Page 11 of 38 FirstFirst ... 78910111213141521 ... LastLast
Results 501 to 550 of 1859
  1. #501
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    69
    Build up on friday, today was first ride about 3 1/2 hours ... so far it seems very good, climbed better then expected. still need fine tuning the fork and damper and my position on the bike.

    weight: as seen on picture little bit over 14kg. But final weight will be around 14,4-14,7 with other pedals, db air und maybe a dropper post.

    few things will be changed in the near future: db air instead of fox ctd when its finally ready for shipping, other stem, other seat and other pedals.

    Production Prime Photo/Build thread-img_0102.jpg

    edit: 1 thing already annoys me. the x-12 drop outs dont have the "guides" that you can put the wheel easier in (already discussed in other thread). at least for me it is really hard to put the wheel back in and i have to dissamable the wheel every time that the bike fits in the car.
    not very nice :/
    Last edited by pinkey; 03-10-2013 at 04:16 PM.

  2. #502
    G_g
    G_g is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    143
    Took the Prime for an Enduro competition this weekend. It worked pretty well, but it needs a fox ctd spacer kit, that thing blows through the travel pretty fast when setup with 25% sag.

    Overall, the 29er experience keeps impressing me, this frame in particular. Changed to a 40mm stem, and would like to get a smaller stack height seatpost, the KS i950 doesn't quite let me lower that seat enough (keep in mind I like the saddle super low on the DH parts. Yes, our enduro went through a dh track, with the big jumps being cut out. KS Lev would fix that)

    The stock Fox CTD is what version? XV1, XV2, LV? See this: Changing 2013 FLOAT CTD Air Spring Compression Ratios

    Whatever it is, I know I want a spacer kit to make it more progressive, but it worked brilliant even considering it blew through the travel. Even then, on climb mode it was pedal feedback free
    Keith Scott: If you want to go mountain biking, then throw a leg over a new Banshee and the bike will do the talking

  3. #503
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,048
    Banshee are in the process of setting up dealers in Australia and NZ to be competative with the big brands who all go direct. So please contact dennis@bansheebikes.com if you are looking to source a Banshee in either Australia or NZ.
    Banshee Bikes Designer
    www.bansheebikes.com
    Banshee Blog

  4. #504
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    167
    Hi you guys..

    What would you choose, between a White Brothers fluid 150mm or a Fox 34, for your Prime?

  5. #505
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,929
    I've never used a White Brothers fork, but the Fox 34 isn't the end all 29er fork in my opinion. I like my RS Revelation as much if not more, especially like the 20mm axle. I'm really hoping that we'll see a 29er Lyrik debuted at Sea Otter next month.
    Last edited by Colin+M; 03-11-2013 at 03:31 PM.

  6. #506
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    58
    what about a 140mm manitou, for those of us on a budget?

  7. #507
    mtbr member
    Reputation: eurospek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,460
    Quote Originally Posted by Colin+M View Post
    I've never used a White Brothers fork, but the Fox 34 isn't the end all 29er fork in my opinion. I like my RS Revelation as much if not more, especially like the 20mm axle. I'm really hoping that we'll see a 29er Lyrik debuted at Sea Otter next month.
    I've had both on my Honzo and in all honesty, I've noticed more difference going from the 32mm stanchions to 34mm vs 15QR to the 20mm Maxle.
    konahonzo

  8. #508
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,929
    Quote Originally Posted by eurospek View Post
    I've had both on my Honzo and in all honesty, I've noticed more difference going from the 32mm stanchions to 34mm vs 15QR to the 20mm Maxle.
    I currently have both, fox is stiffer but I prefer the revelation damper. Bring on the lyrik!

  9. #509
    mtbr member
    Reputation: eurospek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,460
    Quote Originally Posted by Colin+M View Post
    I currently have both, fox is stiffer but I prefer the revelation damper. Bring on the lyrik!
    If SRAM won't do anything stupid, like 15QR only, or market to the 3% rides like the new Vivid.
    konahonzo

  10. #510
    live long and huck
    Reputation: Optimus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,568
    Any of you guys still deciding on wheels, take a look at the e*thirteen LG1+ hubs. I've got some pretty hard and chunky rides on mine, and they make for a much stiffer wheel than your typical small flange hubs. I also ride DT Swiss 240s hubs, and I like the LG1+'s much better. I built them with WTB i23's, but I've got a pair of MTX33's coming tomorrow with some straight gauge spokes, going to be even stiffer yet.

  11. #511
    live long and huck
    Reputation: Optimus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,568
    They've been out for a while, but you're right, very nice tire. Watch for the new Maxxis 29er offerings for gnarlier terrain. That's why I'm rebuilding with wider rims, I'm planning to mount up some 2.5's.

  12. #512
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jncarpenter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,804
    Quote Originally Posted by Optimus View Post
    ...I've got a pair of MTX33's coming tomorrow...
    Where'd you find them?
    Last edited by jncarpenter; 03-11-2013 at 08:06 PM.


  13. #513
    live long and huck
    Reputation: Optimus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,568
    Quote Originally Posted by jncarpenter View Post
    Where'd you find them?
    Universal Cycle, looks like they're out of stock right now, I ordered just in time. They do list 36 hole in stock. When I built my wheels, I considered a 36 spoke rear, but my hubs were available in 32 only.

  14. #514
    beater
    Reputation: evasive's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    4,724
    They are a stout rim. I've been pleased with mine. They certainly aren't the lightest rim around, but if you're looking at them, you have other priorities. I have heard they're a handful for a tubeless setup, even ghetto, so I've never tried. I don't have many thorns up here, though.
    "Back off, man. I'm a scientist." - Dr. Peter Venkman

    Riding in Helena? Everything you need to know, right here.

  15. #515
    live long and huck
    Reputation: Optimus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,568
    I'll let you know on the difficulty of tubeless, but I haven't seen any reviews in that area that really concerned me. My tubeless method is 2 wraps with quality electrical tape, 1 wrap with Stan's yellow tape, and Stan's. I've have wheels that I've set up this way going on 3 years now with absolutely no issues. The trick I feel is to get everything extremely clean, and then take your time and keep the air bubbles worked out from under the tape while you're wrapping.

  16. #516
    Powered by ice cream.
    Reputation: Enel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,305

    Prime Mini-Pro Review

    Prime Mini-Pro Review

    I like the Prime mostly. The Prime is frankly amazing blasting devil-may-care through some horrendous chunk. Stable, planted, bangity, bang, bang and it's done. The faster the better. I love the suspension downhill, and don't notice it at all braking. I feel like the thing has given me an extra gonad launching off my mini stuff.

    I have found a couple things that irritate me that I can not put my finger on exactly:

    1. This thing feels like a beast to pedal uphill. Pedaling efficiency from a mini-link? I am just not feeling it. It feels dead and like it sucks the life out of me with every pedal stroke. Worse or equal to a 6" Lunchbox. The thing is just a total pig and I find myself hating it for this at times. That feeling may get worse as the higher more steady climby trails open up around here. This climbing issue may just be life with a 34+ish pound bike. I have never liked them that heavy although the Stumpjumper was 32, so not a big difference. As a steady state climber, I find it to feel worse than the Stumpjumper, worse than a Behemoth (5") about equal to a Lunchbox (which has an inch more travel).

    2. The rear of the Prime does something weird when I put the power on in the low gears. Whatever that thing is (Stiffening? Falling deeper into the travel? Extending out of travel? I don't know.), it causes an instant and unexpected loss of traction in loose over hard stuff. I notice it when I transition from a seated to standing position up a steep, short rise in lower gears. Of course any bike will struggle for traction in this sort of situation with small gears and standing rider, but I have done these moves many times with the my single pivots and the FSR. All my other bikes did not do this...whatever "this" is. Mostly it is the unexpectedness of the loss of traction that gets on my nerves. It is very abrupt when I hit the power transitioning from a seated spin to standing high power uphill sprint. I have a pretty decent sense of standing traction from a bunch of single speed riding, and this bike catches me off guard a lot.

    That being said, I have also cleared some pretty amazing tech climbs I did not think I could possibly make on the bike. Don't know if that is fitness, new bike stoke, luck or what. All in all, I would say the more tech the climb, the better it likes it so long as the surface is not low traction. As a tech climber except for that one aspect, I would put it equal to the Stumpy, or Behemoth. All of them are pretty good.

    It will be interesting to put this thing through the paces more on steeper, higher, lower traction trails and see if I notice the same. I guess my issue is that I don't feel like the bike is helping me find traction in a traction challenged situation and the wheel slips. My other bikes have given me traction at the expense perhaps of some pedaling efficiency. I was okay with that. I am still coming to terms with whether I am okay with the compromises the Prime makes in this area.
    Quote Originally Posted by buddhak
    And I thought I had a bike obsession. You are at once tragic and awesome.

  17. #517
    live long and huck
    Reputation: Optimus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,568
    Nice review, Enel. I agree completely on all points, except the loose over hard sitting/standing traction thing. I'm riding in similar terrain as you are, and have not noticed it, maybe I'm just not that in tune with how my bike feels. I whole heartedly agree with cleaning tech climbs that I never have before. As far as sustained uphills, mine is over 35 lbs, it doesn't feel excessively heavy, but I can definitely feel it. I consider it the price to pay for the "devil-may-care" downhill ability. This bike, IMO, is scary capable of hauling ass through chunk that you definitely don't want to fall down in. Hopefully this spring I can get up your way, I've been wanting to ride up there for a few years now, I hiked around in the Dells one time, looks like a blast to ride.

  18. #518
    FM
    FM is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: FM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    9,286
    Quote Originally Posted by Enel View Post
    Prime Mini-Pro Review
    Hey Enel-
    I would be very interested to hear your thoughts after trying a different rear shock. Specifically something with a lot less volume. From the sounds of your post I wouldn't be surprised if the two issues were related, both sound to me like symptoms of a rear shock that goes through rear travel too easily under power. Adding LSC is not the ideal solution if the air spring is too linear.

    You have a production bike and I have a proto, but I can say for my proto... I tried several rear shocks and they were all different flavors of Meh...until I picked up a cheap used rp23 and sent it off to PUSH along with the leverage curve chart. Interesting conversation with them, they reccomended a small volume can with very light compression damping and good bottom out control. With this shock my prime is very active but only goes deep into the travel on bigger hits. I can honestly say it climbs great with this shock (except for the frame weight.. which was offset nicely with some stiff carbon wheels).

    Maybe a different can or some shims on your CCDBA?

  19. #519
    live long and huck
    Reputation: Optimus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,568
    Cane Creek is recommending MORE volume for the Prime. I've settled in with my LSC @ 85%, LSR is up there a bit, HSC is down around 15%, HSR around 50%. Nice and squishy in the ruff stuff, decently firm yet responsive in the slower stuff. I'm pretty much out at the extremes of the adjustments for compression, CC claims the HV can will get this into the middle part of the scale.

  20. #520
    FM
    FM is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: FM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    9,286
    Of course Cane Creek's HV could ride like Fox's LV, and also the production bike might ride nothing like the proto.

    But- anytime I feel like the bike is climbing sluggishly, despite plenty/excessive spring pressure and LSC, that says to me "too linear", which is usually too big of an air can. Too linear / not enough LSC could also explain loss of traction (blowing through travel while climbing).

    Interesting that Cane creek's recommendations are so much different than the proto feedback. Small can, light tune was definitely the recommendation from both PUSH and Banshee for my prime proto.

  21. #521
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,048
    What sag are you running at the shock in mm?
    Banshee Bikes Designer
    www.bansheebikes.com
    Banshee Blog

  22. #522
    Powered by ice cream.
    Reputation: Enel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,305

    Production Prime Photo/Build thread

    Quote Originally Posted by FM View Post
    Hey Enel-
    I would be very interested to hear your thoughts after trying a different rear shock. Specifically something with a lot less volume. From the sounds of your post I wouldn't be surprised if the two issues were related, both sound to me like symptoms of a rear shock that goes through rear travel too easily under power. Adding LSC is not the ideal solution if the air spring is too linear.

    You have a production bike and I have a proto, but I can say for my proto... I tried several rear shocks and they were all different flavors of Meh...until I picked up a cheap used rp23 and sent it off to PUSH along with the leverage curve chart. Interesting conversation with them, they reccomended a small volume can with very light compression damping and good bottom out control. With this shock my prime is very active but only goes deep into the travel on bigger hits. I can honestly say it climbs great with this shock (except for the frame weight.. which was offset nicely with some stiff carbon wheels).

    Maybe a different can or some shims on your CCDBA?
    FM. You make a lot of sense. Agree with your assessment and treatment. I will try the big old shim that came with the CCDBa and report back.

    I thought the while idea of mini link bikes was that one did not have to mess around with shocks so much? Set up the LSC light so it is supple on the little stuff and let the linkage worry about climbing.
    Quote Originally Posted by buddhak
    And I thought I had a bike obsession. You are at once tragic and awesome.

  23. #523
    Powered by ice cream.
    Reputation: Enel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,305

    Production Prime Photo/Build thread

    Quote Originally Posted by builttoride View Post
    What sag are you running at the shock in mm?
    I don't remember in mm, but it was 25% exactly. 13-14 mm if memory serves.
    Quote Originally Posted by buddhak
    And I thought I had a bike obsession. You are at once tragic and awesome.

  24. #524
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jncarpenter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,804
    I'm a bit perplexed by the high volume air can suggestion as well. There is little mechanical advantage to the linkage design, given it is a falling rate. With the stock Fox CTD at proper sag, I can easily bottom the shock by simply compressing the suspension with my legs just coasting along. I have been waffling back and forth regarding what shock to replace it with, but I think it will be hard to find a readily available solution, apart from a custom tune.


  25. #525
    Powered by ice cream.
    Reputation: Enel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,305

    Production Prime Photo/Build thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Optimus View Post
    Cane Creek is recommending MORE volume for the Prime. I've settled in with my LSC @ 85%, LSR is up there a bit, HSC is down around 15%, HSR around 50%. Nice and squishy in the ruff stuff, decently firm yet responsive in the slower stuff. I'm pretty much out at the extremes of the adjustments for compression, CC claims the HV can will get this into the middle part of the scale.
    More air does not make sense to me. If anything, the current set up is too linear.
    Quote Originally Posted by buddhak
    And I thought I had a bike obsession. You are at once tragic and awesome.

  26. #526
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jncarpenter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,804
    E, regarding your climbing/traction observations...do you notice a difference depending on which ring up front?


  27. #527
    Powered by ice cream.
    Reputation: Enel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,305

    Production Prime Photo/Build thread

    Quote Originally Posted by jncarpenter View Post
    E, regarding your climbing/traction observations...do you notice a difference depending on which ring up front?
    The issue I notice is primarily small ring. I sort of live in it though.

    I think the Prime is happier in the middle. I also can't put as much torque into the wheel in the middle so I have not noticed it. Any long climbs are usually steep enough I want to be in the small.

    So definitely small, and I have not tested the middle enough to know.
    Quote Originally Posted by buddhak
    And I thought I had a bike obsession. You are at once tragic and awesome.

  28. #528
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jncarpenter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,804
    Sounds like it may be a combination of what FM suggests, that is being compounded by the additional anti-squat/ kickback of the smaller ring. The KS Link has alot less of that feeling than the DW Link, but it is still there. Also one of the reasons Keith doesn't recommend the Hammerschmidt for the KS Link...I think his ideal ring size was recommended as a 28-30T; IIRC.


  29. #529
    FM
    FM is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: FM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    9,286
    I hadn't really considered chainring size... mine is a 1x9 with a 30t front ring, 12/36r. I think Keith mentioned the Prime was optimized for a 30t front ring.

    Enel, you're a candidate for ghetto XX1!!! These ebay cogs will pedal better than a small front ring and could give you the same range... working great for me. That and some suspension tuning and I bet you'll be much happier with the climbing performance.

  30. #530
    G_g
    G_g is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    143
    I have added a 10 cm^3 of suspension oil to my Fox CTD. That is the size of the middle spacer from Fox. It should fix the way too linear feeling it had.
    Keith Scott: If you want to go mountain biking, then throw a leg over a new Banshee and the bike will do the talking

  31. #531
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Brisco Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    277
    Quote Originally Posted by Enel View Post
    Prime Mini-Pro Review
    Nice write up. I went from a Turner Sultan (about 29.5lbs) to The Prime (31lbs) because I wanted something that kills it on the downhills. The Prime definitely delivers. The suspension really comes alive on the downs. And with the awesome downs, come the not-so-awesome climbs. I actually had my first few rides on the Prime at the 24 hours at the Old Pueblo race. It was probably one of the worst testing grounds for a bike like this. Pretty much no technical downhills, no technical climbs, but all the long steady climbs you could want (depending upon the number of laps you do). That being said, it only climbed slightly worse than my Sultan.

    As for the issue you are having with the loss of traction, I havenít experience it. The Prime seems to grip pretty well on all the rides I have had. As other have suggested, maybe it is your shock. I ordered mine with a RockShox Monarch Plus RC3 so I wonít be much help on the Fox low volume/high volume debate.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Production Prime Photo/Build thread-prime1.jpg  


  32. #532
    live long and huck
    Reputation: Optimus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,568
    Brisco, how'd you do at Old Pueblo?

  33. #533
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Brisco Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    277
    Quote Originally Posted by Optimus View Post
    Brisco, how'd you do at Old Pueblo?
    Well I would have won if it weren't for the other 1600+ riders. On the bright side, I didn't crash into a cactus, suffer any real malfunctions, or go OTB on the rock drop. Since it was my first time there, I wasn't expecting much. I'm probably one of the few riders that elected to do the bypass. It was actually much more fun than the b*tches.

  34. #534
    live long and huck
    Reputation: Optimus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,568
    I semi-seriously considered entering it last year, single speed, but freezing my berries for 24 hours and riding myself into the ground ended up just not sounding that fun. Kudos to you for having the motivation to race it.

  35. #535
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Brisco Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    277
    Oh, I don't deserve any praise. I was on a team of 5 people and only 1 person completed more than 2 laps. I actually choose to sleep for 3.5 hours while it was my turn to race. The weather for the race was actually really nice compared to other years.

  36. #536
    live long and huck
    Reputation: Optimus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,568
    Quote Originally Posted by Brisco Dog View Post
    Oh, I don't deserve any praise.
    Sure you do. How many people never even attempted it?

    But, riding your Prime, why in the world did you take the bypass? That's kinda like never going over 55 mph in your Ferrari.

  37. #537
    beater
    Reputation: evasive's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    4,724
    Quote Originally Posted by Brisco Dog View Post
    Well I would have won if it weren't for the other 1600+ riders.
    Awesome!
    "Back off, man. I'm a scientist." - Dr. Peter Venkman

    Riding in Helena? Everything you need to know, right here.

  38. #538
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,169

    Prime suspension characterisitc graphs

    Maybe some answers can be had from these charts and graphs of the Primes suspension characteristics. Very efficient pedlar for sure but the swoop up at the end of the leverage ratio curve would indicate it might be better with a lower volume can or shim.

    Google Translate
    Last edited by skidad; 03-14-2013 at 10:50 PM.
    2013 Banshee Spitfire V2 650b

  39. #539
    Powered by ice cream.
    Reputation: Enel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,305

    Production Prime Photo/Build thread

    Quote Originally Posted by FM View Post
    I hadn't really considered chainring size... mine is a 1x9 with a 30t front ring, 12/36r. I think Keith mentioned the Prime was optimized for a 30t front ring.

    Enel, you're a candidate for ghetto XX1!!! These ebay cogs will pedal better than a small front ring and could give you the same range... working great for me. That and some suspension tuning and I bet you'll be much happier with the climbing performance.
    I would love to go single, but I actually prefer my 20x36 combo for the high days. Let me know when there is a 43 for the rear

    I think part of my Lenz love came fro the fact they are so active in the small ring. They squat a bit, but tons of traction and no pedal feedback

    I forgot to mention that I have felt zero pedal kickback on the Prime. Very nice.

    In tossing around Keith's question: when I notice the loss of traction it mainly occurs during steep ups where I just can't sit and push the gear anymore. It is very possible I am more sagged into the shock than usual due to the upward angle.

    The Prime climbs tech very well indeed if I can stay seated.

    Off to shim the CCDB
    Quote Originally Posted by buddhak
    And I thought I had a bike obsession. You are at once tragic and awesome.

  40. #540
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Colin+M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,929
    I shimmed mine already, it definitely makes it more progressive... to the point where I wasn't getting all the travel out of the shock. YMMV but I prefer it un-shimmed and have a XV can coming from Cane Creek to see how that performs. Of course I don't have anything similar to the terrain you do out there and I am running 1x10 with a 28T chainring.

    So in short, shim away It's terribly easy to do.

  41. #541
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    5
    Dears,
    I'm going to buy a Banshee Prime 29 in next days and I need urgently a support from you (Keith??)
    I am 5' 11" tall, with 2' 9.3" inseam. Could you kindly tell me which is the correct size for Prime for me? I saw some relationship between height and frame, but they were related to the pre-production frame.
    thanks in advance! Bye
    Cate

  42. #542
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,048
    I would suggest that a medium Prime with a long seatpost post would probably be the best option for you. You may need the long seatpost to get correct saddle height, but you will benefit from the shorter top tube given your length of back.
    Banshee Bikes Designer
    www.bansheebikes.com
    Banshee Blog

  43. #543
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    5
    perfect, thansk for the soon reply bye
    Quote Originally Posted by builttoride View Post
    I would suggest that a medium Prime with a long seatpost post would probably be the best option for you. You may need the long seatpost to get correct saddle height, but you will benefit from the shorter top tube given your length of back.

  44. #544
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    5
    But, keith can you please clarify one point. I'll use the bike maily on level or climbing, so mainly pedalling. So I'd expect that considering that the top tube difference between L (610) and M (580) is 30 mm and considering an "higher" seat position (483 vs 445), I will have a more extended position which will facilitate me in pedalling. So I'd expect that the L is more suitable for me. Moreover I'm not a pro, so some grams more (L size) are not a problem. Based on such conditions, do you think that L can be also suitable, or M is still the best? If M is still the best, can you explain why?
    Thanks
    cate

    Quote Originally Posted by builttoride View Post
    I would suggest that a medium Prime with a long seatpost post would probably be the best option for you. You may need the long seatpost to get correct saddle height, but you will benefit from the shorter top tube given your length of back.

  45. #545
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    20,353
    Cater, I think Keith's suggestion was based on assuming you'd be using this bike more towards it's intended purpose and hence wanted a more nimble bike that getting the Medium would give. I'm like you, do a lot of flat roads and connectors and climbing and don't get much air time, and I went with an XL. I'm 6'2.25", 35.25" inseam and very long arms, run a 70/6 stem with 785mm wide bar. I think for your intended purpose a Large might suit you better, but as he said, a Medium could most likely work fine as well, just depends on the intended purpose and the person physical make up - I recon myself like an orangutan with those super long arms, so I fit an XL, even at only 6'2", but do sometimes wish I had a shorter WB and bike for the tighter spots.

    Quote Originally Posted by caterpoller View Post
    But, keith can you please clarify one point. I'll use the bike maily on level or climbing, so mainly pedalling. So I'd expect that considering that the top tube difference between L (610) and M (580) is 30 mm and considering an "higher" seat position (483 vs 445), I will have a more extended position which will facilitate me in pedalling. So I'd expect that the L is more suitable for me. Moreover I'm not a pro, so some grams more (L size) are not a problem. Based on such conditions, do you think that L can be also suitable, or M is still the best? If M is still the best, can you explain why?
    Thanks
    cate
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??
    MTB Barbados
    My Phantom pics

  46. #546
    FM
    FM is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: FM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    9,286
    Not to interfere, but in my experience it's a myth that larger frame will climb or pedal better than a smaller frame with a longer stem & seat post.

    Caterpoller- lets say you went large, used a 50mm stem, no spacers underneath.
    Or you could do a medium, 75mm stem, spacers underneath if you like, and a longer seatpost...

    Both set-ups would put your hands, feet & bum in the same place.
    • The medium will be better standover clearance.
    • The medium frame will corner easier (both up & down) with it's shorter wheelbase. It will also give you the ability to run your bars lower, something which generally benefits climbing.


    It would be good to know your seat height (center of bb to top of saddle)... based on that your seatpost length could be determined.

  47. #547
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    20,353
    Based on his stating his inseam is 33.3", that's 2" off mine, so with the Large frame he'd need the same amount of post out the frame as me. Now on my XL, with my saddle to optimum pedaling height I maxed out the stock 350mm post and had to switch to a 410mm post, actually had to have the post out past the max mark for the 350mm that comes with the frame. Now he could as you and Keith say go for the Medium over Large frame, but then the post would need to be another 1.5"/38mm out of the frame, which should still be well within a 410mm posts range, however, if he happens to have really long arms like myself he might need a longer stem than the 75mm you suggest. Now, not saying the Medium wouldn't work, nor that a 75-90mm stem would be too long, but for me, since I moved to a 70mm post and much wider bar on the Prime, I'm not going back to anything over 80mm for a frame like this.

    Either way, FM and Keith are giving good advice, you'd definitely have a more nimble bike, but if you're accustomed to a more XC setup you might want an even more stretched out cockpit which could be hard to achieve with the Medium frame - I'd love to try a Large with 85mm stem and my 785mm wide bar to see what the 1.5" shorter WB handles like on both the tight and open high speed.


    Quote Originally Posted by FM View Post
    It would be good to know your seat height (center of bb to top of saddle)... based on that your seatpost length could be determined.
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??
    MTB Barbados
    My Phantom pics

  48. #548
    FM
    FM is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: FM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    9,286
    I am just always skeptical about inseam since there are so many variables.... measured with or without shoes, pants inseam or leg length, flats or clipless pedals, shoe thickness, chamois or not.... Two people with the same inseam rarely have the same saddle height...

  49. #549
    live long and huck
    Reputation: Optimus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    5,568
    I will chime in, not with an opinion, but with my results. 6'0" tall, 32" inseam, 30 1/2" BB to saddle top, 10 3/8" from seat tube top to saddle rails. As you regulars know, I debated fairly heavily between a large and a medium. I've been riding the crap out of my medium and have absolutely no second thoughts about choosing that size.

  50. #550
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,048
    My recommendation for medium was based on the info you gave me, however every rider has different preferances, and my suggestion was just a recommendation based on what you told me (you seem to have long legs and shorter back)... however you may well have long monkey arms like I do, in which case a large with short stem could work for you too... The choice is yours to make based on your personal preferances and riding style and what you want from the bike.
    Banshee Bikes Designer
    www.bansheebikes.com
    Banshee Blog

Page 11 of 38 FirstFirst ... 78910111213141521 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •