which is better?

[fishercat]

I'm looking into buying a new sugar. I'm currently on a small sugar frame (5'6", 31" inseam). the way my bike is set up now is with a 100mm thompson stem and a setback seatpost. the saddle is higher than the bars by a few inches.
I'm thinking of going with a medium frame instead but the seatpost will not be higher than the bars and I will be using a smaller stem most likely.
Most pics i see of people on fishers have their seats up high for a more aggressive riding position. If I go with the medium this will not be an option for me. However, I will probably not need to use a setback seatpost.
What are the benefits of a smaller frame as opposed to a larger frame? The bike store says i should be on a small for east coast technical riding, but the truth is i could probably fit on either a small or medium. suggestions? feedback?
thanks, Karen
ps. WSD is not an option

[Repack]

Small will fit you better. Med will be better for agressive riding. The higher front end will allow you to get your CG back farther. Long wheel base will make it more stable. But at 5'6", the fact that it is most likely too big means none of that realy matters. Having the seat higher than the bars gives you more power, but puts your weight over the front end-bad for steep technical. Fishers also have a longish top tube.

[oldfart]

You're just a bit bigger than I am. There are many variables too besides your height and leg length. My wife is a tad taller than me because her neck is longer. Our knee hip and shoulder joints are in nearly the same places but my arms are a good inch and a half longer. We ride the same sized bikes, same saddle height same size shoes but I use a 11 no rise stem while she's on a 100 with spacers and +5 rise. I think the smaller the rider is the less difference you want between saddle and bar height. I have my bars slightly above saddle height and its pretty technical riding here. I ride the small Superlight but I could ride the medium according to Santa Cruz. Small is a bit lighter and stiffer and shorter wheelbase too. And Fishers are long bikes too so maybe a small is better. But I need to see someone on a bike and how they ride before making a recommendation.

[Repack]

One other thing. Genesis geometry fits people with longer torsoes relative to leg length better. Is 31"inseam long for 5'6"? If so, you might want to try the fit of some other bikes.

[sub6]

Originally posted by Repack
Is 31"inseam long for 5'6"? If so, you might want to try the fit of some other bikes.

I think so - I'm a hair under 6'0" and my inseam is 32.....

[mrbigisbudgood]

Originally posted by sub6
I think so - I'm a hair under 6'0" and my inseam is 32.....

Maybe that's my problem. I'm 5'6 and have an inseam of 31. No wonder I like small top tubes, I'm all frikkin legs!!!!!

[fishercat]

mrbig..

you are the same size as me, what size frame do you ride? top tube length??

[mrbigisbudgood]

Originally posted by fishercat
mrbig..

you are the same size as me, what size frame do you ride? top tube length??

I like my XC bikes to be in the neighborhood of 22-22.5" top tube. I usually run a 90mm 5-10 degree rise stem with low risers and I'm comfortable. I rode a size small Superlight for a year in this config. and it fit me PERFECTLY.

[fishercat]

how do you deal with the long leg thiing?? 170 or 175mm cranks? setback seatpost?

[mrbigisbudgood]

Originally posted by fishercat
how do you deal with the long leg thiing?? 170 or 175mm cranks? setback seatpost?

I feel more comfortable with 175mm cranks on XC and road bikes. My BMX bike has 172.5mm and my AC has 170. The 170's have a tendancy to make me cramp up a bit on a long climb because I'm not getting as much range of motion, or maybe it's just because they're on a heavier bike. :D I've always used a straight post.

[fishercat]

by the way, I like your avatar.
great movie.
i'm bored in the office right nw.
i'm gonna need you to go ahead and come in on saturday...

[fishercat]

I'm going to need you to go ahead and come in on sunday too..