Banshee V3 sizing questions- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 29 of 29
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    83

    Banshee V3 sizing questions

    I am looking at the new Banshee frames online. I think they look awesome, and I am trying to learn more. I'm looking for a replacement for my large Turner Burner 27.5 that I broke this summer.

    I'm 5'-10". Almost every other bike maker recommends a large for me, with a typical reach of 460 - 470mm. According to Banshee I fit squarely in the medium range, but the medium's reach is only 445mm. That seems short. The large Banshee frames have a reach of 470mm, which seems perfect, but on the website larges are recommend for riders 6ft and taller....

    So basically I fit a large Banshee frame perfect from a reach standpoint but the website says I should ride medium. I'm scratching my head on this one. Should I choose a medium like the website recommends, or go with a large based on my experience?

    Do these new Banshee frames have an "on top of the bike feeling" or "in the bike feeling? With my Turner, I had the "in the bike" feeling, and I like that type of fit. For any V3 owners, how would you describe the fit?

    Thanks for any advice here.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    657
    I'm in a similar situation at 185cm tall. Banshee recommends the large and I'm currently on an XL Hightower with a reach similar to the XL Banshee numbers. I wouldn't mind if the reach was even longer but according to the chart the XL bike is way too big.

    Would also appreciate input from Banshee riders/builder.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    5
    I am 187cm tall and tend to choose between a Rune V3 in XL or a Titan in L. So I'm really looking forward to more posts in this thread

  4. #4
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    6,741
    Same boat, except I've got skin in the game now.

    6'2 (188) and Banshee (including Keith) strongly recommended size L, where I normally ride XL in most other brands.

    So ... I ordered a large Titan. We'll see how it goes.
    Just like a raindrop, I was born to fall.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    59
    Quote Originally Posted by Blatant View Post
    Same boat, except I've got skin in the game now.

    6'2 (188) and Banshee (including Keith) strongly recommended size L, where I normally ride XL in most other brands.

    So ... I ordered a large Titan. We'll see how it goes.
    When does the frame/bike arrive?

  6. #6
    flailer
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    161
    I was riding an XL Rune V2 and now I am on a L Titan. Both are a perfect fit for me and I am 6'1" tall with a 33" inseam.
    '20 Banshee Titan 29er
    '16 Banshee Rune (sold)
    '91 Spec Allez Epic Carbon (wall art)

  7. #7
    Braaap
    Reputation: DirtMerchantBicycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    514
    Obviously there is personal preference and overlap on sizing. However, Banshee loosely advises Medium (5'7"-6'), Large (5'11-6'4").

    Your large Burner had a reach of 431mm which is useless when comparing to current geometries. I'd suggest hopping on some current bikes to get a feel for up-to-date geometries. You'll then be able to compare reach and stack numbers.
    Dirt Merchant Bicycles
    Providing unrivaled support and unbeatable pricing on all cycling goods to riders near and far.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    83
    Hey Dirt Merchant,
    Thanks for the reply. I tried calling you guys twice this afternoon, but only got an answering machine. I was calling you guys to ask you about this.

    It seems everyone is paying attention to reach, top tubes, angles and wheelbases these days. The confusion I have along with some others in this post is that Banshee's suggested sizing is one size smaller than what some of us are used for a given reach and top tube.

    I mentioned my Turner above, because I rode that for 6 years, but I'm actually riding a new 150mm/160mm travel 27.5 bike that has a reach of 460mm, and I am using a 50mm stem. I keep wishing it has 470mm of reach. I'm 5'-10," with a longer torso and wing span. My inclination based on the bike I am currently riding is that I would want to choose a large Banshee frame, though my height is squarely in the middle of the height range for a medium.

    I see that you guys have these Banshee frames available for purchase. I'm wondering if you have any of them built up? I was thinking I would stop by and hop on a couple of frame sizes. That's probably the only way to put this question to rest, or I can just take a guess and maybe get lucky. 50/50 odds!

    I'm interested in the Prime, Rune and possibly the Spitfire in probably that order. I'm considering succumbing to the wagon wheel craze. I have also wondered if choosing a 29r vs. 27.5 factors into a medium vs. large decision. For example, the same rider may be a large on a 27.5 but a medium on a 29. My guess is that used to be the case a few years ago, but now in most instances the same frame size makes sense for either wheel size, for a given individual.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jncarpenter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,958
    Quote Originally Posted by Wazzou View Post
    Hey Dirt Merchant,
    Thanks for the reply. I tried calling you guys twice this afternoon, but only got an answering machine. I was calling you guys to ask you about this.

    It seems everyone is paying attention to reach, top tubes, angles and wheelbases these days. The confusion I have along with some others in this post is that Banshee's suggested sizing is one size smaller than what some of us are used for a given reach and top tube.

    I mentioned my Turner above, because I rode that for 6 years, but I'm actually riding a new 150mm/160mm travel 27.5 bike that has a reach of 460mm, and I am using a 50mm stem. I keep wishing it has 470mm of reach. I'm 5'-10," with a longer torso and wing span. My inclination based on the bike I am currently riding is that I would want to choose a large Banshee frame, though my height is squarely in the middle of the height range for a medium.

    I see that you guys have these Banshee frames available for purchase. I'm wondering if you have any of them built up? I was thinking I would stop by and hop on a couple of frame sizes. That's probably the only way to put this question to rest, or I can just take a guess and maybe get lucky. 50/50 odds!

    I'm interested in the Prime, Rune and possibly the Spitfire in probably that order. I'm considering succumbing to the wagon wheel craze. I have also wondered if choosing a 29r vs. 27.5 factors into a medium vs. large decision. For example, the same rider may be a large on a 27.5 but a medium on a 29. My guess is that used to be the case a few years ago, but now in most instances the same frame size makes sense for either wheel size, for a given individual.
    One thing to consider as well is the seat tube length & dropper insertion limit. If you have a shorter inseam, you may not be able to run a longer dropper on a large frame.


  10. #10
    flailer
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    161
    @Wazzou, I am down in Parker and you are more than welcome to swing a leg over my L Titan and XL Rune V2.
    '20 Banshee Titan 29er
    '16 Banshee Rune (sold)
    '91 Spec Allez Epic Carbon (wall art)

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    83
    Rock-rod, how tall are you? I'm considering the Prime, so fit should be similar to the Titan. Also considering the Rune. I can't decide on sticking with 27.5 or 29".

    I live up in Glenwood Springs, but will be down in Denver next Wednesday. Do you think you will be around on that day?

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    287
    5'10" here. I've run reaches from 430-475 and have landed on 450ish as my preference, with a 50mm stem. This is both for my trail bike (Prime V3) and Enduro bike (Pivot Firebird). Longer bikes don't work as well in my riding zone, which is slower/techier. The longer reach bikes only feel good on really steep/fast stuff. Longer reach bikes also take more effort to hop around and you have to focus more on weighting the front tire.

    Banshee has a weird, but magical formula for their V3 Prime medium. The reach vs chainstay lengths are almost identical and with the lower bottom bracket and head angle, it rails corners. Literally no thought to weighting front or rear, just tip the bike over, keep your weight where it is and you get perfect cornering traction. Same with climbing, you can pretty much sit and hammer up any climb and get wonderful traction. It's also the first bike where I didn't need to slam the seat full forward. So for average sized people, I'd say 76-77 seat angles are about all we need. I'm guessing there is some ratio of chainstay to front-center that puts your mass exactly in the middle of the wheelbase when in attack position. Going to a large may disrupt that balance.

    It's a little harder to slash corners and it's a little boring at low speeds. I'm running a 150 Transfer dropper and there is no way I could use a longer post. Those are about my only complaints with my V3.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    425
    Keep in mind reach also varies with stack. On two bikes with the similar amounts of travel, you would probably want your bars about the same height. That means if one of those bikes has a lower stack height than the other, you'd have to run more stack spacers or bar rise to make up the difference. When you raise your bars, you're also shortening the effective reach.

    That's not to say you should always follow the manufacturers' recommendations, but you can't just look at any one number to choose a size. It's more complicated than that. Bike sizing is a combination of all the numbers.

    When I'm picking a bike size, I'm looking at reach, stack, chainstay length, head angle, and effective seat angle. I know about what bar height and reach I want based on my current bike and bikes I've demoed. I use the head angle, stack, and reach to figure out which size is closest to my preferred numbers. If the bike has longer chainstays, I might also go for a shorter reach to keep a little bit of playfulness, or if it has shorter chainstays, I might go for a longer reach for more stability. Last, I look at the effective seat angle to consider how long the bike will feel in a seated position mostly just to make sure it's not so long that I'll get back aches.

    You can also kind of adjust the head angle to your liking by sizing down and running a longer stem or sizing up and running a shorter stem, although keep in mind this will affect the steering feel too. I would prefer to just use an angleset if possible, so that's mostly just for bikes with integrated headsets.

    Looking at Banshee's numbers, I'm almost on the border between medium and small at 172cm. By my estimates, the medium 650b bikes look like they'd fit me like a glove with a 40mm stem. The 29ers have the same reach numbers but a lot more stack height and longer chainstays, so I'd probably want to size down to a small if they made one. You can see that the wheelbase is over 20mm longer on the 29ers. Seems to me like the 650b bikes run a little on the small side, and the 29ers run a little on the large side or perhaps just more true to size by modern standards. That being said, I haven't actually had a chance to ride one yet, so take this with a grain of salt.

  14. #14
    flailer
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    161
    Quote Originally Posted by Wazzou View Post
    Rock-rod, how tall are you? I'm considering the Prime, so fit should be similar to the Titan. Also considering the Rune. I can't decide on sticking with 27.5 or 29".

    I live up in Glenwood Springs, but will be down in Denver next Wednesday. Do you think you will be around on that day?
    I should be around. I am 61
    '20 Banshee Titan 29er
    '16 Banshee Rune (sold)
    '91 Spec Allez Epic Carbon (wall art)

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jncarpenter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,958
    I have a medium & am in Fruita if you are down valley & want a comparison.


  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    83
    Lots of thoughtful comments on here. I am finally coming to the realization that how one feels on a certain bike frame (height of seat w/respect to bar height ie. "in the bike vs. over the bike") is mostly due to stack, reach/top tube and bottom bracket height. And it makes sense that 29s give the best experience with this respect due to lower bottom brackets and taller stacks.

    The reason my 2012 Turner Burner had such a great "in the bike" feel, is that ol' Dave designed it with a BB height of 330mm and stack of 615mm! So, a really low bottom bracket and tall stack. No wonder that bike handled so well on the twisty singletrack! It's all about a lower center of gravity right?

    It took awhile for this stuff to sink in, but I think I'm starting to get it now. Maybe I should be looking at the Spitfire...338mm BB Ht and 613 stack. And that greeeeen paint!

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,239
    Just going to step in here and say that our recommended sizes on our geo charts are what we would recommend for a rider of average proportions based on what we personally like.

    To be honest with you, i didn't actually want to list recommended height ranges, as I feel that they can be misleading, and everyone has personal preferences. I recommend comparing geometry to a bike that you fit well, and basing your choice on this. Look at whole picture, not just reach.

    Also beware of brands that are always pushing longer slacker etc geometry... it's an easy sales approach when people are just looking at numbers. I complete disagree with some claims by some brands about reach numbers needing to be super long, and I say this having spend time on protos we tested with very long reach. I felt that while they were super stable at speed, they were less fun, less maneuverable (in some cases to the point of being dangerous), a nightmare at slow speeds, and on really steep descents they were scary as hell because they were too long and didn't let you get weight back. The concept might work for some top racers, with serious skills who only cares about speed and rarely brake. That said, the weight distribution of our bikes would work really well for them too. Just be very aware that long reach does not work for everyone.
    Banshee Bikes Designer
    www.bansheebikes.com
    Banshee Blog

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    83
    Hi Keith,

    Thanks for your comments. Endless questions about sizing, right? I hear you about reach getting crazy long on some bikes.

    So I have a friend with the medium Rune V3, and I sat on his bike this weekend. It was a little small for me. His bike has a 35mm stem and I didn't check to see where his seat was on the rails. but my butt was hanging off the back by probably an inch or more. I guess I'm built like an orangutan or something. So at least in my case, at 5-10", I'm a size large on a 27.5 Banshee.

    A couple of questions for you:

    1)With the reach and ETT being the same (large Rune vs. Prime), do you figure I would be sized a large on your 29 frames as well?

    2)I'm considering the Rune. I have all the components already to build up a new 27.5, including an MRP Ribbon at 160mm & 44mm offset. I like climbing and in Colorado there is a lot of steep climbing. I figure that I would rather have a 160mm on the front instead of 170mm. I crunched the numbers and with an A2C of 552mm (MRP/160), the HA changes to 64.3 degrees. I run 2.6" tires. With the longer fork offset and reduced trail, will the bike still ride ok?

    Thanks!

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,239
    Quote Originally Posted by Wazzou View Post
    Hi Keith,

    Thanks for your comments. Endless questions about sizing, right? I hear you about reach getting crazy long on some bikes.

    So I have a friend with the medium Rune V3, and I sat on his bike this weekend. It was a little small for me. His bike has a 35mm stem and I didn't check to see where his seat was on the rails. but my butt was hanging off the back by probably an inch or more. I guess I'm built like an orangutan or something. So at least in my case, at 5-10", I'm a size large on a 27.5 Banshee.

    A couple of questions for you:

    1)With the reach and ETT being the same (large Rune vs. Prime), do you figure I would be sized a large on your 29 frames as well?

    2)I'm considering the Rune. I have all the components already to build up a new 27.5, including an MRP Ribbon at 160mm & 44mm offset. I like climbing and in Colorado there is a lot of steep climbing. I figure that I would rather have a 160mm on the front instead of 170mm. I crunched the numbers and with an A2C of 552mm (MRP/160), the HA changes to 64.3 degrees. I run 2.6" tires. With the longer fork offset and reduced trail, will the bike still ride ok?

    Thanks!
    Good to get this kind of feedback, thanks. body proportions certainly play a huge factor in bike fit.

    To tackle questions:
    #1 Based on what you have said I think you'd be happier on a large 29er also, yup.

    #2 yeah, the bike will ride nicely with that setup. I ran my proto rune with ribbon at 160mm for a while and really liked it and geometry was very similar to production version. Fork offset is really not all that noticeable. I'd say that 1 degree head angle change was more noticeable in terms of steering control, the longer offset might actually help in some slower speed situations (like tech climbing).
    Banshee Bikes Designer
    www.bansheebikes.com
    Banshee Blog

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,551
    Quote Originally Posted by builttoride View Post
    super long reach numbers can be less maneuverable (in some cases to the point of being dangerous), a nightmare at slow speeds, and on really steep descents they were scary as hell because they were too long and didn't let you get weight back. The concept might work for some top racers, Just be very aware that long reach does not work for everyone.
    This is exactly how I feel about the longer reach trend of the past few years. I'm 5' 7.5" and in the "olden days" always ode a medium. since I went 650b in 2014 (when longer reaches started) iv e had a small ocky mountain altitude and currently a small rune v2. I was really torn when ordering the rune v2, med or small, and glad I went small (reach 402, with 45 mm stem). it feels exactly like medium from 6-10 years ago and I prefer bikes on the small side for manuverabilty and in steep tech theres enough bend in my arms in neutral position that I can get my weight back easily when necessary by straightening them; I tested a current medium and it felt kinda sketchy in that kind of situation. I also prefer a more upright pedaling position for long term spine health. if I ever get a v3 (Banshee for life because they don't make Ebikes (yet?)) now the small is 420 reach will feel perfect with a 30 mm stem.
    Side note:Kudos to Banshee for not jumping on the Ebike bandwagon. keith please tell me you have no plans to do so.
    '18 banshee rune

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,239
    Quote Originally Posted by dwyooaj View Post
    This is exactly how I feel about the longer reach trend of the past few years. I'm 5' 7.5" and in the "olden days" always ode a medium. since I went 650b in 2014 (when longer reaches started) iv e had a small ocky mountain altitude and currently a small rune v2. I was really torn when ordering the rune v2, med or small, and glad I went small (reach 402, with 45 mm stem). it feels exactly like medium from 6-10 years ago and I prefer bikes on the small side for manuverabilty and in steep tech theres enough bend in my arms in neutral position that I can get my weight back easily when necessary by straightening them; I tested a current medium and it felt kinda sketchy in that kind of situation. I also prefer a more upright pedaling position for long term spine health. if I ever get a v3 (Banshee for life because they don't make Ebikes (yet?)) now the small is 420 reach will feel perfect with a 30 mm stem.
    Side note:Kudos to Banshee for not jumping on the Ebike bandwagon. keith please tell me you have no plans to do so.
    No plans at all.
    Banshee Bikes Designer
    www.bansheebikes.com
    Banshee Blog

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,551
    Quote Originally Posted by builttoride View Post
    No plans at all.
    I figured on that.
    '18 banshee rune

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: filbike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    306
    Quote Originally Posted by dwyooaj View Post
    This is exactly how I feel about the longer reach trend of the past few years. I'm 5' 7.5" and in the "olden days" always ode a medium. since I went 650b in 2014 (when longer reaches started) iv e had a small ocky mountain altitude and currently a small rune v2. I was really torn when ordering the rune v2, med or small, and glad I went small (reach 402, with 45 mm stem). it feels exactly like medium from 6-10 years ago and I prefer bikes on the small side for manuverabilty and in steep tech theres enough bend in my arms in neutral position that I can get my weight back easily when necessary by straightening them; I tested a current medium and it felt kinda sketchy in that kind of situation. I also prefer a more upright pedaling position for long term spine health. if I ever get a v3 (Banshee for life because they don't make Ebikes (yet?)) now the small is 420 reach will feel perfect with a 30 mm stem.
    Side note:Kudos to Banshee for not jumping on the Ebike bandwagon. keith please tell me you have no plans to do so.
    Very glad too that Banshee is not joining "motorcycle" tribe.....

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    66
    Any thoughts on the Phantom? I'm 6' 4" with a longer torso. I generally ride what looks to be XXL's in most companies. I have an XC background, so like a slightly longer bike as well. Just comparing TT length, I think I would need to run a 90mm stem to get the saddle to bars that I currently ride. I probably will run 20-40mm wider bars, so I can get away with a 70mm stem im sure, but still. I am currently on an older fuel EX, XXL for what its worth.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    41
    Hi guys! I am confused also. I have a Banshee V2(2013) right now and the size is M but feels like S size and i am planning to buy V3 and I am 5'6 tall. Should i go for M size or S size for the Rune V3? I don't want to regret buying it for the wrong size like my V2 but ended up using it since 2016 til today(ps. I love it but the size tad small for my liking).

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,239
    If your current V2 medium feels a bit cramped, then go for a medium V3.

    Size guide is just a rough guide... everyone is different!
    Banshee Bikes Designer
    www.bansheebikes.com
    Banshee Blog

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    8

    New question here.

    Quote Originally Posted by builttoride View Post
    If your current V2 medium feels a bit cramped, then go for a medium V3.

    Size guide is just a rough guide... everyone is different!
    So Keith, great to see you being active in this thread. Sorry for another sizing question. I have a 2014 Large Rune V2 on 650B in low setting, and I want to switch to the V3. The V2 feels too short for me in L (running it with a 40 mm angled Hope stem and a 20 mm spacer, and a 170 mm Fox 36 fork up front, because it was way too low in the front for me at first).

    For comparison, I have a slack steel frame hardtail in XL with a 470 reach / 650 stack / 660 eff. top tube / 74 seat angle and that feels more natural both climbing and descending. From those numbers, the XL would be a better match for me.

    As a 6'2" guy I probably should have picked an XL for the V2 already.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,239
    It depends if you are judging fit on seated position or standing position. From your hardtail numbers I'd probably recommend a Large actually, as reach is the same at 470mm.

    Although not sure your hardtail geometry adds up, to claim to have 50mm longer ETT with same reach and higher stack but seat angle only being 3degrees slacker.

    Ultimately the choice is up to you. just consider that the large V3 rune has a reach that is already over 30mm longer than your V2 (assuming you run a 170mm fork on both).

    I'm 6'2" and ride a large with 40mm stem... that suits me personally.
    Banshee Bikes Designer
    www.bansheebikes.com
    Banshee Blog

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    8
    Thanks for the answer Keith, your remark made me compare V2 XL sizing to V3 L sizing, and the reach on the V3 L (470 mm) is actually slightly longer than the V2 XL (466 mm). So I would be going one size up anyway comparing apples to apples.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 10-13-2019, 09:29 PM
  2. Bronson v1 to a 5010 v3 or Bronson v3
    By jsync in forum Santa Cruz
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 07-04-2019, 11:02 AM
  3. Replies: 40
    Last Post: 08-05-2018, 01:17 PM
  4. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-16-2017, 12:55 AM
  5. Can you make a Burner v3.0 or v3.1 'Plush'?
    By Spongebob in forum Turner
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 12-02-2015, 06:19 PM

Members who have read this thread: 108

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.