I'm drooling over a sweet homegrown ltd blinged out, but it's a 17" and I'm 5'11" to 6'.

Would it be too small???

are you 5'11 - 6 feet depending on what shoes you wear? or have you just not measured yourself in awhile and your still growing?

Not growing, just haven't measured myself in a while and can't remember if I'm 5'11 or 6'.

O.K. I just did the pen mark on the wall and taped it....6'..... Thank you MInesBroken for dragging me out of my foggy laziness.....

too small I'm thinking...Thinking youre going to need around a 19'' frame at least. I'm 5'10, and my wife's Trek, 18'' frame is too small for me.

2 small

Most likely too small. I'm 5'10.5" and I ride an 18" in most brands. Of course if you can test ride it then find out for yourself. It may fit you like a glove. I just wouldn't risk buying it if you can't ride it first since it will most likely be too small.

Now saying that, the main measurement I worry about is top tube length. See if the top tube is close to what your current bike is.

Why do you guys continue to suggest a frame size based on overall height**********?

Overall height aint go nutin to do wit it.

What is your inseam measurement.

No shoes, feet flat, shoulder's width apart, wedge a book with the spine snugly against your crotch, measure to floor.

For example: I'm 6'0" yet I've got a LONG torsoe and short legs. I ride a 17" frame, heck, I'm comfy on a 15" frame!!!!

Looks like my inseam is 32" assuming the book was level.

Best available online: https://www.wrenchscience.com/WS1/Sec...ing/Height.asp

From my experience, with a 32" inseam then yes a 17 would be too small. You're probably in between a 19 and 21.

If you are going that route why be overly concerned about that, most people are more concerned with top tube length than standover height these days. I know I am. Going by the sounds of your bike sizes you are as well. For the actual height as long as you have a couple inches standover the height can be corrected by the seatpost height.

The truth is there is only one "truely accurate" way to find a bike that fits. That is to test ride.

*edit* You could take someone with the exact same measurements as me and they would probably be miserable on my bike. I like to be pretty stretched out yet I like to have a very short stem. I also like to have quite a bit of saddle to bar drop. This is why test rides are so important, nothing is set in stone.

Lowcel,

You're right, and my method is just the first step in a fitting process.

Then you have to check reach.

I should have said, that overal height doesn't matter, but the inseam and reach are the critical measurements.

I'm 5'11 and my bike 17~18"(mid)
yes, it is a little small but I'm very skinny and somehow feel ok to me.

You just gotta ride it. I'm 6'4 and ride a 18'er. I'm perfect on it.

NOT 2 small

I've said it before... I'm 6'6" and ride a 14.5". No probs at all

From what I've read here it may well depend on things other than just your height such as if you have short or long legs as well as the make of bike. I've heard that Marin Bikes for one run a bit big so a 17 may work on one of those where a 19 would be best on another make. Overall though it does sound like the 19 is going to be better but as others have mentioned give it a try. It would also be nice to be able to compare with maybe another model from the same maker; that is with a 19.

Now that you've measured yourself and found you're 6'0', don't forget!

Indeed. The geometry of the frame is meant to be matched to both your leg length and torso length in a comfortable riding position for the riding you do. The majority of tall riders who fit on short, short bikes either do so because their legs are very limber, or because the bike has a tiny frame but enormous front triangle length.

I am 6' tall. Some years ago I found a 17'' unused CF Coyote Mono six with a Sachs Quartz group at a fleamarket. OK bike said the salesman -45$. Yes it is too small but with a long seatpost, but it has served me very well for many years now. (I am putting it out to pasture now, the idea of old, early CF technology with many miles on rocky roads and paths is a bit too scary).

your welcome. now go ride some bikes, the larger side of medium and up is probably best for you. good luck.

I dunno... not an expert but I'm only 5'8" and both my bikes are 17... just seems so small for someone 6' or more. Regardless if you have incredibly short legs, your torso then would be much too long for a 17. You'll would to put a mundo stem on there, something huge!!!

Best thing to do is have fitting and allow the fitter to recommend bike size. No matter how great a deal the bike if it don't fit you won't be happy!

Your 100% correct.

I'm 5'10 with a 32" cycling inseam and when I was trying out 2004 model Marins I could not stand over an 18.5 inch frame at all.. the 17 I bought was perfect. That being said I am comfortable on a 19 inch trek.

looking at the specs on marins this year the standover is listed as slightly higher if that is possible.

I'm 6' and I rode a 18.5" frame and it was good....now I have a Medium Enduro (not really sure what exact size) which is probably around 16-18" and it fits me fine.

I'm going to go with the "not 2 small" crowd but you should try it if you can and make up your own mind.

I'm 5'10 1/2 with a 32" inseam and I have an 18" Access XCL hardtail and a 17.5" '05 Marin Rift Zone that both fit me perfectly. Once you can stand over a frame, the seat tube length is much less important for comfort than the top tube length. I'm average build and a 22.5" to 23" top tube with a 110mm or 120mm stem is about right (it really depends on how swept back the bars are).

You should try the fit caculator at zinncycles.com or competitivecyclist.com (their MTB calculator, though). Both pretty much nailed my frame size w/top tube length from the measurements I supplied.

I am 5'10 and I just bought a Trek 6500 in 17.5 felt nice when I rode it, Now to put a whole bunch of junk on it