coatseast

Hi, I'm 5'10.5" (180CM) with about 30.5" inseam (77.5CM). Buying a bike today/this week and am in between sizes. I ride a dual sport motorcycle and typically head straight for the trees when skiing if that tells you anything.


Kona's biks run large and their sizing chart says in that range I could go anywhere from a 52 to 56 frame size! I would normally go 54 but the 52 felt more agile (mostly pulling up wheel to go over curbs, etc). I rode a 56 Sutra LTD (way too big), 54" Rove ST (felt OK, but longish and less maneuverable, OK but tight stand-over). and the 52 which i liked... I only rode each for 5-10 min so my question is...


Longer term and for longer rides, do you think I will want the longer bike? Ultimately I'll get a mtn bike for riding tougher stuff, but I like to explore and will certainly find single track and rooty trails right away with this new ride.


Thanks! First post on this forum, BTW!

davehor

Sorry no one replied in time. But for people finding this thread or the OP. Bigger is better on day long, multi day rides, but not stretched out. You wanna get weight off of the hands, and because you'll be producing fewer watts and don't want a sore back at the end of the day.

eduskator

A little late, but I'd go with the one you feel most comfortable on. Some people do prefer going one size down (myself) because they simply feel better on it.

As long as the bike is fitted properly to your specs, go for it and enjoy your ride my friend.

coatseast

I ended up going smaller. I like to hit trails and get off road and found the smaller one much more flickable. its a bit tight with foot to front wheel distance but seems fine. I LOVE the bike.

Funny, I started with the Kona Sutra but really like the shorter wheelbase and size of the Rove ST

joewhistle

Glad you found the right fit!