# Are women-specific design bikes actually better?



## weekendthrasher (Jul 26, 2011)

I am curious if any have experience to share regarding comparisons between women-specific design full suspension mountain bikes and men's bikes. Specifically, my wife is looking at comparing the Trek Lush and Specialized Safire. Whereas, my gut tells me she would be well served with the smallest size men's Specialized Stumpjumper (which I currently ride the Large size of to great satisfaction). She's been riding the Specialized ERA Expert, but has been needing more travel and forgiveness for the type of riding we're enjoying.

Any feedback is greatly appreciated.


----------



## KAriadne (Sep 14, 2011)

Women-specific design bikes are are better for the women they fit. Test riding all three bikes (or more) is her best bet.

I happen to have a long torso. Many WSDs are specifically designed for shorter torsos. It seems that's how most women are built, but I'm not. In fact, I can rarely buy dresses for the same reason. So I ride a 17" Stumpjumper Comp 29. My only complaint with the bike is trouble getting the brake levers adjusted for my woman-hands.

Can't test ride all the bikes? Maybe take her dress shopping!


----------



## NicoleB (Jul 21, 2011)

i have a super short torso, however, i've ridden both men and women bikes. Right now im on a mens XS and its suiting me fine.


----------



## catzilla (Jan 31, 2004)

weekendthrasher said:


> I am curious if any have experience to share regarding comparisons between women-specific design full suspension mountain bikes and men's bikes. Specifically, my wife is looking at comparing the Trek Lush and Specialized Safire. Whereas, my gut tells me she would be well served with the smallest size men's Specialized Stumpjumper (which I currently ride the Large size of to great satisfaction). She's been riding the Specialized ERA Expert, but has been needing more travel and forgiveness for the type of riding we're enjoying.
> 
> Any feedback is greatly appreciated.


I was lucky enough to ride both the Safire and the Lush (and the Era), and all are ridiculously nice bikes. I was very impressed with how well the Era climbed, but still felt very in control on the downhills. The Safire was a good climber, but definitely excelled on the downhills. And the Lush had a nice balance of climbing and descending capabilities.

The thought put into the designs of the Safire and Lush is well beyond the whole "let's put some flowers on it and add shorter cranks" that WSDs sometimes get lumped in with.

In the end, at this caliber of bike, my best advice is that it really doesn't matter what you think she'll be comfortable on. She needs to throw a leg over each (including the small Stumpjumper if she wants) and figure out what will work best for her body, her riding style, and her general bike preferences.


----------



## NicoleB (Jul 21, 2011)

^hmm...i never knew that about shocks. my new men's bike feels a little harsh in the fork, even after we let air out of it. it feels stiff to ME, though my bf insists it feels plush. i've got a small upper body though


----------



## foxpuppet (Jan 2, 2011)

would any of you be of the opinion that if a WS bike say like the safire is considered a trail bike (like the Stumpy for men) at 120mm travel that the stumpy for a woman would be more equivalent to an AM bike (like the Enduro for men) with 140-150mm travel? My wife currently has an 09 Trance x2 Medium frame (unisex/standard model) but she is considering a newer bike with a bit more forgiveness on the rougher trails. The older trance is a little more XC then Trail... so it can be a bit skittish a lot of the time.


----------



## mtnbikinggirl (May 22, 2011)

foxpuppet said:


> would any of you be of the opinion that if a WS bike say like the safire is considered a trail bike (like the Stumpy for men) at 120mm travel that the stumpy for a woman would be more equivalent to an AM bike (like the Enduro for men) with 140-150mm travel? My wife currently has an 09 Trance x2 Medium frame (unisex/standard model) but she is considering a newer bike with a bit more forgiveness on the rougher trails. The older trance is a little more XC then Trail... so it can be a bit skittish a lot of the time.


The Safire/Stumpjumper is definitely more trail. It can handle a lot and I take mine down AM trails but I have to choose my lines carefully (I live on the West Coast of BC). I also have an Enduro for the steeper and more technical lines. It's the geometry of the bike itself and the Safire performs like the Stumpjumper with some adjustments made for a women's centre of gravity, reach, etc.

The original Safire was called the Stumpjumper Women's. I have one of those too


----------



## LadyDi (Apr 17, 2005)

Every woman rider is different. I prefer non-WSD. The ONE time I tried a WSD bike (a large Safire) I felt cramped and I didn't like the narrow bars. For reference I am 5'7" with medium (?) torso, long arms and long legs. I am currently loving the heck outta my small Trance X 29er. To suit my riding style I swapped a few parts- Trance's stock dropper seatpost to cf non-dropper, and the aluminum bars for 710 cf. My advice: let your wife demo as many bikes as possible before making a decision.


----------



## Kyri (Mar 1, 2009)

WSD seems to mean cutesy colors, shorter top tube, and lower end components. Sadly, I know a few guys that would be well-served with the shorter top tubes- but, they are stretched out on bikes that don't fit them well. I think it would be nice if they designed for different "builds", not different sexes... she should just keep demo'ing bikes until one feels good, and she's happy with the component set. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## formica (Jul 4, 2004)

Other things to be considered that could be "women's issues" are shorter cranks, grips for smaller hands and brake levers that can be adjusted for smaller hands. The brake lever thing is really critical imsho.


----------



## TikiGoddess (Mar 24, 2013)

I was in the same conundrum when I was shopping around for a new xc bike. I wanted to get a good fit and figured testing bikes at my local lbs is my best bet at finding a good fit. Everytime I visited an lbs they practically threw wds bikes at me. Given that I am on the smaller side (5.3ish almost 5.4 in height) with a long upper torso, wds bikes should not be the only way to go. In fact, prior to getting my bike I was riding a men's gary fisher size 17 which was too big but worked well on the trails for a while. It was a 26er and stand over height was a bit of a pain but I managed to ride it comfortably on the trails. I think wds designs are only significant to specific women riders that fit a "mold" but not all women are created equal. 

Before buying my wds giant, I shopped around and tried a lot of wds bikes from the big brands: trek, specialized, raleigh, scott and even rei novarras. The noticeable difference, particularly with trek (lush and cali) and specialized (jett comp and myka) is that they were a little cramped. The lbs suggested longer stems at the cost of maneuverability which I was not willing to do. I also sampled some small sized men's bikes, the mamba and x-caliber that fit me pretty well up top but with close to 0 stand over due to the top tube design.

Finally, visited the local giant outlet and found that their wds frames fit me perfectly. I tested the trance 29er too and their xs frame fit me amazingly despite it being a men's specific design. 

Moral of the story. Shop around and try different bikes. It doesn't matter if the design is men's or wds as long as it fits. Only you will know what works for you.


----------



## verslowrdr (Mar 22, 2004)

TikiGoddess said:


> ....Moral of the story. Shop around and try different bikes. It doesn't matter if the design is men's or wds as long as it fits. Only you will know what works for you.


^^^DING DING DING, winner winner chicken dinner!


----------



## MountainManBoy (Apr 16, 2013)

I think wds designs are only significant to specific women riders that fit a "mold" but not all women are created equal....

Moral of the story. Shop around and try different bikes. It doesn't matter if the design is men's or wds as long as it fits. Only you will know what works for you.[/QUOTE]

Amen.


----------



## Stagg3r (Jul 25, 2013)

My first post here... Not trolling, just getting back into the sport after many years absence after my last bike, a Trek 8900 circa 1992 with a Manitou 1 fork and original SPDs was stolen out of my house. By that I mean the actual house and not garage or anything... and I was home at the time... different story though.

Anyway, many moons later, I'm married and living here in Asheville, NC, which happens to be a great place to ride. My wife and I went out on her old clunker and a borrowed bikes a few times enough to get the itch back. Then we spent the last year seeing if the itch really needed a scratch. It did, so we waited till a close friend that is hugely connected with the mtn and road scene here told us, quite suddenly, that one of his main guys at a local shop let him in on some killer deals. So the wife and I went to go buy bikes... a activity that we knew was going to happen but had no idea when we woke up that it would be that day...

The wife immediately found a regular Lush at a very nice price and was set very quickly. I had two options. They had a 17.5" Rumblefish Elite and a 17.5" Lush SL. I'm a smaller to average guy at 5' 6" and 160lbs but my legs/arms are longer and my torso is shorter. Both were serious deals with the Lush at just under $1900.00 and the Rumblefish about $200.00 more as is the case in retail.

So here is the thing, after testing both, the Lush simply felt better. I'm not racing any time soon (ever) and the more upright position was more comfortable and the clearance let me get into position for climbing and descending. I know some of it had to deal with never having been on a 29er before as that wasn't even a thought when I was last riding every day. Still I had been planning on going to a 29er anyway and was prepared for the changes that would bring. The issue was that I just felt stretched out on the Rumblefish.

After checking the fit properly, we determined that the Lush put me in a proper position as it was and the Rumblefish would have required either a smaller frame, which meant ordering and the price going way back up, or a different stem, bar, or possibly seat/post combo to make it work. All of this was adding up and going way past the target of under 2K each with pedals and shoes. It didn't take too long to make up my mind...

I may be the only guy I know riding a WSD bike but I'm fine with that. It fits me, I'm comfortable riding it in a way that I never was on my old bike, or the Cannondale SM1000 that preceded the 8900 before it, too, was stolen (although only the frame remained original on that bike, everything else having been modded or changed out... including an original Rock Shox  ). Yes, it helps that that bike is totally black and minus a few small gold "Lush" markings would only be identified by those who knew what to look for. But, then again, back in the early 90's I lusted after many a bright pink Kleins that were made for us guys, so far as I could tell anyway...

So, that's my tale. I don't know if it's just that I'm older now (not old really at 36) and married but my concern these days is how the bike fits and rides, and my bike does both wonderfully for me no matter what gender it was built for.

P.S. and besides now we get to be the repulsively cute couple with matching bikes [shudder]. Ok maybe something is wrong with me


----------

