I am 38 and am just looking into stepping into my first mountain bike . These sizing videos are a huge help . The whole sizing thing has confused and overwhelmed me for so long. I finally feel like i can get my head around it now. Thankyou gentlemen. 👍
I work as a components engineer in the bike industry (not as a frame designer) and your two videos on bike fit have just blown my mind. It's so easy to get caught up in the new trends that you ignore what should be intuitive. Thanks for opening my eyes!
Wow, thank you! We talk to engineers and suspension designers in the industry all the time and some are quite frustrated. But it's all gonna work out and the new bikes are incredible!!! Kudos to you!
@@JoyOfBike Why do you think that is? Bike companies forcing geometry change/larger sizing in an attempt to sell newer bikes? What do the engineers say? Cheers!
@James Grimshaw your seat and seat post have no effect at all on RAD. RAD is the distance from your bottom bracket center to the bar grip center. Watch the second Joy of Bike fit video to see how it’s measured. But basically, you can lengthen RAD by using a longer stem or raising the bars. However, Lee also has a number called SHO (distance between middle of hands and steering axis) that will be less optimal if your frame is too small. Still, I believe Lee recommends prioritizing RAD over SHO. Check out his fitting book for really detailed guidance
Don’t undersell yourself with phrases like “a person of color” you are a person! If you see yourself as anything other than a human, than you are doing yourself a huge disservice and you will never reach your full potential!
This is a really good video. I I'm 5'9" and have been riding large frames for years and dealing with hand pain. You have me rethinking my decisions in life now.
I'm 186cm tall and I was riding nukeproof Scout 290 in size L. I had 50mm stem and saddle all the way back. My frame developed crack after about 1 year. I bought second frame same model but size XL. Now I run 42mm stem and my saddle is exactly in the middle. Bike feel far more stable and I feel far more confident
Nice! I'm only a few CM taller than you and just bought a nukeproof scout 290 in XL. Should be in the sweet spot for a neutral RAD formula perspective, anyway.
This is a two part comment so hang in there! 1, First full sus bike I brought I went straight for the large awesome bike but way too big went onto ebay had to get another one. Plus the large carbon full face helmet that had to go as well. 2, I just ran your numbers regarding RAD numbers. I brought a transition patrol in medium which I totally feel at home on. My number came out at 450.85 cm and the patrols reach is 450! Hands down this is my favourite biking TH-cam channel!!!
great video! I am 5'10, I have a small transition patrol, works really well. A medium would probably be fine as well, but a large would definitely be way too big for me!
Please forward this video to every bike manufacturer on earth! Lee’s book on bike geo is what I used to size my current bike and I got it as close to my RAD as possible. Instant connection with my bike on the first ride. Thanks for making this video and big respect for supporting Grow Cycling!!
Thanks for producing these videos- I've been using my quick and dirty rad calculation on bikes 2018-2021 with mostly favorable results, aside from a 2020 Salsa, which is a pretty huge outlier, but I see some today which are a little out of whack. For instance, my ideal reach, using the method in the video, falls between 440mm-450mm but when I look at something like the 2022 Orbea Occam, which the size chart says that I should go for a size large on at 5'10" it has a reach of 474mm- That's a pretty massive difference! On the other side of the spectrum, I've got my 2020 Salsa Timberjack in size medium that feels about right but it has a reach of just 430mm, which pretty far off the rad minus scale. Are bikes in 2023 just going to have a longer reach even when the fit is just right because that seems to go against the whole premise of the video? Thanks. **Just to update that I ultimately ordered a size medium Orbea Occam, based on the fact that my ideal rad number, using calculations illustrated in the video, came out to: Neutral: 447.5, Minus 438.5 and Plus 456.45. The large Occam reach came in at what appeared to me to be an enormous 474, whereas medium is 450. So, medium all the way, right? That's what I thought and so I blew off what the size chart said "160-175 63.0"-68.9" M 170-185 66.9"-72.8" L" and sized down. Well, this may be an anomaly (the seat tube angle is rather steep on this particular bike and the effective top tube comes in considerably shorter than my existing bike, which only has a 5mm difference on the reach at 455) but I immediately felt too big when I got on the medium Orbea- It felt like I was being nudged too far forward over the bars and toward the front wheel and my lower half felt cramped like I might tag my leg with the bars in a more demanding technical situation on the trail and the whole thing felt claustrophobic w/out the sense of any kind of leverage advantages illustrated. When I got off the bike, I could visually see the smallness of the cockpit vs. what I'm used to. So, my word of caution is that while this method seems to work for most of my bikes, including my size medium 2019 Santa Cruz Chameleon hardtail(seemingly perfect w/40mm stem) and my size medium 2021 Marin Rift Zone 3(also very near perfect when using a 40mm stem w/perhaps a touch of rad+)- Both of which are consistent with my Rad number, this Orbea, which on paper looked right, felt all wrong on the bike. The shop offered to have a large shipped from another store but I ultimately opted to stick w/my Marin as there was no way that I was sizing up to large with a 474mm reach on the Orbea and the medium w/450mm was decidedly too small- So much so that I don't believe a longer stem or saddle slammed to the rear would have made it right. It would appear that something on the level of a M/L on the Orbea with maybe between 460-465mm-ish reach reach would have done me justice but no such animal exists. Anyway, hope that helps for anyone looking at that particular bike or one with similar geometry to it.
I experienced something similar. I am currently deciding between an M and L Canyon Spectral. My Rad number is 460 and that is exactly size M. But while demoing both M and L, I found that M felt way too small and L felt more natural. Size M felt like I was almost going otb in my normal attack position. I wonder what's going on here 🤔
I'm 189cm and just bought a nukeproof 290 scout XL. Neutral RAD formula puts me about as spot on as possible without having a custom bike made; within 5mm. That's pretty dang good. Now if winter would cease up then I could find out :) Great video!
Great insight and very useful data points. I have been riding an XL SC Tallboy (1, 2 & 3 versions) and all have fit me perfectly. After enjoying your video...take my 470 magic reach number and now I am looking at size Large in almost all the SC frames now. Same with Yeti, Ibis, etc...I am 6'2.5" with long legs and arms(ape index of +3 inches). Due to my ape index, I ended up with a 60mm stem on my Tallboy for my long XC Endurance events.
This is SOOOOO refreshing! I have suspected this for some time but was unable to figure out the science myself. You guys have nailed it! Every bike magazine, test rider, retailer and distributor in the UK should be made to watch this video. The industry is constantly pushing for longer and the mags here always recommend sizing up so you're more centred in the bike. Yes, you'll be more centred, but who wants to spent their whole ride looking like they're doing the 'downward facing dog' in yoga? I ride an older (2017) bike which, as luck would have it, fits me perfectly using your guide. Henceforth, I'm adopting the R.A.D. approach and I'll be recommending it to everyone remotely interested in riding. Lee, you're a biking wizard!
Yes the media is definitely to be blamed. I hope everyone soon realizes modern manufacturer recommended sizes are useless for progressing skills. Chris Porter and Cesar Rojo also need to be blamed. They are the dirty slobs who made riding with heavy hands fashionable. Lee you are a genius and you are the hero the world of mountain biking needs.
After a lesson with Kevin from Lee Likes Bikes, I came to realize that I was on way too big of a bike. I fell between the medium and large on the Yeti size chart and got a large; I actually dropped all the way down to a small, and can't believe how much better the experience is...cornering is better, I can jump and hop better, just overall a better experience. The "RAD" they talk about makes a lot of sense when you try it out by say putting your bike up on two boxes or tables.
Which is interesting because I had the opposite experience. My previous bike was just under what my Rad - number would be and it was hard to properly weight the front to corner without getting TOO far over the front, could easily go nose heavy on jumps if I wasn't religious about pre-loading the front way more than the back. My new bike which is about 20mm over my Rad + number feels much more balanced, the row/counter row motion for jumps and hinging in general feels more natural, corners much more easily, and I never feel like I'm hanging off the back even on steep stuff.
@@austinmcguff1898 I am 5'10" and have the SB130, now in a Small. I am probably somewhere between a small and medium really, but was definitely NOT a large. Very happy with the small.
@@mrvwbug4423 yes I am apparently not fully evolved from ape status as I have long arms (reach ) but shorter legs and when I try to do the TREK sizing chart it’s asks me to check my measurements 🙄 I’m 180 tall and my inner seem measured 77cm ! According to TREK I’m on the boarder height wise for m/l - large but inner seam would be Medium 🤪 I have a m/l Trek Fuel ex8 and now I’ve measured my RAD at 77cm looks like I’m about 6cm too long 😤
I’m 5’10” and I went by the charts and went large twice. I struggled constantly trying to manual or wheelie. Sold both bikes after trying a medium and it is so much more playful and fun. I can’t wait to measure the RAD when I get home tonight. I have a feeling it will be spot on. Thanks again for a very informative video. You guys are the best!
That is a cool way of measuring. I'm not adverse to very long frames, for aerodynamics, comfort, etc. Size charts put me on an L/XL, but tend to ride a M/L.
I only have one 2' step OMG what to do? I did have six cinder blocks though, perfect. Actually I only used four, two laying and two standing because I didn't want to make another trip.
This is an awesome video! Here’s one thing I think about a lot and I mention it in a video talking about my latest Hardtail. My RAD number is 483 and my suspension bike has a reach of 505 and I love it. When I was developing my signature Hardtail with Reeb we made the first version 495 and I couldn’t ride it. We sized down to 485 and I rode it for a year. I started to feel like it was too long so my new bike is 465 but has a slightly taller stack and a 10mm longer stem. So... on paper the Hardtail says it’s substantially shorter than the suspension bike but during dynamic movements they feel way more similar. My theory is that suspension bikes “fold” meaning pedals drop and bars come to your lap. The longer the travel the smaller the bike will feel bunnyhopping and stuff. Hardtails are absolute and don’t do that. Anyway, Lee’s RAD number seems like a really good sweet spot because I do see so many riders on bikes that are way too big. My add on advice would be to use his number and if you’re looking to go tech on a Hardtail definitely lean towards the shorter measurement. Great vid!
@@lee_likes_bikes LOL I feel like I found my bike sizing soul mate! Although... could we just be Boomers? Maybe have an equation that subtracts your age? haha
Thanks Jeff. Love your vids brother!! It’s such a bummer to see so many people on bikes too big. The “fold” is really interesting. Fascinating add. The distance from bar to feet doesn’t change but that fold changes the feel for sure. I can’t ride as well as you but your comment makes me want to play with a rad plus on the full squish specifically on hops. Got a S and M Revel and that will be a fun experiment. You and Christian really load up this full squish rear ends!!! Maybe you can teach me that some time!!! That would be a blast.
What do they call it when channels mash up? It’s not a collab. Cooler than that. Anyway, when it warms up we can get the bunny hop bar out and some full squish and see if you can teach this old dog how to go higher. I sorta dislike hopping suspension bikes and maybe more import than the height is the love!!!! Feels like jello back there. : )
I almost never comment, mostly because I watch on TV and nowhere to comment there, but I've been watching you guys for a couple months now and needed to thank you. I've been riding for almost 40 years 48 years old and you guys teach me things that I've never known! Thank you so much for putting all these together. I finally bought a full suspension bike after having my last mountain bikes since 98. (26 hardtail that still is great) Which I still have and love but I definitely needed full suspension to help with the knees and elbows. Unfortunately bike I just bought I think is to big. Confirmed with your calculations. I believe this video will really help so many people . I have to give my new bike a chance once the weather is better in NJ but might have to bite the bullet and get a different bike and there's not many out there right now at least around me. sorry about the long message thanks so much! You guys are awesome!! Keep up the great work and having fun!
@@JoyOfBike wow thanks. R.A.D. minus is 426 and bought used, which is so old, but a 2013 Trek Rumblefish Elite (size Med 17.5) in perfect never rode condition. Still think need fork and rear shock looked at don't think working properly because no click at all on rear. I never had rear shocks so not sure. Geometry chart I found was for the Pro model and said "Frame Reach" is 16.38 in. if that is correct 426mm = 16.78in so pretty close. I will try the ladder test you did and see how I match up. Just feels very big but I'm coming from 20 years on a med 26.
@@jdogery These multiples that Lee shared are for modern bikes and modern geo. Short stems and slack head angles. Bikes prior to 2015 ish would use a different multiple. BUT The stools always work on any bike any era to get yourself dialed. I think you will be in the ball park and can make tweaks.
@@JoyOfBike Alex thanks so much. I watched the video again and see one of the tweaks is the stem. I will change that for sure maybe on both hard and full. The full has always been very tough to wheelie and I know now that is the reason and how to help it. thx again. Joe
I just received Dialed and have never before been so glued to a book. I only wish I had this knowledge BEFORE buying a medium '21 Transition Scout. I'm 171.5 cm tall in riding shoes and the Scout has a reach of 460! Kills my back. It's super stable at speed but I can't shred like I did on my small 2012 stumpjumper FSR. I think this Scout is too long to correct for my fit needs 😭
Öhlins 👍😎 I've always tended to opt for the smaller size. At 5'7.5", with traditional sizing, it puts me on a medium. All of my mountain bike frames are small & my road bikes have been between a 50cm & 52cm. You can make the micro adjustments with varying stem lengths, bar rise and fore-and-aft saddle adjustments. 👌
Great video. Being average height and between sizes on every size chart is anxiety inducing when it comes to dumping money on a bike. If you’re comfortable on a medium that’s cool if you’re happy on trail barge then that’s cool too. Ride the bikes and work out what’s right but don’t doubt yourself based on what your told.
This channel by the way...love it. Just starting actual getting into really riding the MTB. 46 years old, five spinal fractures. Knee screwed together, three collar bone breaks and more ribs and leg bones than I can count. All the years of extreme skiing and such caught up to me. SO in an effort to try something safer :) - I am learning from these guys to do this and hopefully be using my body correctly in conjunction with the bike setup. Kudos to Alex and Lee for such good content and a natural manner of presenting it. Thanks so much!!
8:20 - olympic rings gymnastics is a hand centric sport. And those guys have massive shoulder muscles! great video gents. much love from Abbotsford, BC!
"It was my understanding, that there would be no math..." - President Gerald R. Ford (Okay, fine. Chevy Chase said it.) Another great video from you both! I will be calculating my 'RAD' tonight for sure but wanted to add that this not only helped to visualize how frame geometry numbers equate to fit but more importantly - mobility. I can't wait to see what you guys come up with when the temp reaches -30!
LOL. The good news is you don't have to do it over and over. Unless the industry starts going with longer stems again. (Doubtful for a while) Your happy reach number is gonna be pretty consistent.
I've come back to the two sizing/RAD videos recently because I was trying to decide on which size frame to get, but then I took it to my son's bike. I built him a Trailcraft Maxwell 275 last year and TC's recommended height range for this frame is 4'10" - 5'6". My son is 12yo and 4'11" right now and he just isn't comfortable on the bike. I finally got out the tape measure and it comes as no surprise that he's not gelling with the bike. Using Lee's height in CM x 2.5 my son should be riding a bike with a 375mm reach. Trailcraft don't publish stack and reach for their frames but I measured his bike and it's 438mm!!!! For comparison my size large 29er Orbea Oiz has a 445mm reach and I'm 11" taller than my son!
A bit over 5’10”. Ride an XL Bronson V3 with 2.6s and an XL Bronson V2 with 2.3s. They do everything- some things amazing, some things adequately. Even the skateparks and DJ parks. The V2 is better than the V3 in those places, but the V3 is better at gnarly downhills and at high speed and off trail features like drops at speed. So I think it depends on what you want to do with the bike. You can do everything with every bike, smaller ones will have advantages in one area and disadvantages in others and vice versa. Also think you are forgetting chainstay length, which makes a huge difference in how easy it is to lift the front wheel and concomitantly how easy to is to then get the back wheel up. And also bb drop. I’ve been paying a lot of attention to that recently and what I’ve found is that greater bb drop makes it more stable at speed but definitely makes it harder to pop the bike. I feel like I am so far down and have so far up to go to get the bike popping. And standover, stack height, seat tube length. And then there is bar width, riser height and sweep and stem size too- I mean if you’re mostly into skateparks and DJ parks narrower bars with a higher rise are the ticket. But get going 35 mph over gnar and you’ll really appreciate even just another 20 or 40 mm of width, or if mostly interested in climbing will want to bring the rise down a lot. I think one really has to look at all of these things together and understand how a change one way or another in one will affect the handling of the bike. Even with sizing I don’t think there is anyway to say that a certain length this or that is right for a person all the time, I think the first question to ask yourself if buying a mtb is what kind of riding am I buying this bike to do? Then get one optimized for that. I mean I love my Bronsons cause they’re optimized for how and what I mostly ride and do the other stuff well enough. If I were doing more other bmx type stuff then I’d get a very different bike and would love that one too.
Was talking to Elliot Jackson about bike sizes and the trends and he said two things that were important. The new tracks are straighter and so how a bike turns is less of an issue so longer works better now. AND many of these guys are running different sizes at different tracks. But I botched the Zoom call recording. LOL
@@JoyOfBike yup, trails have evolved just like bikes. The trails I’m riding now at the speeds I’m riding them and the features I’m doing on them would have been impossible with my 1990 fully rigid- I could have ridden the trails, but a lot slower and wouldn’t have been able to even contemplate the features. It’s kind of an arms race between the trails and the bikes that ride em! Def the the newer trails are designed for the newer longer bikes, but where I am (east coast and Appalachians) it’s not so much that they’re straighter but that the turns are longer and swoopier which makes it easier with the big bikes to really lean the bike down and rail around. It’s still my worst skill given that all of my formative muscle memory years was on shorter bikes, a** hanging of the back sliding the rear end around, but I keep working at it. I don’t have a problem with slow speed tight singletrack on the longer bikes, it’s just a different technique (the Pole guy demonstrates it well), but where I really notice the difference is the tight turny singletrack at moderate speeds- on a shorter bike I can def whip through there faster and easier. Some of the converted hiking trails can be bears to get through on my V3 and really require a bit of effort. And of course DJ parks or skateparks it takes a lot more effort on my V3. One reason I went longer 27.5 wheeled slack bike with 2.6 (my Bronson V3) is to me it’s length (1252 mm wheelbase, wide bars, slack hta) gives me excellent high speed stability and is better at features at speed, the 2.6s give me nearly as good rollover as a 29er (only a half inch difference from a 29 x 2.3) and a little bit more cush and grip on the Appalachian rocks, yet the slightly smaller wheels and lesser bb drop and shorter chainstays maintains is poppiness and allows it to get through those tight, twisty moderate speed trails we have a lot of better than something like a true enduro sled. And since I’m not racing anymore not the speed is just for me and the thrill of it!!! I think we really are living in a golden age of mtbs right now and am just so glad I’m still young and healthy enough to be able to still do some of the features and go pretty hard and really get at least somewhat close to the max out of what these bikes have to give. It’s so cool that a rider really can select almost the perfect bike (or bikes) for his or her kind of riding, and even the one bike quiver bikes are so good at everything. Does require a bit more research on the rider’s part and knowledge prior to purchase, but that’s where vids like yours are so great at helping folks. and the reward for the effort is so sweet. Ride on!! 🤙🤘 th-cam.com/video/GNHKkiqiCZs/w-d-xo.html
If your bikes got no pop it's too long ...how low the pivot is has no bearing on a hop whatsoever when you've got the front end up...your levers too long on your bottom bracket see saw mate
I'm 5' 10 and I measured my RAD with your formulas, and on the reach charts for Specialized I'm an S3, but Specialized recommends S4 in the sizing chart I'm right in the middle. I took a leap of faith with your system, and purchased the $11k Levo Expert Carbon. Needles to say I was extremely nervous to purchase such a bike which possibly could be too small, but you guys were right the money. After owning two Specialized Larges for about 6 years now, I couldn't be happier with this bike and size. It feels very comfortable and natural. My hands are no longer tired from leaning on them for hours. You guys are awesome, thank you for taking the time to do this video. I am getting a little tennis elbow pain though, wondering if it's my 800mm bars. I'll check out your handlebar video.
I'm the same height as you 5'10'' and ride an S3 stumpjumper evo. Cutting my bars down to 770mm made a huge difference for my shoulders and elbows. also gave me more confidence in tight twisty stuff. i highly recommend.
@@funLad80 Yes Jarek and I’m loving it! According to the Specialized Sizing Chart the S4 was a better fit than S3 for me, but I took a leap of faith with these guys after watching this video, and I’m really glad I did. The downhill feels great and the climbs feel great. I actually took my two small ladders to the shop just to make sure before I purchased. But even if I hadn’t, the RAD measurement was enough information to compare to the bike reach specs.
@@moderntouchfurniture S3 got 450-455 reach. If you multiply your height in centimeters by 2.50 you will get your reach, of course it may not work for everybody but at least it gives you idea. It looks like S3 fits you like a glove
What a great video. I really like your methods for educating our biking community and that you do this freely regardless of whether people agree or disagree with your methods. Big props for this. Now I have a better understanding why my 483 mm reach bike feels so good! Thanks and keep up the great work!
Agree 💯. Spot on analogy to help us understand the new bike sizing conundrum. I’m 6’ tall and ride a medium Santa Cruz 5010 V4. Everyone told me I’m crazy for not getting a large. Thanks for the video!
@@JoyOfBike on trek bikes , for the fitness fx bike, it says medium some one max height of 5’8, I bought a large and an 5’11 , not sure if it is bad , my only issue is saddle discomfort
@@lee_likes_bikes I just bought an S3 Enduro frame as a replacement. At 5'10, I'd be about 7mm off from your RAD+ calculations. After investing in two frames, I'm overdue for massive financial hindsight. If I had a chance to do this over again, maybe I would've bought a Santa Cruz Megatower. The reach (high or low) would've fit me. The comparison of price and reviews lead me to the Enduro.
@@lee_likes_bikes Just found this video after I purchased a new 2021 stumpy, I'm 6'0 and going by the size chart I had picked the smallest size in my height range (S4). But using the data from this video, it appears I should have gone with an S3 :( I haven't even picked up the bike yet as it's being shipped in from out of state.
You guy's have saved me alot of hassle. I have order a new bike (a Ribble HT725 steal hardtail size large), I am new to mtb and the last time I rode a bike disc brakes weren't a thing. I watched your video, checked my bike geometry (size L reach 473), my max reach is 447.5 I am 179cm, quickly called the manufacturer Ribble and they are going to change my frame to a medium (reach 455.5) closer to my reach. So thank you guys 🙏🏿
Very interesting thought. I’m 5.10 and always between a M and L. I’ve always opted for the M since I just prefer being able to move the bike around. It feels justified now 👍🏼
I love these videos, no stupid numbers just the facts. I own an old boardman mtb that I love but it old and the wrong size, I’m watching these videos to choose my next bike and make the right decision.
This is a great theory! I've always felt cramped on my bike with a reach of 432mm which is a Large and I'm 5'10". According to your equation I should more comfortably be around 445-454mm! I'll definitely keep this in mind on my next bike!
Kudos for saying this...we can't ride em at any size...that my friends is a bold n true statement...but it's taller guys too...I'm 6,2 and it's a minefield... for most people a new bike is around 4 or 5 thousand pounds...it's not chump change is it for the average consumer...it means credit for a lot of people...it's almost built into the life of a bike the fact that the bikes change so much....good episode guys
I knew something was off with modern bike sizing! When I getting my first mtb they put me on xl based on my height and after a couple day I brought it back and told them I wanted a smaller one. I tried medium and large and the medium felt waaaaay more natural, made me feel like it was an extension of my body. Salesmen looked at me like I was insane.
Same look from my bike salesman. I’m 6’ and fit a medium Specialized better. The salesman looked at me like I was crazy, but I’ve “learned” by purchasing bigger frames bikes in the past. When I picked up my bike I noticed a newbie about my size picking up his XL (same bike model). Yikes. I feel bad not saying anything but didn’t feel it was my place. He didn’t seem to notice me leaving with a medium.
Quick update .. at 6 foot 1 inch I went from 487 reach to 465 reach and it completely changed the game … I ride every trail faster without even trying, jump easier, climb easier and manual easier … thanks again!!
Do steep seat angles make up for these longer reaches though? I’m looking at a Norco Torrent and at 178cm tall they put me in the middle of the size large range which has a 480 reach. Medium has 450 reach, but everyone says it will be cramped pedaling with the steep seat tube. No way for me to test ride them unfortunately. My new favorite mtb channel btw. Love the stoke, keep up the great work!
If you spend most of your day in the saddle the longer bike will feel more comfortable. If you stand and do dynamic moves up and down hill the shorter bike is how I would go. A lot of people ride in circles in a parking lot to test a bike and so the bike with the proper reach actually feels too small in this sit and spin situation.
Fantastic truth bomb content guys, I recently jumped on board with Lee's ride logic online material and it has been by far the best upgrade made to my bike/riding for years, much appreciated...
Hey fellas I'm stoked I'm a science guy since highschool to my profession in todays market and my favorite hobby is MTB. This sizing made me nuts at the demos. You guys explained it very well also your row and anti row got this old fella safely into the air on some table topped trails !!! Thanks a bunch for increasing the stoke!!!! Please keep up the good work!!! Lee your a master dropin knowledge like who knows what! lol!
Guys, thank you for this video. I'm trying to decide what mountain bike to purchase as an entry-level but room to grow bike and I'm getting told all kinds of stories. I ride a little small women's hardtail around town and feel really nimble on it but these bike shop guys keep saying that I should be on a medium. Now I have numbers to use to explain what the small frames in fact DO fit me better! I love learning about this topic so thank you!!
Makes so much sense to me. Thanks, guys! What the industry is trying to do, not so much, but I get it. Hence the phrase "it doesn't make make sense, but I get it" 😄
Enjoyed the video guys! I had an experience like this, I’m 5'7" and ended up returning the size medium 29er trail bike I bought last summer after a day, and replacing it with a small. There’s a psychological tendency to want to go big when you can go big, but the smaller one just felt so much better, like something I could be one with, instead of something I was perched on top of. Also, loved the moment comparing leaning on the bars and losing your center of gravity, to controlling the bars while keeping your center. I’ve studied kung fu and that is kung fu! Rock on.
I know this video is older and may not get a reply, but just to clarify: You are taking your height [cm] multiplied by 2.5 (or 2.45 if you want RAD negative) and you will get a number. For me it was, 421 for RAD negative - 430 for RAD neutral. You then take that number and compare it to the "reach" spec of the bike [in millimeters], correct? According to Giant's site: for the Talon 3 the medium frame reach is 418 mm, which is what I have. So technically my bike is 3 mm under RAD negative? It's funny, because I thought this bike frame was too big for me when I factored in that I have less than an inch of stand-over clearance and my seat post is in the lowest position so I was thinking of dropping down a size, but according to RAD that may make the reach spec even further away from my RAD negative? (The small frame Talon reach spec is 399 mm). Either bikes are confusing as hell or I misunderstood something somewhere. Maybe I'll try the marker method in your other video....
This is quite interesting. While your video was on I had to look up the sizing of my current enduro, a Rocky Mountain Slayer 2018. This bike has the Ride4 Flip Chip. I ride in 2 positions (out of 4 obviously), 2 being slightly slacker and 3 being slightly steeper. And your explanation matches my feelings on my bike. When in the steeper setup I'm exactly where I should be for Rad neutral. When I flip to the slacker setting my bike is a Rad minus. And it fits perfectly for the intended purpose. This video kinda verifies my conclusion regarding my bike setup. Awesome
This is all really valid. I’ve always ridden a size large Specialized epic or Cannondale scalpel but the reach is crazy long on the new epics until my last one which I got in 2017. Now the reach is 460 and unless I get a stem the size of an ant’s pecker, a large would be too long. But on a medium I’ll have a TON of post showing and the drop between the saddle and the bars will be a lot which is crummy for seated handling and my back. Seems like a fail to me.
Just an update, after I watched the video the first time I freaked out thinking my bike was too big because you gave a reach of 446 or something for someone at 175. Then went on my chairs and tried the bike thing and bike fitted perfect with a 468 reach! But the key here was when I crunched the numbers for the RAD of the bike which ended at 793 mm and measuring my knuckles to the ground it’s 81 cm meaning im golden with my bike and just shows me how almost every ride im improving my PR on the downhills. Granted I did have to fit a shorter stem than the stock 50mm, 40mm rise bar cut to 780mm 👌🏽👌🏽 probably will go down to 770mm but not soon as im still testing that out !
This was THE most interesting video I have watched in the last few weeks of catching up on latest trends - after 20yrs pause from MTB. Wanting to get back into it, I have a size L Merida big.trail on pre-order (thanks COVID!), based on recommendation from bike shop. Recommendation was based on the reach between M and L being similar (435 vs 455), but standover on this model being very low and needing to extend seat tube extremely for an upright ride. Having now calculated my R.A.D, size M (435) is a perfect neutral fit for me (Merida's sizing chart is actually spot on). I realise now the the perceived small difference is in fact huge - 455 is beyond R.A.D+ for me! I guess I'll call the bike shop ASAP and amend my pre-order to a medium bike! Thanks heaps - I'd be spewing after waiting 3 months for new bike and finding it big, now knowing this formula!
@@battlegoatracing Yes, had the bike for a little while now and very happy with it. Overall it's a great bike. Really smooth over rough terrain. Feels a little short when seated, but that's due to steep seat tube angle and me coming from traditional XC geometry. Only niggling issue is low BB and 175mm cranks = pedal strikes. I'll probably try 165mm cranks one day. I suspect 435mm chainstay makes it hard to pop the front wheel. Not sure if large would make that even harder or give more leverage? I'd be curious how the large feels, but medium is RAD for me. I'd say for varied and nimbler riding M is good, for pointing it downwards mostly, L is probably better - if between sizes.
Thank you very much. According to the bike chart sizing, it states that I am between sizes. Using your formula, I am actually near the RAD neutral or RAD plus of the SMALLER bike!
The best part of my TH-cam watching week...every time. (Plus every video reminds me I need to work on my manual skills so that I’m a manual king by the end of this year!)
You guys make awesome videos, this one included. There was one spot that wasn't clear to me. This is my interpretation. Correct me if I'm wrong. Calculating RAD based on height should roughly correspond to the measurement from the center of the crank to the center of the grip. Since this is not a standard bike industry measurement it has to be correlated to one that is and in this case you are using reach. Reach and RAD are not the same number but a bike with a given reach will have a corresponding RAD number. For example if a bike has a neutral RAD for a given rider and a reach of 475, it can be assumed that when shopping for bikes that a different bike with a 475 reach will also have a RAD that is in the same ball park. The only real way to know the RAD is to measure the bike but the reach number is the place to start.
Hey Lee and Alex, will there be some merch with just Joy of Bike coming? I'd love to support the channel, my bike skills have improved a ton the past month because of your videos
I am glad I bought a 2020 Canyon Neuron. I am 185 cm and the size large is RAD minus and feels perfect. I tried other bikes with 470mm + reaches and the front end felt sluggish in corners, so decided to stick with a bike with "old school geometry".
Wow! I’m 6’ (183 cm) and have long arms. My “preferred “ reach has been 470 cm. I’ve never tried a medium bike because I’m squarely in the L frame size according to every chart. I’m going to do the step ladder thing to check my fit. I may have been riding bikes too big forever😟
what was the outcome ? i'm 182 cm long arms, looking to get a new bike , according to every chart i'm on L frame, but i did the math and loooks size M 455 reach . what was your take on the ladder thing ? thanks
@@stratoskatsipidis9395 same here with 183cm and long arms. 183*2,5=457,5. I meassured my bikes RAD with 85cm, so is the number 457,5 my perfekt reach 45,75cm ???
Thanks. Hope it’s helpful. We have had lots of off the record convo with shop owners and manufacturers and they know it’s an issue but they can’t afford to argue and lose a sale. As long as people are stoked on their bike I’m stoked.
Hi guys, thanks for the video ! Very helpful. What I didn't fully understand was the RAD with the height in cm x ~2.5 vs the next item "know your reach". Is the RAD you calculated with the formula given the "reach" you speak about at 10:06 or sth. else? I had thought it being sth. different? Thanks a lot for your clarification.
I'm wondering the same thing! I've been calculating my "RAD" as height(cm) x 4.47 which lines up with the measurements involved (approx the 80-90cm range). But in this video they seem to be talking about "reach" but still calling it RAD?? height(cm) x 2.5 does seem to match closer to reach numbers (approx 40-50cm range) in my experience. Hope this helps, but hopefully someone else can clarify the references in the video?
@@KieranSmit In bike geometry terminology "reach" is defined as the horizontal distance between the bottom bracket and the vertical plane of the top of the head tube. It is listed in every bike's geometry chart. So use the height in cm x2.5 calculation to estimate what "reach" number to look for when shopping for bikes.
When you talk about reach/rad do you refer to the (horizontal) distance between bottom bracket and top of head tube (like geometry charts on mtb brands) or between crankset and imaginary line on which our hands grab the bars (or at least the top of the stem)? Because with a slack head angle and few cm of headset spacers you find a reach that's also few cm smaller than the charts one's... In this situation it would make more sense to go for the bigger size if the chart reach is exactly what you find with the height*2.5 formula
The RAD measurement seems like it may not factor in if i have short arms for my height. I'm 5'11" on a 460 hard tail,which seems good, but the stock stem is 60 mm, and my arms are not much longer than my 5'8" wife. i felt so stretched out that i asked the LBS to add a whole bunch of spacers under the stem. I'm trying to see if the stem (35-40 mm) or up sweep bar (20-30 deg) upgrade would be the best choice. I going to set up some RAD measurement device first, though, just to try. My last bike was a 2011 Norco Shore, no reach measurement, only theoretical top tube.
Yea, reach is better to go by, then you can adjust the cockpit to fit with height, the rå dmeasurment is more to get setup the same with same reach and geo bike I guess. But u can have same rad number but tet have shorter reach taller bike or longer reach and lower cockpit. So make no sens eto go by that.
Cool video. But doesnt reach depend on effective seat tube angle? So with 76° seat tube angle at 175cm, 450 reach felt a bit short. Maybe 460 would of been perfect. But 73° effective seat tube angle with 460 reach would be exhausting and even hard on the wrists. Those angles are made for uphill and downhill only.
Thank you guys for all the videos. In my experience with purchasing a bike, most LBS ask you for your height and have you stand over it and try and put you out the door. I’ve always felt a little short changed and confused since geometry is put on a pedestal in the MTB world. When you are spending serious money on a toy you should expect the details to be right. You guys have confirmed what I believed, simplified this concept, and given me tools to take with me on my next purchase.
Maybe it's just me being an engineer and too german, but I feel like it's too simple to reduce the whole geometry on just reach and nothing else. E.g. I'm currently riding a Bike that has (including stem) a reach of ~460 mm which would even be longer than the ideal reach based on the equation in the video. However, that makes it nimble and fun on jumps and pumptracks but in chunky, rough high speed sections I still feel a little "cramped" (in Terms of less room to maneuver with my hips and upper body without being too far forward or backward). Also there's so much more that defines the agility and leverage of a bike IMO like wheel base, standover height, HTA, relation of rear triangle to front triangle that you still have to try and find out what works best for you. Also different body relations make this whole formula somewhat misleading. If Alex would have 40 mm shorter arms the Bike in the example would fit him perfectly with the same body height. However I would strongly agree that longer isn't always the answer, but you have to have a look at all the numbers and most importantly find out what works best for you by testing and comparing. Everything else can just be inspiration. I also recommend to read some Interviews with Chris Porter (founder of geometron) who has a totally different approach. I won't say he's right with everything but most stuff makes just as much sense as the approach in the video which just brings me back to my point before. Cheers and thanks for the great vids.
Thanks brother. Everything you bring up is accurate (except to say we are reducing the geometry down to one reach number.) The reach is the most reliable starting point. THAT is super important. We're trying to get people away from being sold a bike 40-80mm too long. A bike that can be made to fit with ANY amount of changes. Bikes are a huge investment and most people can't just go out and get another one. This is Joy of Bike. If a longer frame is bringing somebody joy I'm all for it. But instead, more often we see them bummed out. Unable to bunny hop. Unable to manual. Unable to get up ledges. And they have no idea why.
Most modern bikes feel long when you stand up but feel "ok" when you're seated. So what's the problem? Well if you size down according to the reach formula you might end up with a cramped feeling while seated :/
@@msch6524 You are right. You will feel cramped. If the focus of your riding is seated then that’s totally fine. Most of the people on this channel are looking for bikes they can hop, jump, pump etc.
@@JoyOfBike Sure... But unless you shuttle 100% of the time or follow James Willsons Mantra don't sit down to spin, you will do some pedalling while seated ;) The question how compromised your postion will be...
Hey Alex, Lee: I got to say that I had the fortune to watch this before my bike arrived and manage to order the shop to get me an L instead of an XL. I'm 6.3 and probably my sizing was good, but I follow your recommendation and get a RAD minus. I'm from Colombia and you inspire me to do this kind of content in Spanish. There aren't good videos like yours in my language. Cheers mate
This video is extremely informative and I learned a ton. I’m 6’5” and recently bought an XXL YT Izzo because I thought at my height this was a no-brainer. The bike is amazing but the reach is definitely a little too long. I’m going to shorten the stem to a 35mm down from the stock 50mm - this will help but I should have bought the xL.
Interesting. I'm 6'2" and I was thinking the same way but opposite experience. I have an XT Giant Anthem (biggest size they make) and I've been thinking that the reach is a little too short. Out of the saddle sprinting leaves me feeling that I need more room in the cockpit to produce more power. Maybe I need a longer stem? Geometry and sizing is complicated for me.
I’m 189 cm and on a bike with a 520mm reach and a 1318mm wheel base and it’s the best bike I’ve ever ridden. It’s all about what and how you ride. I’d even want to go longer to a bike with a 1347mm wheelbase or 1371.
This makes sense to me. I started mountain biking a year ago, and at 6.2.5", the LBS sized me into an XL. It feels too large. I plan to ride it for this season but size down in my next bike.
This was a really cool video, you guys nailed it, I'm here in my office at my desk pausing your video while doing calculations with a pen and paper. HAHA! Good stuff, Frank M.
@@JoyOfBike Yeah i have to figure out a way to set something up like that to see how my new bike is going to fit, i'm praying its going to be sized right for me, im going to get a 45mm stem like you had suggested for me a while back, my bike was suppose to be here this saturday but the ships are delayed off shore, just waiting for their turn to unload. Freakin figures. lol!
Had to make it 900 comments...its like opening up a box of light...have BIKE JOY brothers. Thank You AGAIN Lee for this gift of simplicity, this is your Magnum Opus w/RipRow coming in a close second, you guys have great chemistry to deliver the goods🤙FULL SEND marks on this video👊
Preach! I like my RAD ever so slightly small. Feels great on the trail or on the BMX track. P.S. Louisville, KY would be a perfect spot to work with Grow on a pump track too. 😉
Man I’m 5’6”. It took everything I have to walk out of a shop with a size small bike. It’s hard on the ego. But I’m glad I did. Thanks for this video. Only thing is I’d like to see closer how you are utilizing the step ladder for a pivot.
Small is fine. Bruce lee was 5.6 and 130 pounds. Didn't seem to hold him back any. You're buying a bike, not a dick. S M L. Stop worrying about a letter invented by a bike maker. Different manufacturers size differently. One makers small is another makers large. Im not even kidding. Your small bike could be a medium at many other companies. Its all made up....just like everything else in human society. Its all pretend.
Great information. I have recently subscribed to Lee’s online MTB instruction for mostly this information. My bike feels pretty darn good but I checked the reach and my RAD number and they were very close. I am going to get a slightly shorter stem so that the part of the handlebar where my hands are is more inline with the center of the steerer tube which will make the handling more neutral. I am on a 2018 size small Guerrilla GrAvity Trail Pistol and I am 171 cm tall. It is interesting to see that the reach has gotten even larger on the newer version of this bike which actually puts it out of my “reach” or RAD number. You are right that newer bikes are more stable regardless of size. My last bike was a 2009 Ibis Mojo size medium and the wheel base on the size small Trail Pistol is almost 4” longer. Thanks for the video. Greatly appreciated.
thanks for sharing it was a very informative how you discuss the good sizing and how to get the right size bike. Alex and Lee you guys are awesome. see you on your next vlog.
I am 38 and am just looking into stepping into my first mountain bike . These sizing videos are a huge help . The whole sizing thing has confused and overwhelmed me for so long. I finally feel like i can get my head around it now.
Thankyou gentlemen. 👍
I work as a components engineer in the bike industry (not as a frame designer) and your two videos on bike fit have just blown my mind. It's so easy to get caught up in the new trends that you ignore what should be intuitive. Thanks for opening my eyes!
Wow, thank you! We talk to engineers and suspension designers in the industry all the time and some are quite frustrated. But it's all gonna work out and the new bikes are incredible!!! Kudos to you!
@@JoyOfBike Why do you think that is? Bike companies forcing geometry change/larger sizing in an attempt to sell newer bikes? What do the engineers say? Cheers!
Been mtbing since 2000 watched a million videos, this is the single best of them all. congrats guys.
Quite possibly, THE most important MTB video on TH-cam!
I second
Brutally realistic conclusions in the last 15% of the video. Helpful AF and to my personal taste 100% proven in reality.
that’s hella dope y’all are supporting grow cycling. as a person of color new to the sport that work is really appreciated
Heck yes. Welcome to this wonderful sport!!
Stoked that you have heard of them. Elliot is AWESOME. Gonna figure out how to work his great vibes into a video soon.
@@JoyOfBike thats wassup! looking forward to the content and that raffle
@James Grimshaw your seat and seat post have no effect at all on RAD. RAD is the distance from your bottom bracket center to the bar grip center. Watch the second Joy of Bike fit video to see how it’s measured. But basically, you can lengthen RAD by using a longer stem or raising the bars. However, Lee also has a number called SHO (distance between middle of hands and steering axis) that will be less optimal if your frame is too small. Still, I believe Lee recommends prioritizing RAD over SHO. Check out his fitting book for really detailed guidance
Don’t undersell yourself with phrases like “a person of color” you are a person! If you see yourself as anything other than a human, than you are doing yourself a huge disservice and you will never reach your full potential!
Thank you guys for keeping egos in check... thus saving me thousands in heartache buying the wrong size.
This is a really good video. I I'm 5'9" and have been riding large frames for years and dealing with hand pain. You have me rethinking my decisions in life now.
Great video again Alex and Lee. The most I learned on the topic of MTB from any vids online is from yall. Thanks for sharing.
Glad it’s helpful. Getting a good fit is such a foundational step. Keep shredding!!!
I've been keen on the RAD sizing system ever since I took a 2 hour lesson with Lee in 2017. My bikes are the funnest!! haha
How much did you pay? Lol
Absolutely one of the best made bike fit videos on TH-cam. Thank you so much.
I'm 186cm tall and I was riding nukeproof Scout 290 in size L. I had 50mm stem and saddle all the way back. My frame developed crack after about 1 year.
I bought second frame same model but size XL. Now I run 42mm stem and my saddle is exactly in the middle. Bike feel far more stable and I feel far more confident
Nice! I'm only a few CM taller than you and just bought a nukeproof scout 290 in XL. Should be in the sweet spot for a neutral RAD formula perspective, anyway.
This is a two part comment so hang in there!
1, First full sus bike I brought I went straight for the large awesome bike but way too big went onto ebay had to get another one. Plus the large carbon full face helmet that had to go as well.
2, I just ran your numbers regarding RAD numbers. I brought a transition patrol in medium which I totally feel at home on. My number came out at 450.85 cm and the patrols reach is 450!
Hands down this is my favourite biking TH-cam channel!!!
Right on!!!!!
great video! I am 5'10, I have a small transition patrol, works really well. A medium would probably be fine as well, but a large would definitely be way too big for me!
Saw a guy your size on a large yesterday that was RAD++. I think the M is a great call.
BUT SMALL IS PROBABLY EVEN BETTER!!
GREAT CHANNEL BY THE WAY! PEOPLE THINK ALL THE SHREDDERS ARE ON HUGE BIKES. CHECK OUT THIS CHANNEL PEOPLE.
Binge watching your vids. So good!!
@@JoyOfBike haha thanks
Please forward this video to every bike manufacturer on earth! Lee’s book on bike geo is what I used to size my current bike and I got it as close to my RAD as possible. Instant connection with my bike on the first ride. Thanks for making this video and big respect for supporting Grow Cycling!!
🙏
Thanks for producing these videos- I've been using my quick and dirty rad calculation on bikes 2018-2021 with mostly favorable results, aside from a 2020 Salsa, which is a pretty huge outlier, but I see some today which are a little out of whack. For instance, my ideal reach, using the method in the video, falls between 440mm-450mm but when I look at something like the 2022 Orbea Occam, which the size chart says that I should go for a size large on at 5'10" it has a reach of 474mm- That's a pretty massive difference! On the other side of the spectrum, I've got my 2020 Salsa Timberjack in size medium that feels about right but it has a reach of just 430mm, which pretty far off the rad minus scale. Are bikes in 2023 just going to have a longer reach even when the fit is just right because that seems to go against the whole premise of the video? Thanks.
**Just to update that I ultimately ordered a size medium Orbea Occam, based on the fact that my ideal rad number, using calculations illustrated in the video, came out to: Neutral: 447.5, Minus 438.5 and Plus 456.45. The large Occam reach came in at what appeared to me to be an enormous 474, whereas medium is 450. So, medium all the way, right? That's what I thought and so I blew off what the size chart said "160-175 63.0"-68.9" M
170-185 66.9"-72.8" L" and sized down. Well, this may be an anomaly (the seat tube angle is rather steep on this particular bike and the effective top tube comes in considerably shorter than my existing bike, which only has a 5mm difference on the reach at 455) but I immediately felt too big when I got on the medium Orbea- It felt like I was being nudged too far forward over the bars and toward the front wheel and my lower half felt cramped like I might tag my leg with the bars in a more demanding technical situation on the trail and the whole thing felt claustrophobic w/out the sense of any kind of leverage advantages illustrated. When I got off the bike, I could visually see the smallness of the cockpit vs. what I'm used to. So, my word of caution is that while this method seems to work for most of my bikes, including my size medium 2019 Santa Cruz Chameleon hardtail(seemingly perfect w/40mm stem) and my size medium 2021 Marin Rift Zone 3(also very near perfect when using a 40mm stem w/perhaps a touch of rad+)- Both of which are consistent with my Rad number, this Orbea, which on paper looked right, felt all wrong on the bike. The shop offered to have a large shipped from another store but I ultimately opted to stick w/my Marin as there was no way that I was sizing up to large with a 474mm reach on the Orbea and the medium w/450mm was decidedly too small- So much so that I don't believe a longer stem or saddle slammed to the rear would have made it right. It would appear that something on the level of a M/L on the Orbea with maybe between 460-465mm-ish reach reach would have done me justice but no such animal exists.
Anyway, hope that helps for anyone looking at that particular bike or one with similar geometry to it.
I experienced something similar. I am currently deciding between an M and L Canyon Spectral. My Rad number is 460 and that is exactly size M. But while demoing both M and L, I found that M felt way too small and L felt more natural. Size M felt like I was almost going otb in my normal attack position. I wonder what's going on here 🤔
I'm 189cm and just bought a nukeproof 290 scout XL. Neutral RAD formula puts me about as spot on as possible without having a custom bike made; within 5mm. That's pretty dang good. Now if winter would cease up then I could find out :) Great video!
Great insight and very useful data points. I have been riding an XL SC Tallboy (1, 2 & 3 versions) and all have fit me perfectly. After enjoying your video...take my 470 magic reach number and now I am looking at size Large in almost all the SC frames now. Same with Yeti, Ibis, etc...I am 6'2.5" with long legs and arms(ape index of +3 inches). Due to my ape index, I ended up with a 60mm stem on my Tallboy for my long XC Endurance events.
Nice!
@@lee_likes_bikes BTW...Helm Johnson says Hi...
One of the best MTB video I've ever seen!
This is SOOOOO refreshing!
I have suspected this for some time but was unable to figure out the science myself.
You guys have nailed it!
Every bike magazine, test rider, retailer and distributor in the UK should be made to watch this video.
The industry is constantly pushing for longer and the mags here always recommend sizing up so you're more centred in the bike. Yes, you'll be more centred, but who wants to spent their whole ride looking like they're doing the 'downward facing dog' in yoga?
I ride an older (2017) bike which, as luck would have it, fits me perfectly using your guide. Henceforth, I'm adopting the R.A.D. approach and I'll be recommending it to everyone remotely interested in riding.
Lee, you're a biking wizard!
Right on! Thank you!
Yes the media is definitely to be blamed. I hope everyone soon realizes modern manufacturer recommended sizes are useless for progressing skills. Chris Porter and Cesar Rojo also need to be blamed. They are the dirty slobs who made riding with heavy hands fashionable. Lee you are a genius and you are the hero the world of mountain biking needs.
What a good channel to stumble upon. My LBS also likes to recommend one size too tall btw.
After a lesson with Kevin from Lee Likes Bikes, I came to realize that I was on way too big of a bike. I fell between the medium and large on the Yeti size chart and got a large; I actually dropped all the way down to a small, and can't believe how much better the experience is...cornering is better, I can jump and hop better, just overall a better experience. The "RAD" they talk about makes a lot of sense when you try it out by say putting your bike up on two boxes or tables.
Which is interesting because I had the opposite experience. My previous bike was just under what my Rad - number would be and it was hard to properly weight the front to corner without getting TOO far over the front, could easily go nose heavy on jumps if I wasn't religious about pre-loading the front way more than the back. My new bike which is about 20mm over my Rad + number feels much more balanced, the row/counter row motion for jumps and hinging in general feels more natural, corners much more easily, and I never feel like I'm hanging off the back even on steep stuff.
How tall are you. I just got a sb130 large at 5’11” and based on the RAD I am a small as well?
@@austinmcguff1898 I am 5'10" and have the SB130, now in a Small. I am probably somewhere between a small and medium really, but was definitely NOT a large. Very happy with the small.
@@austinmcguff1898 5'10", I must have fairly long arms for my height or something.
@@mrvwbug4423 yes I am apparently not fully evolved from ape status as I have long arms (reach ) but shorter legs and when I try to do the TREK sizing chart it’s asks me to check my measurements 🙄
I’m 180 tall and my inner seem measured 77cm ! According to TREK I’m on the boarder height wise for m/l - large but inner seam would be Medium 🤪
I have a m/l Trek Fuel ex8 and now I’ve measured my RAD at 77cm looks like I’m about 6cm too long 😤
I’m 5’10” and I went by the charts and went large twice. I struggled constantly trying to manual or wheelie. Sold both bikes after trying a medium and it is so much more playful and fun. I can’t wait to measure the RAD when I get home tonight. I have a feeling it will be spot on. Thanks again for a very informative video. You guys are the best!
Nice work!!! I thought i was 5’10”. Maybe i was once. I’m exactly 5’9” on the dot.
What did you find out?
That is a cool way of measuring. I'm not adverse to very long frames, for aerodynamics, comfort, etc. Size charts put me on an L/XL, but tend to ride a M/L.
I only have one 2' step OMG what to do? I did have six cinder blocks though, perfect. Actually I only used four, two laying and two standing because I didn't want to make another trip.
This is an awesome video! Here’s one thing I think about a lot and I mention it in a video talking about my latest Hardtail. My RAD number is 483 and my suspension bike has a reach of 505 and I love it. When I was developing my signature Hardtail with Reeb we made the first version 495 and I couldn’t ride it. We sized down to 485 and I rode it for a year. I started to feel like it was too long so my new bike is 465 but has a slightly taller stack and a 10mm longer stem. So... on paper the Hardtail says it’s substantially shorter than the suspension bike but during dynamic movements they feel way more similar. My theory is that suspension bikes “fold” meaning pedals drop and bars come to your lap. The longer the travel the smaller the bike will feel bunnyhopping and stuff. Hardtails are absolute and don’t do that. Anyway, Lee’s RAD number seems like a really good sweet spot because I do see so many riders on bikes that are way too big. My add on advice would be to use his number and if you’re looking to go tech on a Hardtail definitely lean towards the shorter measurement. Great vid!
Thank you Jeff! This is high praise coming from you!!
@@lee_likes_bikes LOL I feel like I found my bike sizing soul mate! Although... could we just be Boomers? Maybe have an equation that subtracts your age? haha
Thanks Jeff. Love your vids brother!! It’s such a bummer to see so many people on bikes too big. The “fold” is really interesting. Fascinating add. The distance from bar to feet doesn’t change but that fold changes the feel for sure. I can’t ride as well as you but your comment makes me want to play with a rad plus on the full squish specifically on hops. Got a S and M Revel and that will be a fun experiment. You and Christian really load up this full squish rear ends!!! Maybe you can teach me that some time!!! That would be a blast.
@@JoyOfBike I'd love to, curious to see what you think on the sus bikes!
What do they call it when channels mash up? It’s not a collab. Cooler than that. Anyway, when it warms up we can get the bunny hop bar out and some full squish and see if you can teach this old dog how to go higher. I sorta dislike hopping suspension bikes and maybe more import than the height is the love!!!! Feels like jello back there. : )
Just measured my bike with the ladder trick and it’s perfect i was stressed when I first saw the video
I almost never comment, mostly because I watch on TV and nowhere to comment there, but I've been watching you guys for a couple months now and needed to thank you. I've been riding for almost 40 years 48 years old and you guys teach me things that I've never known! Thank you so much for putting all these together. I finally bought a full suspension bike after having my last mountain bikes since 98. (26 hardtail that still is great) Which I still have and love but I definitely needed full suspension to help with the knees and elbows. Unfortunately bike I just bought I think is to big. Confirmed with your calculations. I believe this video will really help so many people . I have to give my new bike a chance once the weather is better in NJ but might have to bite the bullet and get a different bike and there's not many out there right now at least around me. sorry about the long message thanks so much! You guys are awesome!! Keep up the great work and having fun!
Very common right now. What reach did you calculate and what's the reach and model of your bike. Maybe we can help adjust a bit?
@@JoyOfBike wow thanks. R.A.D. minus is 426 and bought used, which is so old, but a 2013 Trek Rumblefish Elite (size Med 17.5) in perfect never rode condition. Still think need fork and rear shock looked at don't think working properly because no click at all on rear. I never had rear shocks so not sure. Geometry chart I found was for the Pro model and said "Frame Reach" is 16.38 in. if that is correct 426mm = 16.78in so pretty close. I will try the ladder test you did and see how I match up. Just feels very big but I'm coming from 20 years on a med 26.
@@jdogery These multiples that Lee shared are for modern bikes and modern geo. Short stems and slack head angles. Bikes prior to 2015 ish would use a different multiple. BUT The stools always work on any bike any era to get yourself dialed. I think you will be in the ball park and can make tweaks.
@@JoyOfBike Alex thanks so much. I watched the video again and see one of the tweaks is the stem. I will change that for sure maybe on both hard and full. The full has always been very tough to wheelie and I know now that is the reason and how to help it. thx again. Joe
I can highly recommend Lee's book "Dialed" where he goes into other sizing details! Good stuff guys :)
🙏
Thank you. Alex designed the cover. Super sweet.
I just received Dialed and have never before been so glued to a book. I only wish I had this knowledge BEFORE buying a medium '21 Transition Scout. I'm 171.5 cm tall in riding shoes and the Scout has a reach of 460! Kills my back. It's super stable at speed but I can't shred like I did on my small 2012 stumpjumper FSR. I think this Scout is too long to correct for my fit needs 😭
Öhlins 👍😎
I've always tended to opt for the smaller size. At 5'7.5", with traditional sizing, it puts me on a medium. All of my mountain bike frames are small & my road bikes have been between a 50cm & 52cm.
You can make the micro adjustments with varying stem lengths, bar rise and fore-and-aft saddle adjustments. 👌
I'm blown away by the information bombs you two drop with each video! Total game changers!
Thanks brother.
Great video. Being average height and between sizes on every size chart is anxiety inducing when it comes to dumping money on a bike. If you’re comfortable on a medium that’s cool if you’re happy on trail barge then that’s cool too. Ride the bikes and work out what’s right but don’t doubt yourself based on what your told.
This channel by the way...love it. Just starting actual getting into really riding the MTB. 46 years old, five spinal fractures. Knee screwed together, three collar bone breaks and more ribs and leg bones than I can count. All the years of extreme skiing and such caught up to me. SO in an effort to try something safer :) - I am learning from these guys to do this and hopefully be using my body correctly in conjunction with the bike setup. Kudos to Alex and Lee for such good content and a natural manner of presenting it. Thanks so much!!
OMG, we need a pump track in Los Angeles SO BADLY!!! How do we not have one already! Thanks for supporting this cause.
8:20 - olympic rings gymnastics is a hand centric sport. And those guys have massive shoulder muscles! great video gents. much love from Abbotsford, BC!
This is easily the most informative MTB bike video that I have come across on the toob
"It was my understanding, that there would be no math..."
- President Gerald R. Ford
(Okay, fine. Chevy Chase said it.) Another great video from you both! I will be calculating my 'RAD' tonight for sure but wanted to add that this not only helped to visualize how frame geometry numbers equate to fit but more importantly - mobility. I can't wait to see what you guys come up with when the temp reaches -30!
Ha! Thank you.
LOL. The good news is you don't have to do it over and over. Unless the industry starts going with longer stems again. (Doubtful for a while) Your happy reach number is gonna be pretty consistent.
I've come back to the two sizing/RAD videos recently because I was trying to decide on which size frame to get, but then I took it to my son's bike. I built him a Trailcraft Maxwell 275 last year and TC's recommended height range for this frame is 4'10" - 5'6". My son is 12yo and 4'11" right now and he just isn't comfortable on the bike. I finally got out the tape measure and it comes as no surprise that he's not gelling with the bike.
Using Lee's height in CM x 2.5 my son should be riding a bike with a 375mm reach. Trailcraft don't publish stack and reach for their frames but I measured his bike and it's 438mm!!!! For comparison my size large 29er Orbea Oiz has a 445mm reach and I'm 11" taller than my son!
A bit over 5’10”. Ride an XL Bronson V3 with 2.6s and an XL Bronson V2 with 2.3s. They do everything- some things amazing, some things adequately. Even the skateparks and DJ parks. The V2 is better than the V3 in those places, but the V3 is better at gnarly downhills and at high speed and off trail features like drops at speed. So I think it depends on what you want to do with the bike. You can do everything with every bike, smaller ones will have advantages in one area and disadvantages in others and vice versa. Also think you are forgetting chainstay length, which makes a huge difference in how easy it is to lift the front wheel and concomitantly how easy to is to then get the back wheel up. And also bb drop. I’ve been paying a lot of attention to that recently and what I’ve found is that greater bb drop makes it more stable at speed but definitely makes it harder to pop the bike. I feel like I am so far down and have so far up to go to get the bike popping. And standover, stack height, seat tube length. And then there is bar width, riser height and sweep and stem size too- I mean if you’re mostly into skateparks and DJ parks narrower bars with a higher rise are the ticket. But get going 35 mph over gnar and you’ll really appreciate even just another 20 or 40 mm of width, or if mostly interested in climbing will want to bring the rise down a lot. I think one really has to look at all of these things together and understand how a change one way or another in one will affect the handling of the bike. Even with sizing I don’t think there is anyway to say that a certain length this or that is right for a person all the time, I think the first question to ask yourself if buying a mtb is what kind of riding am I buying this bike to do? Then get one optimized for that. I mean I love my Bronsons cause they’re optimized for how and what I mostly ride and do the other stuff well enough. If I were doing more other bmx type stuff then I’d get a very different bike and would love that one too.
Yes! Hence the quiver of bikes.
Was talking to Elliot Jackson about bike sizes and the trends and he said two things that were important. The new tracks are straighter and so how a bike turns is less of an issue so longer works better now. AND many of these guys are running different sizes at different tracks. But I botched the Zoom call recording. LOL
@@lee_likes_bikes exactly.
@@JoyOfBike yup, trails have evolved just like bikes. The trails I’m riding now at the speeds I’m riding them and the features I’m doing on them would have been impossible with my 1990 fully rigid- I could have ridden the trails, but a lot slower and wouldn’t have been able to even contemplate the features. It’s kind of an arms race between the trails and the bikes that ride em! Def the the newer trails are designed for the newer longer bikes, but where I am (east coast and Appalachians) it’s not so much that they’re straighter but that the turns are longer and swoopier which makes it easier with the big bikes to really lean the bike down and rail around. It’s still my worst skill given that all of my formative muscle memory years was on shorter bikes, a** hanging of the back sliding the rear end around, but I keep working at it. I don’t have a problem with slow speed tight singletrack on the longer bikes, it’s just a different technique (the Pole guy demonstrates it well), but where I really notice the difference is the tight turny singletrack at moderate speeds- on a shorter bike I can def whip through there faster and easier. Some of the converted hiking trails can be bears to get through on my V3 and really require a bit of effort. And of course DJ parks or skateparks it takes a lot more effort on my V3. One reason I went longer 27.5 wheeled slack bike with 2.6 (my Bronson V3) is to me it’s length (1252 mm wheelbase, wide bars, slack hta) gives me excellent high speed stability and is better at features at speed, the 2.6s give me nearly as good rollover as a 29er (only a half inch difference from a 29 x 2.3) and a little bit more cush and grip on the Appalachian rocks, yet the slightly smaller wheels and lesser bb drop and shorter chainstays maintains is poppiness and allows it to get through those tight, twisty moderate speed trails we have a lot of better than something like a true enduro sled. And since I’m not racing anymore not the speed is just for me and the thrill of it!!! I think we really are living in a golden age of mtbs right now and am just so glad I’m still young and healthy enough to be able to still do some of the features and go pretty hard and really get at least somewhat close to the max out of what these bikes have to give. It’s so cool that a rider really can select almost the perfect bike (or bikes) for his or her kind of riding, and even the one bike quiver bikes are so good at everything. Does require a bit more research on the rider’s part and knowledge prior to purchase, but that’s where vids like yours are so great at helping folks. and the reward for the effort is so sweet. Ride on!! 🤙🤘
th-cam.com/video/GNHKkiqiCZs/w-d-xo.html
If your bikes got no pop it's too long ...how low the pivot is has no bearing on a hop whatsoever when you've got the front end up...your levers too long on your bottom bracket see saw mate
I'm 5' 10 and I measured my RAD with your formulas, and on the reach charts for Specialized I'm an S3, but Specialized recommends S4 in the sizing chart I'm right in the middle. I took a leap of faith with your system, and purchased the $11k Levo Expert Carbon. Needles to say I was extremely nervous to purchase such a bike which possibly could be too small, but you guys were right the money. After owning two Specialized Larges for about 6 years now, I couldn't be happier with this bike and size. It feels very comfortable and natural. My hands are no longer tired from leaning on them for hours. You guys are awesome, thank you for taking the time to do this video. I am getting a little tennis elbow pain though, wondering if it's my 800mm bars. I'll check out your handlebar video.
I'm the same height as you 5'10'' and ride an S3 stumpjumper evo. Cutting my bars down to 770mm made a huge difference for my shoulders and elbows. also gave me more confidence in tight twisty stuff. i highly recommend.
what size Levo did you get? S3?
@@funLad80 Yes Jarek and I’m loving it! According to the Specialized Sizing Chart the S4 was a better fit than S3 for me, but I took a leap of faith with these guys after watching this video, and I’m really glad I did. The downhill feels great and the climbs feel great. I actually took my two small ladders to the shop just to make sure before I purchased. But even if I hadn’t, the RAD measurement was enough information to compare to the bike reach specs.
@@moderntouchfurniture many thanks
@@moderntouchfurniture S3 got 450-455 reach. If you multiply your height in centimeters by 2.50 you will get your reach, of course it may not work for everybody but at least it gives you idea. It looks like S3 fits you like a glove
What a great video. I really like your methods for educating our biking community and that you do this freely regardless of whether people agree or disagree with your methods. Big props for this. Now I have a better understanding why my 483 mm reach bike feels so good! Thanks and keep up the great work!
Love!
My pleasure!
Thank you! Saved my low back and wrists. Checking RAD. Shopping new bikes!
Great video guys! You two have great chemistry and clear communication style. And the content is original and useful. My RAD is 80cm BTW.
Thank you!!
That's a RAD rad. Mine is 31 inches exactly. In case you ever want to buy me a bike. : )
I mentioned mine in case you get tired of your old DJ bike Alex!!
Agree 💯. Spot on analogy to help us understand the new bike sizing conundrum. I’m 6’ tall and ride a medium Santa Cruz 5010 V4. Everyone told me I’m crazy for not getting a large. Thanks for the video!
Right on!
@@JoyOfBike on trek bikes , for the fitness fx bike, it says medium some one max height of 5’8, I bought a large and an 5’11 , not sure if it is bad , my only issue is saddle discomfort
I needed this video a year ago. This explains everything why my S4 Enduro felt off.
That is a KILLER bike! But it's a big bike. I so wanted one, but none of the sizes work for me. Hence my 2019 Stumpy.
@@lee_likes_bikes I just bought an S3 Enduro frame as a replacement. At 5'10, I'd be about 7mm off from your RAD+ calculations. After investing in two frames, I'm overdue for massive financial hindsight. If I had a chance to do this over again, maybe I would've bought a Santa Cruz Megatower. The reach (high or low) would've fit me. The comparison of price and reviews lead me to the Enduro.
@@lee_likes_bikes Just found this video after I purchased a new 2021 stumpy, I'm 6'0 and going by the size chart I had picked the smallest size in my height range (S4). But using the data from this video, it appears I should have gone with an S3 :( I haven't even picked up the bike yet as it's being shipped in from out of state.
Lees kung fu is unmatched, his reach calc was dead on for all my previous favorite bikes. This man has been the guru for 20 years!
I'm 6'5" tall and my XL bike with a 60mm stem and a 40mm rise bars is still too small but it is 1000% better than my old bike so I am stoked
Heck yeah!
You guy's have saved me alot of hassle. I have order a new bike (a Ribble HT725 steal hardtail size large), I am new to mtb and the last time I rode a bike disc brakes weren't a thing. I watched your video, checked my bike geometry (size L reach 473), my max reach is 447.5 I am 179cm, quickly called the manufacturer Ribble and they are going to change my frame to a medium (reach 455.5) closer to my reach.
So thank you guys 🙏🏿
Wonderful
Very interesting thought. I’m 5.10 and always between a M and L. I’ve always opted for the M since I just prefer being able to move the bike around. It feels justified now 👍🏼
Me too. But be on the lookout. There are supposed S bikes that are too long for me to enjoy. Wild.
27.5 or 29??
@@miguelfragoso7023 29” in my case
first time hearing about the RAD system, but it makes a lot of sense and definitely feels better than relying on manufacturer sizing recommendations
Looimg forward to the builds on these to see the results.
Those frame look super nice.
Me too!!
I love these videos, no stupid numbers just the facts. I own an old boardman mtb that I love but it old and the wrong size, I’m watching these videos to choose my next bike and make the right decision.
This is a great theory! I've always felt cramped on my bike with a reach of 432mm which is a Large and I'm 5'10". According to your equation I should more comfortably be around 445-454mm! I'll definitely keep this in mind on my next bike!
What bike has a reach that short for a large?! Some Smalls nowadays are hanging around 440 reach
Is that the reach to the centre of the head tube? What is the angle? I am the same height but my large Trek feels to big.
Kudos for saying this...we can't ride em at any size...that my friends is a bold n true statement...but it's taller guys too...I'm 6,2 and it's a minefield... for most people a new bike is around 4 or 5 thousand pounds...it's not chump change is it for the average consumer...it means credit for a lot of people...it's almost built into the life of a bike the fact that the bikes change so much....good episode guys
It’s true. This is the first time in history that even tall guys can wind up on bikes that are too big.
@@JoyOfBike KUDOS ... you are an activist. In the best sense
I knew something was off with modern bike sizing! When I getting my first mtb they put me on xl based on my height and after a couple day I brought it back and told them I wanted a smaller one. I tried medium and large and the medium felt waaaaay more natural, made me feel like it was an extension of my body. Salesmen looked at me like I was insane.
@Kevin Cohan I'm about 6' as well. My newest bike is a large and fits me right. They really vary in size between manufacturers.
Same look from my bike salesman. I’m 6’ and fit a medium Specialized better. The salesman looked at me like I was crazy, but I’ve “learned” by purchasing bigger frames bikes in the past.
When I picked up my bike I noticed a newbie about my size picking up his XL (same bike model). Yikes. I feel bad not saying anything but didn’t feel it was my place. He didn’t seem to notice me leaving with a medium.
Joy of Bike thanks for the great video and explanation!
This is the most helpful video I have ever watched … I’m so glad I did before I ordered my new bike … thanks guys!
Quick update .. at 6 foot 1 inch I went from 487 reach to 465 reach and it completely changed the game … I ride every trail faster without even trying, jump easier, climb easier and manual easier … thanks again!!
Do steep seat angles make up for these longer reaches though? I’m looking at a Norco Torrent and at 178cm tall they put me in the middle of the size large range which has a 480 reach. Medium has 450 reach, but everyone says it will be cramped pedaling with the steep seat tube. No way for me to test ride them unfortunately.
My new favorite mtb channel btw. Love the stoke, keep up the great work!
If you spend most of your day in the saddle the longer bike will feel more comfortable. If you stand and do dynamic moves up and down hill the shorter bike is how I would go. A lot of people ride in circles in a parking lot to test a bike and so the bike with the proper reach actually feels too small in this sit and spin situation.
Thanks for explaining why I have always loved medium bikes when the size chart puts me in a large!
Happy to help!
Fantastic truth bomb content guys, I recently jumped on board with Lee's ride logic online material and it has been by far the best upgrade made to my bike/riding for years, much appreciated...
Thank you!!
Hey fellas I'm stoked I'm a science guy since highschool to my profession in todays market and my favorite hobby is MTB. This sizing made me nuts at the demos. You guys explained it very well also your row and anti row got this old fella safely into the air on some table topped trails !!! Thanks a bunch for increasing the stoke!!!! Please keep up the good work!!! Lee your a master dropin knowledge like who knows what! lol!
Thank you so much!!
Right on!
6'6 here Xl warden 520mm reach is perfect with 35 rise bars
Guys, thank you for this video. I'm trying to decide what mountain bike to purchase as an entry-level but room to grow bike and I'm getting told all kinds of stories. I ride a little small women's hardtail around town and feel really nimble on it but these bike shop guys keep saying that I should be on a medium. Now I have numbers to use to explain what the small frames in fact DO fit me better! I love learning about this topic so thank you!!
Sam Hill also rides a Medium frame.
I have felt like this was true, glad to hear someone else say it.
😎
Makes so much sense to me. Thanks, guys!
What the industry is trying to do, not so much, but I get it. Hence the phrase "it doesn't make make sense, but I get it" 😄
Enjoyed the video guys! I had an experience like this, I’m 5'7" and ended up returning the size medium 29er trail bike I bought last summer after a day, and replacing it with a small. There’s a psychological tendency to want to go big when you can go big, but the smaller one just felt so much better, like something I could be one with, instead of something I was perched on top of.
Also, loved the moment comparing leaning on the bars and losing your center of gravity, to controlling the bars while keeping your center. I’ve studied kung fu and that is kung fu! Rock on.
Thank you!!
You have better self esteem than I do brother!!! Still getting used to the idea that I'll probably be a S in my next bike. : )
Can you share the reach number on your new bike.
I know this video is older and may not get a reply, but just to clarify:
You are taking your height [cm] multiplied by 2.5 (or 2.45 if you want RAD negative) and you will get a number. For me it was, 421 for RAD negative - 430 for RAD neutral. You then take that number and compare it to the "reach" spec of the bike [in millimeters], correct?
According to Giant's site: for the Talon 3 the medium frame reach is 418 mm, which is what I have. So technically my bike is 3 mm under RAD negative?
It's funny, because I thought this bike frame was too big for me when I factored in that I have less than an inch of stand-over clearance and my seat post is in the lowest position so I was thinking of dropping down a size, but according to RAD that may make the reach spec even further away from my RAD negative? (The small frame Talon reach spec is 399 mm).
Either bikes are confusing as hell or I misunderstood something somewhere. Maybe I'll try the marker method in your other video....
ah - now that makes sense!
This is quite interesting. While your video was on I had to look up the sizing of my current enduro, a Rocky Mountain Slayer 2018. This bike has the Ride4 Flip Chip. I ride in 2 positions (out of 4 obviously), 2 being slightly slacker and 3 being slightly steeper. And your explanation matches my feelings on my bike. When in the steeper setup I'm exactly where I should be for Rad neutral. When I flip to the slacker setting my bike is a Rad minus. And it fits perfectly for the intended purpose. This video kinda verifies my conclusion regarding my bike setup. Awesome
This is all really valid. I’ve always ridden a size large Specialized epic or Cannondale scalpel but the reach is crazy long on the new epics until my last one which I got in 2017. Now the reach is 460 and unless I get a stem the size of an ant’s pecker, a large would be too long. But on a medium I’ll have a TON of post showing and the drop between the saddle and the bars will be a lot which is crummy for seated handling and my back. Seems like a fail to me.
Just an update, after I watched the video the first time I freaked out thinking my bike was too big because you gave a reach of 446 or something for someone at 175. Then went on my chairs and tried the bike thing and bike fitted perfect with a 468 reach! But the key here was when I crunched the numbers for the RAD of the bike which ended at 793 mm and measuring my knuckles to the ground it’s 81 cm meaning im golden with my bike and just shows me how almost every ride im improving my PR on the downhills. Granted I did have to fit a shorter stem than the stock 50mm, 40mm rise bar cut to 780mm 👌🏽👌🏽 probably will go down to 770mm but not soon as im still testing that out !
This was THE most interesting video I have watched in the last few weeks of catching up on latest trends - after 20yrs pause from MTB. Wanting to get back into it, I have a size L Merida big.trail on pre-order (thanks COVID!), based on recommendation from bike shop. Recommendation was based on the reach between M and L being similar (435 vs 455), but standover on this model being very low and needing to extend seat tube extremely for an upright ride. Having now calculated my R.A.D, size M (435) is a perfect neutral fit for me (Merida's sizing chart is actually spot on). I realise now the the perceived small difference is in fact huge - 455 is beyond R.A.D+ for me! I guess I'll call the bike shop ASAP and amend my pre-order to a medium bike! Thanks heaps - I'd be spewing after waiting 3 months for new bike and finding it big, now knowing this formula!
Did your bike come in? Have you been happy with the medium?
@@battlegoatracing Yes, had the bike for a little while now and very happy with it. Overall it's a great bike. Really smooth over rough terrain. Feels a little short when seated, but that's due to steep seat tube angle and me coming from traditional XC geometry. Only niggling issue is low BB and 175mm cranks = pedal strikes. I'll probably try 165mm cranks one day. I suspect 435mm chainstay makes it hard to pop the front wheel. Not sure if large would make that even harder or give more leverage? I'd be curious how the large feels, but medium is RAD for me. I'd say for varied and nimbler riding M is good, for pointing it downwards mostly, L is probably better - if between sizes.
Thank you very much. According to the bike chart sizing, it states that I am between sizes. Using your formula, I am actually near the RAD neutral or RAD plus of the SMALLER bike!
GOLD I TELL YOU! GOLD!
The best part of my TH-cam watching week...every time. (Plus every video reminds me I need to work on my manual skills so that I’m a manual king by the end of this year!)
Yes!!!
I’m hoping to put together a big bike manual vid this spring.
THIS IS LIFE CHANGING
Heck yeah!!! Bike = Life.
You guys make awesome videos, this one included. There was one spot that wasn't clear to me. This is my interpretation. Correct me if I'm wrong. Calculating RAD based on height should roughly correspond to the measurement from the center of the crank to the center of the grip. Since this is not a standard bike industry measurement it has to be correlated to one that is and in this case you are using reach. Reach and RAD are not the same number but a bike with a given reach will have a corresponding RAD number. For example if a bike has a neutral RAD for a given rider and a reach of 475, it can be assumed that when shopping for bikes that a different bike with a 475 reach will also have a RAD that is in the same ball park. The only real way to know the RAD is to measure the bike but the reach number is the place to start.
Hey Lee and Alex, will there be some merch with just Joy of Bike coming? I'd love to support the channel, my bike skills have improved a ton the past month because of your videos
Under the video you should see a couple t-shirts that we set up in a t-spring store. Let me know if they are not showin up.
Same
@@sybarite5videos You see it or you don't see it?
@@JoyOfBike Link isnt working unfortunately.
@@djowelv Try it now?
I am glad I bought a 2020 Canyon Neuron. I am 185 cm and the size large is RAD minus and feels perfect. I tried other bikes with 470mm + reaches and the front end felt sluggish in corners, so decided to stick with a bike with "old school geometry".
Wow! I’m 6’ (183 cm) and have long arms. My “preferred “ reach has been 470 cm. I’ve never tried a medium bike because I’m squarely in the L frame size according to every chart. I’m going to do the step ladder thing to check my fit. I may have been riding bikes too big forever😟
what was the outcome ? i'm 182 cm long arms, looking to get a new bike , according to every chart i'm on L frame, but i did the math and loooks size M 455 reach . what was your take on the ladder thing ? thanks
@@stratoskatsipidis9395 same here with 183cm and long arms. 183*2,5=457,5. I meassured my bikes RAD with 85cm, so is the number 457,5 my perfekt reach 45,75cm ???
Great video. A treat to see both you and Lee in a new vid. Kudos for sharing this important info with the youtube community.
Thanks. Hope it’s helpful. We have had lots of off the record convo with shop owners and manufacturers and they know it’s an issue but they can’t afford to argue and lose a sale. As long as people are stoked on their bike I’m stoked.
Hi guys, thanks for the video ! Very helpful. What I didn't fully understand was the RAD with the height in cm x ~2.5 vs the next item "know your reach". Is the RAD you calculated with the formula given the "reach" you speak about at 10:06 or sth. else? I had thought it being sth. different?
Thanks a lot for your clarification.
I'm wondering the same thing! I've been calculating my "RAD" as height(cm) x 4.47 which lines up with the measurements involved (approx the 80-90cm range). But in this video they seem to be talking about "reach" but still calling it RAD?? height(cm) x 2.5 does seem to match closer to reach numbers (approx 40-50cm range) in my experience.
Hope this helps, but hopefully someone else can clarify the references in the video?
@@KieranSmit In bike geometry terminology "reach" is defined as the horizontal distance between the bottom bracket and the vertical plane of the top of the head tube. It is listed in every bike's geometry chart. So use the height in cm x2.5 calculation to estimate what "reach" number to look for when shopping for bikes.
@@nevets5920 yes I know that. But in this video they're calling it reach but using the technique to measure rad hence the confusion by OP above
When you talk about reach/rad do you refer to the (horizontal) distance between bottom bracket and top of head tube (like geometry charts on mtb brands) or between crankset and imaginary line on which our hands grab the bars (or at least the top of the stem)?
Because with a slack head angle and few cm of headset spacers you find a reach that's also few cm smaller than the charts one's...
In this situation it would make more sense to go for the bigger size if the chart reach is exactly what you find with the height*2.5 formula
The RAD measurement seems like it may not factor in if i have short arms for my height. I'm 5'11" on a 460 hard tail,which seems good, but the stock stem is 60 mm, and my arms are not much longer than my 5'8" wife. i felt so stretched out that i asked the LBS to add a whole bunch of spacers under the stem. I'm trying to see if the stem (35-40 mm) or up sweep bar (20-30 deg) upgrade would be the best choice. I going to set up some RAD measurement device first, though, just to try.
My last bike was a 2011 Norco Shore, no reach measurement, only theoretical top tube.
Yea, reach is better to go by, then you can adjust the cockpit to fit with height, the rå dmeasurment is more to get setup the same with same reach and geo bike I guess. But u can have same rad number but tet have shorter reach taller bike or longer reach and lower cockpit. So make no sens eto go by that.
Cool video. But doesnt reach depend on effective seat tube angle? So with 76° seat tube angle at 175cm, 450 reach felt a bit short. Maybe 460 would of been perfect. But 73° effective seat tube angle with 460 reach would be exhausting and even hard on the wrists. Those angles are made for uphill and downhill only.
That first bike in the background is a sweety. I just run a cheap 26 to which I added a layback seatpost and that works for me.
If it's feeling good then it is good!!!
Thank you guys for all the videos. In my experience with purchasing a bike, most LBS ask you for your height and have you stand over it and try and put you out the door. I’ve always felt a little short changed and confused since geometry is put on a pedestal in the MTB world. When you are spending serious money on a toy you should expect the details to be right. You guys have confirmed what I believed, simplified this concept, and given me tools to take with me on my next purchase.
Maybe it's just me being an engineer and too german, but I feel like it's too simple to reduce the whole geometry on just reach and nothing else. E.g. I'm currently riding a Bike that has (including stem) a reach of ~460 mm which would even be longer than the ideal reach based on the equation in the video.
However, that makes it nimble and fun on jumps and pumptracks but in chunky, rough high speed sections I still feel a little "cramped" (in Terms of less room to maneuver with my hips and upper body without being too far forward or backward).
Also there's so much more that defines the agility and leverage of a bike IMO like wheel base, standover height, HTA, relation of rear triangle to front triangle that you still have to try and find out what works best for you.
Also different body relations make this whole formula somewhat misleading. If Alex would have 40 mm shorter arms the Bike in the example would fit him perfectly with the same body height.
However I would strongly agree that longer isn't always the answer, but you have to have a look at all the numbers and most importantly find out what works best for you by testing and comparing. Everything else can just be inspiration.
I also recommend to read some Interviews with Chris Porter (founder of geometron) who has a totally different approach. I won't say he's right with everything but most stuff makes just as much sense as the approach in the video which just brings me back to my point before.
Cheers and thanks for the great vids.
Thanks brother. Everything you bring up is accurate (except to say we are reducing the geometry down to one reach number.) The reach is the most reliable starting point. THAT is super important. We're trying to get people away from being sold a bike 40-80mm too long. A bike that can be made to fit with ANY amount of changes. Bikes are a huge investment and most people can't just go out and get another one. This is Joy of Bike. If a longer frame is bringing somebody joy I'm all for it. But instead, more often we see them bummed out. Unable to bunny hop. Unable to manual. Unable to get up ledges. And they have no idea why.
Great answear. I'm 198cm and find it hard to find a comfey bike. 500mm reach is the maximum reach out there. Looking at Canyon Stoic and an Orbea
Most modern bikes feel long when you stand up but feel "ok" when you're seated. So what's the problem? Well if you size down according to the reach formula you might end up with a cramped feeling while seated :/
@@msch6524 You are right. You will feel cramped. If the focus of your riding is seated then that’s totally fine. Most of the people on this channel are looking for bikes they can hop, jump, pump etc.
@@JoyOfBike Sure... But unless you shuttle 100% of the time or follow James Willsons Mantra don't sit down to spin, you will do some pedalling while seated ;) The question how compromised your postion will be...
Hey Alex, Lee: I got to say that I had the fortune to watch this before my bike arrived and manage to order the shop to get me an L instead of an XL. I'm 6.3 and probably my sizing was good, but I follow your recommendation and get a RAD minus. I'm from Colombia and you inspire me to do this kind of content in Spanish. There aren't good videos like yours in my language. Cheers mate
Thanks. Best of luck!!!
This video is extremely informative and I learned a ton. I’m 6’5” and recently bought an XXL YT Izzo because I thought at my height this was a no-brainer. The bike is amazing but the reach is definitely a little too long. I’m going to shorten the stem to a 35mm down from the stock 50mm - this will help but I should have bought the xL.
Look into the pacenti stem too.
Interesting. I'm 6'2" and I was thinking the same way but opposite experience. I have an XT Giant Anthem (biggest size they make) and I've been thinking that the reach is a little too short. Out of the saddle sprinting leaves me feeling that I need more room in the cockpit to produce more power. Maybe I need a longer stem? Geometry and sizing is complicated for me.
I’m 189 cm and on a bike with a 520mm reach and a 1318mm wheel base and it’s the best bike I’ve ever ridden. It’s all about what and how you ride. I’d even want to go longer to a bike with a 1347mm wheelbase or 1371.
Right on. Have fun!
This makes sense to me. I started mountain biking a year ago, and at 6.2.5", the LBS sized me into an XL. It feels too large. I plan to ride it for this season but size down in my next bike.
I’m 6’2” and my large feels great
If your arms are 34 inches long, you may have to go to size medium based on this method.
This is the best video on mountain bike sizing I have ever seen!!!
Appreciate the kind words!!!
This was a really cool video, you guys nailed it, I'm here in my office at my desk pausing your video while doing calculations with a pen and paper. HAHA! Good stuff, Frank M.
I had fun getting my bikes on the footstools and discovering what was fitting. Shocked how good the DH bike fit!!!!
@@JoyOfBike Yeah i have to figure out a way to set something up like that to see how my new bike is going to fit, i'm praying its going to be sized right for me, im going to get a 45mm stem like you had suggested for me a while back, my bike was suppose to be here this saturday but the ships are delayed off shore, just waiting for their turn to unload. Freakin figures. lol!
Had to make it 900 comments...its like opening up a box of light...have BIKE JOY brothers. Thank You AGAIN Lee for this gift of simplicity, this is your Magnum Opus w/RipRow coming in a close second, you guys have great chemistry to deliver the goods🤙FULL SEND marks on this video👊
Appreciate you Mark!
Preach! I like my RAD ever so slightly small. Feels great on the trail or on the BMX track.
P.S. Louisville, KY would be a perfect spot to work with Grow on a pump track too. 😉
I've been surprised. For sure on the BMX I'm RAD minus but I kinda go that way on all my bikes. I thought I was a plus guy. Nope. Keep shredding!!!
Its so many of us out there who has oversized both frame ande wheel.. I am 180 cm and finally I ride Small bikes with 27...Thanks Joy of Bike!
I''ll accept that frame size is probably the biggest factor in fit, but aren't stem length and bar angle and sweep also important to RAD?
details you can change on a frame that fits.. but you cant unfcuk a wrong framesize with components.. cheerio
Thanks, this is the best sizing guide around. I just ordered my first mountain bike at 49 :). This video was a big help.
Man I’m 5’6”. It took everything I have to walk out of a shop with a size small bike. It’s hard on the ego. But I’m glad I did. Thanks for this video. Only thing is I’d like to see closer how you are utilizing the step ladder for a pivot.
Well done!!! Maybe we can do that in a upcoming video.
@@JoyOfBike yes please
Small is fine. Bruce lee was 5.6 and 130 pounds. Didn't seem to hold him back any.
You're buying a bike, not a dick. S M L. Stop worrying about a letter invented by a bike maker. Different manufacturers size differently. One makers small is another makers large. Im not even kidding. Your small bike could be a medium at many other companies. Its all made up....just like everything else in human society. Its all pretend.
@@marcalvarez4890 wake up neo
@@marcalvarez4890 Bruce Lee was made up also, that invalidates your whole argument
Great information. I have recently subscribed to Lee’s online MTB instruction for mostly this information. My bike feels pretty darn good but I checked the reach and my RAD number and they were very close. I am going to get a slightly shorter stem so that the part of the handlebar where my hands are is more inline with the center of the steerer tube which will make the handling more neutral. I am on a 2018 size small Guerrilla GrAvity Trail Pistol and I am 171 cm tall. It is interesting to see that the reach has gotten even larger on the newer version of this bike which actually puts it out of my “reach” or RAD number. You are right that newer bikes are more stable regardless of size. My last bike was a 2009 Ibis Mojo size medium and the wheel base on the size small Trail Pistol is almost 4” longer. Thanks for the video. Greatly appreciated.
Sounds like you're in a good spot with your bike and keeping an eye on the changes.
It's zero outside..you guys crack me up...
thanks for sharing it was a very informative how you discuss the good sizing and how to get the right size bike. Alex and Lee you guys are awesome. see you on your next vlog.