Custom is more than we want to spend. Especially considering how long (not long) bikes last in Moab.
Banshee is a good idea except there is no dealer here and I was an owner of one of those V1 rune owners that had problems with their pivots. I know the prime is different, but my experience with that company leaves me wanting to give them a big FU. I'll admit it is a sweet bike. If anything, maybe too much bike for her. I'll admit, it's a nice ride!
I'm 5'6" and own a Tracer 29, I recently tested a Tracer 275 and that bike seems so much quicker, even with 1/2 inch more travel and 3 degrees slacker head angle. It would fit better.
Originally Posted by TwoTone
Have you considered a 650B?
Also look at an Intense Spider 29 Comp.
Carbon Fiber, 5 inches travel and small has a TT of 22.5
I have a 75mm Specialized Black. Don't need more than that. I hold my own with guys with battle armor and full DH bike. I'm not the fastest but also this is not a DH bike after all.
So all mountain it is. How much do you really need to lower your seat. Most of the time, I lower mine about 30mm if I have to.
I have a 75mm Specialized Black. Don't need more than that. I hold my own with guys with battle armor and full DH bike. I'm not the fastest but also this is not a DH bike after all.
So all mountain it is. How much do you really need to lower your seat. Most of the time, I lower mine about 30mm if I have to.
S
A specialized black? huh? How much do we lower our saddle in Moab? A lot and often. I have a 125mm KS post. I'm planning on getting the 150mm sometime soon. If I had to choose between disc brakes and a dropper post, I'd choose disc brakes but it would be close
Specialized command post Blacklite. Ridden tons in Moab, including UPS, LPS and Porcupine as a loop from town as well as the Portal trail. Took a group for the Kokopelli from Fruita to Moab. Did become handy on Rose Garden Hill.
75mm is plenty for me. All I am saying, is don't write yourself out of a great bike before you look at ALL the variables.
She's fairly short-legged, and a KS 75mm post is slammed (all the way into the frame) to give her *just* the right amount of post extension. Whether your SO can get a 4" or 5" drop post to work on this frame depends a lot on her leg length and a little on which saddle she prefers.
Pretty sure hers is the first S Mammoth in existence. But I saw a few more in stock at my local (GJ, CO) LBS last week. Which means if you were in the neighborhood (Sam's run?) you could swing a leg over and kick the tires at least.
My SO is coming off of a 3" travel bike, and hasn't completely embraced the concept of the on-the-fly changes in geo that happen when you double the travel and start riding more aggressively.
But riding in your backyard is helping that process along quickly.
I only have the one bike/frame here to measure, but I'm happy to answer questions if this one makes your 'must look deeper' list.
Specialized command post Blacklite. Ridden tons in Moab, including UPS, LPS and Porcupine as a loop from town as well as the Portal trail. Took a group for the Kokopelli from Fruita to Moab. Did become handy on Rose Garden Hill.
75mm is plenty for me. All I am saying, is don't write yourself out of a great bike before you look at ALL the variables.
Good luck!
I'm still confused. I'm looking for a bike, not a dropper post
@mikesee thanks for heads up on the lenz. Have to take a closer look.
Why not? Where talking about reach here. Too long and you're stretched out. which sucks for an all mountainy type stuff.
My thought as well. Reach is a far more valuable metric than FC...imho.
***To clarify, I am agreeing that the "ETT" measurement is irrelevant for a bike with offset/bent ST. I also feel the "reach" measurement (reach/stack), is a better gauge for bike fit than “ETT” or “Front Center”.***
I'd have to agree with JNC and the others who go by Reach. Although this is fairly new to me, it has worked out quite well in moving from the Paradox to the Prime. Reach on the Paradox was 446mm and on the Prime 472mm for the XL frames and I've settled on a 70mm stem for the Prime over 90mm for the Paradox, although I tried a 60mm, but felt it a tad too short - this goes to my thoughts that maybe a 65mm would be just perfect and would put the 2 frames within 1mm total reach.
Jwind, I know some got left with a bad taste over the bushing issue, but don't let that dissuade you from looking at the Prime, it's a great bike - the ETT for the M is 22.8", reach 411mm, ST 17.5", which falls within your parameters. As to it being too much bike for your wife, not a chance, not if Moab and that sort of riding is your thing. If I remember it right, didn't you move her from an older bike to a nicer FS a couple years ago and it really boosted her confidence and riding? If that's you, then most assuredly the Prime would do that again - it most certainly did that for me.
Fixed that for you, travel is 130mm not 140mm, but most run a 140mm fork on them as that's what they're designed around, well actual 546mm A2C.
Originally Posted by dubdryver
Also, the Banshee Prime (130mm travel) medium has a 22.8" TT. This coupled with a short stem, zero post, and some bars that have a decent sweep may be the ticket. Banshee Prime: All Mountain
Last edited by LyNx; 11-27-2012 at 05:47 AM.
One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching?? MTB Barbados My MTB vids
I read that as Walt arguing against using ETT for fit, because that's the measurement that Jwind started the thread with. When Jwind responded with "we're talking about reach here" I wasn't sure whether he meant "reach" specifically as the reach/stack bike measurement, or just as a degree of how stretched out the cockpit fit is, since I don't think reach measurements have been mentioned yet in this thread - apologies if I'm wrong about that.
I haven't spent much time wrapping my head around front center, although I understand it's the shortest distance between the BB and the front hub. That makes it fork dependent, obviously. Like JNC and LyNx, (and Walt) I agree that ETT isn't that useful for predicting how a bike in this class will fit. Reach is the first number I look at now.
"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."
- Dr. Peter Venkman
I haven't spent much time wrapping my head around front center, although I understand it's the shortest distance between the BB and the front hub. That makes it fork dependent, obviously. Like JNC and LyNx, (and Walt) I agree that ETT isn't that useful for predicting how a bike in this class will fit. Reach is the first number I look at now.
Front center is most useful when comparing between two of the same type of bikes. It varies wildly, however with different front ends.
I had a short travel hardtail, mid travel FS bike, and rigid all set up with nearly identical reach: when measuring front center it varied by three to four inches. The FS bike had by far the shortest ETT, but the longest reach and by far the longest FC.
Long story short: use reach to get your cockpit sizing. After that, compare the geometry on similar class bikes with close to the same reach to pick the one you prefer. By similar, I mean same configuration and travel, otherwise the comparison is pretty worthless.
Originally Posted by buddhak
And I thought I had a bike obsession. You are at once tragic and awesome.
The distance from center of seatpost to center of headtube. Call it whatever you want. I'm no bike builder, but that's the measurement the ride is responsible for spanning with their body. And yes, I know, from there the stem length will add distance, but that's flexible. The former is not.
The distance from center of seatpost to center of headtube. Call it whatever you want. I'm no bike builder, but that's the measurement the ride is responsible for spanning with their body. And yes, I know, from there the stem length will add distance, but that's flexible. The former is not.
Only when seated. Reach is the distance (horizontal, center of BB to center of HT) you span when standing. Both are important, but at different times.
Originally Posted by buddhak
And I thought I had a bike obsession. You are at once tragic and awesome.
The distance from center of seatpost to center of headtube. Call it whatever you want. I'm no bike builder, but that's the measurement the ride is responsible for spanning with their body. And yes, I know, from there the stem length will add distance, but that's flexible. The former is not.
That's the ETT. But it's dependent on the seat tube angle, and what a number of us are getting at is that reach is a better measurement to consider with modern frame design. My hardtail has an ETT 0.5" longer than my FS bike, but the FS bike has a longer feeling cockpit; the reach is longer. In that case, the ETT doesn't do a very good job of predicting how the bike fits me.
This illustration is pretty good for showing the difference between reach and ETT.
"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."
- Dr. Peter Venkman
Actually Jwind, that measurement is not a good one to use if moving from one frame intended for say XC to another more Trail/AM oriented as the angles will change and that doesn't take that into account. If on say her current bike the STA was 74* and then she's looking at a bike with a 72* STA, going by ETT she would end up with a smaller cockpit because she would have to run her saddle further forward on the rails to end up in the same position relative to the BB as on her previous bike and therfor would have to run a longer stem and/or wider bar.
- ETT is just a horizontal measurement, it does not take into consideration where your saddle is relative to the BB and that is something that should be permanent as you don't want to be changing how far behind the BB you sit to make the bike fit, that's what stem length changes are for.
Originally Posted by Jwind
The distance from center of seatpost to center of headtube. Call it whatever you want. I'm no bike builder, but that's the measurement the ride is responsible for spanning with their body. And yes, I know, from there the stem length will add distance, but that's flexible. The former is not.
Last edited by LyNx; 11-27-2012 at 10:10 AM.
One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching?? MTB Barbados My MTB vids
Im 5'10 and trying to decide between a M or L TB LTc. Shop is pushing a M with a slightly longer stem and a saddle adjust. I rode a friends M on a 5 mile trail and it felt a bit cramped when climbing. Though this was without any adjustments. Also, I use flat pedals and couldn't shake the feeling that my feet would contact the front wheel on aggressive turns. Not sure if the latter would change much with a 1" size increase. I am also new to 29s so this could be the norm and something that goes away with more time on the bike.
Im 5'10 and trying to decide between a M or L TB LTc. Shop is pushing a M with a slightly longer stem and a saddle adjust. I rode a friends M on a 5 mile trail and it felt a bit cramped when climbing. Though this was without any adjustments. Also, I use flat pedals and couldn't shake the feeling that my feet would contact the front wheel on aggressive turns. Not sure if the latter would change much with a 1" size increase. I am also new to 29s so this could be the norm and something that goes away with more time on the bike.
Thanks in advance for the input
I'm 5'10" and ride a M TB. Kind of right on the cusp of the M and L. In the end I went with the M with a 100mm stem. Just felt better to me. FWIW that is what the shop owner was pushing as well. He is 5'10" and he said thats what he would ride. I know the TB Lt is slightly different geometry but its a little bit larger so I would say the same pretty much applies. I also ride flats, you think the tire is close but I have never had an issue. I'd have to have my feet near the heels to actually hit.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by eurospek
Originally Posted by buddhak
