Trek 950 singletrack sizing
#1
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 19
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Trek 950 singletrack sizing
I have a '93 Trek 950 with an 18 inch frame.It is in great shape with with the chrome moly frame and a suspension fork. I know the frame is on the small side for me, as I am 5'11" with a 32" inseam. I have about 8 inch of seat post exposed unless I have it dropped low. Does anyone else ride a smallish frame for Xcountry riding ? I want it mostly for atv trails and dirt roads ,,,, maybe a little single track at the local ski slope. Thoughts on weather I should just look for a larger frame or ride this and enjoy it ?
Thanks in advance ,,,,
Bill
Thanks in advance ,,,,
Bill
#2
Senior Member
I'd look for a size Large (20")
For comparison, I'm around 6'1.5" and prefer a 22" Trek 970 Singletrack.
For comparison, I'm around 6'1.5" and prefer a 22" Trek 970 Singletrack.
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 634
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 734 Post(s)
Liked 323 Times
in
182 Posts
Cross-country MTB riders always go with small frames if they are serious about it, because it allows them to drop back behind the seat on steep descents and makes the bike easier to handle in tight technical stuff. I have been riding a Marin I bought new 25 years ago and I just rode a very technical single-track trail with it that hosted a race a few days before, and it felt perfect as usual. I could ride an XL size frame easy, but when I bought this luckily I researched it and bought the L size frame, I am about 6'2.5". This is what my bike looks like currently;

#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Paradise, TX
Posts: 2,087
Bikes: Soma Pescadero, Surly Pugsley, Salsa Fargo, Schwinn Klunker, Gravity SS 27.5, Monocog 29er
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 186 Post(s)
Liked 232 Times
in
165 Posts
In the old days it was common the ride a smaller frame with a big seat to bar drop. Now we have learned better. Ride a bike that fits, newer bikes are more stabil and you will go over the bars less often. Dropperposts make getting the weight back much easier and you don't take a saddle to the gut on landing.
#5
Junior Member
5'11 keep the 18" frame, get wider bars. You're not far off, I am an inch shorter than you & 18" is my preferred sizing. Try a wider riser bar like 750mm. Should help with the overall fit and function.
#6
Disco Infiltrator
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Folsom CA
Posts: 13,569
Bikes: Stormchaser, Paramount, Timberjack, Expert TG, Samba tandem
Mentioned: 69 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3033 Post(s)
Liked 1,964 Times
in
1,278 Posts
18 is a Medium and you are a Large. And it's an old MTB so it sits a lot more racy than a new one. A 1990's medium would feel tiiiiiny after coming off a 2023 large bike.
Just for fun...
Just for fun...

__________________
Genesis 49:16-17
Genesis 49:16-17
#7
Advanced Slacker
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 5,944
Bikes: Soma Fog Cutter, Surly Wednesday, Canfielld Tilt
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2640 Post(s)
Liked 2,375 Times
in
1,337 Posts
Not sure about that bike’s particular sizing , but 18” could have been a med or large, and someone at your height would typically be a large.
That said, conventional wisdom around sizing has changed a lot since then. First, the frame reach and ETT length) trumps seat tube length as the fit criteria, and those have both gotten a bit longer especially the former.
I was riding 17” mtbs in the 90s with TT lengths just over 22” (with a 120-135mm stem and 580mm bars) If I were to ride similar bikes now I would go with a 19” with wider bars and much shorter stem. In reality though, I would be unable to get a good fit on a 90’s mtb now because in order to get the frame reach I want I would be on a large or XL bike and that would just not work.
As far as your bike goes, don’t worry about exposed seat tube. Just worry about if it feels OK. You can always use a riser bar or riser stem to lift the bars if the saddle to bar drop is too great.
That said, conventional wisdom around sizing has changed a lot since then. First, the frame reach and ETT length) trumps seat tube length as the fit criteria, and those have both gotten a bit longer especially the former.
I was riding 17” mtbs in the 90s with TT lengths just over 22” (with a 120-135mm stem and 580mm bars) If I were to ride similar bikes now I would go with a 19” with wider bars and much shorter stem. In reality though, I would be unable to get a good fit on a 90’s mtb now because in order to get the frame reach I want I would be on a large or XL bike and that would just not work.
As far as your bike goes, don’t worry about exposed seat tube. Just worry about if it feels OK. You can always use a riser bar or riser stem to lift the bars if the saddle to bar drop is too great.
Last edited by Kapusta; 08-14-22 at 09:26 AM.
#8
Disco Infiltrator
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Folsom CA
Posts: 13,569
Bikes: Stormchaser, Paramount, Timberjack, Expert TG, Samba tandem
Mentioned: 69 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3033 Post(s)
Liked 1,964 Times
in
1,278 Posts
The seat tube length is still important now because if it's a size too big you definitely won't fit much of a dropper. I'm 5-8 so I'm usually on a medium. (Trek would put me on a "Medium Large" lol. Hard to sell a guy something called medium when there's something called large!) With a 17 inch seat tube for me, a 150 dropper, which seems average, is fully slammed. A 240 dropper is not really in the cards! Seat tubes are getting shorter but haven't done that. OEM droppers are still like 100-125mm playing it safe.
__________________
Genesis 49:16-17
Genesis 49:16-17