Gen 2 Banshee Phantom- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 23 of 23
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    332

    Gen 2 Banshee Phantom ~ Jenson Build

    Thought Iíd start a thread for Gen 2 (2017 Ė present) Banshee Phantom owners, as a place to share experiences, compare notes etc. Weíve got some slightly updated geometry.

    I recently picked up a ď2018Ē Jenson buildÖ. Not sure how many of these they sold, but there were only two left when I got mine. Pretty incredible build for the price!

    Quick changes from ďstockĒ are Deity riser bars from my old bike, Odi grips, a 70mm stem (Syntace), and brought my setback 9point8 dropper over from my last bike too (the 150mm Fox dropper didnít allow for a low enough saddle position, in my case).

    And of course, tires. Jenson shipped these with non-tubeless Continental something-somethings. Sheesh. Right now running an XR2 2.6 on the rear and a Bomboloni that I had lying around up front.

    Switching from the 50 to the 70mm stem really opened things up for me and made me more comfortable on descents, as well as feeling more precise with steering which sounds a little counterintuitive. Maybe itís more about what I was used to on my last bike.

    Since Iím coming off a Trek Stache, my direct comparisons to similar bikes are limited (I had a Kona Hei Hei before that, but it's been a while). I chose the Phantom because I wanted some rear suspension, ability to run near-plus tires, and a snappy ride. I like to ride ďfastĒ (thatís relative) and donít shy away from technical trails, but also donít hit big jumps or dropsÖ. so when looking at the phantom vs. prime, I decided I really didnít need the bigger travel.

    So far thatís been working out great. PRís on almost every segment in my first 70 miles of riding. Iím faster than I was on the StacheÖ. Even though my phantom is about 1.5 pounds heavier as built. Fwiw.

    Would love to hear from other phantom owners! Whatís working, what are you changing up, etc?
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Gen 2 Banshee Phantom-img_20180825_133117.jpg  

    Last edited by S​​usspect; 09-07-2018 at 05:42 PM. Reason: adding picture

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    332

    A few pictures...

    A few more pics of the Phantom... you can see the shape of the hydroformed top tube in the last one.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Gen 2 Banshee Phantom-dscn2425.jpg  

    Gen 2 Banshee Phantom-dscn2426.jpg  

    Gen 2 Banshee Phantom-dscn2424.jpg  

    Gen 2 Banshee Phantom-dscn2427.jpg  


  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,080
    Curious how tall you are and what size frame that is? Also if you want to really be helpful and make this a worthwhile resource thread, include your weight, riding style, shock and fork settings.
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    332
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    Curious how tall you are and what size frame that is? Also if you want to really be helpful and make this a worthwhile resource thread, include your weight, riding style, shock and fork settings.
    Right, so Iím 5í8Ē and 162 pounds, on a size medium.

    I chose the Phantom over the Prime (Jenson also had the Prime builds when I was looking) because I hoped it would fit my riding style in a more realistic way.

    My other bike is a rigid mountain bike, and on that and on my plus hardtail I have learned about line choice and unweighting the saddleÖ I like to see the lines and try to follow them. That part of my riding style suggests that I didnít need the bigger travel of the Prime.

    Iím also an older guy (44) and not looking to take big risks in the form of jumps and drops. This is not to say that the younger man within me is able to resist charging as hard as I can through the rocky, technical trails that continue to be built in my area. Where I live, we are truly blessed with significant, ongoing trail expansion of great variety. I like to ride it all. I didnít want just an XC rig.

    These Jenson bikes come with Cane Creek Inline shocks, set up with a base tune. So far (now about 80 miles in) I havenít been able to get the 105mm of travel to bottom out, not even close. Turns out I havenít had sag set properly, which I just fixedÖ had to let the air down to about 150psi. Iíve been backing off on the high speed compression a half turn at a time, so far Iíve backed off 1 turn. Yesterday I also backed off the low speed compression a quarter turn, and felt that helped with small bump compliance. Iíll have to re-evaluate if this is overkill now that Iíve corrected the sag (yes, I am doing this backwards). To be honest, itís been hard for me to slow down and pay close enough attention to what the suspension is doing, Iíve been having so much fun just charging around like aÖ. banshee. But from now on Iíll be a bit more scientific.

    The fork has been good out of the box, I havenít changed anything yet. Running about 78psi.

    It seems like the Prime and other longer travel bikes get more attention, and no doubt they deserve it and make sense for a lot of people. The younger guys hitting the bigger features around here might need that travel. Still, I canít help but think thereís a lot of riders like me, that like technical trails but take alternate routes around really big stuff, or that just like that extra trail feedback. Good on Banshee for thinking of us too.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,080
    Sounds like you're a lot like me, don't mind hitting a nice roll or drop, not so found of jumps, absolutely love my V1 Phantom. Liek you I like trail feedback and not feeling like I'm on a marshmallow ride, if I hit rough/big stuff, I use technique tofloat the bike over it, not just bash into it like I can on the Prime (I own both). I took my Phantom with me to Crested Butte Colorado in 2016 and found it was perfect, for all the types of trails we rode, to me geo is the most important thing, not travel, too many people just like to go fast and don't care if it's them or the bike making that happen, with the Phantom on the rougher trails, I know it's piloting.

    It seems like the Prime and other longer travel bikes get more attention, and no doubt they deserve it and make sense for a lot of people. The younger guys hitting the bigger features around here might need that travel. Still, I canít help but think thereís a lot of riders like me, that like technical trails but take alternate routes around really big stuff, or that just like that extra trail feedback. Good on Banshee for thinking of us too.
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    332
    Few more rides in. Iíve been able to use about 90% of rear travel when moving through the rockiest sections of my local trails and hitting small (two foot) drops.

    Iíve been out on some longer rides as well (20 mile rides on Sunday the past two weekends). Iíve been settling in and feeling more and more comfortable on the bike across varied terrain. One thing has begun to stand out, as Iím coming off a Stache that is somewhat legendary for being a ďfunĒ bike to ride: I donít feel like Iíve lost any of that fun factor. This thing rides like a sports car that loves long drives.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,080
    Sounds like the Phantom is definitely the bike for you, very efficient still as an FS and very lively and playful, a great compliment to a rigid. It definitely is a bike that encourages and rewards an active riding style.

    Do yourself a favour and let all all the air out of the shock and cycle it to full travel and check that the shock does in fact use the entire length of the shaft and doesn't stop short and you're then mis-reading how much travel you're getting. Can't help with the Monarch, use a X-Fusion 02 RCX on mine, but can tell you that the 02 RCX, falls short of full shaft use by quite a bit, hence how and why I learned this lesson, has about 5mm it can't use.

    Quote Originally Posted by JScoot View Post
    Few more rides in. Iíve been able to use about 90% of rear travel when moving through the rockiest sections of my local trails and hitting small (two foot) drops.

    Iíve been out on some longer rides as well (20 mile rides on Sunday the past two weekends). Iíve been settling in and feeling more and more comfortable on the bike across varied terrain. One thing has begun to stand out, as Iím coming off a Stache that is somewhat legendary for being a ďfunĒ bike to ride: I donít feel like Iíve lost any of that fun factor. This thing rides like a sports car that loves long drives.
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    332
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    Do yourself a favour and let all all the air out of the shock and cycle it to full travel and check that the shock does in fact use the entire length of the shaft.
    Good idea. I ran this test and found this shock (Cane Creek Inline) also does not use the full shaft length. In my case, it leaves about 10mm. So it turns out I have probably bottomed this shock out a few times on the rougher stuff. The good news is I had no idea and did not notice it happening.

    Here is a picture of the O-ring showing what full compression looks like. I rode the same trail last night at a more relaxed pace and did not use this much of the travel.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Gen 2 Banshee Phantom-img_20180905_182946.jpg  


  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    1
    I'm looking to eventually pull the trigger on this bike. Just need to sell my current ride. Few questions.
    Did your build come with the Fox fork?
    I'm 5'9 170 lbs and I am not sure on medium or large. Riding an 18.5 trek fuel right now. Suggestions?
    How will this ride on 4-5 drops? I'm decently smooth but don't want to compromise the rear shock.
    Thank you I'm advance for any suggestions! I'm actively monitoring Jenson for new stock.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by nlam433 View Post
    I'm looking to eventually pull the trigger on this bike. Just need to sell my current ride. Few questions.
    Did your build come with the Fox fork?
    I'm 5'9 170 lbs and I am not sure on medium or large. Riding an 18.5 trek fuel right now. Suggestions?
    How will this ride on 4-5 drops? I'm decently smooth but don't want to compromise the rear shock.
    Thank you I'm advance for any suggestions! I'm actively monitoring Jenson for new stock.
    probably a medium. Maybe a large.

    With only 105mm of travel it lets you know when you have made a mistake. It can handle some pretty rough terrain.

    I am looking to upgrade to a new gen large and sell my 1st gen medium at some point.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,080
    A link to the geo chart for the Fuel would help as you didn't say what year and they've been around a LONG time and geo has changed quite a bit over the years.

    I'd say you need to look at your riding style to figure out what size might work for you, if you ride more steep, aggressive stuff, maybe the Large with the shortest stem might work for you, if it's more a mixed bag, then maybe the Medium with a 50-70mm stem.

    FYI I'm 6'2.25" tall with long arms and legs and went with a size Large on the V1 frame with a 70mm stem and 780mm bar, but I also run a setback post to get me where I like relative to the BB, so the 450mm Reach worked most likely because of that. Going to be going for a V2 hopefully by end of year and plan to go for the XL most likely with a 35-40mm stem. Had originally thought to go with the Large to keep WB in check for the tighter stuff as I had an XL PP Prime that I had run with a 65mm stem and thought could use a little improving in that area, but after then building the Prime back up about 1.5 years later with a 40mm stem I figured out I had too long a stem on it before and that caused a few issues.


    Quote Originally Posted by nlam433 View Post
    I'm looking to eventually pull the trigger on this bike. Just need to sell my current ride. Few questions.
    Did your build come with the Fox fork?
    I'm 5'9 170 lbs and I am not sure on medium or large. Riding an 18.5 trek fuel right now. Suggestions?
    How will this ride on 4-5 drops? I'm decently smooth but don't want to compromise the rear shock.
    Thank you I'm advance for any suggestions! I'm actively monitoring Jenson for new stock.
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    332
    Quote Originally Posted by nlam433 View Post
    Did your build come with the Fox fork?
    Yes... Fox Rhythm 34 on the Jenson Eagle build.
    Quote Originally Posted by nlam433 View Post
    I'm 5'9 170 lbs and I am not sure on medium or large. Riding an 18.5 trek fuel right now. Suggestions?
    Well, I'm 5'8" and 165, and I've been happy with a medium. I did feel it was a bit short on my first couple rides, as I lost about 19mm of effective top tube from my other bike (18.5virtual/17.5 actual Trek Stache). I swapped on a 70mm stem for the 50mm stock stem and instantly felt better, now after a number of rides I've totally adjusted and like it more than the Stache. It's just a bit more upright and less of a long, "xc" machine.
    Quote Originally Posted by nlam433 View Post
    How will this ride on 4-5 drops? I'm decently smooth but don't want to compromise the rear shock.
    Dunno... I stop at about 30"... but it handles that without a second thought. In fact, I don't bottom out on drops at all, the only places I may bottom out is really chunky fast stuff.
    Quote Originally Posted by nlam433 View Post
    Thank you I'm advance for any suggestions! I'm actively monitoring Jenson for new stock.
    Good luck! It's a screaming deal. I don't know if Jenson will stock again in 2018 (could call and ask?) but I did notice a couple of pre-owned Jenson-looking builds had sold on Ebay, so you could check there too. So far, I can't recommend this bike enough, it absolutely rips, and pedals all day.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    332
    Quote Originally Posted by nlam433 View Post
    I'm looking to eventually pull the trigger on this bike. I'm actively monitoring Jenson for new stock.
    I just noticed that banshee is running a 20% off sale through October 31st, prices good through all US dealers.... fwiw.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    332
    To update on some of my earlier comments about bottoming out, I've reset the HSC on the CC inline shock to the stock setting (had been running it half a turn wider open) and I'm no longer bottoming it out at all. Leaving about 5mm of travel available in the roughest stuff I ride. I do have the LSC a quarter turn more open than stock and that's good for me. Moral of the story is the stock settings are pretty good if not perfect in my case.

    In other news, I took my trek stache out a week or so ago and locked the fork out to see how I'd like it as a rigid bike. What surprised me was that after 6 weeks on the phantom, I noticed the lack of rear suspension on the stache much more than I noticed the fork being locked out. The short travel phantom really does a phenomenal job of soaking up the trail.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69tr6r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    795
    Phantom V1 owner here. Loving the bike, and mostly ride it setup as a plus bike but occasionally throw my 29er wheels on for more rough stuff.


    i'm 5.10" with long legs and I like the short 420mm reach of my Medium. Stem is 60mm. I suppose I could ride a Large with a 30mm stem and it should feel the same.

    The Phantom will handle whatever you can throw at it. Here are a couple of pics of me hitting 2 decent sized drops to transition. The smaller is about 5-6 feet and the larger is about 8 feet.

    https://www.instagram.com/p/BjQVWWCh...aken-by=69tr6r

    I'm running a 140mm Fox Float on there with the 29er wheels. Fork just lightly bottomed but CCDB did not, so I would say my fork is perfect, but I could reduce the compression of my shock a bit. People who ride my bike say it's setup very stiff, but I like the poppy feel.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    332
    Nice pics, it's cool to see the phantom punching far above the weight class I'm riding it in.
    I went with the phantom because I was more willing to err on the side of less travel than join the "too much travel" club. I'm still really happy with it, and certainly don't feel undergunned on my trails.
    The only thing I can see doing in the next year is picking up a 27.5 plus hardtail (I just sold my stache). Then I could have two bikes with 4 setup configurations, since I could run the 29er wheels on the hardtail as needed.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    332
    Well I did it, I found a good deal on a 27.5+ hardtail and bought it, motivated in large part by wanting to try the plus wheels on the phantom (and that it doesn't hurt having a hardtail to change things up now and then).

    Put the wheels on the banshee and rode it like that for a few weeks.... I noticed being closer to the ground, and I noticed the slightly steeper head angle (I did flip the chips to get better bb clearance). I enjoyed it for climbing rocky stuff, I felt I could maneuver the front wheel a bit more easily. The first impression is low, more forward, and just felt like a mountain goat.

    I write in past tense because I'm back on 29x2.6 now, and as soon as I got the stock wheels back on the slacker angle and bigger wheels encouraged me to charge faster. The 29 is significantly taller than 27.5+, easily seen by the amount of clearance in the rear triangle. In 29 it feels (to me) like it's begging to be ridden aggressively which often translates to more fun. Honestly I was expecting the reverse to be true, so I'm a little surprised, but I will switch back and forth in the future bc I do appreciate something about the low maneuverability of the smaller wheels.

    * It's worth mentioning that my plus wheels are a lot heavier, so the comparison is a bit flawed in that regard. The rear wheel and tire is 1.25 pounds heavier than my 29er setup. The biggest culprit is the gx eagle cassette that's 12 ounces heavier than the xo eagle. The tire I'm running (specialized slaughter grid) adds another 8 ounces.
    Last edited by S​​usspect; 11-26-2018 at 03:10 PM.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 69tr6r's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    795
    Quote Originally Posted by JScoot View Post
    Well I did it, I found a good deal on a 27.5+ hardtail and bought it, motivated in large part by wanting to try the plus wheels on the phantom (and that it doesn't hurt having a hardtail to change things up now and then).

    Put the wheels on the banshee and rode it like that for a few weeks.... I noticed being closer to the ground, and I noticed the slightly steeper head angle (I did flip the chips to get better bb clearance). I enjoyed it for climbing rocky stuff, I felt I could maneuver the front wheel a bit more easily. The first impression is low, more forward, and just felt like a mountain goat.

    I write in past tense because I'm back on 29x2.6 now, and as soon as I got the stock wheels back on the slacker angle and bigger wheels encouraged me to charge faster. The 29 is significantly taller than 27.5+, easily seem by the amount of clearance in the rear triangle. In 29 it feels (to me) like it's begging to be ridden aggressively which often translates to more fun. Honestly I was expecting the reverse to be true, so I'm a little surprised, but I will switch back and forth in the future bc I do appreciate something about the low maneuverability of the smaller wheels.

    * It's worth mentioning that my plus wheels are a lot heavier, so the comparison is a bit flawed in that regard. The rear wheel and tire is 1.25 pounds heavier than my 29er setup. The biggest culprit is the gx eagle cassette that's 12 ounces heavier than the xo eagle. The tire I'm running (specialized slaughter grid) adds another 8 ounces.
    Very cool you got to try the 27.5+ setup! It's funny, I have the same problem with my 29er wheels that you have with the plus wheels, the weight. I'm very tempted to buy some nicer 29er wheels and tires, probably 2.6", just to see if I'd actually like it better than my 27.5+ setup.

    I'd like to have the higher bb and be able to adjust my dropouts to the mid or slack setting. Especially for Fall riding in New England. Lot's of leaves hiding roots and rocks that end up in pedal strikes.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    332
    Quote Originally Posted by 69tr6r View Post
    Very cool you got to try the 27.5+ setup!
    Yeah, I'm still intrigued by it, and will probably try it again in a few weeks. I was having a lot of fun with that setup, the first ride especially was really grin-inducing as I crawled over rocks and carved around berms... but then when the 29ers went back on, the bike felt like it was off to the races.

    Another part of my comparison problem is I was running a bomboloni (29x3.0) on the front until I tried 27.5+. So when I switched back to 29, it was my first ride with a 2.6 XR4 up front. I think the bomboloni may have been deadening the ride a bit, while I really like the feel of the XR4.

    I'll post a pic of it in 27.5+ mode. You can almost tell just by looking that it's lower and a little steeper.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Gen 2 Banshee Phantom-img_20181111_112519.jpg  


  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,080
    Hey, JScoot, the reason that the B+ setup didni't instill a more monster truck feel is you started from that already with 2.6" 29er tyres, if you had on more "normal" size rubber in the 2.3" range, then I think you would have gotten the feeling
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    332
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    Hey, JScoot, the reason that the B+ setup didni't instill a more monster truck feel is you started from that already with 2.6" 29er tyres, if you had on more "normal" size rubber in the 2.3" range, then I think you would have gotten the feeling
    There's no doubt I've grown accustomed to the big tires. After a year and a half on a Stache, the 2.6 looked skinny at first. 27.5+ (2.8) is a little wider, and a lot shorter.

    Something new I'm mulling is swapping forks with my hardtail (Norco Torrent 7.1, which is turning out to be a great bike, fwiw). It came with a fantastic DVO Diamond fork with 140mm of travel.... I just think I could push this fork a little harder if it was on the Phantom. It's a burly fork, with 35mm stanchions.

    From what I can tell, I can reduce the travel down to 130, like the "stock" Fox.

    I don't really feel like this bike *needs* or even wants any more slackness or travel, but wondering if it would push the limits of what the Phantom is built around to just leave it at 140 (seems easier than figuring out how to adjust it). Looks like most folks stick with 120-130 up front, saw that some have run 140.

    Anyway it's something I may experiment with next time the home-mechanic bug strikes.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,080
    The simple answer, at least from me, is yes, very doable, but I'll caution that it will definitely push it towards a more DH oriented bike vs great all rounder. I tried a 140mm F34 a few years back, definitely opened up the DH possibilities, but then, as said, also effected it's climbing prowess in just needing more body english to make steep stuff or tight turns. If you run it in the steep position, you would basically end up with it about 1.5-2 degrees slacker, depending on the A2C of that fork vs the designed for 531 A2C it was designed around, with of course a higher BB, which you may or may not like.

    BTW, small suggestion, if you want to see a big change in how the Phantom rides, try some 2.3-2.4" tyres, it will really liven it up

    Quote Originally Posted by JScoot View Post
    There's no doubt I've grown accustomed to the big tires. After a year and a half on a Stache, the 2.6 looked skinny at first. 27.5+ (2.8) is a little wider, and a lot shorter.

    Something new I'm mulling is swapping forks with my hardtail (Norco Torrent 7.1, which is turning out to be a great bike, fwiw). It came with a fantastic DVO Diamond fork with 140mm of travel.... I just think I could push this fork a little harder if it was on the Phantom. It's a burly fork, with 35mm stanchions.

    From what I can tell, I can reduce the travel down to 130, like the "stock" Fox.

    I don't really feel like this bike *needs* or even wants any more slackness or travel, but wondering if it would push the limits of what the Phantom is built around to just leave it at 140 (seems easier than figuring out how to adjust it). Looks like most folks stick with 120-130 up front, saw that some have run 140.

    Anyway it's something I may experiment with next time the home-mechanic bug strikes.
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: S​​usspect's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    332
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    BTW, small suggestion, if you want to see a big change in how the Phantom rides, try some 2.3-2.4" tyres, it will really liven it up
    I may get there some day, maybe after the winter.... for now 2.6 still looks skinny to me!

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 22
    Last Post: 04-01-2017, 06:54 PM
  2. transition bandit 29 vs banshee phantom
    By PrisonCityStandout in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 06-19-2015, 08:23 AM
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-30-2014, 01:52 PM
  4. Banshee PHANTOM - One bike to rule them all!
    By LyNx in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 224
    Last Post: 05-15-2014, 10:04 AM

Members who have read this thread: 11

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.