# Who makes XS frame 27.5'ers?



## randyharris (Jul 1, 2009)

I know the Pivot LES comes in a XS, but looking for other less expensive options.

Please pipe up if you know of XS frame 27.5 bikes.

Thanks!


----------



## dc40 (Oct 4, 2013)

you are in luck, I was just research that, here are few

Kona Process 134 SE
KONA BIKES | 2015 BIKES | ENDURO | PROCESS 134 SE

GT Sensor
Trail - Mountain - Bikes

Juliana Bicycles - Orgin
Juliana Bicycles Origin

Norco Fluid 7.3 ( this is probably the cheapest)
Fluid - Trail - Mountain - Bikes - Norco Bicycles

Giant has several models
Giant Bicycles | Official site


----------



## randyharris (Jul 1, 2009)

Awesome thanks!

BTW - the new Niner EMD, 29er, XS has a very low standover, lower than most those 27.5's.

27.3", pretty dang low for a 29er.

E.M.D. 9


----------



## BXCc (May 31, 2012)

Most of Trek's hardtails are 27.5 in the small and extra small sizes. The top tube is 525 which is pretty short. I've had my 8 yo sit on a few xs bikes lately at one of the LBS's. Reach is going to be the issue before standover for her.


----------



## randyharris (Jul 1, 2009)

BXCc said:


> Most of Trek's hardtails are 27.5 in the small and extra small sizes. The top tube is 525 which is pretty short. I've had my 8 yo sit on a few xs bikes lately at one of the LBS's. Reach is going to be the issue before standover for her.


Awesome! The X-Caliber 8 has some really good specs from my perspective for the frame size on a 27.5 bike.

THANKS

X-Caliber 8 - Trek Bicycle


----------



## GSJ1973 (May 8, 2011)

BXCc said:


> Most of Trek's hardtails are 27.5 in the small and extra small sizes. The top tube is 525 which is pretty short. I've had my 8 yo sit on a few xs bikes lately at one of the LBS's. Reach is going to be the issue before standover for her.


Putting a child under 5 feet tall and sub-80 pounds on a bike with 27.5" wheels, in my opinion, is not a smart move. Way too big and the bike will feel uncomfortable under them.

What about an XS 26" bike Randy? Or dare I ask if they even exist any more.


----------



## dc40 (Oct 4, 2013)

GSJ1973 said:


> Putting a child under 5 feet tall and sub-80 pounds on a bike with 27.5" wheels, in my opinion, is not a smart move. Way too big and the bike will feel uncomfortable under them.
> 
> What about an XS 26" bike Randy? Or dare I ask if they even exist any more.


I agree with GSJ1973, there are still few out there that make them. I have been search any that support interchangeable drops outs. My boy is 4'11" right now, once he it's 5'1", I'll upgrade him from his 24" to hopefully a 26".

Here are a few XS:
NOROC Fluid 6.3
Fluid - Trail - Mountain - Bikes - Norco Bicycles

Black Market Roam - support interchangeable dropout 26", 27.5, 29" and various travel.
Frames

Pivot Mach 5.7 alloy
Mach 5.7 Alloy | Pivot Cycles | Performance Redefined

Here are few small frames that support 26", geared for rider 5 feet or taller.

Banshee Spitfire - support 26" & 27.5 with interchangeable drop outs
Banshee Bikes » Spitfire, 26", Trail, mountain bikes for sale

Transition 2014 Covert bikes or frames:
Do a search on google, you can find some good deals on some left over Coverts.


----------



## randyharris (Jul 1, 2009)

GSJ1973 said:


> Putting a child under 5 feet tall and sub-80 pounds on a bike with 27.5" wheels, in my opinion, is not a smart move. Way too big and the bike will feel uncomfortable under them.
> 
> What about an XS 26" bike Randy? Or dare I ask if they even exist any more.


I'm not sure why you don't think it is s good idea. One of the boys on my sons team rides a Pivot LES 27.5 XS and he totally rocks it. And those bigger wheels roll noticeably better over our rough rocky trails here in Phoenix.


----------



## BXCc (May 31, 2012)

GSJ1973 said:


> Putting a child under 5 feet tall and sub-80 pounds on a bike with 27.5" wheels, in my opinion, is not a smart move. Way too big and the bike will feel uncomfortable under them.
> 
> What about an XS 26" bike Randy? Or dare I ask if they even exist any more.


Maybe. But that really depends on the kid and the bike. She is 4'5" so we are just looking at this point. Her 20" wheeled bike is still going fine. Probably need a longer stem and a set back post soon. I've been looking at one of the XS 26" wheeled carbon frames on eBay too. I have some carbon 26" hoops to use on it. Thought about putting those on one of the XS Treks too. Not sure what way we will go. I do know it wont be the $750 and up route.


----------



## GSJ1973 (May 8, 2011)

randyharris said:


> I'm not sure why you don't think it is s good idea. One of the boys on my sons team rides a Pivot LES 27.5 XS and he totally rocks it. And those bigger wheels roll noticeably better over our rough rocky trails here in Phoenix.


General rule of thumb:

- Front end becomes higher 
- Wheel bases become longer
- Chainstays become longer
- Rotational weight greater
- Wheels heavier
- Stand over height suffers (in most cases)

Right now unfortunately manufacturers are chasing for 27.5" world marketing domination leaving a very important wheel size in question.

Kids are better off on a bike that actually fits properly in my opinion, especially one under 5 feet tall. A big long bike also isn't going to be as fun as a smaller bike using a tighter geometry made for the wheel size.

It does vary between kids height/weight/skill level, but general rule of thumb in our shop is if you can't clear the wheel size when the wheel is actually between your legs, then it is too big and you need to size down.

You can tell the 27.5" marketing is working when folks are even thinking about going from 20" straight to 27.5 for their 4'5" 8 year old's skipping two whole wheel sizes now! Hey why stop there, just go straight to a XXXS 29er NOW and be done buying bikes for your kids until they go off to college and can buy their next bike!


----------



## BXCc (May 31, 2012)

GSJ1973 said:


> You can tell the 27.5" marketing is working when folks are even thinking about going from 20" straight to 27.5 for their 4'5" 8 year old's skipping two whole wheel sizes now! Hey why stop there, just go straight to a XXXS 29er NOW and be done buying bikes for your kids until they go off to college and can buy their next bike!


That sounds an awful lot like an assumption that I might be a MTBR meathead that has never worked in a shop and doesn't care about a proper fitting bike. I'm just here to give the OP some oprions. I also feel a bike ia best being too small versus too big. But I also know there is no way to see how a bike fits without getting them on one. So is it bad that I entertained the idea by having her sit on one? And for the record, it wasn't a 27.5" wheeled trek. It was a 26" wheeled Giant from my second shop of choice. And it still didn't fit right. But when your daughter asks to build her next bike, you start looking and play along. Even if she won't be ready until 2016 season. It does however give us time to look for deals and for her to save some money for it.


----------



## BXCc (May 31, 2012)

But you are right. In the future i will make sure to NEVER let my kids sit on bikes that are too big. Even if I am only trying to size them up and see how far off it is.:thumbsup:


----------



## randyharris (Jul 1, 2009)

GSJ1973 said:


> General rule of thumb:
> 
> - Front end becomes higher
> - Wheel bases become longer
> ...


I'm not sure why you think I'm talking about going straight from 20" to 27.5", my kid is on a Marin BayView Trail 24" bike now, and I'm looking at skipping 26" and going to 27.5" for the next bike.

Some of your assumptions aren't very accurate either. My 29er wheels and tires weigh less than the ones on my kids 24" bike for example, in fact my 29er, and some of the 27.5" bikes I'm looking at are also lighter in weight than his 28 pound Marin 24" bike. Longer wheelbase and chain stays make for a more stable bike. Standover on an XS 27.5 is far low enough for kids under 5" tall, no problem - stand over on a Trek X-Caliber XS is under 26".

I get your sentiment, but I think some of that is not founded in my opinion, and I'd rather move my kid up to a 27.5 from his 24 when the sizing looks proper and not mess with a 26" bike, or stuff him onto a too big 29" bike.


----------



## BXCc (May 31, 2012)

randyharris said:


> GSJ1973 said:
> 
> 
> > You can tell the 27.5" marketing is working when folks are even thinking about going from 20" straight to 27.5 for their 4'5" 8 year old's skipping two whole wheel sizes now! Hey why stop there, just go straight to a XXXS 29er NOW and be done buying bikes for your kids until they go off to college and can buy their next bike!
> ...


I believe he was talking about me because I mentioned having my 4'5" daughter sitting on XS small bikes. I think he took it as I was hoping to buy one and skip a few sizes regardless of fit, you know, because i fell for the marketing hype and all. Good thing I didn't mention the time my youngest, 4 at time, sat on a new Santa Cruz Tallboy LT carbon because it was her favorite color. Who knows, maybe I could make the Tallboy work for her, she is 6 now :skep:

Ok, my sarcastic rant is over. I have some 26" Reynolds MTN wheels that she will get when she is ready. Thought of putting them on 27.5" bike but not sure if it would be helpful or not.


----------



## dc40 (Oct 4, 2013)

Longer wheel base and chain stay do provide more stability, but makes harder for them to lift there front ends up and impacts maneuverability/cornering, then add larger wheels which increases those effects even more. Then compound that to the size and strengths of the child, which IMO is not good to help improve skills and confident of the child. The smaller tires, will help the child learn to ride/flow with the terrain. If the goal is XC racing, I do see the value of the larger tires depending on the riders skills/bike handling capabilities.

For my boy and I, we mostly ride intermediate/blue trails at the DH Parks or local trails. Even though I could fit him on XS 26" frame bike, it would be more of challenge for him to maneuver the technical switchbacks/corners compared to his 24" DH or trail bike. The 26" bike would help with rolling over obstacles, but he is gaining much more skills learning to read and flow with the terrain required for the 24".


----------



## JackJr (Sep 24, 2007)

*Yeti*

because every kid needs a Yeti


----------



## GSJ1973 (May 8, 2011)

BXCc said:


> I believe he was talking about me because I mentioned having my 4'5" daughter sitting on XS small bikes. I think he took it as I was hoping to buy one and skip a few sizes regardless of fit, you know, because i fell for the marketing hype and all.
> 
> Ok, my sarcastic rant is over.


BXCc, sorry you must have missed my wink at the end of that paragraph. 

My opinion still stands Randy that a 26" is the way to go for a kid under 5 feet tall. A lot of xs bikes out there that will be more fun!


----------



## singletrackmack (Oct 18, 2012)

randyharris said:


> I'm not sure why you don't think it is s good idea. One of the boys on my sons team rides a Pivot LES 27.5 XS and he totally rocks it. And those bigger wheels roll noticeably better over our rough rocky trails here in Phoenix


I am new to this forum and saw this thread while looking for info on a strider bike for my son.

The obvious advantage of the 27.5" over the 26" would be more rollover, but not as much as you might think and it may not even be necessary given the lower center of gravity of a smaller rider. The disadvantages (as are mentioned above) would be a front end that is 1" higher, longer chain-stay/wheel base and most importantly higher rotational weight.

The 27.5" only has 1/2" more rollover than a 26" which is about a 4% increase in efficiency going over a 6" square object. It is much less of an increase in efficiency when going over objects that are less than 6" high and rounded.

While it does have a 1/2" more rollover it also has almost 12% more moment of inertia, which is probably not a big deal for a full size rider and could be even considered a good thing, but for a smaller rider when in motion it makes the wheel considerably heavier than an equally equipped 26". It's not just about the static weight of the wheel, but the weight when in motion. Not only is a 27.5" wheel heavier than a 26" wheel, but since it is 1" larger in diameter than a 26" that puts the weight further out from the axle increasing the weight even more. This additional weight when in motion plus the longer chain-stay/wheel base and higher front end could make the bike much more difficult to maneuver and get up to speed for a smaller rider, while only gaining a small increase in rollover.

You should check out some of this stuff regarding wheel size and rider height from Liteville.

First here is a video regarding center of gravity, rider height and wheel size:





And here is some info from their website regarding scaled sizing and some specific text regarding drawbacks of a larger wheel for smaller riders: :
LITEVILLE - SCALED SIZING - HOME

"Of course, with shorter riders (say 1.6 m), a larger rear wheel of diameter 650b or 29" would theoretically roll somewhat better in flat terrain, but in practice would also bring noticeable performance and confidence drawbacks in technical terrain. Not an good idea for a real mountainbike."

Would be pretty cool if someone was making 26" front/24" rear and 24" front/20" rear bikes for kids.


----------

