Thanks for all your comments re smaller frame bikes - I'd love to go for a custom build (Titus or Santa Cruz) but unfortunately my budget just won't stretch that far - the most I have to spend on a complete bike is £1250, and that's my upper limit. Ideally I'd like to keep it at or below £1000.
With that in mind, I've been dithering between the Trek 6700 WSD (14") and the women's non-disc Stumpjumper (13").
I won't buy before I've at least sat on each bike, but I may not get a chance to give them a thorough test ride. The geometry of both bikes would seem to be in the right ball park, though.
Do any of you have an opinion about which one is the better bike? I like the Stumpy but the Trek has disc brakes...but I'm not sure I could tolerate a pink bike! I'm getting more and more confused as I look at more and more on-line sites!
Alternatively does anyone else know of another small framed bike that I should be looking at and that's within my budget? (just to add to my confusion?)
I've got a stumpy 2005, 15". I upgraded the brakes to hope minis and am really glad it did as they are excellent.
The Stumpy is lovely but a word or 2 of warning. I was used to riding big heavy boys bikes and the sheer lightness and precision handing has made some rides rather more "fun" than I would have hoped for. The shorter stem makes the bike much more sensitive than anything I've ridden before. That said, its not the bike's fault, its me for being a bit too heavy handed!
The frame geometry's soooo much better than ridding a non-WSD for me - I'm (almost!) 5'4" with short arms and what a difference to comfort and lower back not having that excessive reach makes.
Haven't tried the trek, but am a happy stumpy fan. You could buy and save up to upgrade the brakes??
Hi there, I also have a stumpy 2005, 15" with exactly the same upgrade as ktmcn. I love it! My previous bike was a Trek 8000 WSD (which got pinched, darn it!), which Trek don't make any more. I also loved that! (so I'm probably not helping)
I did look at the Trek 6700 when I had to get a bike replacement for my stolen bike, but I was told that the frame would be a lot heavier than my old Trek (which is partly what I liked about it, it was sooo light) and also the insurance company were willing to cough up more cash than it cost so it would have been silly!
But one think I would say is that upgrading to disc brakes has improved my riding and confidence no end, so as ktmcn suggests I would advise upgrading the brakes if you go for the stumpjumper when you can afford it.
Also given the 2005 sales are on now on, you might be able to find a good deal that meant you could afford to upgrade now and stay within budget if you went for the stumpjumper. The stumpjumper comes with disc compatible wheels so you don't have to change the wheels if you want to upgrade btw. The Stumpjumper seems a lot higher spec than the Trek, with the exception of the brakes, which I guess is not surprising as its a lot more expensive. To be honest I'd go for the stumpjumper if you can afford it (and it fits of course)
having never had a blokes mtb, I didn't have the issues that ktmcn describes, I love my bike! It rides similarly to my old Trek so you may find that the two bikes feel quite similar.
And ... <girly comment>It's a really nice red colour</girly comment>. I also am not convinced on the pink of the Trek!
Unfortunately I just went to my LBS and confirmed the Stumpy dimensions - even the smallest 13.5" frame has a standover of 535mm which is around 29" - given that my inside leg measurement (in my SPDs)is 29" I think I'm going to have to think again - which is a bummer because the Stumpy was my first choice - and you gals have made me want one even more now! DOH!!!
On to my other contenders - the Trek and the Gary Fisher Big Sur GS....they have similar components (heavy on the Bontrager), but the GF seems to have better frame, forks and gears - which is what you'd expect for a couple of hundred quid more, I guess). Plus, I like the colour of the new GF- I think I'd get sick of pink pretty quickly.
Has anyone ever owned or ridden a Gary Fisher? The Trek and GF both have small standover heights (26.4" and 26.6" respectively, but the GF top tube is 1.3" longer than the Trek - I don't know enough about geometry to know whether this would be a problem or not...)
Does anyone have any views one way or the other?
Hopefully both Trek and GF will be at the Bike Show so I may be able to try them out at the same location.
Thanks for the input so far - very compelling for the Stumpy :o/ - now I need some cheerleaders for either the Trek or the GF!
Are you sure? Specialized site says 693mm = 27.3 inches? (535 is the top tube length) Admittedly larger than the Trek and GF but worth a try if this is right. Also, possibly a stupid question, but do different companies measure standover height in the same way? As surely it depends on the geometry of the frame and where on the top tube you measure it to? I think my inside leg is 29-30 inches, and I ride the 15' stumpjumper fine, though i did wonder about getting the 13 inch one instead. (My old Trek was 14 inches, but a bit small for me)
Oops, meant to say the standover height for the '06 model is 735mm (you're right, it was the TT length that was 530mm)....this seemed way too big to be true and I didn't trust what the US Specialized site was telling me hence my trip to the LBS - he looked it up for me in the new Specialized dealers manual, and it's definitely 735mm - he was amazed too!
Its a really tiny shop and didn't have any 13" frames stocked. I tried a 15" Hardrock just to check if they really were that big, and I'd say the TT was at least 1.5" higher than my 15.5" Orange Clockwork rigid fork bike (obviously because of the extra height required by the suspension).
I'll have to hope there's a 13" Stumpy at the bike show - its good to know you personally don't feel your 15" Stumpy is too big when your inside leg is similar to mine...I guess you never can tell for sure until you actually see a bike in the flesh and try it for size.
Hi Janey I have a Stumpy FSR 04 Expert Men's small and the standover is shown as 732mm - this fits me perfectly with plenty to spare. I am 5'3" and have a 29inch inside leg. I have had the bike for about 18 months and love riding it (wouldn't swop it for anything else). Only change to the geometry I made was to shorten the handlebars. Although it is a men's bike I found the geometry fitted me well. (I did try some women specific bikes when I was looking but at that time the spec's weren't as good as this one.) It has lovely Fox forks which I find perfect for me. Good luck with your choice!
Guess which bike I've got! Have just spent a weekend on the Quantocks on it, and loved it to bits. I am not sure where the comment about 'heavier frame' comes from - it is very light indeed. However, it is pink. I don't have a problem with this - I don't care what other people think about it as long as it gives the ride I want, and it probably makes it a bit more thief-proof! The tour leader this weekend commetned on what a good fit the bike seemed to be - this is the 16 inch one, I am 164cm / 5 foot 4& a half inches tall. The Big Sur was the other bike I was interested in, but the Trek came in a good £200 cheaper than the best deal I could get on the Gary Fisher, and my local bike shop stocked it, so I could try it out, get full service back-up, etc. There are still some 2005 Treks out there on the web, which aren't pink, so that could be an option. I'd certainly recommend giving it a go.
I'd have to agree with the awful colour of the Trek 6700 WSD,just cos its a women's specific bike doesn't mean the manufacturers have to make it in barbie pink. I've noticed other manufacturers women's models in equally horrible colours eg a particularly bad purple. It a shame cos I'm sure the bike is fine with a reasonable spec for the price. They could at least give us a choice of two colours one would have thought. For that reason, and probably for that reason only I would definitly have to go for the Stumpy over the Trek.
I've just tried to post a classified but it keeps returning an error message. I think you might be interested.
Upgraded 2005 women's Stumpy Comp, size small (13"), suit small woman 5'-5'3". Customised with Fox Float RL80 forks, SMICA componentry, full XT dual control groupset including XT cranks and disc brakes. Comes with original wheels (unused) and a choice of tyres. Raced one season and fully serviced, better specced than any new women's bike on the market. Absolute bargain for the right buyer, £1,000.
Note that the Fox Float RL80s are a shorter travel fork than the standard Manitou Divas, and this drops the standover height by an inch or so. The bike handles brilliantly with a shorter fork and being small I've never missed the extra travel. Drop me a line if you are interested, jenn@pattersontraining.com
I have a stumpy FSR expert and love it. Got it the year before the womens design came to UK so can't comment on that but mine is great. I am 5'7" so am not on the petite side but found I needed to but a shorter / slightly higher angle stem and risers on it to make it comfortable for my frame but that said it is great. The only thing I do find with it is that the cranks are a little low and you can ground out in ruts occasionally !! Just keep your eyes peeled and pedals level and you should be OK.
If you've got some specific questions about the 6700 let me know. I work for Trek and run around the US with a trailer full of bikes, including the 6700. The pink color is a really good pink, IMO. 'Course I'm a fan of pink bikes and not because it's a girly color, either.
As for the Bontrager components, don't think for a second that you are settling for second best with those components on your bike. The testing of components at Trek is very rigorous, and the company standards far exceed the standards for the rest of the industry. We test a lot of competitor products, as well.
The women that test rode our 6700's over the summer loved them. There really is a remarkable fit difference between a WSD bike and a standard frame.
Feel free to email me directly if you have other questions: chris_garrison@trekbikes.com
Janey I presume, looking at the dates, you will have got a new bike by now? I'm only 5' tall and have had a 13" stumpy for the past 5 years and it has done me proud - light to handle etc. Yes, there is not much stand over - but the top tube does slide downwards giving me enough. I upgraded it to have Hope disk brakes. I am now the proud owner of a Yeti (full suss) and one of the main reasons I bought it over the Specialised/Santa Cruse etc was the wonderful stand over height on the XS - and the fact that I was able to have a test ride for a whole weekend from Bromley Bikes. Being expected to buy a bike after just standing over it in a shop or worse still looking at a catalogue was not an option for me once I had gone into what I consider serious money - and Bromley Bikes have a whole range of test bikes from quite a few manufacturers. No obligation to buy - just pay for the bike (as a deposit) and get 100% of what you pay back after the day/weekend.
