carbon frame geometry question

[Dennis]

now, please don't get me wrong, I love my Oz (Blue Crush). Its by far the best riding mtb I have ever ridden, and I have been putting lots and lots of mileage on it lately. It fits me very well (medium size frame), except for one issue. the standover height.
I know that the medium and large frames have the same standover height. Does anyone have an idea as to why the standover height on these frames is so high? I mean, its over 30", which to a 5'8" person like me is stretching things a bit, if you know what I mean.
This does not mean I will ever give up this bike, but a couple people have asked me why I ride a bike thats a bit "too big" for me, and I don't have a good answer as to why the bike is so high (at least to me). the top tube length is just about perfect for me.
thanks for any info anyone has on this subject.
[smiley=groucho.gif]

[Scott]

My guess is our Oz s.o. is made a little higher than normal to allow for a slight upward climb of the top tube in order to gain the strength needed in the front triangle for the very wide range of duty an Oz is expected to perform.  Also, I think many people ride frames to small for them-it's great when you're starting out and dabbing or tipping over often but you get over that phase and by then many riders have grown used to the slightly cramped cockpit.

[Ionit]

I'm 5'6" With an inseam of around 30" which you would think poses a dilemma. To everyone’s surprise I never had any issues.
I attribute the high standover length primarily to the wideness of the tubes and to the fact that It would make more sense in a manufacturing standpoint to make one frame and only change critical dimensions to accommodate different sized people. Like "Top Tube length" and "BB to Seat clamp length". which both could be adjusted by simply making the seat neck longer and higher.
To sum this up our medium frames are just tweaked versions of the Large frames.
k2 not only made the size of the frames similar but they use a 17.1" chainstay for both models which is long for both sizes (M and L).

[Dennis]

I2,
wow, so you are a bit shorter than me, but your inseam is longer. guess my legs really are short!!

thanks for the replies, just for fun I've looked up geometries of other fs bikes (new ones) and some of them have standover heights for "small" size frames that are just about the same as the Oz. granted these are longer travel bikes, but very interesting as far as I'm concerned. Its almost like the industry is oriented towards taller people.
It seems to me that the windsurfing industry (something I've dealt with quite extensively over the  years) is oriented towards tall, thin people, whereas the sailboat industry is oriented towards heavier people. just something I've noticed in terms of equipment and clothing sizing.
for instance, I wear medium or large sizes in bike and windsurfing apparel, but small in most sailing apparel.
just an observation.
[smiley=groucho.gif]

[Ionit]

Yeah its really hard to find bikes for people with short legs. I hate to admit but cycling is a sport for tall people. It has something to do with stronger and more energy efficient petal strokes which gives them the advantage. That doesn't mean a shorter rider is always the worst rider. I've done just fine in my local races. I've won the All around award and kept the most consistent point gain race after race. Maybe if I had blonde hair blue eyes and was 6" taller I would have won every race. Take a look at my post about "chainstay improvment" and tell me what you think.

[tim]

I have a med. 957 and am heavy with small legs (30" inseam)...while the "standover" height is a little too tall for me, when I put my weight on the bike and get the 20% sag on the rear fork, the dimension is perfect!  I think standover height is a good thing to look at but you really need to take into account the amount of flex the rear shock has when weighted. That's how we ride the bike, I rarely ride my bike with my feet planted firmly on the ground
Just my opinion...I'm a newbie

[Old Proflexer]

couple of thoughts -

i believe sailing apparel like hunting garb, is designed to be layered and i end up using a medium instead of a large - sizes have a tendency to run on the roomy side.

(perhaps it is also the inordinate amount of beer drinking, gun toting, big bellie contestors that are in my alternate sport that has clothing run larger as well - in some hunting circles, a 48" waist is average/medium)

as for tim's standover, i can't recall a time riding my bike with my feet firmly planted on the ground either, but when they do touch, i'm glad i have my standover.  with sag, i just worry about the bottom bracket dragging.

OP

[Ionit]

I think compensating for sag when choosing a bike's height probably is a hospitalized offence. Consider the following. If you encounter a situation where your loose control and your weight is shifted all off the bike the top tube could meet your crotch. In which case your bike would be without any sage at all. Ouch [smiley=dead.gif]