As long as the BB height drop doesn't cause any problems.
Seems to me a 140mm fork would put it in the sweet spot - pretty much the same as a Yeti ASR-5 with a 140mm fork.
thanks for the info / updateBanshee goons are out in force..
the title of this thread is a bit misleading, it's not a 4x bike but a TRAIL bike, thus the name TRc.
They are saying that the TRc was inspired by the now defunct 4X blur, but it's not advertised as a 4X bike. Just a trail bike with more modern geometry. yeah the 68degree HA sounds steep, but that's spec'd with a 130mm fork. Like Dogboy mentioned, use a 140mm or 150mm fork and you'll have a much slacker HA. Want to keep the BB low, then use an AngleSet. There are tons of option out there - pick your poison.
I think this bike is pretty sweet (minus the price)
I personally wouldn't want to ride a trail bike with a 41" WB - but that's just me.
Path edition Ventana!
Do they still sell those?
how about you share with us exactly what you expected? what do you really mean by a "small" DH bike?
Why should I have to pay the extra money for an angleset to make my $2700 frame what I want it to be?
I think most would just rather have tons of fun going down and sacrifice a little bit of climbing ability. Not a tanked out all mountain bike, just something that is more fun than a roadied out xc bike.
Maybe I'm from a different breed. The breed that shares chairs every weekend, but rides with legitimately fast XC guys all week. I know what a 67* bike feels like pinned 45 minutes in on a rad descent, and 3 hours in when the ride shows it's teeth. There's a balance. 67*, and anything below, only works against you once your redbull and egg mcmuffin happy hour burn itself off in true Challenger fashion. If ya'll are about sacraficing climbing ability for going down, why even look at this bike? I can assure you a 30lb 6.5" bike with proper angles is way more fun descending than any 67* XC bike will ever be. This thing is far from a roadied out XC bike - those are your 70-71* race steeds. This, this is for the dudes who log miles, ride fast, and know how to turn and descend too well to ever sit on a XC race bike. I really think they've got a winner, and I'm not that big of a Santa Cruz guy anymore.
But you live in Main, is there any trails there that are steep enough to warrant a slack trail bike?
There are. Some parts of the state are flat, some parts aren't. I don't only ride in Maine though.
The beginning of your post starts out like a bud light or coors commercial... It made me thirsty.
Not everyone wants what you want. Just reading this thread it's pretty clear that some people are pretty stoked on the numbers for this bike. An Angleset just makes it more versatile, making the bike an option for more people. And in the context of a $2700 frame, an Angleset isn't that much additional cheddar. Seriously, what's the difference in cost between an angleset and a premium headset?
Going fast uphill is in the legs, not the headangle.
This is true, there are other bikes out there with other numbers that other people want. I'm not attacking SC for building this bike, I think it's a pretty slick ride. My comment was more directed at the guy who was telling people to make do with this bike and an angle set and quit bitching. I think for that amount of money you shouldn't have to.
No its not. Some tech climbs can get steep enough that it will start lifting your front end. Than you will wish you had a steeper head angle. I didnt measure my bike yet but Im pretty sure at 140mm front it goes close to 67mm and the its unrideable over some steeper clims unless I lay on the bars. Hardly the most effective uphill method.Going fast uphill is in the legs, not the headangle.
Next you're going to tell me I shouldn't have a 50mm stem on my bike for racing hillclimbs, either?
Going fast uphill is in the legs, but going fast downhill is in the rider, not the headangleGoing fast uphill is in the legs, not the headangle.
Next you're going to tell me I shouldn't have a 50mm stem on my bike for racing hillclimbs, either?
