banshee mx frame?

[97sicshee]

I know i've seen a componey that makes banshee frames that are basicly 250r susp. comp. I just need to know were i can get it from?

[dawarriorman]

I believe Lonestars frame used 250r geometry. Laeger can make you one too. Be prepared to fork out BIG bucks though, they aren't cheap.

[97sicshee]

I know its expensive but it seems worth it to me.Where can i find out more info or pics.

[dawarriorman]

www.lsracing.com

www.laegerracing.com

You might have to call laeger to get information from them.

[Banshee17Racing]

I would really like to see more pics of your bike. Do they sell long travel arms w/ the chassis set-up, too? If only I had the money...

[decon]

always wondered if someone with the fab skills could give a stock frame off a shee 250r geometry. cheaper alternative to the aftermarket frame.

[97sicshee]

Lobo you got me sold,I dont race but thats what i want.

[97sicshee]

Forgot to ask,Is the front any lighter?

[dawarriorman]

You got about 10 grand and they can build it out of titanium

 

But otherwise I doubt there would be much weight difference either way.

[97sicshee]

Iwas just hoping i h8 how nose heavy banshee's are but 10,000 seems a little steep.Im pritty sure my girl would shoot me unless i got one for her shee.

[decon]

Not unless you know how to figure motion ratios and have a frame jig. The problem with doing the 250R stuff in a stock frame is that the entire front section would have to be cut off because the 250R has about 4-5 more degree's of rake in it. The only other thing out there that can come close is the Roll Design LoboII front end for a stock chassis banshee.

447346[/snapback]

 

what's special about the roll design loboII front end? im interested in what your talking about.and about the stock frame thing, their was a company that mated the 250r front end to the banshee's. they charged about 900 but then you had to use 250r components.

[decon]

thanks for the info...the roll design lobo II suspension is pricy though but you've caught my attention, I will look into it.

[dawarriorman]

Theres no way you can accomplish the same thing as adding more rake to the frame. You can twist the a-arms any which you you want, put damn loops in them. Unless you mod the frame, they will all pivot in the exact same position. If the shock mounts are in the same position as stock, then you get the same range of motion as stock.

 

I don't mean to be an ass, but Its frankly its annoying that so many people think every thing Roll makes has been touched by the hand of God.

Edited December 12, 2005 by dawarriorman

[dawarriorman]

Oh and God is always capitalized, you should be ashamed of yourself. 

447678[/snapback]

 

No, I really want to know what makes you think that though. Is it something Roll said, or did someone else say it? The geometry of the front end is determined by the a-arm mount positions, the shock mount positions, and the spindle dimensions. Nothing else can affect it (tie rods affect the steering). All those fancy shapes you see in the long travel a-arms are just different ways of moving the shock mount to fit a longer shock.

Edited December 12, 2005 by dawarriorman

[PUSH THE THROTTLE]

No, I really want to know what makes you think that though.  Is it something Roll said, or did someone else say it?  The geometry of the front end is determined by the a-arm mount positions, the shock mount positions, and the spindle dimensions.  Nothing else can affect it (tie rods affect the steering).  All those fancy shapes you see in the long travel a-arms are just different ways of moving the shock mount to fit a longer shock.

447737[/snapback]

To my thinking dawarriorman is right. I don't see how a twist can make the arm do anything other than go over a treestump a little easier, your geometry can't change other than positional due to width and length increases. But then again I'm no suspension expert.