cmktech

How is the genesis geometry? The Gary Fisher bikes seem very well spec'd and very affordable. Just wondering how the genesis geometry is. I am really hoping to get a Gary Fisher Hardtail for x-mas.

Flak

Are you freakishly long in the torso but have miget like legs? It may be for you.

cmktech

I am just the opposite. Uh oh. I have long legs but a short torso. I am 5'11".

ed 

Has nothing to do with that.

Genesis geometry doesn't change the rider body position. It changes where the rider is perched over the rear tire. The top tube is longer because the seat tube is moved further back toward the rear wheel. The stem is shorter to compensate for the longer top tube so your arms don't have to reach any further.

I agree that the Genesis geometry makes for a better climbing and descending bike. When you climb, you have more traction, when you descend you are farther back over the rear tire so it feels more controlled.

It's kinda like putting a true layed back seatpost and shorter stem on it except on the Genesis geometry, the crankset is moved back a little to compensate for everything else so it doesn't feel like you're pedaling a Townie.

LowCel 

I've had a couple of Sugars with genesis geometry and I liked the geometry, I hated the chainsuck though. I believe the Genesis geometry did a lot to get people to start going with longer top tubes and shorter stems. I know that's how I like my bike, I hate long stems.

CaptMatt15

My Marlin has Genesis Geometry, I'm 6'4", and it fits me really well - I absolutely love it. Its also got me hating long stems - I'm planning a new, non-GF frame purchase and I'm trying to get it as close as possible to my Marlin's numbers because it fits me that well, without having to go to a stem longer than like 110....

Taylor

I would go with it, I bought a new Fisher last yeear with the Genesis Geometry and I love it. At first it was really uncomfortable, but I slid my seat a little further forward and it helped out alot. THe bike is way more manueverable and its alot of fun to ride. I'd wish for one sitting in the living room at Christmas. Good Luck!

ed 

I don't think chainsuck is inherant to the Genesis Geometry...probably just the Sugar. I have only had 1 issue of chainsuck on mine and that's because I was "mud riding" and the chain was literally caked in mud.

willtsmith_nwi

I rode an XXL Giant. But an XL fisher works fine on me. Genesis gets you farther back over the wheel. At the same time, this lengthens the top tube.

I have a slightly longer torso as well as broad shoulders and long arms (6'3", 34" inseam). So, Genesis rocks for me. Though I avoid Fisher as they are all pretty lightweight. It's the Karate Monkey for me!!!!

victorthewombat

my experience is long top tubes and short stems make the handelbars flop especially on steep uphills. I like having a bit longer stem 110mm ( I am 71" tall with a 33.5" inseam) rather than being able to "roost" my tush over the rear wheel on the downhill. That said, some people really like longer top tubes. It comes down to personal choice, ride one and find out for yourself.

VTW

3MTA3

genesis bikes handle & accelerate exceptionally well. i'm 5'10 & have long legs & their 17.5 is just fine under me.

garysol1 

Love my Tass. I am 5ft 8in...average leg to torso but a tad short in the arms. Fits me just fine. The bike climbs very well and feels stable at speed so as far as I am concerned....it works

born2bahick

I have an 05 Tass, Genisis geometry. Two other bikes, normal geometry. honestly, I have never switched to the GF and said, WOW this bike feels totally different. I just ride it like the other bikes. I have read and maybe even repeated that you either love the Genisis geometry or you hate it. This isn't true in my case, I don't even notice it. As for manufacturer claims of better climbing? most of the time when climbing I shift my weight forward over the bars, if I'm not completely out of the saddle. So it would seem that for me the better climbing thing is just a selling point that may or may not fit a riders style. I notice GF still makes Conventional geometry bikes also, So they're not convinced it's better for all. I also notice the GF is more likely to break the rear tire loose in slick conditions, I don't know why. But I don't think about any of these things when I want to ride it. Sometimes I think we make more out of something, than it really is.

Crue4

5'11 and I like the ride... it feels different than other rides, but not more than a couple of hours on the bike can't fix... feels perfectly comfortable and normal now... even when I switch between bikes I notice a slight adjustment time but nothing drastic...

sherpaPeak

which GF bike are your referring to?

I think the genesis hype is exactly that ----a hype.

there are some theoretical plus to the geometry....but after riding a Tass, a Kona hartail, and a trek 4900....I dont think genesis is any better than the others. and I personally think Genesis with longer top tube changes my "body position". I can specifically feel it when I ride the Tass right before or after the Trek 4900......

its so easy to get sucked into the manufacturers' marketing tricks....

ed 

STOP DISSIN' MY HOMIE G-DAWG FISHER, JERKS!!!!!!!

Ummmm......just kidding, tee hee. <---that smiley is how I look when I Poof.

I think the Genesis geometry makes it easier for me to use a shorter stem which I like. (personal preference)

To me...a long stem feels like I'm swinging my whole upper torso versus just my arms to steer. I have to move the handlebars in a larger arc to get the same degree of turning because I'm further from the fulcrum.

I also feel the difference in climbing.

Crue4

Sherpa: Not saying that it is any better... but just saying that it does feel a little different... but not so different that you don't get used to it quickly.

BTW: Bought a new bike, thanks for your help... I went with a GF Xcalibur 29er... and LOVE it!

pinkrobe

Does anyone know what the actual geometry is on these bikes? I see some dimensions posted on the GF website, but no mention of some of the basics, like head/seat angles, chainstay length, etc. From what I have seen of these bikes, and from a couple of test rides, they simply have a long top tube, and maybe a steeper head angle.

I ride a Trek with a TT of 23", and the GF in my size [Ferrous] runs 23.9" but with a stem that's 20mm shorter than mine. This amounts to a 3mm more forward position on the GF. The wheelbase is ~13mm longer on the GF. Other than a shorter stem + longer TT, there's not much that can be too different from standard geometry vs. Genesis. If the bikes had dramatically shorter chainstays, that would move the rear wheel below the rider's CG, but then there would be clearance issues. They could always slacken the seat tube angle to put the rider's weight farther back, but that would mean changing the head angle in a similar fashion, which could make handling a little more sluggish.

Overall, I'd say the Genesis Geometry isn't revolutionary at all, it's just a longer bike. If it works for you, great. It seems very similar to the way GT used to design their frames in the late 90's. You would get a similar ride today on a Rocky Mountain, especially a Blizzard.

sherpaPeak

great decision. you got a really great bike. Congratulations.....enjoy and when you get a chance post some picks, please......

Crue4

I will take some shots this weekend and post them... it is a 2007... and I got a heck of deal on it... for the riding I do it is perfect and the 29 in wheels are a pure joy so far..