Originally Posted by
eugene_b
I've got the following results from the site:
Road
Frame Size: 58 cm. 23 in.
Crank Length: 170-172.5mm
Mountain
Frame Size: 47 cm. 18 in.
Crank Length: 175-177.5mm
Seat Height
76 cm. 30 in.
Your sizes seem small for someone who is 6'3". I'm 6' and wear pants with a 32" inseam and I ride a 58cm road and 19" mountain. You should start looking at a 60 cm road bike and at least a 20" mountain bike. More likely you'll fit on a 22" mountain bike.
Originally Posted by
eugene_b
Again, thanks everyone for all the input, inlcuding the small steel vs aluminium flame war
Basically aluminium is not a huge concern to me, I just wanted to confirm that it is good. I used to have a cheap aluminium mountain bike before (I believe here it would be called a "wallmart bike") and after a couple of years I could easily see how it bends and wears off so that eventually I was too scared to use that bike. But I guess they used some special chinese aluminium there
A good quality aluminum mountain bike frame from one of the major manufacturers is going to be far better than a Helmart special. Like I said, I ride aluminum hard and the durability isn't a concern.
Originally Posted by
eugene_b
Today I visited one of the local shops which according to the website looked like a bigger one. They did have a lot of stuff but not so much for my height. The handlebar question still remains unresolved: all non-road bikes they carry have flat one. First they gave me to try Specialized Crosstrail L-20". It feels really light and fast and it still performed great in grass and some of the mud. However, may be that's a phobia or something like that, but the thinner wheels kept me nervous when I had to do turns and maneuver: it feels as if I enter the turn at even slightly sharper angle, the bike will fall.
The performance of thinner tires on dirt is what I was talking about. I have lots of experience and excellent handling skills but even I don't want to ride skinny tires too far on dirt.
Originally Posted by
eugene_b
Another bike I tried was Hardock mountain bike which didn't come in my size so the test wasn't too clean. The thicker tires felt much better, I could do turns without fearing anything and the muddy ride was somehwat less bumpy. It did require more effort though. However when I locked the front suspension, It became almost as fast and easy to ride as the Crosstrail one. The smaller size of the bicycle did make the ride slightly uncomfortable though so I can't tell for sure.
The shock probably wasn't tuned to your weight so it was pretty soft when engaged. Tuning it would make the ride better off-road. The lockout comes in very handy for those sections where you stitch trails together, however.
Originally Posted by
SlimRider
OTOH, once you've exited mountain country, the MTB becomes the sloth of the bicycle world when on smooth pavement. The nonsuspension rigid forked hardtail MTN bikes are faster than the suspended fork hardtails, and the suspended fork hardtails are faster than the dual suspension MTN bikes. Apparently, some of the cyclist's forward energy is lost due to countering the opposing forces related to the MTN bike's suspension system. That's why the rigid MTN bikes do so much better!
Again with the misinformation. Mountain bikes
are slower but not that much slower. JeremyZ's claims notwithstanding, the speed differential is only a few mph. If you are trying to ride a road bike off-road, you'll be a whole lot slower on it in the dirt than the mountain bike will be on pavement.
Originally Posted by
SlimRider
Yeah, me too!
Then don't go around spreading misinformation.