 

[Gary]

Nah. Not annoying at all. I find it quite funny, and the bike industry is full of it

 

[James7475]

Nope.

I feel like a giant replying to this thread at 181cm and 33" inseam but my two main mtbs are 420mm reach (both 26" wheel) , and my Eeb is 435mm (27.5)
It's entirely up to YOU what size bike you prefer riding. Longer is definitely more stable but the flipside is shorter being more nimble.
FWIW I do prefer more reach on 29" wheel bikes. But i don't find those particularly nimble in any size.
Ebikes have tons more stability than normal bikes anyway so there's less need to go super long

Ps. why are we randomly switching between metric and imperial measuring units?

Apologies Gary, and thanks for your message, but quoting inseams in cms seems strange for some reason. I should have said that I’ve ridden friend’s larger reach bikes and, due to my skill level, not really noticed the increased stability or decreased nimbleness. I aim to obviously improve but just trying to decide what is the ideal size as, when I’m hopefully a bit better, the geometry of the bike won’t be holding me back. Curse of the invetweener!! FWIW I’m leaning to a shorter reach too

 

[Gary]

Even something as simple as a (proper) bunnyhop needs way more effort the longer a bike is add in the extra weight of an Ebike you need even more.
My lower back hurts just trying to imagine how much effort you little guys have to put in to raise the front wheel to the balance point to manual a long Ebike

 

[James7475]

Even something as simple as a (proper) bunnyhop needs way more effort the longer a bike is add in the extra weight of an Ebike you need even more.
My lower back hurts just trying to imagine how much effort you little guys have to put in to raise the front wheel to the balance point to manual a long Ebike

Just found this great video. Definitely worth a watch as backs up the shorter is better ethos a treat. Especially for us “little guys”. Maybe your lower back hurts from carrying around your “bigger guy” ego? ? Irrespective, thanks again for your time Gary

 

[Billybopsbasher]

In my case it helps that ive always lifted weights/rode copious amounts of street bmx and mtb when growing up.... The techniques never leave you?.... That and having the benefit of weight to help me?
Don't get me wrong.. Doing a manny now is much harder with a 470mm chainstay than with my old whyte g160 which had a 425mm rear end but it only takes a couple of goes until its like 2nd nature again

 

[Billybopsbasher]

Just found this great video. Definitely worth a watch as backs up the shorter is better ethos a treat. Especially for us “little guys”. Maybe your lower back hurts from carrying around your “bigger guy” ego? ? Irrespective, thanks again for your time Gary

From looking at your body proportions I'd look at something similar to an older shape Levo/cube equivalent as they tend to have slightly older gen geometry ie shorter top tube/seat tube length ratio compared to the newer stuff.

 

[Gary]

maybe your lower back hurts from carrying around your “bigger guy” ego?

Maybe ask your mom the reason ?

 

[Billybopsbasher]

Maybe ask your mom the reason ?

Oooh, matron! ?

 

[Gary]

Just found this great video.

Erm... Great? Really?
Guys are so insecure about their height aren't they? So few are actually honest about their heights and rounding it up only seems to get worse the shorter they are
Lee isn't average sized. He's short.
Richie Rude isn't the best Enduro rider in the world either. Let's get that straight. He's an incredibly good DH and Enduro racer who has done very well in both disciplines at world level. But yeah. as well as his doping conviction It's well known he chooses to race on shorter bikes. He's not the only fast rider who does and someone like Jack moir would be a better example at an actual height of 6'4" and riding a large Canyon enduro bike.
Despite actually agreeing with a lot of what Lee is saying here. He really isn't really worth listening to anymore. (once upon a time he was and the skills book he wrote 20 years back is still very good)

RAD is massively flawed as it doesn't take into account the angle of the measurement or any other sizes or geometry variables of the bike so not only will it not tell you how long or tall a bike actually is it's absolutely NOT transferrable between different frames.
Down tube measurement is a better frame measurement as it's not a "virtual2 measurement. But even that is useless on its own. But if comparing two bikes with the same travel, BB height and H/A will actually yeild a comparable sizing method between the two.
Oh... and BTW "reach" is also a worthless measurement without "stack"

 

[James7475]

Maybe ask your mom the reason ?

Haha. She said

Oooh, matron! ?

Oooh Matron indeed! Haha

 

[slippery pete]

I’ll be using this new ebike (160mm travel) for any steeper downhill I come across and therefore may require a slightly larger cockpit right?

Not sure exactly what you're asking.

The video posted up by @James7475 is as good as any I've seen and the LLB RAD methodology isn't nearly as daft as some things we read about. They talk about a lot of really good stuff, especially not having your stance load weight through your hands.

At 185cm, the bikes I've picked up over the years vary from the oldest one with 432mm reach up to the largest at 483mm. I've refined my cockpit setups on those bikes independently tuning the fit and feel, bar rise, roll, stem length, rise and spacers. They came out bang on the same from BB to the grips when I measured them yesterday.

They both fit; they both plaster a grin on my face; they are both fast, rowdy bikes when I want them to be. Is the bigger bike inherently better because it has "better" reach? No, not that I can tell. They're both bloody good bikes.

So I disagree with "longer is better" dogma and reckon you should stick close to what you know.

 

[Eddy Current]

There’s two things missing here

1. Longer reach don’t mean longer bike. That’s the WB. A 455 cs 430 reach 65 ha is longer than a 430 cs 450 reach 66 ha.

2. So isnt more nimble, is easy to flick but you loose freedom of movement and on steep trails you’re kinda peek out to the balcony.

Then some got longer torso, shorter arms etc

The best balance for a 1.70 (like me) is some 445 with a 65/66 ha*... 430 is going to be nice to pull the bike and do tricks but nothing more. You can have more poppy playfulness with a high BB f.e adding travel to the fork and increasing rebound if it’s what you’re looking for.

*DH bikes sometimes can deal with a average shorter reach because they run 63 ha or less and higher stack than compensate the lack.

edit: forget to say, I prefer and overall reach with longer frame and shorter stem than the other way. Longer Reach also gives you a pleasant feeling of more natural attack position when standing.

 

[Eddy Current]

Forget to say. 90% of the brands offers 440-455 reach in the M sizes (to say the most common) normally is now 450 on a generous reach bike, paired with a 35mm stem is 485 overall reach.

More roomy frame
Lively steering
Less weight ahead the front wheel axis

On a 435 reach paired with a 50mm stem you get the same but all above is going on the other side.

The WB will be longer if they share cs lenght and ha. But as you can see ebikes are also moving towards shorter cs, I also prefer this formula of longer frame over longer cs with the same wheelbase numbers. And fork offsets are now shorter as well to keep wb shorter and helped with shorter stems to balance the trail.

Marketing is wise: LLS rules. OBEY

 

[Gary]

That's not how "reach" works mate

 

[Gary]

Oh.. And very few bikes marketed as LLS actually have LOW BBs

 

[pez_cemetery]

Erm... Great? Really?
Guys are so insecure about their height aren't they? So few are actually honest about their heights and rounding it up only seems to get worse the shorter they are
Lee isn't average sized. He's short.

Lee is shorter than mean height but within one standard deviation so I wouldn't call him 'short'.

Richie Rude isn't the best Enduro rider in the world either. Let's get that straight. He's an incredibly good DH and Enduro racer who has done very well in both disciplines at world level. But yeah. as well as his doping conviction It's well known he chooses to race on shorter bikes. He's not the only fast rider who does and someone like Jack moir would be a better example at an actual height of 6'4" and riding a large Canyon enduro bike.
Despite actually agreeing with a lot of what Lee is saying here. He really isn't really worth listening to anymore. (once upon a time he was and the skills book he wrote 20 years back is still very good)

Lee isn't really worth listening to anymore, but you are?

RAD is massively flawed as it doesn't take into account the angle of the measurement or any other sizes or geometry variables of the bike so not only will it not tell you how long or tall a bike actually is it's absolutely NOT transferrable between different frames.
Down tube measurement is a better frame measurement as it's not a "virtual2 measurement. But even that is useless on its own. But if comparing two bikes with the same travel, BB height and H/A will actually yeild a comparable sizing method between the two.
Oh... and BTW "reach" is also a worthless measurement without "stack"

There is a second video that includes angle on Joy of Bike now, and most of the other stuff is discussed in the comments of the two videos. Lee goes into detail on all of this in his book 'Dialled', which came out 3 years ago.

ps. I'm not Lee

 

[Gary]

Just like goldilocks I've tried daddy bear, mommy bear and baby bears bike sizes all my life. Each has its merits and drawbacks and not being short I can actually ride each size just fine so I don't need some short balding American skills coach's badly thought up formula to tell me how each bike feels.

You do seem to know a lot about Lee. Tell me is there a single picture of him riding a genuinely technical wet trail in his latest book? Or is it all just pumptracks, bmx tracks and manicured bike park style trails?
Genuinely interested.

 

[Eddy Current]

That's not how "reach" works mate

oh my ... go ahead, I’m all ears

 

[Gary]

oh my ... go ahead, I’m all ears

what about eyes. you got those too?


When talking about sizing of comparing frame sizes reach is absolutely worthless without stack

and no stem ads reach or stack

 

[pez_cemetery]

not being short I can actually ride each size just fine so I don't need some short balding American skills coach's American skills coach's badly thought up formula to tell me how each bike feels.

Just for clarity, which part or combination of 'short', 'balding' and 'American' is relevant to your disagreement with his his views? I'm particularly struggling to see what 'balding' and 'American' have to do with it, although you are very clear about the importance of not being 'short'.

 

[Eddy Current]

what about eyes. you got those too?


When talking about sizing of comparing frame sizes reach is absolutely worthless without stack

and no stem ads reach or stack

Of course and without ha (no directly) reach alone and even more as cold number don’t tell the whole story. Since theres no two equals trails unless you’re ride a specific kind of trails is no better longer or shorter. Maybe because of the weight on ebikes you benefit a bit short for wrestling the tank

Pd: second amendment rules God bless America