Open Min.d owners, please weigh in

Does anyone out there own an Open Min.d? I’m considering. I want to build a new bike with a mechanical groupset, and there are fewer and fewer options available. I like what I see, with the following reservations.

I’m currently riding a 2017 Emonda SL, which with a tallish headtube might be considered an endurance bike in this day and age. But in spite of that it has quick steering and handles great at speed going downhill. The Min.d looks a bit slacker up front (based on the numbers I see at bikeinsights.com). And I worry I might be losing some of the quick steering.

Both the head tube and seat tube angles are also more laid back. This one really unsettles me. The Min.d’s head tube angle is a full degree slacker, and almost that much at the seat tube. I worry this might create a more sluggish handling bike, as well. It would be great to have some input from experience here.

On the other hand, the stack and reach both are shorter on the Min.d. I don’t have a long torso or long arms, so I think the shorter reach but lower stack actually might work in my favor. There aren’t a whole lot of performance bikes out there that do this for me. And I also like the idea of squeezing a 32c in there. This and that.

If you own one of these bikes, please unload all of your opinions about it here. Many thanks.

1 Like

Note that the seat tube is integrated, and effectively builds in the offset that a seatpost would normally provide. So unless you’re riding a zero-offset post on the Emonda, I wouldn’t worry.

The Open is much more of an endurance, long ride focused bike than the Emonda, though, so it will be more relaxed/lazier up front. That’s neither good nor bad, but it will be different.

As regards stack and reach, we’d need to know what size Trek you have, and what size Open you’re looking at.

1 Like

Curious if you’ve considered the Aethos? The non-S-works frame is mechanical compatible.

@Mintaerobars Good points. I’m on a 56cm Emonda (remember, this was what Trek considered the H2 fit back in 2017). And I’m looking at the Medium Min.d. Just in terms of stack and reach, that’s 577mm:560mm and 387:373, Trek and Open respectively.

And wouldn’t you know it, I have the 0-degree option post on my Emonda (which is actually about 5-degrees setback). But the reach is so much shorter on the Min.d, maybe that would still compensate for the seat post angle.

Thanks for your thoughts. That helps better form my opinions about this option.

@Joe_Cheng That’s a fair suggestion. Who hasn’t considered the Aethos? I’m guessing I’d have to go to a 54cm Aethos (from the H2-fit 56cm Emonda) to get a reach that would be reasonable for me. Given the stack on that 54cm Aethos, I’m just afraid the bike would end up looking like a giraffe once I got it set up close to my current numbers. But thanks for warming up the idea. It wouldn’t hurt to revisit it.

I’ve been riding an Open Min.D for six months and love it. It’s an endurance style bike and has a more relaxed feel than my Parlee Altum. However, it is by no means sluggish. I also looked at the Aethos but once I modified it to my liking, it would cost a fortune. With the Open, you start with the frame and add parts to your size and liking. The Open is very comfortable, makes 100k plus rides less arduous, and particularly excels on poor quality roads. Bumpy descents that used to scare me are now fun (30mm tubeless at 58 psi helps too). And that ISP really flexes, in a nice, subtle, springy way. Just make sure you get a good fitting before you cut the ISP.

1 Like

Don’t forget to factor in whatever headset cap and spacers you have on the Trek…if you have 10mm of spacer stack on the Trek, you’ll need 27mm of spacers for the Open.

Based on those numbers, I don’t think they are comparable. What are the numbers for a Large Open?

@Andrew_Glickman Thanks for taking the time to comment. If you find another minute, would you min.d sharing how tall you are and what frame size you ended up with? Much appreciated.
Yes, I can imagine what a headache you’d have after cutting the post on the wrong line.

1 Like

@Henri_Desgrange Good point. Thanks for throwing that in the mix. You’re right, the Trek has an exaggerated sweep upwards at the headset, and on top of that there’s a semi-conical headset cap that continues the line even higher off the top tube. I have my stem lowered to that without additional spacers. But that will skew the comparison.
The Open Min.d is has a whopping stack of 585 for the large. The reach is 385; that’s technically two millimeters shorter than the Emonda. But who do you listen to? The Open Min.d page recommends someone between 5’10" and 6’3" for the large. I’m 5’9".
The comparison becomes problematic there.

What astonishes me is the short wheelbase of the Mind. (The rear center is extremely short for an endurance bike.)

Emonda H2 (56):

Stack 577
Reach 387
SA: 73.3

Open Mind (L):

Stack 585
Reach 385
SA: 72.5

If you’re actually running about 5mm setback on the Emonda, you should be within the range of saddle adjustment on the Open.

The other measurements are very much close enough.

The only other thing to check is saddle height; if you’re running a very high or low saddle (relative to frame size) on the Trek, the ISP on the Open might cause issues. For reference, Open suggest a saddle height of 735 to 820mm for the Large. You might able to go 5mm lower than that, maybe, but that’s your ballpark.

However, if you’re looking at dropping 3k+ on a frame, you might want to get a bike fitter to double check these numbers. Assuming you’re comfortable on your current bike, it’s a pretty straightforward and quick process to map your current setup onto another rig.

1 Like

@Mintaerobars Well that does it for the large. My saddle height floats around 710. I’m glad you mentioned that. I hadn’t seen that information. But it is in line with the recommended rider height information in the geometry chart (for the Open Min.d).
And getting a fit before dropping over 3k for a frame and fork is completely sensible if only to have an experienced fitter lend opinion to the idea of going shorter and lower for the reach and stack (given the medium). In fact, a double-check of the numbers might be a good idea at this stage. Thanks.

@Jack_Leville Yeah, I noticed that, too. It’s seems like it’s aiming at aggressive climbing in the rear triangle, and endurance objectives up front. Hmm.

Regarding size of my open mind, it is a medium. I am 5’9”, with a 30” pants inseam. . Before purchasing the bike, I sent my bikefitting measurements to Open in Switzerland. They confirmed what my bike shop recommended, that I was a medium.

Apparently we were cast in the same mold. Those measurements describe me perfectly. Thank you @Andrew_Glickman. That is very helpful.