standover height

It's really personal preference do you like the look of lower or taller ? It doesn't really change anything else besides lower being easier for foot tricks and higher more barspin type stuff but you can even bar etc with a lower so.

The top tubes are 20.5” and 21”, it’s the seat tube length that the standover refers to.

A typical height is around 8.5” these days. Like Cell said, it’s more of an aesthetic factor than a performance one, but it will change a couple things. I recall Stranger made a frame that had a 10” standover, I think it was Caleb Quanbeck’s sig. model. But then there are super short standovers that go below 7” tall.

If you like a bit of height to your seat, but don’t like the look of running a seatpost miles long, get a taller one. If you run a slammed seat and like it low, picking a shorter standover won’t hurt.

I run a low standover at 7.4” and slam my seat, and it helps with my can-cans and footjam whips, it was a noticeable change when I came from a 8.75” standover on my old frame.

Personally, stand over is important to me. As someone else mentioned, 8.5" is a middle ground, and it feels pretty good. I rode an 8" SO for a long time. I'm not a huge fan of a really low SO, so 8" is the lowest I'd go. I rode a 7.25" for a while, and I did not care for it much. But it's all personal preference, and you could love a 7" SO.

A lower standover will be less stable in the air, but easier to manipulate side-to-side, and will provide more clearance for any trick involving raising at least one foot/leg over the top tube.

A higher standover is more stable in the air, but doesn't lean as easily as a shorter SO would. They provide less clearance for tailwhips, can-cans, ect.

The standover on that Haro appears to be between 8.5" and 9".

If you can try a bike/frame with a lower SO it could help with your decision.

I'd say if you want to try a short SO, 8" could be a good compromise, being short, but not too short.

I run a 7.25 stand over frame. I love the look and I feel tailwhip are personally easier for me. I’ve always ridden an 8.5 stand over but with a 11.5 BB it’s still pretty low compared to a 8.5 with like an 11.8.

So basically there is some other things that you need to take in also

Mulletsnax wrote:

I run a 7.25 stand over frame. I love the look and I feel tailwhip are personally easier for me. I’ve always ridden an 8.5 stand over but with a 11.5 BB it’s still pretty low compared to a 8.5 with like an 11.8.

Agree, BB paired with SO is very significant.

High standovers are a pain in the ass for can can maneuvers

RonniMontana wrote:

Personally, stand over is important to me. As someone else mentioned, 8.5" is a middle ground, and it feels pretty good. I rode an 8" SO for a long time. I'm not a huge fan of a really low SO, so 8" is the lowest I'd go. I rode a 7.25" for a while, and I did not care for it much. But it's all personal preference, and you could love a 7" SO.

A lower standover will be less stable in the air, but easier to manipulate side-to-side, and will provide more clearance for any trick involving raising at least one foot/leg over the top tube.

A higher standover is more stable in the air, but doesn't lean as easily as a shorter SO would. They provide less clearance for tailwhips, can-cans, ect.

The standover on that Haro appears to be between 8.5" and 9".

If you can try a bike/frame with a lower SO it could help with your decision.

I'd say if you want to try a short SO, 8" could be a good compromise, being short, but not too short.

This don't make a lot of sense, when primarily park frames have the lowest standover and that is what most big air riders seem to be using for flying out of mega ramps into the stratosphere.

I'd guess short standover gives the bike an overall lower CG therefore making them more stable for high speed use.

RonniMontana wrote:

Personally, stand over is important to me. As someone else mentioned, 8.5" is a middle ground, and it feels pretty good. I rode an 8" SO for a long time. I'm not a huge fan of a really low SO, so 8" is the lowest I'd go. I rode a 7.25" for a while, and I did not care for it much. But it's all personal preference, and you could love a 7" SO.

A lower standover will be less stable in the air, but easier to manipulate side-to-side, and will provide more clearance for any trick involving raising at least one foot/leg over the top tube.

A higher standover is more stable in the air, but doesn't lean as easily as a shorter SO would. They provide less clearance for tailwhips, can-cans, ect.

The standover on that Haro appears to be between 8.5" and 9".

If you can try a bike/frame with a lower SO it could help with your decision.

I'd say if you want to try a short SO, 8" could be a good compromise, being short, but not too short.

streethack wrote:

This don't make a lot of sense, when primarily park frames have the lowest standover and that is what most big air riders seem to be using for flying out of mega ramps into the stratosphere.

I'd guess short standover gives the bike an overall lower CG therefore making them more stable for high speed use.

The mega ramp guys that ride wizards are a 11.8 BB which is pretty high for my taste. I think it’s a 8 or 8.25 stand over.

Saw Morgan wade recently doing bmx shows and was talking to him about his new sig frame. It’s freaking long and tall.

I prefer the look of a higher stand over. But I would imagine it's harder to get your feet over when doing tailwhips. But people do....

Mine is like 8.5 and looks low to me. But then when I measure my BB height it's at 12". That seems high. So I got a lower than I want top tube and a higher than I want bottom tube. LOL. If I get smaller tires that will help the Bottom Bracket height get a little lower though.

Fortyseven wrote:

I prefer the look of a higher stand over. But I would imagine it's harder to get your feet over when doing tailwhips. But people do....

Mine is like 8.5 and looks low to me. But then when I measure my BB height it's at 12". That seems high. So I got a lower than I want top tube and a higher than I want bottom tube. LOL. If I get smaller tires that will help the Bottom Bracket height get a little lower though.

How are you measuring the BB height though? Cause it might measure as 12" from the floor but that isn't likely the actual BB height of your frame on paper.

Correct way to measure is first measure height of the center of rear axle to the floor. Take that measurement and minus it by 10" (half of true 20" tire diameter) and keep that number in mind. Then measure to center of crank spindle, minus it by the amount in the previous axle calculation for the closest to spec BB height of your frame.

RonniMontana wrote:

Personally, stand over is important to me. As someone else mentioned, 8.5" is a middle ground, and it feels pretty good. I rode an 8" SO for a long time. I'm not a huge fan of a really low SO, so 8" is the lowest I'd go. I rode a 7.25" for a while, and I did not care for it much. But it's all personal preference, and you could love a 7" SO.

A lower standover will be less stable in the air, but easier to manipulate side-to-side, and will provide more clearance for any trick involving raising at least one foot/leg over the top tube.

A higher standover is more stable in the air, but doesn't lean as easily as a shorter SO would. They provide less clearance for tailwhips, can-cans, ect.

The standover on that Haro appears to be between 8.5" and 9".

If you can try a bike/frame with a lower SO it could help with your decision.

I'd say if you want to try a short SO, 8" could be a good compromise, being short, but not too short.

streethack wrote:

This don't make a lot of sense, when primarily park frames have the lowest standover and that is what most big air riders seem to be using for flying out of mega ramps into the stratosphere.

I'd guess short standover gives the bike an overall lower CG therefore making them more stable for high speed use.

Park riders use low SO because it's easier to do tricks like turndowns, tables, foot jam and tailwhip stuff, all of which regularly put your leg in contact with the TT. The lower SO is out of the way so it makes it easier to do those tricks without banging their foot or leg on it (though they are still possible with higher SO). It also makes the bike.lighter and because its mass is more concentrated, its easier to throw around in the air.
Some folks say a higher SO makes the bike more stable but I really believe that's just a mental thing as it really just makes it heavier and creates more drag when its moving and that could be what they're experiencing and referring to. I really don't think it makes a bike perform better or worse, its more about rider comfort.

Fortyseven wrote:

I prefer the look of a higher stand over. But I would imagine it's harder to get your feet over when doing tailwhips. But people do....

Mine is like 8.5 and looks low to me. But then when I measure my BB height it's at 12". That seems high. So I got a lower than I want top tube and a higher than I want bottom tube. LOL. If I get smaller tires that will help the Bottom Bracket height get a little lower though.

streethack wrote:

How are you measuring the BB height though? Cause it might measure as 12" from the floor but that isn't likely the actual BB height of your frame on paper.

Correct way to measure is first measure height of the center of rear axle to the floor. Take that measurement and minus it by 10" (half of true 20" tire diameter) and keep that number in mind. Then measure to center of crank spindle, minus it by the amount in the previous axle calculation for the closest to spec BB height of your frame.

Somehow you lost me. All I know is that when I have the bike standing vertical, and I take a tape measure and measure from the floor to the center axis of the crank, it's 12". Your calculation makes me think it would be 10". But I don't think I'm following your formula properly.

Fortyseven wrote:

Somehow you lost me. All I know is that when I have the bike standing vertical, and I take a tape measure and measure from the floor to the center axis of the crank, it's 12". Your calculation makes me think it would be 10". But I don't think I'm following your formula properly.

You sound about right, and not everyone’s will be 100% on-the-dot. Plus, it depends what tire size you run.

For example, a 11.8” BB will technically sit lower on 1.95” tires compared to 2.5” tires. But like street said, calculations for these things are done with the base value of 20”, the diameter of a BMX wheel.

streethack wrote:

This don't make a lot of sense, when primarily park frames have the lowest standover and that is what most big air riders seem to be using for flying out of mega ramps into the stratosphere.

I'd guess short standover gives the bike an overall lower CG therefore making them more stable for high speed use.

Flatland typically has a lower standover than park but also not really for airing either.

Fortyseven wrote:

Somehow you lost me. All I know is that when I have the bike standing vertical, and I take a tape measure and measure from the floor to the center axis of the crank, it's 12". Your calculation makes me think it would be 10". But I don't think I'm following your formula properly.

Measure the rear axle height, minus that number by 10 inches. Then measure the crank spindle height, minus that number by the previous answer of the axle calculation.

Here like this;

My rear axle height is just on 10.5" (minus 10 = 0.5)

My crank spindle height is 12.35"

12.35 - 0.5 = Actual BB height

Therefore the frame is technically 11.85" BB (not the 11.5 the bike brand thinks China welded together)

OK. Thanks for the formula. Just measured. I got 10-5/8" at the rear axle and 12-1/4" at the crank....

So lets see... axle height minus 10 equals 5/8". 12-1/4 minus 5/8" would be...…. 11-5/8"... I think.

Dang, mines lower than yours by a hair. LOL.

Yeah, my tires are fat. I just measured them with a caliper over the weekend and my rear tire is at 2.48 and my front is at 2.46. Yowza. I have them pumped up to almost exactly 60. I think the front is right at 60 and the rear was 58. Or vice versa. I knew I had one of the right on and the other one was just under and I said close enough. That was like a week ago.

So your frame most likely has an 11.6 BB height, common for many frames to be around 11.5 - 11.7 these days.

It's a more significant difference than you think though, got a buddy with a Dak frame (11.6) and it just feels low and odd for me being used to the snappier feel of the high BB, which I think is partly because of the angle of the CS.

streethack wrote:

So your frame most likely has an 11.6 BB height, common for many frames to be around 11.5 - 11.7 these days.

It's a more significant difference than you think though, got a buddy with a Dak frame (11.6) and it just feels low and odd for me being used to the snappier feel of the high BB, which I think is partly because of the angle of the CS.

Well Shiver me timbers. Learn something new every day. I thought mine was actually high but it's just my tires. LOL.

readybmxer wrote:

The top tubes are 20.5” and 21”, it’s the seat tube length that the standover refers to.

A typical height is around 8.5” these days. Like Cell said, it’s more of an aesthetic factor than a performance one, but it will change a couple things. I recall Stranger made a frame that had a 10” standover, I think it was Caleb Quanbeck’s sig. model. But then there are super short standovers that go below 7” tall.

If you like a bit of height to your seat, but don’t like the look of running a seatpost miles long, get a taller one. If you run a slammed seat and like it low, picking a shorter standover won’t hurt.

I run a low standover at 7.4” and slam my seat, and it helps with my can-cans and footjam whips, it was a noticeable change when I came from a 8.75” standover on my old frame.

Does the stand over height make a difference in how easy it is to wheelie?

DifferentDanYou wrote:

Does the stand over height make a difference in how easy it is to wheelie?

You really want to know about wheelies?......or manuals? Bottom bracket and chain stay length usually have the biggest influence over how manuals feel.

High BB = easy to to get into the manual but difficult to hold it. Low BB= harder to get into the initial manual position but more stable once manualling.

CS length: Longer makes it harder to get into the manual but has a more stable balance point. Shorter length makes it easy to get into it, but the balance point is a lot more touchy.

But it all comes down to skill. If you're practiced up and good at manuals then your bike likely isn't going to make or break your ability to perform them.

readybmxer wrote:

The top tubes are 20.5” and 21”, it’s the seat tube length that the standover refers to.

A typical height is around 8.5” these days. Like Cell said, it’s more of an aesthetic factor than a performance one, but it will change a couple things. I recall Stranger made a frame that had a 10” standover, I think it was Caleb Quanbeck’s sig. model. But then there are super short standovers that go below 7” tall.

If you like a bit of height to your seat, but don’t like the look of running a seatpost miles long, get a taller one. If you run a slammed seat and like it low, picking a shorter standover won’t hurt.

I run a low standover at 7.4” and slam my seat, and it helps with my can-cans and footjam whips, it was a noticeable change when I came from a 8.75” standover on my old frame.

DifferentDanYou wrote:

Does the stand over height make a difference in how easy it is to wheelie?

MostlyBowlDoggin wrote:

You really want to know about wheelies?......or manuals? Bottom bracket and chain stay length usually have the biggest influence over how manuals feel.

High BB = easy to to get into the manual but difficult to hold it. Low BB= harder to get into the initial manual position but more stable once manualling.

CS length: Longer makes it harder to get into the manual but has a more stable balance point. Shorter length makes it easy to get into it, but the balance point is a lot more touchy.

But it all comes down to skill. If you're practiced up and good at manuals then your bike likely isn't going to make or break your ability to perform them.

Well for me, I can’t do either and I’ve been really struggling for a while just to do wheelies, so my main goal is wheelies. A manual is something that I would like to accomplish eventually, but I’m not expecting it any time soon.

Honestly, doing a wheelie doesn't take frame geometry into account as much. You pull up, you pedal... If you run a brake, tap it when you start to loop out. If you're brakeless, well, why are you riding without brakes when you can't wheelie yet? Wheelies are kinda pointless from a true BMX point of view. Focus on manuals. Just sayin'.

oldstreetthrasher wrote:

Honestly, doing a wheelie doesn't take frame geometry into account as much. You pull up, you pedal... If you run a brake, tap it when you start to loop out. If you're brakeless, well, why are you riding without brakes when you can't wheelie yet? Wheelies are kinda pointless from a true BMX point of view. Focus on manuals. Just sayin'.

I’m not trying to do pro BMX stuff, I’m mostly just trying to have fun riding around town and what not. But I like BMX bikes. I’ve only rode BMX and owned them. I’ve never owned or bought a mountain bike. My bike also doesn’t have brakes 😂. Which is kinda necessary when learning to do things on a bike. I like they way my friends bike feels, but the only difference between his and the bike I’m looking at buying is the stand over height and it’s a drastic difference.

Man, I've been riding for 34 years and I'm nowhere near pro level in any way. It IS all about how fun it is, so I guess I take back what I said. If wheelies are fun for you, learn them. It just takes time and practice.

oldstreetthrasher wrote:

Man, I've been riding for 34 years and I'm nowhere near pro level in any way. It IS all about how fun it is, so I guess I take back what I said. If wheelies are fun for you, learn them. It just takes time and practice.

Well part of it is I’m a big guy, I’m 220lbs and I’m afraid to fall off the back. I’ve fallen off the back one time trying to wheelie and I did not land on my feet. I’ve been told to learn how to wheelie you kinda have to fall off the back often. So every time I try, I don’t lean back enough and I’ve been trying for months.

You need a bike with a brake, for real. It'll help your confidence a lot. There is zero reason to ride brakeless starting out other than to be trendy. My flatland bike has two brakes, and my street bike has one. I don't care what some grom thinks of my setup, I ride what I like. If I ever do go brakeless it'll be because I want to. Damn... Went on a rant for a min. Sorry.

oldstreetthrasher wrote:

You need a bike with a brake, for real. It'll help your confidence a lot. There is zero reason to ride brakeless starting out other than to be trendy. My flatland bike has two brakes, and my street bike has one. I don't care what some grom thinks of my setup, I ride what I like. If I ever do go brakeless it'll be because I want to. Damn... Went on a rant for a min. Sorry.

The only reason I don’t have brakes is because I just haven’t decided to drop 30$, but I def hate riding without them, I’ve gone straight through 2 pairs of shoes because of it. But I’m debating on buying a new bike and selling the one I have which brings me back to the stand over question, but from what you say, if I have breaks that it will all be good? That I can get the new bike and the stand over won’t impact me learning to ride one?