12/8/14 6:36 PM

I mentioned some months ago, that based on advice received here, I was likely to purchase a Specialized MTB with 29" wheels. I finally got around to test riding a medium, my usual size, and found the standover height insufficient. I mean, really insufficient - lots of potential pain there. The shop did not have a small in stock, but is willing to order a one with no commitment from me so I can test it.

So, I’m curious as to other folk who made the move to a 29’er. Did you have to go down in frame size?

12/8/14 6:54 PM

I guess some are more sloping than others. My Gary is an XL. Maybe the G2 geom is lower as well as the longer, dunno. I could ride a Large, but I traded for it. I have always been between sizes anyway. I have plenty stand over even with 2.4/2.2 tires. I have a 34,25" inseam barefoot. Which is a little long for a 6' person. I use to be 6'1" until the last 5-10 years. ;)

I guess if you need a lower bike, the G2 Gary/treks and some others have that low and long thing going on. Maybe that is your direction? This have been the story of my life. Bikes long enough are usually too tall.
My old steel Spesh Stump Jumper is a large and also pretty long as compared to C-Dales I had previously.

12/8/14 8:07 PM

I ride the same size in 29 I rode in 26. Does the frame seem too tall at the headtube also? It may not have enough slope for you.

I doubt that bottom bracket heights matters in this case.

12/8/14 9:07 PM

I pretty much ride the same size in a 29'r that I did in a 26, of course geometry's very a bit by manufacturer, but overall I would say that for me wheel size would not change frame size.

12/9/14 9:03 AM

I think the trend in wheel size is going to be based in part on the rider size-27.5 seems a good compromise for small to medium riders, as on a smaller 29'er the wheels can dominate the bike/ride.

12/9/14 10:31 AM

My friend wanted to try my Gary, so we switched for a bit. His Trek 26er oddly felt so tall and towering. I did not realize how cockpit feeling the Paragon was now that I got so used to it. Both bike are hardtails.

12/9/14 10:32 PM

I've tried a few 29" over the last few years (never was convinced enough to pull the trigger).

Majority of them are the same size as 26", which for me is man's small or women's medium.

Though I do remember one occasion when I felt the bike was too tall. Oddly enough, it just "felt" tall but I still had enough tt clearance. It's just I felt like I was perched WAY high on the saddle and it's a loooong jump to get down to the ground. Thanks to the dramatic sloping tt, I had comfortable room straddling it.

My guess, same as others, the tt doesn't slope enough. Perhaps a different model would work out better.

12/9/14 10:40 PM

I think there is a rider height threshold where a 26er is the choice over a 29er. When I worked at the LBS I would suggest folks 5'10" and taller should test ride one even when they came in looking for a 26er. Not many over 6' did not go with the 29er.

12/10/14 1:13 PM

I used to ride a 26er tried a 29er and never went back. My bike is an aluminum hardtail with an air/oil suspension fork and a remote lockout for the suspension. I'm 6'1" and ride a 56 or 57 road bike. My MTBs were always 19" 26 and the 29 is the same.

The ride is so much faster that it isn't even fair. Stuff that is technical and can trip you up on a 26 is barely perceptible with the 29er. It just rolls right over it. Climbs better too. It is a subjective impression but the wheels don't seem to slip as much on big climbs with low traction.

I think what size you choose depends on the height of the bb, the slope of the top tube and the length of the top tube. You have the most flexibility with top tube length as you can always go up in stem size if necessary.

12/10/14 1:39 PM

" I'm 6'1" and ride a 56 or 57 road bike."

You must be totally on the opposite proportions scale for a 6'1" person than I. Most 58s, too small. The Roubaix is one of the few 58s, and I have a few 61s and XLs which are admittedly a tad big. But offer more goods than bad in that.

What is your inseam, and do you mean 56-7 measured to the center of the TT form the BB??

I am actually closer to 6' now, but I started @ 6'1". But my height loss has not occurred in my inseam. ;)

12/21/14 3:32 PM

OK--in modern frames the key dimension is the top tube. So top tube center/center=56 or 57.

My inseam is 33. In the old days when frames where measured in inches I rode a 23 (58). So my road bike has a semi sloping top tube and a 56 top tube and I ride a 120 stem. My track bike is 52 seat tube but 57 top tube and I also use a 120 stem on that, but with a 17* rise. The top of my bars is always 3.5" below the nose of my seat on both the road bike and the track bike.

12/30/14 6:24 PM

I just bought a Niner Rip9, in a Medium because it had the same 23" virtual top tube as my typical 19" or Large bike with 26" wheels.

A lot of 29ers seem to be set up with shorter stems though, so on those bikes perhaps a longer top tube would better simulate the fit on a 26er with a shorter top tube and longer stem.

Maybe there is something about the handling of 29ers that favors the use of a shorter stem, or maybe these 29" bikes tend to have longer top tubes on average for a given frame size.

In any case, the top tube length should be a major consideration imo.

12/31/14 1:17 PM

You will love that bike, I had 2 friends get niners in the last year (based on my recommendation) and they both love them