# The ever shrinking seat tube!!



## keithrad (May 4, 2007)

I'm always window shopping for a newer ride and am intrigued with the longer / slacker geometry of todays frames. But I notice that seat tubes have dropped from what was once around 20 to 20.5 for large frames ( Yeti's and Intense's ) to 18 to 18.5 inches in size large. I've already gone from my large 2007 Yeti 575's 20.5 ST to my current 2014 large Yeti sb95a's 19.5 ST. 

On one hand I don't care for the look of frames when they get too stretched out for larger sizes. But at the same time, I don't like the look of having a seatpost sticking out 12 - 15 inches. It's like " man, his bike is happy to see him"!!

So I find myself looking at XL frames now to accommodate my 35.5 inch inseam, and even those are usually 19.5 at the most, but the TT and reach are starting to get too long! 

Anybody else feeling this?


----------



## Len Baird (Aug 1, 2017)

It's compact geometry, where the seat tube shrinks, but the top tube and measurements roughly stay the same. Supposed to be stiffer, lighter and cooler looking.
I think it's why no one measures sizes by the seat tube anymore. And you can buy a bike in a larger size without it injuring yourself at a stop due to lower standover on compact. You used to have to buy a bike one size too small and put a longer stem on it to get a similar result.


----------



## NYrr496 (Sep 10, 2008)

My inseam is 35" also and I only ride XL.


----------



## Crockpot2001 (Nov 2, 2004)

Head tubes are dinky too. This results in stupid low stack heights and the need for 2" of spacers and 3"riser bars. Stems are so so short now that there is effectively no rise to get out of them. Companies like salsa, Santa cruz, and Trek are all the same.


----------



## NYrr496 (Sep 10, 2008)

Yep. I recently built an XL Surly Krampus and had to get these Jones H Bars with a couple inches of rise built into em so I could have a normal spacer stack. Good thing I like swept bars.


----------



## Legbacon (Jan 20, 2004)

Seat tubes are getting shorter to make room for longer droppers.


----------



## targnik (Jan 11, 2014)

Travis Bickle said:


> Seat tubes are getting shorter to make room for longer droppers.


+1

More drop equals shorter ST's

Much better for the jank ^^

Buy an XC bike maybe?

'We'll all make it to the top... Some of us, might not make it to the bottom'


----------



## Ray Lee (Aug 17, 2007)

Crockpot2001 said:


> Head tubes are dinky too. This results in stupid low stack heights and the need for 2" of spacers and 3"riser bars. Stems are so so short now that there is effectively no rise to get out of them. Companies like salsa, Santa cruz, and Trek are all the same.


I don't mind the shorter seat tubes, especially with the longer droppers available now... but the really low stack heights stopped me from buying a new bike this season. Low stack and for some reason manufacturers cut the F-ing steerer off means I would need to Ebay any fork the bike comes with then buy it again new and uncut  figure I will wait for a good discounted or even used demo so I wont take such a big hit flipping the fork $

Seems like bikes are designed as mediums the XL's get a stretch but not much else or at least not proportional... went on a couple big group rides and all the mediums had bars around an inch lower than saddle hight... the 2 tall guys had seats towering above the bars by 4 inches or more.

Im only 6'3" but a little more leg than average for my height.


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

Ray Lee said:


> I don't mind the shorter seat tubes, especially with the longer droppers available now... but the really low stack heights stopped me from buying a new bike this season.


That's partially why I'm probably going to a 29er. I tested a Trek Remedy yesterday and with 30mm of stem spacers and a 27.5mm riser bar was still way too low. It was unfortunate because the bike was great otherwise.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

Travis Bickle said:


> Seat tubes are getting shorter to make room for longer droppers.


Yes, because everyone _needs_ a 200mm dropper post...


----------



## Legbacon (Jan 20, 2004)

I'm not tall, but maybe the need more drop than normal people

At 5'9" I'm happy to see shorter seat tubes because it makes it possible to fit a large frame to get enough reach. I suspect the average designer is 5'10.5".


----------



## sturge (Feb 22, 2009)

Ray Lee said:


> I don't mind the shorter seat tubes, especially with the longer droppers available now... but the really low stack heights stopped me from buying a new bike this season. Low stack and for some reason manufacturers cut the F-ing steerer off means I would need to Ebay any fork the bike comes with then buy it again new and uncut  figure I will wait for a good discounted or even used demo so I wont take such a big hit flipping the fork $
> 
> Seems like bikes are designed as mediums the XL's get a stretch but not much else or at least not proportional... went on a couple big group rides and all the mediums had bars around an inch lower than saddle hight... the 2 tall guys had seats towering above the bars by 4 inches or more.
> 
> Im only 6'3" but a little more leg than average for my height.


Yeah...I would fully agree with this. Being 6'4" that's exactly what I'm dealing with on my 2018 Kona Process 153 (XL). One of the things I noticed right away was how much pressure I felt on hands/wrists compared to setup on my two older 26" bikes (both XL). The geo on the Process gives me plenty of reach but the bars seem very low with few options to get where I need to be. After getting bike out of the box and assembling, I was surprised that fork steerer tube did not have more length. Came with 18mm of spacers which was the max I could use for length of tube.

Not many rides on it but eventually I'm probably going to need a riser bar. Regarding seatpost...I really like the 170mm dropper which gives plenty of travel for comfortable climbing position when fully extended.


----------



## Crockpot2001 (Nov 2, 2004)

Travis Bickle said:


> Seat tubes are getting shorter to make room for longer droppers.


Most people don't spend all that much time with the seat dropped so I don't think this is correct. I want the 90% of the riding time to be comfortable. If not, I would buy a downhill bike.


----------



## Mr Pig (Jun 25, 2008)

Crockpot2001 said:


> Most people don't spend all that much time with the seat dropped...


So what? My mate doesn't but he still bought the biggest dropper that would fit in his frame. The one-percent of people who can really ride have careers paid for by the dreamers.


----------



## targnik (Jan 11, 2014)

sturge said:


> Yeah...I would fully agree with this. Being 6'4" that's exactly what I'm dealing with on my 2018 Kona Process 153 (XL). One of the things I noticed right away was how much pressure I felt on hands/wrists compared to setup on my two older 26" bikes (both XL). The geo on the Process gives me plenty of reach but the bars seem very low with few options to get where I need to be. After getting bike out of the box and assembling, I was surprised that fork steerer tube did not have more length. Came with 18mm of spacers which was the max I could use for length of tube.
> 
> Not many rides on it but eventually I'm probably going to need a riser bar. Regarding seatpost...I really like the 170mm dropper which gives plenty of travel for comfortable climbing position when fully extended.


Riser bar & riser stem (think they make those)... Plus, a riding bud of mine has a thicker crown race (think that's what it's called) i.e. between fork crown & head tube. It's so he can run a tapered fork steerer in a straight head tube... I'm guessing you could use/find similar to raise the front end.

PS - some fatter grips would also help.

'We'll all make it to the top... Some of us, might not make it to the bottom'


----------



## alexbn921 (Mar 31, 2009)

I run a 200mm dropper and did not/ would not buy a bike that could not take at least 185. Seat tubes are shrinking for droppers and they will continue to do so now that every decent trail bike comes with a dropper.


----------



## Surfdog93 (May 30, 2005)

Yeah, and calling 20.5" ST frame, a 21.5" frame / XXL.....another trend working against us.
Slimmer pickings, but thankfully still some very good bikes in both carbon and aluminum to select from, and as others pointed out, long droppers.


----------



## Stalkerfiveo (Feb 24, 2015)

Travis Bickle said:


> Seat tubes are getting shorter to make room for longer droppers.


Several of y'all have beat me to it. With 150/175 common and a few 200mm droppers out there, I think MORE bile companies should adapt. A lot of people, especially shorter riders on smaller frames, are stuck with 125 (sometimes only 100) mm droppers. There's tons on threads/complaints on this very issue all over the net.

Also, any of you y'all guys wanting 
more stack but plenty low enough seat tune for a big dropper, look at Guerrilla Gravity!


----------



## evasive (Feb 18, 2005)

Crockpot2001 said:


> Most people don't spend all that much time with the seat dropped so I don't think this is correct. I want the 90% of the riding time to be comfortable. If not, I would buy a downhill bike.


Meaning you disagree with Travis Bickle about the reason seat tubes are shorter? Or you disagree with the design of shorter seat tubes to allow longer droppers?

Either way, I disagree. That's clearly the reason for shorter tubes, and I don't understand why you couldn't be comfortable with the seat post extended for that 90%.


----------



## Legbacon (Jan 20, 2004)

I was in the lbs the other day and they were working on a bike of an owner who just recently moved here. This guy hated his dropper because he always had to drop it a bit to find his ideal pedaling position. The mechanic just slid the post into the frame more and now at full extension his pedaling is ideal. Never assume that everyone knows how it's supposed to work. I spend way more time fully extended than lowered because climbing takes up most of my riding time. I suspect the majority, like myself are faster going down than up. Anyway, if you make seat tube shorter, you can fit a post with more drop. You don't have to like it to understand it.


----------



## targnik (Jan 11, 2014)

Travis Bickle said:


> I was in the lbs the other day and they were working on a bike of an owner who just recently moved here. This guy hated his dropper because he always had to drop it a bit to find his ideal pedaling position. The mechanic just slid the post into the frame more and now at full extension his pedaling is ideal. Never assume that everyone knows how it's supposed to work. I spend way more time fully extended than lowered because climbing takes up most of my riding time. I suspect the majority, like myself are faster going down than up. Anyway, if you make seat tube shorter, you can fit a post with more drop. You don't have to like it to understand it.


I'm at least 5x faster going down than up ;-P

2 of those fasters I'll accredit to my dropper =)

& low stand over...

'We'll all make it to the top... Some of us, might not make it to the bottom'


----------



## Gigantic (Aug 31, 2012)

Crockpot2001 said:


> Most people don't spend all that much time with the seat dropped so I don't think this is correct. I want the 90% of the riding time to be comfortable. If not, I would buy a downhill bike.


I use a dropper a lot. I still don't spend much time with the seat dropped, just on descents, over obstacles, on step-ups and slightly dropped when cornering, but with a dropper post, 100% of the riding time is comfortable.


----------



## alexbn921 (Mar 31, 2009)

I only use my brakes 10% of the time. I must not need them either. :idea:


----------



## Ray Lee (Aug 17, 2007)

*top tube*

Seems like most are not "shrinking" the seat tube but just connecting the top tube further down it. regardless of reasons, as a tall guy I like the look much better. 2008-2009 my bikes looked like road bike frames with a skinny swing arm.









I think this 2012 Giant Trance would look so much better with the top tube swooped and welding way down the seat tube.

Giant Trance X1 - First ride review - BikeRadar


----------



## Crockpot2001 (Nov 2, 2004)

evasive said:


> Meaning you disagree with Travis Bickle about the reason seat tubes are shorter? Or you disagree with the design of shorter seat tubes to allow longer droppers?
> 
> Either way, I disagree. That's clearly the reason for shorter tubes, and I don't understand why you couldn't be comfortable with the seat post extended for that 90%.


Admittedly my response was based on me reading that "HEAD TUBES" are getting shorter to accommodate longer droppers. I had been discussing this with someone earlier in the thread and my mind stayed on it. I am obsessed with how low Stack heights are and it follows me everywhere.


----------



## Legbacon (Jan 20, 2004)

That makes sense. Adding a pile of spacers has to be compensated for with a bit more stem length.


----------



## evasive (Feb 18, 2005)

Crockpot2001 said:


> Admittedly my response was based on me reading that "HEAD TUBES" are getting shorter to accommodate longer droppers. I had been discussing this with someone earlier in the thread and my mind stayed on it. I am obsessed with how low Stack heights are and it follows me everywhere.


Ah. That makes sense.


----------



## keithrad (May 4, 2007)

Ray Lee said:


> Seems like most are not "shrinking" the seat tube but just connecting the top tube further down it. regardless of reasons, as a tall guy I like the look much better. 2008-2009 my bikes looked like road bike frames with a skinny swing arm.
> 
> View attachment 1180512


I agree to an extent, but the lengths are getting shorter from the center of the b.b. to the top of the s.t.!

As I stated I'm not a fan of the stretched out frame look. But conversely, like several posts back of the picture of the Trek, there is too much seat post showing in my opinion. I guess I'm looking for a happy medium in the top tube slope. Between top tubes that look like road bikes and sloped top tubes that look like old school (70's era) girl bikes. (presumably so they could ride with dresses.)

I get that the dropper posts with longer travel are the reason, but my freakishly long legs don't need a lot of drop, as I suspect with other taller riders. Hell even with my old 20.5 inch seat tube frame ( albeit a Yeti 575 with the knuckle top tube) all I needed to do was manually drop my post to the clamp and I had clearance for days!

First world problems...I know!


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

Seat tube are getting shorter. The above graphic is not an example of the norm. My size Large Stache has an 18.5" ST. Large used to be 19-20.


----------



## scnelson (Jun 18, 2019)

I realize this thread is old, but I'm getting tired of shorter seat tubes. I'm 6'4" and I just don't need my seat that low. Plus I just really hate the look of a mountain bike with 20 inches of seatpost extending upward. It looks stupid. There is a happy medium that doesn't seem to exist, but I wish it did. I want a long bike with a 520mm to 530mm seat tube. But it doesn't exist. Yes my main riding is XC racing. So sometimes I don't even run a dropper. In fact I almost always run a fixed carbon post. I love the the longer top tube geometry with longer reach, but it is always combined with a stupid short seat tube. There simply is no XC bike in xl or xxl that has a reach, stack, ETT, and seat tube that I want to buy. None. The Epic EVO is close, but is not a long enough reach or ETT. The Norco revolver is close but the stack is way too low. The Nicolai Saturn is close, but is aluminum (meh) and has a puny seat tube. Etc, first world probs.


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

I really wish I could fit a longer dropper.. and I'm not short


----------



## scnelson (Jun 18, 2019)

dysfunction said:


> I really wish I could fit a longer dropper.. and I'm not short


So... you are saying I should quit whining and just become a dropper lover. Hmmph.


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

scnelson said:


> So... you are saying I should quit whining and just become a dropper lover. Hmmph.


You're probably out numbered in that regard.


----------



## geofharries (Jun 2, 2006)

For some taller people, a 480mm seat tube and a 200mm dropper post won’t be enough in an XL size. For example, my saddle height is 825mm. That requires a lot of exposed post at full extension.

I appreciate the 546mm seat tube on my XC bike more and more these days. Same with its 670mm stack height.

We are all built differently. Not everyone fits in the same box.


----------



## malucky (Mar 7, 2015)

I've noticed that on many bikes the reach has increased but stack is still about the same. No bueno for some of us high inseam/height ratio people.

My inseam is almost 36 inches, but I have a regular length torso, so "modern geometry" bikes don't fit so well. I run the bike in "low" setting to slack it a bit (about 5mm lower in the rear), a 140mm front fork (-.5 degrees angle)

I use a 40mm riser bar, 40mm head-stack, 35mm stem-length, and the seat 10mm forward. Even this isn't right. I just ordered a stem with 10mm rise, and am thinking about even taller riser-bars. The 175mm dropper could also stand to be a 200mm unit, but I'm OK with it since I'm no shredder.

All this is on a 2018 SC Tallboy XXL!


----------



## scnelson (Jun 18, 2019)

malucky said:


> I've noticed that on many bikes the reach has increased but stack is still about the same. No bueno for some of us high inseam/height ratio people.
> 
> My inseam is almost 36 inches, but I have a regular length torso, so "modern geometry" bikes don't fit so well. I run the bike in "low" setting to slack it a bit (about 5mm lower in the rear), a 140mm front fork (-.5 degrees angle)
> 
> ...


Yes I feel your pain. My inseam is about 35 inches, and I also have a normal torso. Long legs and arms, that's me. 38mm riser bars, long stem, long seat post, similar song and dance. Funny too because I'm considering buying your same bike and size. But I was concerned about some fit issues (and also rear tire size limits, but that's another thread) As nice as the longer geometry is in some respects, there still aren't many (any) bikes that fit us tall guys well.


----------



## malucky (Mar 7, 2015)

scnelson said:


> Yes I feel your pain. My inseam is about 35 inches, and I also have a normal torso. Long legs and arms, that's me. 38mm riser bars, long stem, long seat post, similar song and dance. Funny too because I'm considering buying your same bike and size. But I was concerned about some fit issues (and also rear tire size limits, but that's another thread) As nice as the longer geometry is in some respects, there still aren't many (any) bikes that fit us tall guys well.


The rear tire can fit 29 x 2.4" and that's what I run. I'd seriously try both the XL and XXL in person before buying one of these. Don't get me wrong, I adore my carbon beauty, but getting it to fit right was more work than it should have been.

I get it, that we larger riders are the minority, and comprise just a small fraction of the bike sales, but that doesn't change that bikes (in general), don't fit the very large, or very small riders as well as the Bell-curve sized riders. .


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

malucky said:


> (in general), don't fit the very large, or very small riders as well as the Bell-curve sized riders. .


I think you can remove 'bikes' from that statement. Nothing fits people outside the 40th to 60th percentile. Just look at airplane seats. My knees are embedded into the seat in front of me, and my 152cm wife has plenty of leg room but the seat jams her head down and forward. I don't see this changing, without having a custom build made (probably the best option for most over ~188cm anyway)... or, you just learn to deal with compromise


----------



## ilmfat (Mar 10, 2007)

I think you tall folk have it rougher than small folk. My (then) 10 year old daughter chose a Sm 29er over an Xs B+. She was 4'8". She rides better than I do.


----------



## scnelson (Jun 18, 2019)

dysfunction said:


> I think you can remove 'bikes' from that statement. Nothing fits people outside the 40th to 60th percentile. Just look at airplane seats. My knees are embedded into the seat in front of me, and my 152cm wife has plenty of leg room but the seat jams her head down and forward. I don't see this changing, without having a custom build made (probably the best option for most over ~188cm anyway)... or, you just learn to deal with compromise


It's extra frustrating because some bikes are close. And one manufacturer does the reach and seat tube I want but not the stack, while another manufacturer has the stack but not the seat tube etc. For a xc bike, take the Norco revolver 120 and give it the Specialized Epic Evo stack, and I'd buy it. Well except a little more wheelbase would be nice too Hmmm Someone gonna build my bike soon. I keep hoping.


----------



## alexbn921 (Mar 31, 2009)

scnelson said:


> I realize this thread is old, but I'm getting tired of shorter seat tubes. I'm 6'4" and I just don't need my seat that low. Plus I just really hate the look of a mountain bike with 20 inches of seatpost extending upward. It looks stupid. There is a happy medium that doesn't seem to exist, but I wish it did. I want a long bike with a 520mm to 530mm seat tube. But it doesn't exist. Yes my main riding is XC racing. So sometimes I don't even run a dropper. In fact I almost always run a fixed carbon post. I love the the longer top tube geometry with longer reach, but it is always combined with a stupid short seat tube. There simply is no XC bike in xl or xxl that has a reach, stack, ETT, and seat tube that I want to buy. None. The Epic EVO is close, but is not a long enough reach or ETT. The Norco revolver is close but the stack is way too low. The Nicolai Saturn is close, but is aluminum (meh) and has a puny seat tube. Etc, first world probs.


Long seat tubes are never coming back as there is ZERO downside to short ones and it provides the ability to run longer dropper post that 99% of people want. Check out the new Ibis XC bike.


----------



## scnelson (Jun 18, 2019)

alexbn921 said:


> Long seat tubes are never coming back as there is ZERO downside to short ones and it provides the ability to run longer dropper post that 99% of people want. Check out the new Ibis XC bike.


Booyah! Thank you for mentioning the Ibis Exie XC bike. I just looked it up, and you know what? It is almost exactly the bike I want as far as geometry. So thank you. Yes the seat tube could be a little longer, but at 508mm, I can work with that. It's true that droppers are sweet and will not ever be replaced by long seat tubes again. But as another commenter mentioned above, some taller riders can't find a dropper that is long enough to compensate for the overly short seat tube on their bike. They just can't get enough height. Sure these riders are outliers, but still it sucks to be an outlier and not to have a bike that fits.


----------



## CrozCountry (Mar 18, 2011)

Just wait a couple of years until 250mm droppers become the norm.


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

CrozCountry said:


> Just wait a couple of years until 250mm droppers become the norm.


I'm surprised it's taking this long. I'd love a 250mm dropper. At 6'5", 210mm feels like it's in the way.


----------



## geofharries (Jun 2, 2006)

alexbn921 said:


> Long seat tubes are never coming back as there is ZERO downside to short ones and it provides the ability to run longer dropper post that 99% of people want. Check out the new Ibis XC bike.


Ha. There are only zero downsides if you have short or regular length legs. Try finding and riding a “modern” bike when you have a 37“ or 38” inseam. Even with a 250mm dropper, it’s still not enough and it also creates a giant lever above the frame.


----------



## alexbn921 (Mar 31, 2009)

geofharries said:


> Ha. There are only zero downsides if you have short or regular length legs. Try finding and riding a “modern” bike when you have a 37“ or 38” inseam. Even with a 250mm dropper, it’s still not enough and it also creates a giant lever above the frame.


I have a 36" inseam  We are in the top .05% of riders. NO ONE is going to build a longer seat tube just for us, not that I want one. Just like rear stay length should be in the 460mm range for XXL bikes, but they insist on using 1 size rear.


----------



## nhodge (Jul 6, 2004)

alexbn921 said:


> I have a 36" inseam  We are in the top .05% of riders. NO ONE is going to build a longer seat tube just for us, not that I want one. Just like rear stay length should be in the 460mm range for XXL bikes, but they insist on using 1 size rear.


Concerning same length chain stays, I've been bugged for years how builders do that & there's been so little complaining. 
Did any builder address that? 
I would think Ventana would w/ their customs, but w/o special orders , who did?


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

nhodge said:


> Concerning same length chain stays, I've been bugged for years how builders do that & there's been so little complaining.
> Did any builder address that?
> I would think Ventana would w/ their customs, but w/o special orders , who did?


A few brands are doing that now.


----------



## nhodge (Jul 6, 2004)

jeremy3220 said:


> A few brands are doing that now.


Such as?


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

nhodge said:


> Such as?


Santa Cruz, Commencal, and a few others I can't remember.


----------



## BoomShakkaLagga (Apr 18, 2008)

I have 36” inseam and totally dig the shorter seat tubes today with now 240mm seatposts available. I currently run a 50cm ST with a 210mm post. Works perfect.

Back in 2013 I treated myself with a Liteville 301 in XXL - that thing probably was one of the first long travel 29ers that also came in XXL - also probably one of the first true XXLs around.

That bike still has a 54cm seat tube - which for me along with the shock leverage ratio at my weight back then was the reason why I sold it a year later.

Even the current model year version of that frame comes with a 54cm seat tube… if you want that “old STL sizing”, Liteville may be a brand to look at.


----------



## dvdslw45 (Mar 20, 2019)

scnelson said:


> I realize this thread is old, but I'm getting tired of shorter seat tubes. I'm 6'4" and I just don't need my seat that low. Plus I just really hate the look of a mountain bike with 20 inches of seatpost extending upward. It looks stupid. There is a happy medium that doesn't seem to exist, but I wish it did. I want a long bike with a 520mm to 530mm seat tube. But it doesn't exist. Yes my main riding is XC racing. So sometimes I don't even run a dropper. In fact I almost always run a fixed carbon post. I love the the longer top tube geometry with longer reach, but it is always combined with a stupid short seat tube. There simply is no XC bike in xl or xxl that has a reach, stack, ETT, and seat tube that I want to buy. None. The Epic EVO is close, but is not a long enough reach or ETT. The Norco revolver is close but the stack is way too low. The Nicolai Saturn is close, but is aluminum (meh) and has a puny seat tube. Etc, first world probs.


I agree 100% about everything you just wrote. I've been sitting on some money to buy a new bike for months now and just can't find anything that fits. At 6'4 with long legs, any bike I've test ridden has looked like a huge girls bike with the super low top tube and two miles of extended seat post waaaay above the bars. Frustrating!!!


----------



## bingemtbr (Apr 1, 2004)

alexbn921 said:


> Long seat tubes are never coming back as there is ZERO downside to short ones and it provides the ability to run longer dropper post that 99% of people want. Check out the new Ibis XC bike.


31.5" inseam. I ride an xl SC TB4. I do not need nor want a dropper post unless I am spending week riding at resorts or Moab/Brevard/NWA--for which I will rent a bike to forgo the wear-n-tear of those areas. Otherwise, here in StL there are really only a handful of features which would (very remotely) require a dropper.

The downsides I can immediately think of:
1. Added weight, cost, and complexity just because the industry tells you to do it. I may nickname riders with droppers "manbuns". 
2. Availability of long, traditional (not a dropper) seat posts. Finding a well engineered 400+mm seatpost is extremely challenging.
3. More maintenance. More controls on the handlebar. 
4. Interference with my corduroy skin suit.
5. Chaffing. 

Of course, Mathieu van der Poel may have a differing perspective. ;-)


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

I have a 2008 stumpy frame I'll sell you. No provision for a dropper there, and that seat tube is tall.

I mean, if you feel the need to have your nuts close to the cross tube.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Im 6’2” on a 21.5” trek which im the lower limit of that size. Guy at a race was like dude, you need a bigger bike. Le sigh….


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Crockpot2001 said:


> Most people don't spend all that much time with the seat dropped so I don't think this is correct. I want the 90% of the riding time to be comfortable. If not, I would buy a downhill bike.


I raise and lower my post constantly, it’s the most utilized component in my cockpit, when I riding down or through the rough, the post gets dropped.

The only time my post stays at full extension is when I’m climbing something really smooth … that doesn’t happen much; even climbing I adjust my post for comfort.

All my bikes are running a 210mm Dropper, hardtail included.

I suppose there are folks on the XC end of the spectrum who don’t ride a long dropper, if that’s what works for them then great, but those folks aren’t riding enduro bikes.

I miss Travis ☹


----------



## alexbn921 (Mar 31, 2009)

bingemtbr said:


> 31.5" inseam. I ride an xl SC TB4. I do not need nor want a dropper post unless I am spending week riding at resorts or Moab/Brevard/NWA--for which I will rent a bike to forgo the wear-n-tear of those areas. Otherwise, here in StL there are really only a handful of features which would (very remotely) require a dropper.
> 
> The downsides I can immediately think of:
> 1. Added weight, cost, and complexity just because the industry tells you to do it. I may nickname riders with droppers "manbuns".
> ...


So bike companies should make you a bike when 99.999999% of people want a dropper. 

It's simple. You probably want old school geometry too so get a custom frame.

No new real MTB is ever going to work for you. Ever.


----------



## bingemtbr (Apr 1, 2004)

alexbn921 said:


> So bike companies should make you a bike when 99.999999% of people want a dropper.
> 
> It's simple. You probably want old school geometry too so get a custom frame.
> 
> No new real MTB is ever going to work for you. Ever.


LMAO. Alex-I am not complaining and I'm not the OP. Just chiming in with my perspective.

I do feel my SC TB4 works extremely well for me. In fact, I'd go as far as to state that its the best bike I've ever ridden. ;-)


----------

