Josh, was it is recent model Rocky? I have heard some really good things about their new RSL line, specifically wrt. the improvements in the suspension. I'd like to try one again, as it's been a few years since I rode a Rocky.
Interesting that you would prefer a lower end bike like that over a top shelf Trek or Spec. I'm beginning to be a firm believer that the frame quality and geometry of the bike matter way more than the bolted on component parts. In other words, they can tack on all the fancy, lightweight parts in an attempt to give a bike some cred or bling, but if the frame is poor, then no high end cranks or wheels or drivetrain will make it better. As my friend from Georgia would say: "It's like putting lipstick on a pig". Not sure if my Fisher fits that description, but I guess I will find out once I test ride some of the new 29er models out there.
So....Liam....descr ibe this Banshee of yours, if you please? The geometry looks almost identical to that of my Paragon, which is intriguing because I really like the way the bike maneuvers in virtually all terrain. Descending, climbing, cornering -- it's all good. Tight twisty hairpins on singletrack take a bit of technique, and I can't get lazy or sloppy there or else it's trouble -- the right body position is crucial, more so than with most 26ers I've ridden. Otherwise, I think that Fisher got it right with their geometry -- 69 deg. HTA; 72 deg. STA; 440 mm CSL. Almost exactly like your Banshee. TTL and SOH are slightly longer/higher, but otherwise the bikes seem very close.
How does the Banshee handle? Climb? Descend? Smooth ride? Responsive acceleration?
FWIW, and this goes back to a comment Josh made about more slack head tubes, I test rode a few 29ers that had a steeper HTA, and I hated them. Way too twitchy. Conversely, if they are too slack, then the ride just gets boring for me, and I get no fun out of it. The 69 deg. angle feels just perfect.
Cheers,
Svend
Home
Login
Register