In between bike sizes

So I'm picking up a new enduro bike soon, I'm 185cm so just under 6'1" my current bike is a megatower size large with a 35mm stem and around 465mm reach. I like my bike to feel playful and I find anytime I try out an XL I feel as though I'm driving a school bus down the trail. 

My last bike before the megatower was a dinosaur from 2011 so It was a big jump going up to 29er wheels from 26" and really out of date geo so the Santa Cruz felt huge when I first started riding it and took me a long time to adapt but now I absolutely love it.

Does anyone have any experience with a similar situation or is in between sizes? Everyone tells me I should be on an XL and that I'll just get used to it. Also my wingspan is 193cm and inseam of 97cm so I'm pretty lanky.

Cheers

I can usually ride two different frame sizes. I generally prefer riding the smaller of the two sizes that I can fit on. No right or wrong here. Just a matter of what feels better.

A lot of personal preference here, no right or wrong answer. But if you like 465mm reach you’re not on an XL of any of the rowdier brands. They tend to be between 500-520 these days. 465 is pretty short for your size so maybe borrow a bike in the 480 range and see if it feels good?

In general, lankier at 6’1” a large is the safe bet. Torso length matters more than height. You definitely don’t want a slack seat angle for long legs.

I’m 6’2” with an avg to sorta long torso. I’m stuck smack between L and XL on a lot of models since my comfort+fun range is 490-505mm.

I think any of these new bikes will seem really long to you. But you'll get used to it. I find the steeper seat angle feels a bit odd on flat ground but the benefits for climbing are clear. The slack head angle seems like it would be an issue (because it really was on shorter bikes where your weight was oriented rearward) but because the seat angle leans you forward the bike turns really well. 

You aren't between sizes. At 185cm you are definitely XL.

How long is the XL? I went from 470ish to an XL @ 505 reach and loved it. 

I'm back to a large now but still @490 ; with way more travel and longer stays, so similar wheel base.

You're basically on the equivalent of some modern mediums now at 465mm, with a super stubby 35mm stem to boot...

When looking at new school geo keep stack in mind too if making big lane changes in bike categories.

Depending on the brand, a modern large say at 485mm reach with a 45mm stem will feel about 3 feet longer than what you're on now, just saying. 

Seated top tube reach however, with the super steep seat angles these days, will probably feel the same or shorter.

What bikes are you looking at?

Posted by: MaxRockatansky

How long is the XL? I went from 470ish to an XL @ 505 reach and loved it. 

I'm back to a large now but still @490 ; with way more travel and longer stays, so similar wheel base.

I'm guessing it's going to be 500-505mm the bike I'm getting is about to be released in the next 2 months

Posted by: Hepcat

You're basically on the equivalent of some modern mediums now at 465mm, with a super stubby 35mm stem to boot...

When looking at new school geo keep stack in mind too if making big lane changes in bike categories.

Depending on the brand, a modern large say at 485mm reach with a 45mm stem will feel about 3 feet longer than what you're on now, just saying. 

Seated top tube reach however, with the super steep seat angles these days, will probably feel the same or shorter.

What bikes are you looking at?

My Current Megatower has a warranty issue "crack" and SC are sending me a new updated frame when it gets realased so still unsure what the get numbers will be like, I just assume it will be similar to the new Nomad in Geo.

Posted by: craw

I think any of these new bikes will seem really long to you. But you'll get used to it. I find the steeper seat angle feels a bit odd on flat ground but the benefits for climbing are clear. The slack head angle seems like it would be an issue (because it really was on shorter bikes where your weight was oriented rearward) but because the seat angle leans you forward the bike turns really well. 

You aren't between sizes. At 185cm you are definitely XL.

Depending on who you ask, he might be exactly right at 185cm and 465mm reach.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyppZOpHocM

Posted by: shoreboy

Posted by: craw

I think any of these new bikes will seem really long to you. But you'll get used to it. I find the steeper seat angle feels a bit odd on flat ground but the benefits for climbing are clear. The slack head angle seems like it would be an issue (because it really was on shorter bikes where your weight was oriented rearward) but because the seat angle leans you forward the bike turns really well. 

You aren't between sizes. At 185cm you are definitely XL.

Depending on who you ask, he might be exactly right at 185cm and 465mm reach.

Interesting video! But I wonder if a riders arm/torso length comes into play at all? I guess that's when you would go with Rad+

I'm 185cm with longer torso and arms. I'm on a XL with 515cm reach. 

I tried that RAD equation, even with my son's Large bike(reach 465).....it was too big of a frame. No way I'm a medium. RAD definitely not for me!

I think if you have a longer torso you might be an XL.

I don't buy what he's selling in that video.  There's too many variables.  I'm 5'10, but my wingspan is 6'3".  According to his method my ideal range for reach is 429mm - 446mm.

I'm currently riding a bike with a 450mm reach and it feels too small for me.  I'm trying (waiting) to get a new bike with a longer reach to fit me better.  Based on bikes I've had a chance to throw a leg over and ride my ideal reach is more like 465mm - 480mm.

I mean, I can ride my bike just fine, but I think slightly larger would be more comfortable for the riding I'm doing these days.

I'm the same height as you and the large megatower was too small for me. With steeper seat tube, the seated position is shorter than what you would have experienced on an old 26" bike. Santa Cruz should have made their L a M/L and their XL a L IMO. 

In any case, I prefer to downsize and I find 500+ too long a reach. 480-490 seems to be a sweat spot for me. I have one bike that is 455 (slack STA makes for a correct ETT) and I still enjoy riding that bike as well as it is super playful. Reach is only the correct one for you if it enables the bike to ride the way you want. Some people who are totally sold on a long reach may not ride their bike the way you want to ride yours. That being said, there is no doubt that a long reach will make for a very stable bike and more capable of feeling stable at high speeds (do some people consider this playful?).