Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Mountain Biking
Reload this Page >

OK, Fit gurus, explain something to this roadie.

Mountain Biking Mountain biking is one of the fastest growing sports in the world. Check out this forum to discuss the latest tips, tricks, gear and equipment in the world of mountain biking.

OK, Fit gurus, explain something to this roadie.

Old 09-19-08, 08:43 AM
Senior Member
Thread Starter
gfrance's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: New York City
Posts: 1,757
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
OK, Fit gurus, explain something to this roadie.

I have been noticing on cyclingnews, that when they publish riders specs and their bike set ups, things seem on the large side to my roadie skewed way of thinking. Chris Eatough's and now Lance Armstrong's bikes are a good case in point. Are mountain bikes fitted according to top tube primarily as in road bikes? Or is there more consideration to something else? Both riders are roughly 5'10" (same as me) and are on 62ishcm effective top tube frames. That 'sounds' giant. What gives? My MTB is I believe a 59cm top tube if I recall; Titus Racer X from 2004. It seems to fit me fine. But could it be too small still?


Frame: Trek Top Fuel 9.8, 19.5"
Rear shock: DT Swiss XR Carbon w/ remote lockout
Fork: RockShox SID World Cup w/ PopLoc remote lockout, 100mm travel

Critical measurements
Rider's height: 1.77m (5' 10") ; Weight: 73kg (161lb)
Seat tube length, c-c: n/a
Seat tube length, c-t: 590mm
Saddle height, from BB (c-t): 765mm
Tip of saddle nose to C of bars (next to stem): 609mm
C of front wheel to top of bars (next to stem): 712mm
Top tube length: 625mm (effective)

Chris Eatough

Frame: Trek Top Fuel, Alpha Red Aluminum, 90mm travel, 19.5" frame
Rear shock: Rock Shox Monarch 3.3
Fork: Rock Shox SID Race with Pushloc remote

Critical measurements
Rider's height: 1.78m (5' 10") Weight: 72.6kg (160lb)
Seat tube length, c-c: 453mm
Seat tube length, c-t: 495mm
Top tube length: 628mm
Saddle height, from BB (c-t): 753mm
Saddle nose tip to C of bars: 568mm
C of front hub to top of bars: 600mm
gfrance is offline  
Old 09-19-08, 10:00 AM
Gravity Is Yer Friend
dirtbikedude's Avatar
Join Date: May 2002
Location: "Over the Hill" and going down fast in the 805.
Posts: 2,961

Bikes: Scott Gambler, Scott Ransom, Kona Bear, Bianchi 928 Carbon/Chorus, C'Dale Rize4

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
The 59cm Racer X is a medium Titus frame which is an 18" frame. At 5'10 I would say you are running on the larger side of the spectrum.

Pure roadies that dabble in mountain bikes tend to fit their mtb's on the larger side, as if fitting a road bike because the feel is more familiar. Long rides, long ascents and smooth/semi-smooth trails will be the bread and butter of the larger frame. If you get into technical riding, jumps and/or drops then a smaller frame would WORK best although it may feel way to small.

Also, xc racers fit their bikes more like a roadie as it allows more power to the pedals. At the levels of the two riders you mentioned, they would be given a different size mtb if the trails got very technical but if that happened they probably, well, at least Armstrong, would not ride.
dirtbikedude is offline  
Related Topics
Thread Starter
Last Post
Folding Bikes
06-09-19 05:22 PM
Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg)
03-29-09 11:28 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.