Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
Cancel
Create thread New Forums

Prime vs phantom geometry

Jump to Latest
1 - 20 of 26 Posts

FM

· Well-known member
Joined
·
9,592 Posts
Discussion starter · #1 · (Edited)
Seems like a good thread to start after an awesome ride on my prime and a few pints :)

So looking at the numbers;
  • BB height, ~roughly the same
  • chainstay length, ~roughly the same
  • Phantom -25mm rear travel
  • Phantom -15mm wheelbase
  • Phantom +10mm ETT/reach
  • Head angles ~identical (per drop-out settings)
  • Spec fork a2c lengths, 531mm (phantom) vs 546mm (prime). Not sure what actual forks these lengths relate to- seems like 120 vs. 135mm travel

Based on the numbers, these two are more similar than I had expected :confused:

I recently bumped the Pike on my prime to 160mm, and now it's feeling just a bit slow in the corners to me, however that could just be the trails I've been riding. Also notice I get most all the rear travel, but rarely more than 140mm up front, on most rides.

Just pondering where these bikes overlap and where the sweet spot is, geometry wise, for different terrain...
 
#3 ·
Linkagedesign.blogspot.com has data on both now. The anti-squat appears lower than expected on Phantom. Just struck me as an odd one, having eyed at the site for a while now. I expected optimization for 30-32T, 100% or more anti-squat in the context of a KS-link XC-ish bike, but what do I know! Of course the other values need to be considered as well, but I'm no good at that.
 
#4 ·
The geometry is close, no doubt. As a lover of the Prime, I'm kinda glad. I at least know what I'm getting myself into with it. I feel like I'm overbiked for 99% of my trails/talent so the thought of having a quicker version of the Prime really interests me.

I guess I'll find out soon enough. If I lived out where you do FM, I'd probably just stick to the Prime as it's a phenomenal bike.
 
Discussion starter · #6 ·
Fun stuff.... Yes Leverage ratios and also I was thinking "sagged" geometry would be different even with the same BB heights. With less travel, maybe that gives the phantom just a hair taller BB.

I'm guessing the weight difference is minor.... certainly less than the beer I typically haul!

Colin+M said:
I guess I'll find out soon enough. If I lived out where you do FM, I'd probably just stick to the Prime as it's a phenomenal bike.
Click to expand...
No doubt. I'm guessing the Phantom might corner a little better, but I often ride the Prime on "full face" trails, and it does great on those. My shoulder is about 90% after my dislocation/fracture in February, so I'm not really pushing the bike or myself that hard yet.

I would say I'm not 100% sold on the handling with pike at 160mm. I did drop the bars 10mm so bar height is the same as before.

I think I'll try the neutral chips- that might quicken things up just a hair and it's less work than pulling my fork apart again!
 
#7 ·
To me FM, you hit the nail on the head, not much different in terms of numbers on paper, felt very at home when I hoped on my Phantom from the Prime. What I did feel on the Phantom compared to the Prime was the less weight, more connected to the trail feel, more efficient climbing, doesn't feel like a monster truck/tank that will just plow over everything and the 10mm longer Reach meant I could go for a Large instead of XL, so dropped 2.5" off WB, so more agile. Like Colin said, definitely don't feel "Over Biked" as I used to on the Prime, suits my trails much more.
 
#8 ·
It does seems a bit odd cause the two frame are much alike. No make sense same BB height with 25 mm less travel. No make sense such slack angles for 29er trail geometry. Spitfire and rune differ in many aspects cause they aim not the same use. I ride the prime and was waiting for phantom from last april. Meantime bought the Canyon nerve 29er . I was thinking to combine the two into the phantom with 2 sets of wheels in order to get one bike that does it all, but...... The phantom doesnt apear to be such bike. Its another dh speed oriented bike which will be very slugishhhh in xc`s trails exactely like its big bro. TaLking about over rated cs lengh? We should talk about overrated slack head angles.....
As i stated in another post, for me the sweet spot would be 13" bb height with 68.5 in the slack position.
 
#9 · (Edited)
So you don't like the Phantom, a bike you never have ridden, and still you say it would be sluggish on your XC trail - that makes sense?!
You guys need to stop talking facts on something you haven't tried in real life.

If the spec's dosen't suit you, there are other brands you know..
I don't think that the guys at Banshee are gonna change the geo anytime soon, i think they're pretty happy with the bike as it is.
And good luck finding that one do-it-all-bike;)

For the record, the Phantom rides a lot lower than the Prime (bb-wise) even though the numbers says otherwise.
 
#10 ·
Yes, it does make sense. You and I have just enough experience to make some assumptions like the one we take.
Like the prime, it will be a great ride, the question is if it will be more versatile than the prime.
And for the record, my criticism is for a very good reason. I want this frame so I`m trying to customise it for my needs ;-). And for the record #2 - The time that you will reply in the same manner when one writes a post that will glorified the design without riding it , then your comment will make sense.
Cheers mate.
 
#11 ·
I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one, the Phantom and Prime while initially the transition feels the same when you hop from one to another pedaling around in front your house, that's about where it ends. The Phantom is a very different feeling to the Prime, very much more feedback from the trail, more connected, definitely more nimble and agile and doesn't in the least feel monster truck/bus like. The suspension however doesn't feel harsh, has the same, "Oh I used all the travel, when was that" feel of the Prime, but oh so more responsive & nimble.

I'm a slow tech guy, could say I like to ride kind of Trials like, I like that stuff, have never really been too much a fan of the fast DHs, but the Phantom is making them fun for me, much easier to control and throw about in the tight and twisties and pedaling on the flats and UHs, it flies.

Guyg said:
It does seems a bit odd cause the two frame are much alike. No make sense same BB height with 25 mm less travel. No make sense such slack angles for 29er trail geometry. Spitfire and rune differ in many aspects cause they aim not the same use. I ride the prime and was waiting for phantom from last april. Meantime bought the Canyon nerve 29er . I was thinking to combine the two into the phantom with 2 sets of wheels in order to get one bike that does it all, but...... The phantom doesnt apear to be such bike. Its another dh speed oriented bike which will be very slugishhhh in xc`s trails exactely like its big bro. TaLking about over rated cs lengh? We should talk about overrated slack head angles.....
As i stated in another post, for me the sweet spot would be 13" bb height with 68.5 in the slack position.
Click to expand...
 
Discussion starter · #12 ·
Kofoed said:
For the record, the Phantom rides a lot lower than the Prime (bb-wise) even though the numbers says otherwise.
Click to expand...
Im having a hard time getting my head around that one. My guess is that the BB heights are very similar, but the phantom allows for a much lower front end vs the prime.

Along the same lines... I was wondering how the Phantom chops -15mm off the wheelbase despite having similar angles and chainstay length, and a longer ETT/reach. It must be that longer fork on the Prime, which puts the front wheel farther out. The longer fork that also makes the front end taller.

To be clear, I am not judging the Phantom :)
Just interested in comparing the geometry and maybe tweaking my Prime a little bit. The more I think through it, it's the fork. I was happy at 150mm but increasing the fork to 160mm slowed the steering down and now I'd like it quicker. So it's either shorten the fork or adjust the drop-outs.
 
#14 · (Edited)
Guyg said:
Yes, it does make sense. You and I have just enough experience to make some assumptions like the one we take.
Like the prime, it will be a great ride, the question is if it will be more versatile than the prime.
And for the record, my criticism is for a very good reason. I want this frame so I`m trying to customise it for my needs ;-). And for the record #2 - The time that you will reply in the same manner when one writes a post that will glorified the design without riding it , then your comment will make sense.
Cheers mate.
Click to expand...
#2 You are so right. But if I understand you correct I have to say that I am the happy owner of both bikes, so I do have some real world experience, mate..
 
#20 ·
FM said:
Along the same lines... I was wondering how the Phantom chops -15mm off the wheelbase despite having similar angles and chainstay length, and a longer ETT/reach.
Click to expand...
I have wondered the same thing. I thought that maybe it had something to do with the slightly different seat angle on the phantom. The picture in my head is the Phantom's slightly slacker seat angle puts the bb a little more forward and pulls the rear wheel in a little. I could be wrong...
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
About this Discussion
25 Replies
12 Participants
Last post:
Kofoed
Mountain Bike Reviews Forum
posts
16M
members
534K
Since
1990
A forum community dedicated to Mountain Bike owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about bike parts, components, deals, performance, modifications, classifieds, trails, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
General Discussion Downhill - Freeride California - Norcal Shocks and Suspension Passion