# She is 5'9" with a 36" inseam. Bike fit issue??



## danK (Jan 15, 2004)

My girlfriend is 5ft 9in with a 36 inch inseam.

We're shopping around for a hardtail with suspension fork (not sure whether 26er or 29er) but I'm hoping this is not a custom-build situation. I don't want to do a band-aid fix with a super short stem on a XL frame yet the long standover with the relatively short toptube reach is an issue.

Anyone with loooong legs and not so tall torso know of a mainstream mtb that would fit this general criteria? Is a women's specific bike built for women's measurements such as this?


----------



## Wylie (Mar 19, 2007)

Whoa. I'm about that height and have always thought that I have a long inseam at around 33". I wish I had something more helpful to say other than I'll be curious what you end up doing. At my height/inseam, I've just found that most medium-ish bikes still work for me, after I tweak components to make the cockpit just how I like (bars, stem length, etc). But I'm pretty sure you're well outside the range of any WSD bike. Good luck!


----------



## JDM (May 2, 2008)

My sister is 5'10" with a 35.5" inseam and she rides a size L mountain bike with a 60mm-ish stem comfortable.

I'm thinking that a 29er with 'trail' or 'all mountain' geometry would tend to put the handlebars closer and higher before any changes to the stem or bars. You could probably go with a 50mm-ish stem and some bars with decent rise and make it work.


----------



## danK (Jan 15, 2004)

Oh you just made her day! We're going to scour the shops for a 29er Large frame and shorter stem/riser setup. Thanks!!



JDM said:


> My sister is 5'10" with a 35.5" inseam and she rides a size L mountain bike with a 60mm-ish stem comfortable.
> 
> I'm thinking that a 29er with 'trail' or 'all mountain' geometry would tend to put the handlebars closer and higher before any changes to the stem or bars. You could probably go with a 50mm-ish stem and some bars with decent rise and make it work.


----------



## shopcat_cycles (Dec 28, 2007)

I don't usually hang out here, but I saw the title and was thinking "woah" - those are some long legs at 5'9".

I'm 5'9" with a 33.5" cycling inseam(short torso/arms) and find medium sized frames(29er or 26er) with a set-back seatpost and 80-100mm stem to be a better compromise than a large w/ straight-post and super-short stem.

Also, take a look at the Fuji geometry chart: Fuji Bikes | MOUNTAIN SERIES | 29ER HARDTAIL | NEVADA 29 1.0Fujibikes[/url] Their medium frames have a 19" seat-tube(like most manufacturers 'large' frames), which I found to be quite comfortable for longer legs and the ETT measurement is close to most medium frames.

Just my 2cents.


----------



## bspill1 (Aug 20, 2010)

While hers are particularly long legs, those are the portions that women's bikes are designed around. Typically women have longer legs to torso proportions than men.

Good luck


----------



## fishercat (Mar 1, 2004)

one issue with long legs i have noticed is that in order to get the proper saddle position, if you have long femurs, a setback post may be necessary. this will put your center farther away from the bars, in which case a shorter top tube is the way to go. i recently sized down because of this reason (medium to small frame) and much prefer the positioning I have on the smaller frame. when I rode a medium frame i felt that the front wheel was too far out in front of me. I do like running a shorter stem but not as a crutch to make a long bike shorter. it is important to have your weight equally balanced over the front and rear wheels for the best positioning for climbing and descending. fwiw i'm 5'5.5" with 31" inseam so my seatpost is far out but because of my shorter torso i the shorter top tube works for me. I also like the shorter wheelbase and lighter frame because it is easier for me to control as I am 120 lbs. all that being said, perhaps a medium sized 29er is the way to go !


----------

