Weird Yo Eddy sizing

mkozaczek

Member
I've been looking for a 91/93 M/L Yo for some time. Seems a M is too small and an L is too big.

I thought I found one but the measurements don't add up

Serial 261Y2M - so a 92 Medium right?

Seat tube c2c - 17.5" (or thereabouts)
Top tube c2c - 22.5" (or so)

Here is the kicker though

Head tube - 4.9"

So, based on the head tube length it's a M/L, but unless the other dimensions are not correct it's a medium.

Any thoughts??
 

fat-tony

Moderator
Staff member
For what it is worth, I own a 1993 small and a 1993 medium. According to Fat sizing, the small would be the frame for me, but I feel like I am on a bmx'er. I think the sizes were meant for racing. ...I personally feel more comfortable on my medium.
 

yo-Nate-y

Moderator
Staff member
It could be a non or sus corrected frame. I can check when I get home with my 91 M and 93 M....the sus corrected frames have an even shorter head tube.
 

mkozaczek

Member
I'm beginning to suspect it is an M/L and just not denoted in the S/N.

Going to remeasure the "effective" top tube length and I'm pretty sure it will come out to 23.3 not the 22.5 I measured. Then the seat tube should fall inline with the 18" stated in the catalog.

Maybe they only started the M/L stamping later on, or just forgot... I think the nearly 5" head tube is a dead give away.

I think it'll work. Now if I could trade my BOI for a Yo fork I'd be set.
 

yo-Nate-y

Moderator
Staff member
My '93 M headtube is 3.5 inches and the '91 M is 3 7/8th inches or about 98mm. Top tubes are both 22.5 actual. Seat c-to-c is 17".
 

northerndave

New member
I'd say the head tube difference is due to suspension correction. From what I understand the head tube got progressively shorter as the correction increased.

17.5 c-c sounds about right for a M although I thought M was 17 and M/L was 18. Catalogues have geom charts if needed. Not sure back to 91 though.
 
Top