Watched my mate fall off his XR650l today on a relatively slight grassy incline, he has been riding 40+ years and had the honda over 6 years and done thousands of miles on it. Ok i accept it happens to the best of us, and at 6 foot 3 he normally manages on rough ground just fine.
So nothing to see here then, so why the post here. ?
well for a long time now i have quietly had a thing against bikes with high seat hights.
I am 6foot and not short in the legs, but even my beloved XT600e can be high at times, and luckily i have never had a full on fall due to the hight ride hight but i will admit there have been moments where things hung literaly in the balance and these have indeed on occasion been iritated by the dual sport ergonomics.
being a trials rider i believe gives one an edge often, but there comes a point when a bike stops and you dont want to stand there kicking out maintaining balance and you need to make contact with the ground.
My mate andy got it vwrong today. and thankfully a bent clutch leaver was the only casualty, but i was thinking to my self that the Trail/ ADV bike ride hights with the advantages of travel and varriations in sag and spring rates etc cnd to add to this could make for most riders a problem given the right circumstances. And a low seat hight could have prevented most of them, but perhaps created some others.
If you look at any modern trials bike, its clear to see that ground clearance and suspension can be in a low profile frame. and it would be possible to produce a ADV bike with a much lower seat hight and maintain a comfortable ergonomic riding possition.
My old triumph tiger XCx800 was not especially high on the seating but was comfortabe enough, but it could have been made with a lower seat profile.
I think there must be many people out there of the same opinion, and not only would this make a bike a more suitable mount for short folks, it would do no harm and potentially good for all riders.
So nothing to see here then, so why the post here. ?
well for a long time now i have quietly had a thing against bikes with high seat hights.
I am 6foot and not short in the legs, but even my beloved XT600e can be high at times, and luckily i have never had a full on fall due to the hight ride hight but i will admit there have been moments where things hung literaly in the balance and these have indeed on occasion been iritated by the dual sport ergonomics.
being a trials rider i believe gives one an edge often, but there comes a point when a bike stops and you dont want to stand there kicking out maintaining balance and you need to make contact with the ground.
My mate andy got it vwrong today. and thankfully a bent clutch leaver was the only casualty, but i was thinking to my self that the Trail/ ADV bike ride hights with the advantages of travel and varriations in sag and spring rates etc cnd to add to this could make for most riders a problem given the right circumstances. And a low seat hight could have prevented most of them, but perhaps created some others.
If you look at any modern trials bike, its clear to see that ground clearance and suspension can be in a low profile frame. and it would be possible to produce a ADV bike with a much lower seat hight and maintain a comfortable ergonomic riding possition.
My old triumph tiger XCx800 was not especially high on the seating but was comfortabe enough, but it could have been made with a lower seat profile.
I think there must be many people out there of the same opinion, and not only would this make a bike a more suitable mount for short folks, it would do no harm and potentially good for all riders.
Last edited:
Its not obvious exactly what bikes are on the tall side exactly. And Older bikes are just that old and are what they are, so without fabrication work on the frame or seat pad trimming etc its simply accademic debate. But going forward now, and acepting that triumph to name just one firm did see the ned, Do we think Manufacturers generaly have done enough to make their bikes ergonomic /
