[gmac]

I'm always messing with my bike. So, it isn't at all a stock rig. And I'm not the wrench I'd like to be. Anyways, I got curious and measured it. I ride 90%+ trails and DH when I can. I wondered if anyone else knows their geometry ? And what do people like or feel is optimal for trail ? I looked at bike specs online and they vary. Santacruz looked steep-->Transition Co. ---> finally Rocky & Banshee seemed the slackest and closest to my bike.

I'm on a modified (old shorter shock) 04 small Bullit frame w/ an older 6" Bomber DC:

HA= 66.5
ST= 68.5
BB= 14.25
wheelbase axle to axle= 42.5"
I run a 75mm stem for better knee clearance & to strech out on long rides.
I run 1/3 travel sag rear and 3/4" sag front.


So, what are people running ? Or do you even know/care ? I guess it is basically by feel in the end. I'd post a pic but no Adobe photoshop yet. ( I spent the $ on my bike)

 

[dw]

Its all ergonomics and body position. Some people can alter their body position bike to bike, some cant. Thats what I have seen. So basically, some people need more specific geometry than others.

Personally, I always know my geometry, but I almost always can adapt to whatever. At the highest levels of my performance, there are times/ courses/ trails, where I would prefer a modified geometry here and there, but most of the time, my rider error negates any advantage that i would gain from new geometry. For Sam Hill its a different story.

Once in a while though...!

One key for people answering your question is: how much travel f&r are you running?

dw

 

[Bulldog]

I prefer a higher bb and slacker head angle than most, coupled with a fork that can lower down through 3-4" of its travel (Marz ETA) to make a radical geo change for climbing (low bb, steep ha) with the flick of a switch. Our trails around here are pretty technical but feature short steeps up and down. No mega-mile climbs or descents around here.