# Anyone here riding a 23 inch Trek Fuel EX 29er?



## Sassen (May 30, 2012)

I'm 6.5 (198cm) tall with a inseam at around 36 inches. 

I've been looking at getting a Trek Fuel EX 29er as they come in a 23 inch size. However in Australia there's no bike shops that stock or that will get in a 23 inch to try out. 

Looking at the geo on the Trek website it looks like it 'should' fit but I can't test ride. 

Anyone here on a 23 inch Trek Fuel 29er and how tall are you?


----------



## Robg68 (Oct 27, 2013)

I ride a 21.5" and I'm 6'4.5" tall. And I'm very comfortable. I put a shorter stem on mine. Was 90mm went to 70mm. I felt I was to stretched out. My son that is 6'6" rides it every once in a while and all he does is raise the seat a little. Hope that's some help for you. 


2014 Trek Fuel 8-29er. 2015 Trek Farley 6.


----------



## Sassen (May 30, 2012)

thanks for that, anyone here ride a 23 inch Trek Fuel?


----------



## JonJones (Feb 12, 2012)

Sassen said:


> thanks for that, anyone here ride a 23 inch Trek Fuel?


I have one. I bought it about 3 weeks ago. I'm 6'4" with a 36 inseam.
Where in Australia are you as I'm in Melbourne?

Short answer is it will be plenty long enough. I ride mine with 820mm wide bars and either 80mm stem or a 40mm stem. (Still working out which I prefer).


----------



## Sassen (May 30, 2012)

Thanks, good to know JonJones, I'm in Melbourne as well.


----------



## JonJones (Feb 12, 2012)

If you're ever around Lysterfield early in the morning at the weekend I'll be about on it. 
Usually from 6:00 in the morning until 10:00. 

Happy to have you get on it for size. :^)


----------



## Sassen (May 30, 2012)

nice, thanks!


----------



## johnd663 (Jun 28, 2007)

Sassen said:


> Thanks, good to know JonJones, I'm in Melbourne as well.


Hey- Cycles Galleria in the QV building in CBD has an XXL Fuel out the back on order for me. I dont think I can do it now so have told them to sell it. It is the last in the country- Fuel EX 9. Go and check it out.


----------



## jeffj (Jan 13, 2004)

I'm somewhere around 6'5" or maybe a bit less now that I'm at the stage of life where that happens ;~)

I ride an XXL (23") Trek Stache which has an ETT that has one tenth of an inch less top tube length than the Fuel in the XXL size. Best fitting bike I have ever ridden. I spent a month on an XL (21.5") Stache (test bike), so I know the difference. No doubt, I like the XXL better.


----------



## zman172 (Dec 22, 2015)

Yeah, where is the 23" Trek Fuel any more? I look on their website and don't see it. I'm 6'5" and really need it.


----------



## Sassen (May 30, 2012)

zman172 said:


> Yeah, where is the 23" Trek Fuel any more? I look on their website and don't see it. I'm 6'5" and really need it.


What country are you in?


----------



## TooTallUK (Jul 5, 2005)

zman172 said:


> Yeah, where is the 23" Trek Fuel any more? I look on their website and don't see it. I'm 6'5" and really need it.


I'd not say so, not unless you have VERY long legs. I'd probably put you on a 21/22" bike. I'm 6'7" and ride a 23" bike and it's too big for most anyone under 6'6".


----------



## Sassen (May 30, 2012)

Trek have updated their site with a new sizing chart, very handy 
Sizing Charts


----------



## klydesdale (Feb 6, 2005)

TooTallUK said:


> I'd not say so, not unless you have VERY long legs. I'd probably put you on a 21/22" bike. I'm 6'7" and ride a 23" bike and it's too big for most anyone under 6'6".


I disagree. You don't necessarily need to have very long legs to fit well on a 23" bike. If you have a longish torso for a 6' 5" height like I do, the 23" Trek frames (which really have a 22" ST) will be a much better fit than the smaller 21.5" ones.

My custom Curtlo FS 29er has damn near the same ST and ETT measurements as the 23" Fuel EX and I'm more comfortable on that bike than I have ever been on any smaller frame MTB. I was fitted for this custom frame by the owner of my favorite LBS who's has decades of experience at fitting bikes. If Trek had offered bikes like the Fuel EX in the XXL size back when I had this frame made, I would have never had to go custom.

I also have *25"* Ventana El Rey that I'm just as comfortable riding because it's ETT is similar and it has a low-standover height design.


----------



## AuburnAlex (Jun 26, 2016)

Hello, I understand that this is a relatively old thread, but I really appreciate the information here for taller riders. I am 6'7" and have been shopping around for a new trail or all-mountain bike awhile now. I finally have settled on the new Trek Fuel EX 9 29 23" frame. I found a 23" Trek Remedy but with the latest Fuel EX upgrades with the 130mm fork and so on, thought this will be the best option. Just looking to go for longer rides, so I guess I have to sacrifice a bit on the downhill. 
Anyone have a final opinions about the fit and ride of their 23" Trek Fuel EX before I throw down a wad of money?
I've always rode bikes that don't quite fit, so Im thrilled to have found this bike right in my price range. Just wanted some final thoughts from anybody, since I won't be able to demo the bike. Thanks!


----------



## SlowScott (Feb 18, 2012)

*Buy it!!*



AuburnAlex said:


> Hello, I understand that this is a relatively old thread, but I really appreciate the information here for taller riders. I am 6'7" and have been shopping around for a new trail or all-mountain bike awhile now. I finally have settled on the new Trek Fuel EX 9 29 23" frame. I found a 23" Trek Remedy but with the latest Fuel EX upgrades with the 130mm fork and so on, thought this will be the best option. Just looking to go for longer rides, so I guess I have to sacrifice a bit on the downhill.
> Anyone have a final opinions about the fit and ride of their 23" Trek Fuel EX before I throw down a wad of money?
> I've always rode bikes that don't quite fit, so Im thrilled to have found this bike right in my price range. Just wanted some final thoughts from anybody, since I won't be able to demo the bike. Thanks!


I feel your pain. I'm tall as well and had to commit to buying the 23" bike before the Trek store would order it, so no demo here either. But the fit is spot on. Couldn't be happier and I'm 6'7" as well with a 36" inseam (barefoot, floor to taint).

The only changes I made were swapping for a slightly longer stem and a flatter 3T bar for more of the XC feel that I'm used too.

Ride is excellent, too. Climbs loose, techy sections better than my Niner HT and is really a hoot on the flowy downhills.

Two thumbs up from me!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

Let me know if you need any more info.

Scott


----------



## AuburnAlex (Jun 26, 2016)

Hey Scott, thank for the response. You told me just what I wanted to hear! And an extra bonus, MTBR just released the first ride report for the new 2017 model. Hopefully everyone doesn't snatch them up before I get my paycheck.


----------



## NZjibbs (Mar 9, 2013)

I'm torn between 21.5 and 23. I'm just over 6'4. I fell like i've never fit a bike properly, I see that the Treks' sizing chart says I'm a 21.5 frame, but with all the hype and praise around longer bikes should I jump to the largest frame option. 
What are riders my height riding?


----------



## JonJones (Feb 12, 2012)

If it helps, I'm 6'4" and running a 23" XXL Fuel (2015 model). I have it with a 40mm stem and 780mm wide bars. It fits beautifully (I have long arms and legs). 
I will say I could have run an XL 21" frame but would have had to match it with a 60mm / 80mm stem. 

It is a long bike though with benefits (stable and comfortable) and pitfalls (uphill switchbacks are testing).


----------



## NZjibbs (Mar 9, 2013)

JonJones said:


> If it helps, I'm 6'4" and running a 23" XXL Fuel (2015 model). I have it with a 40mm stem and 780mm wide bars. It fits beautifully (I have long arms and legs).
> I will say I could have run an XL 21" frame but would have had to match it with a 60mm / 80mm stem.
> 
> It is a long bike though with benefits (stable and comfortable) and pitfalls (uphill switchbacks are testing).


Thanks JonJones

Looking at the 2015 specs the 2017 23" seams to be even larger comparatively to the 21.5" of both years.

Cheers


----------



## Tjaard (Aug 17, 2007)

*23" Fuel EX*



JonJones said:


> If it helps, I'm 6'4" and running a 23" XXL Fuel (2015 model). I have it with a 40mm stem and 780mm wide bars. It fits beautifully (I have long arms and legs).
> I will say I could have run an XL 21" frame but would have had to match it with a 60mm / 80mm stem.
> 
> It is a long bike though with benefits (stable and comfortable) and pitfalls (uphill switchbacks are testing).



23" only comes in alloy frame, not carbon(same for Stumpjumper FSR)
2014/15 frame reach is shorter than 2016 is shorter reach than 2017 for the same size. But '14/'15 frames had longer chain stays.
Make sure you are reading the geometry chart correctly. The low position will have about 5mm shorter reach than the high position. On some charts Trek listed the 23" in high and all other sizes in low
The 2016 9-29 had a taller fork than the other models(130vs 120). This will shorten the reach by about 5mm. This is not adjusted in the geometry chart.


I am 6'5 (196cm) and ride the 2017 23" model with the stock 50mm stem. On my '15 23" I had to use a much longer stem, not ideal for handling.


----------



## Sassen (May 30, 2012)

Hey Tjaard, what stem where you using in your 2015 23" trek?


----------



## Tjaard (Aug 17, 2007)

Sassen,
As a bike fitter I'd say, that very personal. It depends on your body proportions and flexibility, as well as other set up issues like handle bar height, width and sweep and what kind of fit you are trying to achieve.

I was running a taller fork on there, so that shortens the reach a bit, with answer 20/20 bars I had a 140 stem. If I would have had the stock fork and a bar with less sweep, then maybe a 110mm?
That doesn't mean that's right for you though. Given how short those old frames were though, at your height you will absolutely have the best fit on the 23".
What width bar are you using? Make sure it's a wide enough for you, that takes up a bit of reach, allowing you to go shorter on the stem.

What kind of fit are you going for?


----------



## Rafu (Oct 25, 2013)

I am almost 6'5" (195) with 37.5" of inseam. My current bike is 23" Superfly and I feel that it could be shorter - I am running 90mm stem and seapost without offset. I haven't had chance to ride 2017 Fuel Ex but I did it with 2016 Fuel EX (23") and it was perfect. On the other hand I rode 21.5" 2016 Remedy and it was too short + seatpost on the limit. What size of new Fuel EX would you advise guys?


----------



## Tjaard (Aug 17, 2007)

Rafu said:


> I am almost 6'5" (195) with 37.5" of inseam. I haven't had chance to ride 2017 Fuel Ex but I did it with 2016 Fuel EX (23") and it was perfect. On the other hand I rode 21.5" 2016 Remedy and it was too short + seatpost on the limit. What size of new Fuel EX would you advise guys?


For sure a 23", unless you have a super short reach. As you see above, I am very close in size to you and I ride a 2017 23" Fuel EX.
17" for 5'8" riders, 19" for 6', 21 for 6'2", 23" for 6'4" see the progression here?

Normally, on a trail bike like a Fuel EX you'd run a stem around 30-60mm long for the best handling, and slightly wider handlebars than on an XC bike like your Superfly. Handlebar width calculator

If you are fitting the bike for long, fairly smooth rides, go longer and higher. If you want to rip technical terrain and really work the bike, go shorter and lower (BMX would be the extreme example).

The 2017 is longer than the 2016, but it is following modern geometry, designed to be used with a shorter stem.

If you want to run it in the lower/slacker setting, absolutely get the 23", as the reach will shorten a bit from what's listed.


----------

