Larger AM frame for technical climbs? wife has approved the funding.

[The Reverend]

why don't you take in consideration the offset bushings? cheap and effective...

That it might be, but that will affect the entire ride. It only seems like the climbing is causing the problem so I would keep recommending the travel adjust fork. If he tries the offset bushings it'll make everything different. Granted, he might actually like this in which case it's a win and an inexpensive one at that, but I'm not sold.

Talas / Dual Position Pike in my view. I doubt it makes much of a difference which one if the OP gets the 2014 models.

Or a completely new bike in which case it's time to visit the reviews / decide what he wants from a new bike / frame. Seems like he's got lots of choices.

 

[evObda2]

The problem i see, and i think a few people have touched on this before..
Is the seat tube angle is slightly exaggerated on the Rune (many bikes do this). i.e. the seat tube isn't going straight up from the BB, its going up from slightly in front of it.

This is perfectly fine if your an average height rider for the frame size, but as soon as you get someone much taller like yourself it throws it all out and puts you too much over the back wheel.

I had a similar problem on an older medium Commencal Meta4. Although I'm not tall as such, for that size frame i was probably at the limit of where the seat post height could go due to the exaggerated seat tube angle which started in front of the BB.

There are many small bandaid fixes you could try with your current frame, but i think if your going to sort the problem id be looking for a frame which has a seat tube running directly up from the BB, and perhaps also one thats a little steep. I know some AM frame manufacturers have made there seat tube angle a touch steeper as it gives a more aggressive stance on climbing with longer suspension. The only thing to be wary is frames which run like this you need to be wary that the top tube length often feels a touch shorter.

Frames that run a touch large e.g. Yeti's might also help with this as well. Perhaps a Large SB66 like other have said. A test ride can't hurt! Im sure there are a few riders out there willing to give you a quick burl.

 

[Ivan]

The problem with the SB66, and why it has never made it onto my personal wish list, is it has a slack 71.5° -ish Seat Angle. Which would be worse than the Rune, even at the long seatpost extension.

 

[Mywifesirrational]

why don't you take in consideration the offset bushings? cheap and effective...

Sorry I never put that in my list a few posts up, certainly considered the off set bushings. Had a good chat to Nerf Herder about them at the bike expo a few months ago as perhaps the cheapest option to try. As the Reverend said below the thing that made me wary was the global effect to handling they may/will have. Nerfs solution was a Morewood Sekuma!

That it might be, but that will affect the entire ride. It only seems like the climbing is causing the problem so I would keep recommending the travel adjust fork. If he tries the offset bushings it'll make everything different. Granted, he might actually like this in which case it's a win and an inexpensive one at that, but I'm not sold.

Talas / Dual Position Pike in my view. I doubt it makes much of a difference which one if the OP gets the 2014 models.

Or a completely new bike in which case it's time to visit the reviews / decide what he wants from a new bike / frame. Seems like he's got lots of choices.

That's the problem the handling and geometry of the bike is excellent other than were the seat ends up.

The problem i see, and i think a few people have touched on this before..
Is the seat tube angle is slightly exaggerated on the Rune (many bikes do this). i.e. the seat tube isn't going straight up from the BB, its going up from slightly in front of it.

This is perfectly fine if your an average height rider for the frame size, but as soon as you get someone much taller like yourself it throws it all out and puts you too much over the back wheel.

I had a similar problem on an older medium Commencal Meta4. Although I'm not tall as such, for that size frame i was probably at the limit of where the seat post height could go due to the exaggerated seat tube angle which started in front of the BB.

There are many small bandaid fixes you could try with your current frame, but i think if your going to sort the problem id be looking for a frame which has a seat tube running directly up from the BB, and perhaps also one thats a little steep. I know some AM frame manufacturers have made there seat tube angle a touch steeper as it gives a more aggressive stance on climbing with longer suspension. The only thing to be wary is frames which run like this you need to be wary that the top tube length often feels a touch shorter.

Frames that run a touch large e.g. Yeti's might also help with this as well. Perhaps a Large SB66 like other have said. A test ride can't hurt! Im sure there are a few riders out there willing to give you a quick burl.

I measured the seat angle this morning in the lab at work and it's 71.3, well below what the banshee website claims. This is also partially aggravated due a slightly taller forks than needed - 170mm, but the bike is designed for 160-180's. And also a smaller volume rear tyre compared to the front, which will lean the bike back slightly. Not sure how they measured it, but with the seat tube starting well in front of the bb, I agree that this is probably the main problem with the bike for someone of my height - with a bias in height in the legs.

Putting a mate on the frame who is a only a little shorter than me, but much shorter legs, he sits the the perfect position.

The problem with the SB66, and why it has never made it onto my personal wish list, is it has a slack 71.5° -ish Seat Angle. Which would be worse than the Rune, even at the long seatpost extension.

Yeah, I like the yeti, but this has me concerned as well. I'm able to get a decent test ride on a large in a few weeks, so I'll be curious how it feels.

 

[evObda2]

Ah yes true.. My mojo HD is similar just with shorter top tube.
Any 73deg (actual) seat angle bikes round that aren't trail/xc orientated?
With the longer fork it will definitely set you back further as well. So a couple of things contributing to it, it sounds like.

Nukeproof Mega i heard steepened their seat angle and look pretty decent. But I haven't really studied the angles which you may need to do. It will work well with your 170mm fork too (designed to go up to 180). Below is the older 26" version.. they've just changed to 650b as well for 2014…

http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/au/en/nukeproof-mega-am-frame-rockshox-monarch-2013/rp-prod81835

 

[pink poodle]

The Santa Cruz Nomad won't let you down. Had mine for years. Not much it can't handle. Ran it with 160, 170, and 180mm forks. A dual position 180mm fork like talas (I believe there is a totem that does this as well) will give you a bike that delivers everything you need, including mail and milk.

 

[oriion]

Something to consider:

http://knollybikes.com/bikes/chilcotin

One of these in XL might suit you, I test rode one of these in the states a few months back, and whilst I normally prefer a large, the only demo they had left was XL - it felt like a lot of bike - and might be worth looking at.

I'm 6 3" with longer legs too, but it's all individual preference. My Large Spitfire with 160 pikes and 50mm stem suit my style perfectly, I would have thought your Rune would have been the same.

anyways, food for thought

 

[kalem]

This is why i love what Rocky Mountain do with their seat tube angles, around 74-75 degrees on the new altitude (with HTA from 66.6). I ride a 2012 altitude in a L while i'm 6'4" i should probably be on a XL..however climbing has always been excellent, front end planted and plenty of rear traction. Sorta makes it feel like an xc bike in the saddle but when standing with the saddle out of the way it's ready to carve.

 

[Mywifesirrational]

This is why i love what Rocky Mountain do with their seat tube angles, around 74-75 degrees on the new altitude (with HTA from 66.6). I ride a 2012 altitude in a L while i'm 6'4" i should probably be on a XL..however climbing has always been excellent, front end planted and plenty of rear traction. Sorta makes it feel like an xc bike in the saddle but when standing with the saddle out of the way it's ready to carve.

Indeed, just had a look, slack at the front, steep at the rear, perfect geometry.

 

[placebo]

That's the problem the handling and geometry of the bike is excellent other than were the seat ends up.

I ride an intense slopestyle2 around a bit as well. It has a sloped seat tube that put me too far back with the seat at the necessary extension for my leg length, so I reversed the reverb post to move the seat forward when extended. If the post you're using has setback like a reverb, maybe that could help.

 

[Mywifesirrational]

I ride an intense slopestyle2 around a bit as well. It has a sloped seat tube that put me too far back with the seat at the necessary extension for my leg length, so I reversed the reverb post to move the seat forward when extended. If the post you're using has setback like a reverb, maybe that could help.

Yeah, it's a zero set back post, but I can slide the seat forward 25mm, which on the large frame makes it too cramped, but an XL it would I think would out nicely. Definitely simplest way of artificially changing the seat angle.

If i can work out if I can lower a 2013 lyrik from 170 to 160 it'll steepen the SA slightly and 27.5 dropouts would add 10mm to the CS length, but I am not sure yet if they change SA negatively as they may slacken it out a little with 26 wheels.

 

[rowdyflat]

Another fix that I dont think has been mentioned is a longer rear shock .
I did that with one bike no probs .
It lifts the bottom bracket + steepens the seat angle .
You can check that it wont foul on the frame first.

 

[placebo]

If i can work out if I can lower a 2013 lyrik from 170 to 160 it'll steepen the SA slightly and 27.5 dropouts would add 10mm to the CS length, but I am not sure yet if they change SA negatively as they may slacken it out a little with 26 wheels.

Rockshox used to have spacers callled "all-travel" or something like that. In solo air forks you could drop one onto the air spring shaft after removing the piston to lower the fork and travel by 20mm. I used one to lower a totem after seeing done on another site. If you cut one in half with the cut part facing the bottom of the air chamber and the flat surface facing the piston you'd probably have a cheaper way of dropping your lyric to 160mm than finding a 160mm shaft from an old lyric.

 

[MARKL]

I ride an intense slopestyle2 around a bit as well. It has a sloped seat tube that put me too far back with the seat at the necessary extension for my leg length, so I reversed the reverb post to move the seat forward when extended. If the post you're using has setback like a reverb, maybe that could help.

I have an original SS, one of the reasons I got it over the SS2 was the seat post angle. How do you like? Awesome looking bike.

 

[placebo]

It's a fun bike. Slack, low, stiff. With a dropper fork and XX1 group it climbs well too. I'd cracked a tracer vp at the machined relief on the swing arm where they mostly all broke, and got a deal on the SS2. I loved the tracer, so I didn't hesitate. The seat angle and rear triangle width (not many cranks for 73mm bb have a q-factor wide enough to fit) were problems I hadn't considered though.

 

[scblack]

I ride an intense slopestyle2 around a bit as well. It has a sloped seat tube that put me too far back with the seat at the necessary extension for my leg length, so I reversed the reverb post to move the seat forward when extended. If the post you're using has setback like a reverb, maybe that could help.

I have an Intense SlopeStyle2 also. That idea to swap the setback seatpost around to get better pedalling was suggested to me just last week. I use an Intense seatpost so it is setback, but I just hope the angle can be reversed enough to be properly rideable.

 

[Mywifesirrational]

I Thought I'd update this with a conclusion.

Went to an XL Nomad frame, with the geometry being slightly different, longer stays, steeper STA and longer top tube / more reach. Whilst it's a little more than 25mm longer, I've gpne from a 65mm stem back to a 50mm stem, so length has only increase by little more than 10mm.

While nothing geometry wise is much different on paper, this has solved the issues I was having on the Rune, I can keep the front down on steep climbs and clear sections again that I could not on the Rune. The larger frame is the the main factor I think, as I can slide my weight more forward (and run the saddle more forward), but the trade off I am not sure has been worth it. This things is a bit of a pig unless the tracks steep enough to make use of the geometry and long wheelbase, the bikes also not as playful for this reason.

Another advantage is I have been able to run much higer bars, which I am quite liking when flying through the air or going down something steep, I've always run really low bars, but I think this was probably a compensaton for frames that were too short (it artificially extends the reach - been playing in the biomechanics lab at work) - although I do prefer smaller frames but practically it wasn't working out.

 

[Ivan]

Effective seat angle is super important and often overlooked. I won't buy a bike with lower than 73 deg at my seat height

 

[datnat]

Nice outcome there MWII!

Out of interest, what bars are you running now?

Cheers

 

[Mywifesirrational]

Nice outcome there MWII!

Out of interest, what bars are you running now?

Cheers

woo, subscirption never tells me when things get posted.. bloody internet.

running renthal carbons 780mm with 30mm rise, nice bars.

Thought this might be an interesting update for anyone still reading this, banshee have been reading my thread, well not likely but you never know.

2016 Banshee Rune Updates

Geometry is now optimised for 27.5 wheels and ergonomic updates for better weight distribution.
- Longer top tube and reach in all sizes.
- 0.5deg slacker head angle
- 0.5deg steeper seat angle on Small and Medium, 1.0deg on Large and Extra Large
- Splined ISCG tabs (like 2015 Darkside)
- Lower Standover
- Improved cable routing
- Refined shock mount
- Introduction of Rock Shox Monarch Plus shock option

This was the exact thing I had issues with, a longer pole made the effective STA way to slack for decvent climbing, really nice to see that they have addressed this and even made is size specific. Well done Banshee, tall people will be getting chubs over this.

Ooh, and I still think the Rune is a better (more playful fun bike) than the nomad, after a year of being on the nomad.