# Bike sells rep won't sell me the XL size!



## bikedna (Apr 10, 2011)

So now I'm down to 320 lbs. Grateful for all the feed back!

I was able to pick up a used Giant Ricon 26er. Love it but it is way to tall for my size. I'm 6 feet tall. So now looking for an upgrade. 

My budget for a new mtb is $1500.

I test rode the Giant Fathom in XL frame and the cockpit is awesome!
But was told for my height to go with Large frame.
The large frame feels ok but not as comfy as the XL. 

My current bike stand over height is 34 inches . 

STAND OVER HEIGHT (mm) Large: 753 vs XL: 786. 
I love how the XL cockpit feels vs the Large. 

My local bike sells rep insist and will only sell me the Large size. 

Do you fellow riders agree?

Do I have to detox off my current super tall 26er mtb?

Thanks for all the help!


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

standover is the wrong way to size bikes. It's a consideration, but it should be lower on the list.

#1 is always the reach to the handlebars. It's the least adjustable part of the whole setup.

At 6ft tall, my inclination is that the large is probably the best. At 5'8, I can manage on a large frame, but medium is pretty much always better. But my assessment might be different seeing you on the bike. If you're 6' tall with a particularly long torso, it might be a good idea to size up. If you've got a short torso and/or short arms, staying a size smaller is probably the better choice. But since I can't see you on the bike, my impressions are only that - impressions.

If your current bike is definitely the wrong size, then that absolutely is going to color the way you feel about new bikes. Getting even a little bit closer to the right size is going to feel much better. If I was you, I'd visit a handful of shops over a period of a couple weeks to try different bikes. And also to try out different salespeople and see what they say about the bike size they recommend for you.


----------



## life behind bars (May 24, 2014)

Yep, @ 6'1" (more or less) I fit pretty well on most large size Giants.


----------



## NYrr496 (Sep 10, 2008)

They should sell you whatever you want. It sounds like the Large really is better for you. If you really want the XL, tell them it's a gift for your cousin who's 6'5".


----------



## Gigantic (Aug 31, 2012)

Go with the large. I'm 6'8" and ride an xl, as others have said, standover is just one factor and not the most important. Reach is more important and having too much, will affect handling and comfort over the long run.


----------



## Guest (May 14, 2017)

"Lorem semper recta sunt" - The customer is always right. However, I know more folks who are angry that a bike shop "let them" buy a bike that was too big or small than I know folks who are disappointed when the bike shop actually recommended the right size bike. Fix the cockpit issue with a longer stem or set-back seat post or both.


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

With a 34" inseam and only 6ft, I'd have to tend to agree with the shop on saying the Large is the size for you. Reach on the Large is 44mm and 460mm for the XL. I'm 6'2", 35.25" inseam, long arms and my ideal trail Reach would be somewhere between 460-480mm with a 50-70mm stem and 780-800mm bar, depending on which bias I was after. 

If you wanted to run a really short stem, say 30-40mm, then the XL could work for you and would be more stable on descents, but it all depends on what you like and what sort of trails you'll be riding. What length stem did both sizes have?


----------



## KidCharlemagne (Dec 11, 2012)

I would say that the bike sales guy is doing you a favor. Any time you get a sales guy willing to risk a sale you should listen carefully. 

I bought a fat bike two years ago and they recommended a medium, where everything I had ever bought in my life was a large or extra-large. I was initially very skeptical but I finally decided that they knew what they were talking about after they did a full fit, and went with the medium. I have been completely happy with it and I feel that the fat bike fits just as well as my 58cm road bike (6'0", 240, 29" inseam so I have a long reach).


----------



## bikedna (Apr 10, 2011)

Thanks for all the great replies!

I'm going to trust my local shop and go large.


----------



## RAKC Ind (Jan 27, 2017)

I have the opposite matter. I used to ride large was hard as hell to get a good fit, went XL and it fit perfectly. I shouldn't be XL frame but I'm long in the torso. But XL is being done with 60mm stem and 780 bars. Only way I'm comfortable and I'm 6'1.

Your more legs than me, so large may very well be a better fit.

But DO NOT always assume the sales guy knows more. If he's not an avid cyclist himself and we'll experienced in bike fitting, may not be a good idea to listen 

Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

RAKC Ind said:


> But DO NOT always assume the sales guy knows more


This is true. My wife has been in the market for a bike for awhile. She has a super short reach, but if you only base your sizing on her height, you'll assume she fits best on a small. While her current bike is a small, and she loves it, it has a definite xc fit to it. She's a bit stretched out, and can only fit 1 or 2 droppers that are on the market, and it doesn't have stealth routing to accept those posts. Works great as an xc bike, but she wants something more rowdy, that she can fit a normal dropper on, and that she has more range of motion on.

With more recent bikes getting longer top tubes, she's found that she likes the fits of smalls even less. Her current bike has a somewhat short top tube for the size, and a fairly short stem. Current "small" frames in the category of bikes she's looking at (130mm travel-ish) have tt's so long that there'd be no room for a stem to get the same reach she has now. So it's a non-starter. She's demo'd some, and nope.

We took a LONG road trip so she could ride an xs in a bike she tried in a small, and had just finished a nice ride on varied trails and she loved it. We stopped in a different shop that carried different brands, and the dude threw out a full-on mansplaining sales pitch saying she REALLY ought to be on a small (then put her on a small Intense Spider, which looked too long to me), which I think was heavily related to the fact that he didn't have a single xs in the shop. I pointed out that her arms are very short, and he told me that didn't matter at all, which I know for a fact is utter bs. I let the guy go, partly because I wanted to hear what he had to say, but also because I could tell that if I said much, it would become a pissing match. By the end of it, my wife was really starting to doubt what she felt on the ride. Thankfully, I got some really nice video of her in a chunky section where the xs fit looked exactly where it should have. She was even comfortable on 760mm bars, which surprised me. But her position on the bike looked great.

She asked me later what I thought of what the sales guy was saying, and I laid it out for her that I thought he was full of ****. Some of what he said regarding bike handling made sense, but he put too many things into absolutes that I was uncomfortable with. I've been watching my wife ride mtb's for 12 years. I've talked to her a lot about how she feels on different bikes she's ridden, things she finds difficult, and I've watched her a lot. I also happen to have worked in shops a lot over the past several years and I've had a good bit of experience sizing people up for just about every type of bike out there. Arm length absolutely matters. The ratio between torso length and measured inseam absolutely matters. Sizing/fitting bikes gets tricky when a person's body dimensions start getting outside the norm. A bike that technically "fits" someone with a short torso and a long inseam will wind up with a LOT of exposed seatpost, which creates handling issues unless you address the weight imbalance that creates. Someone with a long torso and short legs is going to find that the right sized bike has very little standover clearance. Those sorts of fit issues create challenges when you're trying to choose the "right" bike that minimizes the tweaks you need to make.

A shop employee who doesn't "get" that is going to recommend a lot of bikes that aren't the right fit for people. The guy that told my wife to ride small frames...yeah, he never actually watched my wife ride the bike he recommended. WTF, dude? I don't think we're going to be visiting that shop in the future.


----------



## RAKC Ind (Jan 27, 2017)

That's how I found I needed an XL. Demo ride (trek demo day). Been riding a large the whole time but was dying to try a new fuel ex 9.8. 

At the dismay of the reps I told them to give me the large, use my pedals. Set the seat at 29" which meant almost as low as the reverb would insert in the seat tube. I had a ton of standover clearance which was odd(lowered TT design).

Felt a bit big at first, moved the seat more centered and away I went. Damn if it didn't fit like a glove. Went back out later on my 29er and it hit me, my long torso and arms in relation to legs had me sized wrong.

Bought a used Mukluk XL, stem down to 80mm, bars out to 780mm and fits perfect. 2011 so TT was slightly shorter compared to current.

So I kept with it, new Cannondale Beast, XL. 60mm stem, 780mm bars. Me and the bike just jive like nothing else.

I spent 4 years getting my 29er fit right and at my most fit physically, I was able to get it close. But nothing like my fat and beast fit me now. But part of my issue is broad shoulders so wide bars is a must. And knees don't like set back seat posts (neither does my bike handling either since I am yet to own a dropper).

Sometimes shops are going to go after what they have to sell. It's much better to get an actual demo or at least ride for more than a few minutes.

Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk


----------



## zooey (Oct 31, 2016)

RAKC Ind said:


> Sometimes shops are going to go after what they have to sell. It's much better to get an actual demo or at least ride for more than a few minutes.


This. "Sell what's in stock" is a common sales-person saying. Having too many SKUs to manage, due to people wanting variety/options, is retailer hell. They don't want to custom order anything without a serious deposit either, preferably a 100% deposit, which might actually be troublesome if they have any sort of customer satisfaction policy.

I find when I fit well on the stock config, everything works better than if I had to change stem length, seatpost setback, or whatever else I need to do to adjust fit. Just feels more balanced in the technical sections, and generally more comfortable to handle/pedal.

Understeer and oversteer, suspension, and overall behavior regarding pedaling and traction in technical cases are problems caused by having too much weight bias rearward or forward. Too much weight on the rear causes the front to slip sooner, leading to understeer (the bike just wants to continue moving forward). Customizing for a big/wide DH tire up front and light/skinny fast rolling tire can compensate for rearward weight bias, but the same tire front and rear which offers much more predictable handling, without the rear rim experiencing excessive abuse from a rearward setup. XC steep HA bikes can be too forward, the rear prone to slipping up steep hills, cutting corners too close, and sliding sideways due to hitting any bump/slope in a corner (oversteer). Too rearward on a climb causes the front to wander, especially at slower speeds, most notably when you're stuck behind someone slower. Suspension feels more dialed when it's balanced.

Short stems for the sake of short stems isn't always beneficial. E29, ROS9, SB5c, all size med/18", for a 5'7" rider, all felt better with stock 60mm stems over a 35mm length stem. On the other hand, an Air9RDO felt better with a 35mm stem and Superfly 100 felt better with a 50mm stem. 71 and 70d HA probably put a bit too much weight on the front for my liking. Always felt discomfort on cramped bikes, especially for longer distance riding (2.5+ hour days).

The biggest reason to size down is to get a shorter wheelbase, which is more playful the shorter it is. It will pop more off of bumps and is able to be whipped around easier, for more of a BMX-like riding-on-top-of-the-bike feel. On the other hand, if you don't want bumps and dips causing your bike to tilt (harsh feeling bumps, bucking, going over the bars) and pop excessively, and want more stability, max speed, confidence, and comfort instead, a longer wheelbase is better. Considering you're going for a HT and not a big FS bike, it may very well be more enjoyable downsizing and embracing the inevitable bouncing and knowing it's no endurance bike.

In the end, decisions like this tend to be more emotion based and going with what personally feels right is a decision you can live with better, than a decision made by someone else, if it turns out wrong. The more analyzing you do, the less you're able to come to a decision, due to there being no clear answer, just pros and cons.


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

So um, you're the lucky one that fits right there in the middle of where the engineers/designers have designed the bike and spec'd the stem, bar, post and saddle for, knew there had to be at least one person out there :skep: Seriously, how many people do you really think fall perfectly into a companies size? Not a whole lot, especially not those who mostly come on here asking for help, most are asking the question, "I'm a tweener, which size should I get?".

Also, yes some people just believe in short stems, but no people aren't just using short stems because they're trendy and in vogue, a lot of manufacturers are designing their frames to work best with short stems and wide bars. Your example of using a 50mm stem on the XC designed SF 100, is a clear example of not using the sort of length stem the bike was designed for and most likely using it "outside" of it's intended design intentions and modifying it to work there.



zooey said:


> I find when I fit well on the stock config, everything works better than if I had to change stem length, seatpost setback, or whatever else I need to do to adjust fit. Just feels more balanced in the technical sections, and generally more comfortable to handle/pedal.


----------



## Joules (Oct 12, 2005)

My experience in situations like this is refusal to sell you the size you think you need is code for "we're out of that size, so we're going to sell you something that doesn't fit, because you probably don't know any better."

Standover height is not a factor in fitting a bike. Someone who tells you a bike doesn't fit because of too little standover doesn't understand bike fit well enough to sell you a bike. 

I'd just about bet the rent money the rep knows they're out of XLs for the year, and is trying to sell you what he can get.


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Joules said:


> My experience in situations like this is refusal to sell you the size you think you need is code for "we're out of that size, so we're going to sell you something that doesn't fit, because you probably don't know any better."
> 
> Standover height is not a factor in fitting a bike. Someone who tells you a bike doesn't fit because of too little standover doesn't understand bike fit well enough to sell you a bike.
> 
> I'd just about bet the rent money the rep knows they're out of XLs for the year, and is trying to sell you what he can get.


Sometimes that happens, but not always. I will tell the customer if I can't get any more of a particular bike rather than sell the wrong size. That is shitty when salespeople pull that move.

My #1 philosophy is honesty. If I don't know, I say so. If I don't have it or can't get it, I say so. And I will call out salespeople for doing it.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## Mdp3612 (Aug 15, 2016)

Wait he won't sell you an XL who the hell does he think he is. Did he forget the buyer is alway right?


----------



## Dan Zulu (Jul 5, 2008)

I learned the hard way that the recommendations to get 58cm or L frames was putting me on bikes far too small. I made my own decision this time and am 6'0" riding a 62cm Tamland 2, and am happy with it, on both paved and single track.


----------



## Muirenn (Jun 17, 2013)

Joules said:


> My experience in situations like this is refusal to sell you the size you think you need is code for "we're out of that size, so we're going to sell you something that doesn't fit, because you probably don't know any better."
> 
> Standover height is not a factor in fitting a bike. Someone who tells you a bike doesn't fit because of too little standover doesn't understand bike fit well enough to sell you a bike.
> 
> I'd just about bet the rent money the rep knows they're out of XLs for the year, and is trying to sell you what he can get.


Have to disagree on standover height importance. I know women who
Have 25" inseams and a lot of difficulty getting a bike with enough standover. I have problems with too much: I'm 5'7" with a 33.3" inseam. If a mountain bike has a seat tube of around 400 mm, I've far too much seat post exposed, and as a result, too much saddle to bar drop for a mountainbike, so too many spacers. An older style bike with a longer seat tube and higher Head tube would be a better fit, but that is a short list.


----------



## Namlehse (May 8, 2013)

I'm 6'4 with a 34" inseam, wish I could ride a large. With my torso as long as it is, I can't ride a bike smaller than XL. I think reach is a bigger importance than stand over, but that's personal preference. I feel high and unbalanced on large bikes.


----------



## RAKC Ind (Jan 27, 2017)

Namlehse said:


> I'm 6'4 with a 34" inseam, wish I could ride a large. With my torso as long as it is, I can't ride a bike smaller than XL. I think reach is a bigger importance than stand over, but that's personal preference. I feel high and unbalanced on large bikes.


Im 6'1, shorter inseam and still ride XL due to reach. As long as i can straddle the TT in padded shorts without boys getting crammed up inside thats all the clearance thats needed.

Really thats all anyone needs, standing legs almost together with shoes on, if your standing flat footed and your nether regions arent being smashed by the top tube your good to go.

Truly the hole needing a ton of standover is a mental fear. I have NEVER taken a hit from the TT to that region regardless of how much (or in the more recent cases of both my bikes being XLs now) or how little stand over I have. Seat has got me on small drops i wasnt ready for but never the TT.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

Of my 3 mtn bikes.... 

I have small 29HT SS, medium 29HT Geared, and large 27.5 FS. All fit me well and I am 5'7". 

Each bike does have a different stem length. 


Size up or size down usually is not that big of a deal if you can adjust the seat/stem to match. It comes down to feel and what is comfortable.


----------



## jeffj (Jan 13, 2004)

I try to remember to never say never, and I have had a few customers that were under 6' that fit best on an XL, and one was a woman (on a men's XL). If you can ride them both and have an in-depth discussion about why they feel you're best on the Large. My inclination is to tell you that they're probably correct, but it's best to ride them, and have a good discussion about it.


----------



## Tavic (Apr 25, 2016)

.....


----------

