# When are WSD REALLY women's-specific?



## petey15 (Sep 1, 2006)

I'm on the "lookout" for my next bike. I currently am riding a Giant Trance X 29er in a small. I'm somewhere between 5'4" and 5'5" depending on the day or shoes . I love my Trance, but I'm developing my skills and would like something more aggressive and slacker for our more technical and downhill trails. Something a little more playful and with a smaller wheel diameter.
I have a really good sense of fit and what is comfortable for me. Reach and standover are VERY important to me. I don't want to go into the whole argument that you're not "standing" over your bike when riding. I care about how much room I have should I have to bail quickly, or get started again on a slope. I am tired of guys chiming in saying it's not important - it is to ME. 
A friend of mine got a Liv Intrigue last year to replace her old Santa Cruz FS, and let me tell you, she was a good rider before, but her skills have greatly expanded since then. I asked her about it and she was like, I don't know, it's hard to explain, but this bike just fits me in every way - in size, in riding style...she suggested I try one sometime.
So, that got me thinking about maybe researching WSD bikes and what kinds of aggressive bikes were available. Was anyone even making them for women? The last truly aggressive bike specifically designed for women that I lusted after was the Transition Syren. Unfortunately they discontinued it long before I even came close to having any skills worthy of such a bike. The most aggressive WSD bikes I've come up with seem to top off at about 5" of travel, max. I've looked at Specialized, Trek, Scott, Giant, Santa Cruz, and Yeti. I compared standover and much to my dismay, most, even at their smallest offering, have a standover between 30 and 31". Seriously??? My inseam is 29.5". And standovers were consistently measured at the frames' lowest points on the top tube. 
I should mention I'm also looking for an aluminum frame, specifically. I know there are some bikes out there that might fit the bill, but they're carbon (sorry Stripes  ) and I'm old-school and paranoid. Now, here's where my long post gets interesting (and infuriating). I checked out the Juliana Roubion for giggles...and then read it is EXACTLY like the Bronson, except only available in carbon and super expensive. But hey, it's a pretty color, right? Oh, and different contact points (read women's saddle and smaller grips).
How about Yeti's Beti? Wow, Yeti bikes are sweet - lemme check that out. Huh...whaddya know. Same bike as the unisex SB5c or whatever they're calling it, but in a different color, only carbon, $$$ and holy crap, 30" standover...on their xs. Out of curiosity, how many times do they warranty a carbon frame on crash replacements? The only differences between the Beti and the unisex version? Color and "contact points". 
And then I heard about Trek's new women's Remedy. Cool, I thought. So I found a blurb about it from Eurobike: NEW! Trek Remedy 27.5 Women's Full Suspension Mountain Bike | 11 Highlights from Trek's 2016 Collection - Total Women's Cycling
Wait...did I just read that? Exactly the same as the unisex bike, no need to change geometry because no need to sit on it (if there's no need to sit on it, why put a women's saddle on it then) and smaller grips. Oh, but the color is different! They said (read the article, it's enlightening) that they changed the grips and saddle because women would do that anyway if buying the "men's" version and gave it a color they thought would find more appealing. How insulting is that?
So, that brings me down to Giant. A year ago they branched out and made Liv, which has women's-specific bikes and products. Their Intrigue SX has the most travel available with 160mm up front, aluminum, great standover, great specs for the price, and actual geometry changes from the men's versions. Granted, they aren't huge changes, but they are noticeable. I got a chance to demo the Liv Intrigue SX and I loved it. Felt like instead of basically going along with my bike at times, I was actually in control. It was very playful and confidence-inspiring on our downhill and technical trails and just plain fun. I didn't feel too stretched out or crowded in the cockpit. Oh, I never felt like I was going to endo because the front-center is a little shorter and the chainstay is so "long", lol (from another thread on the Giant forum). Maybe it's because I know how to distribute my weight. Maybe because it simply isn't an issue. You know what else? Pretty much I didn't notice anything except the trail I was riding! I didn't feel the saddle (meaning it didn't cause pain). And the more I rode, the more I was like, I wonder if I can do "this" with it. Yup! I felt confident going over logs and even sailed over one I always, always catch my down tube on. If I had to get off, no worries, it was easy to swing a leg back over. Thanks to a manufacturer who finally LISTENED to what women want and is doing their darnedest to deliver it, without just changing the color on the men's version. Seriously - we can tell the difference. You can paint poo a different color, but it doesn't change how it smells, ya know?


----------



## formica (Jul 4, 2004)

Have you found anything out there with geometry similar to the Intrigue? I LOVE mine but in my dreams I want carbon.


----------



## WaywardTraveller (Oct 2, 2011)

Feel better?

Glad you found a bike that works for you!


----------



## stacers (Oct 29, 2012)

Yeah, I agree with you - I looked at the Yeti Beti and Juliana, and was not impressed by the high standover. I don't understand it - even for men, why would this be a good thing? I also loved the way the Scott bikes ride, but again the standover was an issue for me, uncomfortable high on a small bike. I suspect that these bike companies are simply designing their bikes for a taller set, and the size small models are an afterthought. I can't see any guy who is 5'6" wanting a 30" standover either. 

I don't actually care for a women's specific bike (give me wide handlebars and regular size grips please), so I looked for a bike that had a geometry I liked, regardless of whether it was women's specific or men's.

I ended up on a Pivot Mach 4 (I'm more of a XC rider) and it's got an insanely low standover of 26.2" on a small frame. I LOVE LOVE LOVE it - I feel so much more confident on technical climbs because I know I can bail easily without worrying about the bike being in the way. Cornering and bike-body separation are also so much better on a bike with lower standover. I rode a Bronson with a 30" standover, and even though I have longish legs (32.5" inseam) I just hated it. 

Not women's specific, but if you're looking for a more aggressive bike in carbon (formica), the Pivot Mach 6 also has a more friendly geometry - 28" standover in size sm, 27.9 in XS. Geometry is a bit different - more slack. It's a fun bike though. I have no need for a 6" bike, but I took one for a demo and had a blast on it.


----------



## formica (Jul 4, 2004)

thanks... the intrigue is still new enough I'm not really looking to replace it.


----------



## Lucy Juice (Dec 29, 2010)

I agree with Stacers, I like wide bars!

The WSD conversation really interests me. I've heard it repeated ad nauseam that women's bodies are proportioned differently, but I've never actually seen anyone back this up with data or a source. And then today, I ran across this: http://www.womenscycling.ca/blog/georgena-terry/womens-body-proportions-different-mens/ which states the data shows the opposite, but there's still a good reason why women feel better on bikes with shorter top tubes!

I do know, from teaching yoga, that even among a group of women or men, there is a lot of variation in body type and proportions and because of that, there is truly not a "one-geometry-fits-all" for women OR men--but it does seem there's a hole in the market for bikes with geometry like the Intrigue, that fit a certain body proportion AND riding style.

Anecdotally--I rode a 2012 Trek Lush for several years, loved it, but sold it this spring. Demoed a 2016 yesterday and it was just awful for me. So however they changed the geometry, it was not in my favor! Really disappointing to read what that Trek rep had to say about the Remedy. I generally like Trek, but that's just ignorant...


----------



## petey15 (Sep 1, 2006)

The Intrigue SX addressed the wider bars and shorter stem complaint many demo riders had and put them on. I like wider bars and "normal" grips, too. Lots of women said they wished it was available in carbon, too (from what the rep told me when I demo'd it). I wouldn't be surprised if they did offer it in carbon in the future if sales are good.

I agree, I don't necessarily think I "need" a WSD...but having a bike with a shorter reach and standover is awesome, and I'm sure there are guys out there who feel the same way. As far as color schemes, I don't need it to look too feminine - guess it depends on the overall aesthetics. I'm not against pinks (hot or darker) and purples. I actually think the regular Intrigue's color scheme is quite sharp.


----------



## Lucy Juice (Dec 29, 2010)

And see, ^^that's what's awesome about Liv. They really listened to what their customer base was saying and responded!


----------



## Fuzzle (Mar 31, 2015)

Good info. here. Gives me something to consider for the future.

I'm somewhere between 5'3' and 5'4'. and I have a problem with standover. My husband doesn't get it like most guys and I feel insulted. 

At this point 'm I still working on my skills and the 29er has helped in many ways so I will stick with it for now. Another issue is I don't feel I can bail out of if needed either and I don't think that's too good for building up confidence. 

I hope this isn't a dumb question. I also feel I'm sitting a bit to upright. What do you guys think about flipping my bars or stem to get a negative rise? My grips are higher then my seat. From what I've read the base line to start with is bars equal with the seat.


----------



## stacers (Oct 29, 2012)

littlebird said:


> And see, ^^that's what's awesome about Liv. They really listened to what their customer base was saying and responded!


I agree. My previous bike was an old school Giant WSD and it was great - they've come a long way since then and I'm glad to see they're listening to customer input. Props to the company for making good bikes for smaller riders, and listening to what they really need.

Here's my "men's" bike:









I love a company that engineers a size small the right way, and gives me range of colors to choose from. Sure, I love my pink, but I know a lot women would hate it - could have picked a traditional color instead


----------



## formica (Jul 4, 2004)

Do you have any room to lower the stack on your stem by removing spacers? That would be the first thing to look at. A lot of bikes are set up with more spacers than really needed. You can also go to stem with less rise.

Upright is not necessarily a bad thing. I don't know your history, but riders coming over from road riding are more familiar with a laid over feel. Some mtb geometry can feel "sit up and beg" after being on a road or serious XC type set up. Does this make any sense to you?

What bike are you currently on?


----------



## Fuzzle (Mar 31, 2015)

formica said:


> Do you have any room to lower the stack on your stem by removing spacers? That would be the first thing to look at. A lot of bikes are set up with more spacers than really needed. You can also go to stem with less rise.
> 
> Upright is not necessarily a bad thing. I don't know your history, but riders coming over from road riding are more familiar with a laid over feel. Some mtb geometry can feel "sit up and beg" after being on a road or serious XC type set up. Does this make any sense to you?
> 
> What bike are you currently on?


I ride a 2014 Santa Cruz Superlight.

I have a very long road history. I also did MTB too back in the 90's and then all we had was fire road and nothing really technical. Getting back into it is new territory.

I bought my old bike from some guy and it was custom built for him. I can't seem to hold as a straight a line on it like I can my Superlight, however I like the stretched out feel of the old frame geometry.

I do have some added spacers and I think I can drop my stem about a 1/2 inch. My stem is also reversible.

Thanks so much! You made this easy .


----------



## formica (Jul 4, 2004)

that should say, "road riding or old school XC geometry"


----------



## Fuzzle (Mar 31, 2015)

You right!. The mtb is a full on race setup. 

I flipped the stem, but the spacers couldn't be removed. It's does make a difference.

I gave some thought about what you said regarding sitting more upright. I think I can get use to it. I don't race anymore so as long as I'm comfortable and confident at my ripe old age I'm happy.

Thanks for your help!


----------



## formica (Jul 4, 2004)

If you practice your ready/attack position paying attention to being well balanced through your feet, that should help you to feel more comfortable.


----------



## otter12 (Jun 11, 2006)

petey15 said:


> Wait...did I just read that? Exactly the same as the unisex bike, no need to change geometry because no need to sit on it (if there's no need to sit on it, why put a women's saddle on it then) and smaller grips. Oh, but the color is different! They said (read the article, it's enlightening) that they changed the grips and saddle because women would do that anyway if buying the "men's" version and gave it a color they thought would find more appealing. How insulting is that?


It's not insulting at all, that's exactly why I chose the Juliana Roubion when I could have easily bought a med Bronson. They both fit me great (i'm 5'6") I like having another color option, I like the bar width and its the first time in 20 yrs I can use the saddle that came on a new bike. Yeti Beti's, in addition to changes to the contact points have the suspension tuned for riders 90-170lbs compared to 130-210lbs. I would seriously consider a Beti model if I were going to purchase a yeti, because is more what I want. 
Why would it be insulting to have more options, pick the bike that you like better WDS or Not.... it's good to have choices.


----------



## petey15 (Sep 1, 2006)

otter12 said:


> It's not insulting at all, that's exactly why I chose the Juliana Roubion when I could have easily bought a med Bronson. They both fit me great (i'm 5'6") I like having another color option, I like the bar width and its the first time in 20 yrs I can use the saddle that came on a new bike. Yeti Beti's, in addition to changes to the contact points have the suspension tuned for riders 90-170lbs compared to 130-210lbs. I would seriously consider a Beti model if I were going to purchase a yeti, because is more what I want.
> Why would it be insulting to have more options, pick the bike that you like better WDS or Not.... it's good to have choices.


It's not insulting to have options - I wasn't objecting to that. I'm objecting to companies offering bikes specifically designed for women when in actuality there is no difference between those and the men's bikes (or unisex) other than color and contact points. Just don't call them women's-specific then. It's great the Beti has their shocks tuned differently. More color choices are great. But, to me, when I read "design", I'm thinking geometry changes to include lower standover and a shorter reach without impacting on the ride quality.


----------



## otter12 (Jun 11, 2006)

I guess my point was that I am a women and I don't need a lower standover or shorter reach, but I do like that the bikes are offered with changes to the contact points and colors. I've tried womens specific bikes that have shorter reach and they don't fit me so I'm glad we are getting bikes that have the same geometry. Maybe it would be better if they had bikes for shorter or petite riders too, since not all women are petite.


----------



## petey15 (Sep 1, 2006)

otter12 said:


> I guess my point was that I am a women and I don't need a lower standover or shorter reach, but I do like that the bikes are offered with changes to the contact points and colors. I've tried womens specific bikes that have shorter reach and they don't fit me so I'm glad we are getting bikes that have the same geometry. Maybe it would be better if they had bikes for shorter or petite riders too, since not all women are petite.


I agree with that, too. All the bikes I currently own are men's versions. I'd never even tried a women's-specific bike before because typically, the components weren't as good. But, in all of the bikes I own, I've made changes in order to tweak and improve the fit, and yes, they've included different bars, shorter stems, and different saddles. It was nice hopping on the Liv Intrigue and feeling like I wouldn't need to change a thing! In fact, I literally forgot about the saddle, and everything else because it fit and felt so good, it didn't stand out or bother me.

You're lucky you fit well on a "regular" bike - so many options available to you. There are lots of women out there that "women's-specific" bikes don't work for. I understand for you and them how nice it is to have the other options, including color choices available. It's just disappointing for a number of us when we check out a "women's-specific" bike thinking it will be smaller, only to discover it has a really long reach and high standover.


----------



## petey15 (Sep 1, 2006)

@stripes - I know, I was teasing about the carbon 😉. I just have a fear of spending all that money on a bike and damaging the carbon somehow. 

Basically, I think we can all agree having a lot of options available would be great for everyone...but unfortunately this isn't the case.


----------



## formica (Jul 4, 2004)

Stripes, you ever had your suspension PUSHED?


----------



## chuky (Apr 3, 2005)

Stripes said:


> Formica: You're aware I was talking about a bike in 2001 before PUSH really took off.
> 
> Also, when you buy a new bike, the _least_ thing you expect to do is take off the suspension bits and send them in to get them to be tuned correctly.
> 
> That makes absolutely NO sense for a new bike you just purchase. The only reason for Pushing something is after you've ridden it for a bit and want certain characteristics. Not because you bought this brand new WSD bike for someone who weighs much less than you do and you have to wait another 2-3 weeks before you have a working bike.


Manufacturers have to pick a range for ideal shock tune that applies across sizes. A bike that fits XS-XL sizes will require a shock that can respond well to a wide range of rider weights. In the WSD models, they can aim for a lighter tune as the size/weight range is on average, smaller, but still, they have to aim for "typical", unfortunately for riders that exist outside the average.

It can be a bit frustrating from the manufacturer side, too - you offer the widest range of bike sizes you can justify economically, advocate for shock tuning that fits a wide range of riders and still, people think you are somehow neglecting them when they are outside those parameters.


----------



## chuky (Apr 3, 2005)

This whole thread is kind of hilarious. Basically, we are complaining because a whole bunch of companies want women as customers and they have differing philosophies as to how to do it best:

_First, geometry changes are not a zero-sum game_. Making a bike feel more stable through longer chainstays affects the nimbleness of a bike. Shortening the top tube drives seat and head tube angle choices which affect technical handling. When a company designs a unisex bike, they are (hopefully), making choices that that will make this bike the best handling bike they can. That is the number one priority. When the number one priority becomes WSD geo, and is on a bike more likely to be purchased by a new rider, you may experience handling compromises that make a bike friendlier to a less experienced rider.

*Trek, Giant, Specialized*: These guys offer "WSD" models with different geo and spec from guy's models. Riders looking for a short top tube or specifically feminine aesthetic can look at these bikes and find a good option. Disadvantage is that because of lower volume sales, you may get a bit lower component spec for the money. Ride is also designed more for fit than for agility. May have some compromises when it comes to ideal handling - i.e. the stuff the OP was referring to in terms of chainstay length, etc.

*Yeti, Juliana*: These guys offer WSD build kits on standard frames with feminine aesthetics. Great for riders who want the same handling characteristics that drive the primary bike line. Nice for someone who wants a pretty bike and a women's saddle but that doesn't need/want the shorter top tube (in my experience, this torso/leg thing is about 50/50 across women's population). Disadvantage is that because of lower volume sales, you may get a bit lower component spec for the money. But on the other hand, you get all the same handling qualities that the guys get - for more advanced riders, this will be attractive.

*Pivot*: Offers different carbon layups in smaller sizes for a weight appropriate ride feel as well as some of the smallest bikes in the industry, but doesn't specify any particular women's component kits. Offers pink in the small sizes, but also offers all the same color options as the guys get, too. Emphasizes low standover, but handling is the same for all genders. Disadvantage is that if you want women's components you'll have to do some swapping.

So basically, you have 6 MTB companies with 3 differing philosophies all trying to reach women as customers and when looked at as a group, meeting the needs of a very wide variety of riders. This is a HUGE improvement on 15 years ago, when the only company attempting WSD was Titus (then owned by the guy who now owns Pivot). Seems like pretty good progress to me.

What none of this is is a trick or a deception on the part of the bike companies. It's just not realistic for them to operate this way - everyone is making what they feel are the best choices for making the most customers happy within that company's production capabilities.

Cheers,
C


----------



## Lucy Juice (Dec 29, 2010)

Chuky, I agree with you, but I do think it's a fair question to ask what really makes a WSD bike a WSD bike. 

Regarding shock tuning... as a short and light woman who is usually on the low end and sometimes under the weight range that stock shocks are tuned for, I do have to get my shock tuned pretty soon after buying the bike if not immediately. Manufacturers simply can't reach every individual in the market. For me, it's a fantastic idea for manufacturers to build their smaller bikes for lightweight riders! I love the lighter carbon layup strategy so I get a lighter bike and better power-to-weight ratio. Buuuut.... I also know that small =/= light and there are a lot of women who will take a major issue with my above statement. 

If you've been riding for a while, I think immediately swapping out components from a full build to meet your preferences is a given. Even WSD saddles are not one-size fits all. I don't care what kind of saddle comes on a bike because I KNOW I'll be replacing it with my favorite Bontrager (which I hoard :lol.


----------



## petey15 (Sep 1, 2006)

littlebird said:


> Chuky, I agree with you, but I do think it's a fair question to ask what really makes a WSD bike a WSD bike.
> 
> Regarding shock tuning... as a short and light woman who is usually on the low end and sometimes under the weight range that stock shocks are tuned for, I do have to get my shock tuned pretty soon after buying the bike if not immediately. Manufacturers simply can't reach every individual in the market. For me, it's a fantastic idea for manufacturers to build their smaller bikes for lightweight riders! I love the lighter carbon layup strategy so I get a lighter bike and better power-to-weight ratio. Buuuut.... I also know that small =/= light and there are a lot of women who will take a major issue with my above statement.
> 
> If you've been riding for a while, I think immediately swapping out components from a full build to meet your preferences is a given. Even WSD saddles are not one-size fits all. I don't care what kind of saddle comes on a bike because I KNOW I'll be replacing it with my favorite Bontrager (which I hoard :lol.


Yes, that's all I was really asking - and is it fair to say a bike is "women's-specific" by just changing the color and touchpoints? I'm not disregarding the women who prefer it and fit fine on a the "men's" or unisex version or whatever you want to call it. But not all women do and then look hopefully at a "women's-specific" design in hopes of finding something that fits their dimensions and needs better.

I do understand that manufacturers can't build a bike for everyone, too. It's frustrating. But, I also feel that if we just accept what is given to us without questioning anything, nothing will change and progress won't be made. I'm grateful for the progress that has been made...I just feel like they (the industry) could do more.

I appreciate the different opinions. I'm learning a lot.


----------



## Rae6503 (Jun 30, 2009)

Maybe they should probably just label all of them unisex, and maybe offer an option of which grips and saddle you want, etc. I'm sure some men would rock a pink bike.


----------



## chuky (Apr 3, 2005)

petey15 said:


> Yes, that's all I was really asking - and is it fair to say a bike is "women's-specific" by just changing the color and touchpoints?...I just feel like they (the industry) could do more.


1. WSD is a term created by Trek for a road bike line, I think. It's been a while, but I'm pretty sure that they were the first company to shorten top tubes, add a women's saddle and give it a name. You will notice that most other companies shy away from this exact phrasing, Trek may have it trademarked, I can't remember.

WSD isn't a scientific set of design features, but when it first emerged, it was very difficult to buy small road bikes and due to the Lance effect, small road bikes, and road bikes in general, were in high demand. Most of them went to very new riders seeking comfort and the ability to finish a charity ride - not dedicated cyclists. Short top tubes, high stems and cushy saddles were the rule. New riders are awesome, but the bikes were designed for folks who had very little concern regarding handling. They were TERRIBLE in a group ride or crit, super sketchy.

When translated to MTB - the same principles apply - most WSD style bikes are designed for comfort first, and handling second. There are standouts of course, but a bike that is hard to manual may not be because you don't have the skills - it may just not be designed to do it very well. As company that choses to address touch points and suspension IS designing a bike that can be called WSD - especially if the segment of women you choose to design for are the 50% with long torsos and short legs. Personally, I don't like the way WSD stuff rides - I am experienced enough that I can really tell when handling is compromised - but I also know that I one among a very diverse group and certainly don't begrudge riders who find happiness on a different fit. I am glad we all have options that work these days.

2. As far as the industry doing more goes, I promise you, we want your money.  That said, we also want to keep all the people in our companies employed and keep our doors open. I've posted extensively on why women's gear is hard to make and why it is hard for shops to keep in stock:

Making Gear for Women:
Better Gear for Women- Mtbr.com

Stocking Gear for Women:
Better Gear for Women- Mtbr.com


----------



## Lucy Juice (Dec 29, 2010)

Chuky, may I ask where you work? You have a trove of knowledge on this stuff.


----------



## chuky (Apr 3, 2005)

littlebird said:


> Chuky, may I ask where you work? You have a trove of knowledge on this stuff.


It isn't too hard to figure out, but I'm not representing the company when I post, it is all my own opinion and I just want to keep stuff separate-ish .

C


----------



## Lucy Juice (Dec 29, 2010)

chuky said:


> It isn't too hard to figure out, but I'm not representing the company when I post, it is all my own opinion and I just want to keep stuff separate-ish .
> 
> C


Totally understand. I really appreciate your knowledge and input, especially knowing you've been in the industry for a while (it seems).


----------



## chuky (Apr 3, 2005)

Since 92 if you count my mechanic days. :-0 
I'm so old. hahaha


----------



## laine (Oct 4, 2012)

Thanks chuky for your industry insights! I love reading these conversations, since I'm 5'1" and lots o' bike shops wanted to put me on a WSD bike. But I struggled with a lot of them. They didn't come with the components I wanted and most of the larger brand WSD ones didn't allow for builds from the frame up (this was about 2/2.5 years ago). 

I ended up with a Pivot Mach 5.7 - the standover is fantastic - even with my recent conversion it to 27.5. Nobody likes clam slam.

-laine


----------



## sooshee (Jun 16, 2012)

Rae6503 said:


> Maybe they should probably just label all of them unisex, and maybe offer an option of which grips and saddle you want, etc. I'm sure some men would rock a pink bike.


My cyclocross bike is unisex and is pink and black... S-Works Crux. Love it! Specialized offered a black/pink color scheme on the S-Works Epic last year, too, which is a "men's" bike, and the only one I've ever seen in person is ridden by a man. So there are indeed men out there that would rock pink!

My single speed MTB is black/purple and a men's offering now that I think about it... and many many many men ride the bike!


----------



## EcoTravelerChick (Jun 27, 2012)

This is a great post! I've learned a lot from you all!

my first "big girl" bike (i.e. more than $500) was a 2013 Trek Lush S - it was the first time I ever rode a bike with a generous standover height (I'm barely 5'1"), and I definitely fit the "average women's proportions" (my inseam is 29" and I have a very short torso), so I loved the short top tube - it helped me feel more in control.

Fast forward a couple of years and I was starting to feel that I've outgrown the bike. I realize I like all mountain (dare I call it "enduro"  ) riding far more than cross country, and I needed a burlier bike. I looked at the Giant Intrigue, and nearly bought one, but then started looking around some more, and decided if I was going to spend the money I might as well spend a bit more and go carbon, with 150-160mm suspension, and really get my dream bike. 

I spent a month or more researching, and in the end I bought the Juliana Roubion. I was initially very leery of the standover height, especially since I'm not in a position to test ride anything before I buy it where I live, but it turns out that it hasn't been an issue. It feels simply amazing to ride! Several of my friends have commented that I look extremely comfortable on it, and my position is perfect. So I've gone from a WSD to technically a "unisex," but in some ways I think it is a natural progression - the WSD gave me the geometry to be comfortable and gain skills and confidence, the Roubion will (hopefully) take me to the next level of riding!

one last thing - I know the Roubion is the same bike as the Bronson... I even looked at the different Bronson models when I was making the purchase, but the price was essentially the same for the same spec'd Bronson, and the Roubion's color is just SO pretty!!


----------

