Review: Raaw Madonna V3 - Yes, It's Still Great
The third version of the Raaw Madonna builds on the rock solid foundation established by the previous iterations – the bike already had a well-deserved reputation for being a tough, reliable enduro bike, so there was no need for a complete overhaul. Instead, it was more about refining some of the aluminum frame's features, as well as increasing the level of adjustability.
The travel amount remains the same at 160mm, and Raaw recommends running a 170mm fork, although it is dual-crown compatible for riders who want to build up a bike park smasher. Replaceable lower shock mounts are used to allow the bike to run either a 29” or 27.5” wheel, and the mounts can also be used to change the amount of shock progression.
The travel amount remains the same at 160mm, and Raaw recommends running a 170mm fork, although it is dual-crown compatible for riders who want to build up a bike park smasher. Replaceable lower shock mounts are used to allow the bike to run either a 29” or 27.5” wheel, and the mounts can also be used to change the amount of shock progression.
Madonna V3 Details
• 160mm travel, 170mm fork
• Aluminum frame
• 29" wheels (mixed wheel shock mount available)
• Sizes: S, M, L, XL, XXL
• Weight (size L, no pedals, mixed wheels): 36.5 lb / 16.5 kg
• Price: frame kits from $2,603, rolling chassis from $4,614.
• raawmtb.com
• 160mm travel, 170mm fork
• Aluminum frame
• 29" wheels (mixed wheel shock mount available)
• Sizes: S, M, L, XL, XXL
• Weight (size L, no pedals, mixed wheels): 36.5 lb / 16.5 kg
• Price: frame kits from $2,603, rolling chassis from $4,614.
• raawmtb.com
The Madonna is available as a frame only for $2,603 (that's without a shock), and Raaw also has rolling chassis options starting at $4,614 USD, which includes everything except brakes and a drivetrain.
 | I'm convinced there's something special about the geometry recipe Raaw has cooked up. The low bottom bracket and tall front end make it almost impossible to have poor form. |
Frame Details
As I mentioned, the new Madonna isn't drastically different from the previous version. The top tube is a little lower and the rocker link is a little smaller, but you'd be forgiven for not immediately noticing the changes.
The bearing and pivot hardware were also updated, in order to help reduce the likelihood of creaking, and to increase the overall strength. Those updates include wider bearings, and axles that run directly through the bearings rather than using any sort of reducing hardware.
The Madonna has fully external cable routing (well, except for the brief portion of the dropper post housing that's inside the seat tube), and it all runs along the top of the down tube and then through the bolt-on cable guides on either side of the head tube. It makes building up the bike or swapping out parts refreshingly easy – there's no need to take the fork off, or try to fit your hand inside a teeny tiny hole to get everything installed properly.
![Raaw Madonna V3 review]()
The seat tube isn't totally straight, which means there is a limit when it comes to dropper post length. That said, I was able to run a 210mm OneUp dropper with room to spare on a size large frame, so I don't have any complaints about the fit of the size large for my 5'11" height and 33" inseam. That V2 OneUp dropper post bottoms out at 7mm from fully slammed, and the V3 (which is a little longer in the 210mm size) bottoms out at 23mm from fully slammed.
Given its fairly simple and straightforward look, the Madonna V3 packs in a lot of potential adjustments. The chainstay length can be altered by + or -5mm by using a different axle kit, the shock progression can be changed by + or – 3% from the stock 26% progression via the lower shock mounts, and the bottom bracket height can be raised or lowered by 3mm, also by swapping those lower shock mounts. On their own the changes aren't massive, but combine a few of them and there will be a noticeable change in the bike's handling characteristics.
![Raaw Madonna V3 review]()
![Raaw Madonna V3 review]()
![Raaw Madonna V3 review]()
![Raaw Madonna V3 review]()
As I mentioned, the new Madonna isn't drastically different from the previous version. The top tube is a little lower and the rocker link is a little smaller, but you'd be forgiven for not immediately noticing the changes.
The bearing and pivot hardware were also updated, in order to help reduce the likelihood of creaking, and to increase the overall strength. Those updates include wider bearings, and axles that run directly through the bearings rather than using any sort of reducing hardware.
The Madonna has fully external cable routing (well, except for the brief portion of the dropper post housing that's inside the seat tube), and it all runs along the top of the down tube and then through the bolt-on cable guides on either side of the head tube. It makes building up the bike or swapping out parts refreshingly easy – there's no need to take the fork off, or try to fit your hand inside a teeny tiny hole to get everything installed properly.
The seat tube isn't totally straight, which means there is a limit when it comes to dropper post length. That said, I was able to run a 210mm OneUp dropper with room to spare on a size large frame, so I don't have any complaints about the fit of the size large for my 5'11" height and 33" inseam. That V2 OneUp dropper post bottoms out at 7mm from fully slammed, and the V3 (which is a little longer in the 210mm size) bottoms out at 23mm from fully slammed.
Given its fairly simple and straightforward look, the Madonna V3 packs in a lot of potential adjustments. The chainstay length can be altered by + or -5mm by using a different axle kit, the shock progression can be changed by + or – 3% from the stock 26% progression via the lower shock mounts, and the bottom bracket height can be raised or lowered by 3mm, also by swapping those lower shock mounts. On their own the changes aren't massive, but combine a few of them and there will be a noticeable change in the bike's handling characteristics.
Geometry
The Madonna's 64-degree head angle is pretty standard for enduro-ish bikes these days – it seems to hit something of a sweet spot when it comes to all-round handling. Of course, the straight headtube does make it easier to go even slacker by installing an angle adjust headset, but I didn't see any need to go that route during testing.
The reach numbers of the Madonna are fairly typical as well, ranging from 430mm on the size small and going up to 530mm on the XXL. It's when you look at the stack, bottom bracket height, and chainstay length that the Madonna's geometry starts to deviate a little from the norm.
The size large I tested has a chainstay length of 450mm, which is on the longer side compared to other bikes in this category. For instance, out of the 8 bikes we featured in last year's Enduro Field Test, all of the chainstays were sub-450mm, although the Commencal Meta SX and Pole Onni come close, at 447mm and 448mm respectively. More companies are starting to test the longer chainstay waters, but it's been a slow process – apparently the 'shorter is better' mindset takes a long time to shake.
The Raaw has a stack height of 664mm, another number that's on the higher side of the scale. That high front end combined with a generous bottom bracket drop of 35mm us a recipe for a fun time on steeper trails – I'll explain more in the ride impressions section of this review.
Suspension Design
The Madonna uses a Horst link suspension layout, with two different rocker links available – the 60 and 65 – that are used to change the leverage ratio depending on rider weight. The 60 is for riders under 90 kg and uses a 60mm stroke shock, while the 65 is for riders over 90 kg and uses a 65mm shock. The progression is nearly identical between the two, at 26% for the 60 and 23% for the 65.
Anti-squat sits at almost exactly 100% at the recommended amount of sag, and then decreases as the bike goes through its travel. Anti-rise is at a consistent mid-40% level for the majority of the travel, a number that should allow the rear suspension to remain active under braking.
![Raaw Madonna V3 review]()
![Raaw Madonna V3 review]()
The Madonna uses a Horst link suspension layout, with two different rocker links available – the 60 and 65 – that are used to change the leverage ratio depending on rider weight. The 60 is for riders under 90 kg and uses a 60mm stroke shock, while the 65 is for riders over 90 kg and uses a 65mm shock. The progression is nearly identical between the two, at 26% for the 60 and 23% for the 65.
Anti-squat sits at almost exactly 100% at the recommended amount of sag, and then decreases as the bike goes through its travel. Anti-rise is at a consistent mid-40% level for the majority of the travel, a number that should allow the rear suspension to remain active under braking.
Test Bike Setup
As far as the basics go, I ran 770mm wide bars with a 40mm stem. Tires were usually a Maxxis Assegai up front, and a DHR II out back, both with a MaxxGrip compound and DoubleDown casing – that's my preferred setup for most fall / winter rides here in the Pacific Northwest. Pressures were 20psi in the front and 23 in the rear.
Raaw has detailed suspension setup tables on their website, and I found the recommended settings to be an excellent starting point. With the Ohlins TTX22 that I used for most of the test period I ran a 480 lb spring, which put me at 26% sag. LSC was set to 11, and LSR was 4, all clicks from closed. I ran 87 psi in the Fox 38 with two volume spacers.
As far as the basics go, I ran 770mm wide bars with a 40mm stem. Tires were usually a Maxxis Assegai up front, and a DHR II out back, both with a MaxxGrip compound and DoubleDown casing – that's my preferred setup for most fall / winter rides here in the Pacific Northwest. Pressures were 20psi in the front and 23 in the rear.
Raaw has detailed suspension setup tables on their website, and I found the recommended settings to be an excellent starting point. With the Ohlins TTX22 that I used for most of the test period I ran a 480 lb spring, which put me at 26% sag. LSC was set to 11, and LSR was 4, all clicks from closed. I ran 87 psi in the Fox 38 with two volume spacers.
Mike Kazimer
Location: Bellingham, WA, USA
Height: 5'11" / 180cm
Inseam: 33" / 84cm
Weight: 160 lbs / 72.6 kg
Industry affiliations / sponsors: None
Instagram: @mikekazimer
Location: Bellingham, WA, USA
Height: 5'11" / 180cm
Inseam: 33" / 84cm
Weight: 160 lbs / 72.6 kg
Industry affiliations / sponsors: None
Instagram: @mikekazimer
Testing Info
Testing took place in Bellingham, Washington, Squamish, BC, over a four month time period. Conditions varied between wet and wetter, but the sun did make a few welcome appearances. The Trailforks lap from the 2022 Whistler EWS above would be an ideal big day out on the Raaw, with a mix of chairlift and pedal-assisted climbing, followed by big descents filled with wheel-eating holes, thick roots, and plenty of rocks.
Climbing
The Raaw's steep, 78-degree seat angle and tall front end give it a riding position that's not world's apart from that of a commuter bike, and I'm all for it. It works well given the Madonna's intentions – I probably wouldn't be as enamored if this was a trail bike with less travel and a shorter wheelbase, but for a fairly slack, long bike, that position is very comfortable.
It can feel a little strange at first, almost like you're on a Stairmaster, or one of those goofy ElliptiGo bikes that I think old people buy from late-night infomercials, but the very centered position does have benefits – it makes the relatively long wheelbase feel much more manageable. Being centered means that it's possible to stay seated and keep pedaling through steep, tight uphill switchbacks, rather than needing to stand up and lean forward to keep weight on the front wheel.
Even with the Ohlins coil shock installed there wasn't an excessive amount of pedal bob, and I'd typically only flick the compression lever for long fire road approaches, and even then only moved it into the middle position. One thing I would highly recommend is running 165mm cranks. The bottom bracket is very low, and going with shorter cranks means you're much less likely to smack pedals. The difference between 170mm and 165mm cranks is noticeable, especially in chunkier terrain.
![Raaw Madonna V3 review]()
The Raaw's steep, 78-degree seat angle and tall front end give it a riding position that's not world's apart from that of a commuter bike, and I'm all for it. It works well given the Madonna's intentions – I probably wouldn't be as enamored if this was a trail bike with less travel and a shorter wheelbase, but for a fairly slack, long bike, that position is very comfortable.
It can feel a little strange at first, almost like you're on a Stairmaster, or one of those goofy ElliptiGo bikes that I think old people buy from late-night infomercials, but the very centered position does have benefits – it makes the relatively long wheelbase feel much more manageable. Being centered means that it's possible to stay seated and keep pedaling through steep, tight uphill switchbacks, rather than needing to stand up and lean forward to keep weight on the front wheel.
Even with the Ohlins coil shock installed there wasn't an excessive amount of pedal bob, and I'd typically only flick the compression lever for long fire road approaches, and even then only moved it into the middle position. One thing I would highly recommend is running 165mm cranks. The bottom bracket is very low, and going with shorter cranks means you're much less likely to smack pedals. The difference between 170mm and 165mm cranks is noticeable, especially in chunkier terrain.
Descending
Version 3.0 of the Madonna is a little slacker and a little longer than the version I reviewed back in 2020, but if anything, those changes all add up to create an even more potent descender, and that's saying something – version 2.0 was certainly no slouch.
The concept of 'safe speed' kept rattling around in my head when I was on the Madonna. It's the difference between going 120 mph in a luxury car versus a clapped out jalopy – in one of them that high speed isn't an issue, and you can actually look around and enjoy the ride, while in the other it's a roll of the dice as to whether or not it'll rattle apart. The Madonna has that safe speed characteristic – it feels unflappable, with an addictive locked-in feel, especially while cornering.
I'm convinced there's something special about the geometry recipe Raaw has cooked up. The low bottom bracket and tall front end make it almost impossible to have poor form – your weight naturally ends up in the correct spot, centered and balanced, and ready to rail turns. That position gives it a very carvy sensation – the whole bike seems to move as one cohesive unit.
The Fox 38 / Ohlins TTX22 suspension combo is an excellent one. It takes the edge off those big hits, while transmitting just enough feedback to really be able to tell what's going on underneath the wheels. The shock's bottom out bumper is generous, and I never had even a hint harshness at the end of the stroke.
29” vs Mullet
For pure, unadulterated speed, especially in a straight line, the 29” setup will be the way to go. I enjoyed the Madonna in this configuration, but it does give it a bigger presence compared to the mixed-wheel setup – it's fun on flat out sections of trail, but doesn't have the same level of maneuverability at slower speeds as the mixed wheel setup.
I'm pretty sold on mixed wheels for longer travel bikes, and that holds true with the Madonna – that ended up being my preferred setup, mainly due to the handling on steep trails and in tight corners.
Raaw Madonna
Atherton S170
How Does It Compare?
The Atherton S170 was recently released, another high-end aluminum option that's designed with similar intentions to the Raaw. The lugged construction of the S170 is the reason why there are so many size options – 12 to be exact – versus the five options offered by Raaw. As far as the geometry goes, the S170 has a slightly slacker head angle due to the 180mm fork, a shorter head tube length, and shorter chainstays.
On the trail, the S170 has more of a park bike feel – the back end is easy to slide around turns, and it has a good amount of pop even with a coil shock. Neither bike will hold you back on the descents, but I did prefer the longer chainstays and higher stack of the Raaw – those dimenions worked well with my riding style. While both bikes are descent-oriented, the S170 feels even more gravity oriented than the Madonna. Categorizing bikes in this travel bracket can by tricky, but I'd say the S170 is more of a mini-DH thing, and the Madonna is an enduro bike. Either way, for a longer adventure without any chairlifts in sight I'd be more likely to grab the Madonna.
As far as weight goes, the S170 frame is a little heavier than the Raaw, although I don't have the exact figures. Neither bike is a lightweight, but it'll take more work to get the S170 below that 36-pound mark. Both frame only options are in a similar ballpark – the Madonna with a Fox DHX2 and SLS spring is $3,163 USD, and the S170 is $2,962 with a regular spring.
At the end of the day, the Raaw is still a big bike, one that's happiest at higher speeds and tracks. It's not going to be as mindblowing on flatter, smoother terrain – in those instances the weight and length start to become more apparent. It's a little less versatile compared to something like the Ibis HD6 – that bike has a similar amount of travel, but a slightly slacker seat angle and shorter wheelbase. It wouldn't be out of the question to use the HD6 as a long travel all-mountain rig, no matter what Henry Quinney thinks of that term, while the Madonna is happiest when the trail is extra-rugged.
SRAM Maven brakes.
Roval Traverse HD wheels.
Technical Report
Coil vs Air: I tested the Madonna with both the Fox Float X air shock and the Ohlins TTX2 coil. The Float X gives it a more energetic feel; it's a bit more eager to get airborne, and it doesn't dip into its travel as much while climbing. There's still good traction, although the coil option is the way to go to maximize the amount of grip.
I initially swapped back and forth, but eventually settled on the Ohlins for the remainder of the test period. Conditions were extra-wet, and that shock delivers an incredible amount of traction, even when the roots where covered with an icy muck. It give the Madonna a very calm, settled ride quality, exactly what I was looking for while trying to make my way down steep trails in heinous conditions.
SRAM Maven brakes: The Madonna served as the test platform for the SRAM Maven brakes that Dario and I tested. My thoughts from that review remain the same – the brakes are very, very powerful, and lighter riders (myself included) may need to take steps to make that power useable. For me, the organic pads with Centerline rotors ended up being the ticket. Personally, I see the Mavens being best suited to e-bikes and DH bikes, and for bigger riders on enduro bikes. As for that lever feel that seems to be riling up the internet? Yes, it's a little harder to pull than Codes, but no so much that it really bothered me, although it would have been nice if SRAM took a page out of the Hayes Dominion playbook and lightened up that lever action.
Roval Traverse HD Carbon wheels: I've been running these wheels on various bikes since last summer and they're still going strong. I've had a grand total of zero flats, and I only had to do a quick true of the rear wheel to get rid of a slight wobble, and that was after months of hard laps. These will be getting a full review in the nearish future, but so far I have zero complaints – they do exactly what you'd want a nice carbon wheelset to do.
Coil vs Air: I tested the Madonna with both the Fox Float X air shock and the Ohlins TTX2 coil. The Float X gives it a more energetic feel; it's a bit more eager to get airborne, and it doesn't dip into its travel as much while climbing. There's still good traction, although the coil option is the way to go to maximize the amount of grip.
I initially swapped back and forth, but eventually settled on the Ohlins for the remainder of the test period. Conditions were extra-wet, and that shock delivers an incredible amount of traction, even when the roots where covered with an icy muck. It give the Madonna a very calm, settled ride quality, exactly what I was looking for while trying to make my way down steep trails in heinous conditions.
SRAM Maven brakes: The Madonna served as the test platform for the SRAM Maven brakes that Dario and I tested. My thoughts from that review remain the same – the brakes are very, very powerful, and lighter riders (myself included) may need to take steps to make that power useable. For me, the organic pads with Centerline rotors ended up being the ticket. Personally, I see the Mavens being best suited to e-bikes and DH bikes, and for bigger riders on enduro bikes. As for that lever feel that seems to be riling up the internet? Yes, it's a little harder to pull than Codes, but no so much that it really bothered me, although it would have been nice if SRAM took a page out of the Hayes Dominion playbook and lightened up that lever action.
Roval Traverse HD Carbon wheels: I've been running these wheels on various bikes since last summer and they're still going strong. I've had a grand total of zero flats, and I only had to do a quick true of the rear wheel to get rid of a slight wobble, and that was after months of hard laps. These will be getting a full review in the nearish future, but so far I have zero complaints – they do exactly what you'd want a nice carbon wheelset to do.
Pros
+ Excellent geometry
+ Great traction with coil or air shock
+ Plenty of adjustments for fine tuning geometry or suspension feel
Cons
- Relatively expensive for an aluminum frame
Pinkbike's Take
| Time for a trip down memory lane. Back in the early 2000s, right around the time when fat powder skis were really catching on, word started to spread about the Volkl Explosiv. It was a wide (for the time) and stiff ski, built to take a beating, the ideal tool for the contingent of ski bums who enjoyed billygoating through rocks that were barely covered with snow. It was the ski for a number of seasons, earning a cult following amongst the global ski bum collective. In my mind, the Madonna is the modern mountain bike equivalent of that classic. It's not overly flashy, there's no gimmickry, it's simply a solid, well-executed mountain bike that's built to last, and deliver a very good time in the process. |
Author Info:
Must Read This Week
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup
One thing Atherton are doing well though is sizing. At my height I would be looking for 490-495 reach on a bike like this. As I often do though, I'm falling between sizes on the RAAW. L is 480 and XL is 505. Just too small and just too big for me I think. Seems kinda crazy to have +/- 3% shock progression, +/- 5mm chainstay, but you have 25mm jumps in reach and seat tube between sizes.
I probably need to STFU and just pick one and ride it.
It's not easy being a perfectionist nerd.
420 limits shorter riders to ~ 150 dropper which sucks.
The only reason that 99% of brands don't offer a dozen sizes is manufacturing and tooling cost isn't supported by the demand for exact sizing.
Hopefully part of the next revolution in the bike industry will be fine-grained sizing options across a lot of manufacturers, as additive manufacturing matures. Adjustable geo is a great intermediate step that more bikes should offer.
you need to STFU and pick a bike and ride it.
Youre preferred Reach numbers are meaningless on their own, and Stack, Seat Angle, Head Angle, BB height, wheel size, CS length all play a part.
I'm not trying to be argumentative, or call you out, we can all take this advice. The "perfect" anything doesnt exist, as there a million variables in play, that change when going down the trail.
I'm always reminded that some people see opportunity in difference, and others see roadblocks.
How does T-shirt sizing change anything, call it S sizing, or R sizing, or anything, it doesnt matter.
Everyone is "between" sizing, theres no one thing thats perfect, its all a compromise one way or another, so you find the series of compromises that works best for you, at the time.....Thats important, cause those compromises are going to change over time, type of trails, terrain, innovations, etc.
you honestly, hand over heart think you can tell the performance difference between 20mm?
Worth noting, the Raaw has huge stack in comparison to most other bikes.
From span perspective (Hypotenuse between reach and stack), the Large Raaw, is as large as most XL's from other brands, which might have more reach.
Raaw Madonna v3 Large has 480mm of reach, but 664mm of stack.
Transition Spire in XL has 510mm of reach, and 637mm of stack, but is 3mm smaller than the Large V3 in Span.
The new Knolly Chilcotin 167 in size large has 509mm of reach, and 637mm of stack... but measures slightly smaller in span (2mm smaller than the Raaw).
My bad man!
I've demo'd and ridden others' bikes and while I can of course adapt sufficiently to ride trails on even a size up or down, I always jump back on my own setup and it just feels right. In a sport where enjoyment is defined by the user, I'll opt for fit down to 5mm if I can achieve it at reasonable cost. (And I kind of love the search for "optimal".)
Raise or lower your stem height by 10mm and ride your favorite section of your favorite trail a bunch of times.
Not trying to see roadblocks, just looking forward to an "even better" when I can choose my perfect size bike for reasonable cost.
"T-Shirt" sizing just means "3 or 4 sizes". I want shoe sizes, pants sizes. Atherton delivers (but it's expensive til the tech is commoditized.)
If given a free custom fitted suit, I dunno who'd say "nah I'm fine with this one on the rack, thanks" except for the mannequin it was tailored for.
It's not a premium brand. It's *supposed* to be the budget brand.
Honestly, if those are the prices they're gunning for as a profit, with the entire mtb industry on sale right now, they're not looking too hot right now.
Theres no such thing as too small, I spent years riding "medium" bikes with 26" wheels, and sub 400 reach....You adapt.
Hell most early Freeriders, and racers were on bikes that we call kid sizing now, and theyd still be faster, more stylish, and smoother than prolly 99% of us.
Stop making silly excuses
So many of us telling ourselves "I'm just between sizes" like we are out here vying for WC gold, or feeding our families from riding bikes....
Honestly, we all need to have a stern conversation with ourselves...
Imma hit that up upvote button for ya bruh
I would have really liked to see the bottom bolted on rear shock mount be triangulated, rather than the tow slightly offset bolts. I feel like, those are going to want to start "rocking" when subjected to multiple bottom outs. I get that its part of the bb forged area, rather than the down tube, but I would have loved to see 3 triangulated bolts mounting that shock mount....
some combo of reliability/performance/affordability is what i aim for and this looks decent
@onawalk I think that's the first time anybody has ever apologised to me on Pinkbike
@likeittacky / @schwaaa31 / @Jordmackay - Glad I'm not the only one. When you're dropping so much money you really do want it to be a perfect fit and not feel like it's a compromise.
We all obsess over these things too much
Tailored suit, absolutly, a well fitting piece of clothing is a great thing, and most of us will never experience it. Thing is, I dont play basketball in my tailored suit, or change my oil, or go to the dentist, looks great when I'm standing in front of people though.
When we ride our bikes off road, especially on more advanced trails, we are making compromises continually. What might work best on the climb (steeper SA, steeper HA, lower stack, long CS) might not be what we want on the way down. Its all a compromise. The T-shirt sized bike, might be an advantage on a section of trail, and youve never really noticed, cause it faded into the background.
Having an idea of what you prefer can be great, but in my experience, it actually becomes a limiting factor for most people. People get focused on a certain aspect, and decide thats perfect for them, which makes change, either bad or good much more difficult.
Id be willing to bet, blind folded, most people wouldnt be able to tell the difference one way or another about 5-10 mm, and I'm willing to spend a weekend with anyone to test the theory.
Willing to bet, you have your brake levers set at the same height, same distance from your grips, etc, all in an effort for symmetry. But our bodies arent symmetrical, not even close, youve just become used to that setup, so changing things (confirmation bias is big here) feels strange, or wrong...
I support anyone trying, testing, friggin around, with their bikes and setup, its a good time, and you just might find something you like.
Loads of different sizes is cool, custom frames are cool, I love the idea of both, you can literally get a Marino frame for next to nothing, and play with sizing all you want.
Agree. Great points.
I don't play basketball in a suit either.
It's really nice at weddings though, and you could say that it performs better than an off-the-rack suit at its job. And because of approachable manufacturing cost, within the budget of a working person as much as a bike is.
I have to say, my comments are not a knock on the Madonna at all. I love RAAW's design and function-first approach. It's beautiful in its simplicity. Drool-worthy.
Don't most of us set brake lever position by feel, so they always end up a tad asymmetrical?
Similar with tire pressures - set, tinker, record? (and set per trail when you know what you like?)
100%, this sport is all about compromise and it's so damn addictive. It's messy, it's imperfect. - that's why so many of us are lifelong riders. The pursuit of "perfect" is neverending. Like the PB comments section.
Can you share with me how you came to this conclusion?
genuinely curious
(and then realize a month later (oh shit, I'd rather have the chainstay a little longer/shorter now...
Custom + some adjustable geo would be the ticket.
Right now there are a couple brands whose XL's are sized down 10-15mm from the norm, so there are some choices.
Funny to consider this conversation in a historical context though:
"I really want a seatpost that I can adjust up/down" .... "Naw man, just pick a height and stop being picky"
"Why do I have to have this dumb front derailleur?" ....
"Can't bikes come with longer/size-specific chainstays?" ....
It was possible to adjust a too-small frame up and a too-large frame down to be good enough, but there was a "better" in the middle.
Compared 3 similar-geo enduro bikes in the L - XL range (475, 484, 500mm reach).
Swapped stems between 40, 45, 50mm
Swapped bars with rises of 19, 38, 50mm
Tried all combinations over a couple months of riding, same-stack, same-reach, best-climbing, best-descending, handling, etc.
The 475 reach bike needed the longer stem to feel better on climbs, flats, ultimately felt like a longer reach could be better on the downhills, even with the tallest bars to help preserve effective reach.
500 reach bike climbed and descended great in straight lines, with the short 40mm stem + 19mm bar. With enough spacers the effective reach was reduced 10mm+ nicely. Front axle felt too far in front on tech twisties though.
Settled on 484 reach, 45mm stem slammed below spec for the most reach possible, and a 50mm rise bar to bring stack back up. As an all-round best compromise, this config is working. Front axle to bar position feels right, effective reach is comfy standing and seated, and the 45 stem just feels like a sweet spot turning-wise on a modern HA frame. A 50mm stem still works if I need more weight on the front tire or want to stretch out for a long ride.
you tested the same bike, just in different sizes?
Obviously bikes come in different sizes, just trying to clarify where what youre basing your opinion on. Some WC riders spend loads of time testing and trying things, others, not really at all. and honestly, neither of us are WC athletes, so what they do, has very little benefit to us
Yet at the same time I trust @RAAWMountainBikes doesn't do anything without thinking it through so if you're reading this, I'm curious why you chose to do it this way.
@ljblk: I doubt the extra length is going to help here.
A more simple but equally effective solution of what I suggested above is what for instance Alutech (and/or the "crowd") did with their ICB2.0 bike: guide the hose real close to the pivot: enduro-mtb.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/IBC_2.0-5-von-9-1140x760.jpg. That bike was actually designed at the beginning of the internal-routing madness so hoses and cables can be routed both internally as well as externally (or through the headset if you ditch the fork).
So ya 2.6k for an aluminum frame without a shock is kinda crazy, especially considering they are off the shelf geometry so its not like custom tubing and welding are occuring
demanding they have the same pricing as a specialized is crazy. you're comparing apples to starfruit and wondering why starfruit aren't 50 cents each instead of $3.
Yeah they are fruit, but one is far more exotic and hard to grow and in much more limited supply.
Knolly uses stupid super boost so add the cost of a new wheel. into it.
Specialized carbon frames are the best deal actually. Enduro frames are $2600 and S-works $3000.
Stumpy Evo runs $2050-$2500
Specialized carbon frames are the best deal actually. Enduro frames are $2600 and S-works $3000.
Stumpy Evo runs $2050-$2500
First point: Specialized is super expensive and we shouldn't be using it as a "value" price benchmark.
Second point: Raaw is a basic aluminum frame and I don't care that they're a small company; simple aluminum frames should not be more than $2k
Third point: Raaw can charge basically as much as they want because they have the demand, but it's not a good value just because so many people want it.
Quick search on some common alu frames full retail prices w/ rear shock in american monies. I know many of these are much cheaper right now. The smaller brands have less purchasing power from the Taiwanese frame factories, so they cost more, but they also look way better imo. Looks like Raaw is running at a premium over direct peers by about $500. Not saying they're not worth it. The Madonna frame is gorgeous.
Mainstream:
stumpy evo - $2100
ripmo AF - $2200
Small boutique(ish) brands:
knolly (fugitive / chilcotin) - $2300 - $2600
privateer 141 gen 2 - $2390
banshee prime - $2500
canfield lithum - $2500
raaw madonna v3 - $2940
I feel like you kind of get what you pay for with raaw. It's expensive, but it's also about the most future-proof, forever-bike frame (imo) that you can get. It's going to last you for as long as you want to keep it. The v2 was the first frame I had that wasn't fully clapped out after a couple of seasons. Definitely could have kept it running for years to come had I not decided to spoil myself.
Banshee is way outdated and can't be compared to the rest.
Privateer UGLY AF and cannot be compared to the RAAW.
Transition aluminum frames are crap.
They can all be compared to Raaw because they're all boutique(ish) brands selling performance aluminum frames near the same pricepoint. And prices listed include a rear shock.
Agree 157 spacing adds cost to a Knolly frame swap. Banshees look fully modern to me. Frames are beautiful, geo modern and with some modularity built in, and a nice dual link design. Privateers are... not quite there yet in the looks department.
I think these are just the usual suspects that buyers seeking a less mainstream alloy frame are likely to consider. Yeah you could add Kona, Transition, and Santa Cruz alu frames to the "mainstream" list. When I choose alu I like a smaller brand (have owned 2 Canfields) and most of them look better in person than the mainstream stuff. My ripmoAF was hideous compared to a Canfield, Knolly, Banshee, or Raaw.
Not sure what my point is. The Raaw costs more but that doesn't mean it's a bad value if the performance and design is above their direct peers, which I don't know. Maybe they're the Yeti of alu frames except the frames don't snap? How cool would a small brand alu bike shootout be?
Transition aluminum frames are horrible. I had a 2022 patrol so did a few others I know, and they are a real disappointment. Very shoddy frame compared to others. Mass produced garbage.
Sucks Knolly went to 157 otherwise I would buy the new Endorphin.
i think Banshee fell off, can't even find them anymore and don't see any out there.
My buddy is building up a Madonna V3. Can't wait to see it when it's done.
I know people have a love/hate relationship with them but Specialized aluminum frames have always been really good.
What canfields did you have?
Good feedback. Yeah my past specialized alu frames have been good.
Tilt and Lithium but I’m headed back to Ibis as I’m becoming a princess and like those light and snappy dw-link frames. Canfields pedal well are weight competitive against their alu peers.
On the V3, I managed to insert a KS LEV 200mm, almost fully slammed down (5mm left under the collar). I think the KS Lev 200 is among the shortest overall on the market.
200mm is my limit anyway - anything longer than that, will end up in a unfriendly meeting of saddle and rear tire anyway.
And by the way - the bike is awesome - no useless gimmicks - just riding.
As reach is measured to the top of the headtube, a longer headtube, given that you'd still mount your bar at the same height (measured to the ground) as you would on a shorter headtube, means that a bike with a longer headtube should feel shorter than one with a shorter headtube, right?
Or, to put it differently:
Would the V3 have a 120mm headtube length instead of its 130mm. It would have 10mm less stack and therefore the Reach measurement would increase by approx. 5mm ...? Correct?
If I'm correct with this: the bike that I'm currently riding (615mm stack / 470 reach) would feel similar to the V3 in M (650 / 455) not the L ....?
@RAAWMountainBikes you're very welcome to jump in here too to help me getting rid of my confusion, thanx! ;-)
Two bikes with 470 reach. One with 620 stack and the other with 660 stack.
You want the bars at the same height on both so you run 40mm more spacers on the 620 stack bike.
This raises the stem/bars 30mm up (actually slightly less) but also back towards you by 10-15mm (depending on HA) so effective reach to the grips feels shorter.
If one bike has 620mm stack and the other 660mm stack, and the reach is identical, then you’ll need to add 45mm of spacers to get the grips to the same height (assuming matching handlebars/stems). And adding 45mm of spacers will push the grips backwards by 20mm. (It’s sine and cosine functions of the head angle).
So conveniently, 10mm more stack is effectively the same as 5mm more reach, you just need to adjust the grip position with spacers and/or bar rise.
This means, as I was trying to say in my original post, that the 660 stack 455 reach bike will feel pretty similar to the 620 stack 470 reach bike. As the 40mm of spacers will bring the bar approx 15 mm nearer to me.
You also said " means that a bike with a longer headtube should feel shorter than one with a shorter headtube" which is what I was answering.
You can use Bikecalc (or draw it out) to visulize the changes.
Assuming the front-center-distance FC is supposed to stay the same: Yes, this is correct.
maybe it's the marketing but this thing seems a little more bombproof and reliable, in terms of service? how would its ride feel compare?
it's an easy fix but also annoying.
Pole and Nicolai/Geometron for sure deserve some credit for catalyzing the steep SA / slack HA evolution (and too long reach), and they frequently get it, so I'm not sure your complaint.
That's not to take away from what Pole and Geometron led and accomplished. Both were ahead of their times and influential. Pole gets less favor here because of the notable frame failures and the founder's abrasive personality / lack of accountability, but the influence and credit is still there. But to claim these current bikes are "very close" is misleading to folks considering their next bike.
Quick search on some common alu frames full retail prices w/ rear shock in american monies. I know many of these are much cheaper right now. The smaller brands have less purchasing power from the Taiwanese frame factories, so they cost more, but they also look way better imo. Looks like Raaw is running at a premium over direct peers by about $500. Not saying they're not worth it. The Madonna frame is gorgeous.
Mainstream:
stumpy evo - $2100
ripmo AF - $2200
Small boutique(ish) brands:
knolly (fugitive / chilcotin) - $2300 - $2600
privateer 141 gen 2 - $2390
banshee prime - $2500
canfield lithum - $2500
raaw madonna v3 - $2940
it's perfectly capable on flats... it's just dull compared to a bike with lower stack that lets you get more over the front. a bike like the Madonna feels more like a boat than a sports car.
I don't get why everoyne seems to think every bike should do everything... that's not how physics works. long stays are about straight lining rough terrain up and down. if that's not your thing... awesome, but don't get a bike that has a long WB and long CS.
Banshee makes a poppy bike... it's the Engima, and it's a hardtail.
... and above all I LOVE my short hardtail (Stanton Switchback).
Short bikes are fun
hence why i have lots of bikes. different strokes for different days.
I have a Spire, 450mm CS, bike is a weapon on fast trails, on jank trails, on steeeeep trails. Its very poppy, and loves to jump, the caveat being, you need some grade, and speed. flat trails, it is boring, hell, blue trails of most description, boring.
but....
I also have a ST Fugitive (120-140), running a 36, and an X2, way more fun on low angle trails, still poppy (435 CS) I use it for coaching, riders with intermediate riders, or those that are new to the sport. Its very capable, I'll use it for park laps in a pinch, just beats me up a bit more...
Smuggler (current one) feels similar to my Fugitive, the Smuggler prolly climbs better, my Figitive prolly descends better (but only slightly in either direction)
- because at pretty much every bike my grips sit at 109 cm (+/- 5 mm) height, no matter the stack height. i don't even messure because i naturally set up my bike like that. just out of curiousity i meassured my last bike i got a couple of weeks ago and grip hight was spot on at 109,4 cm.
So once the stack is not unreasonably low (which most aren't anyway) i'll get up to my prefered grip height. this works pretty good, because most bottom brackets sit at the same spot too, at least nowdays.
I keep hearing this sentiment get repeated, but it doesn't seem to be true. If it were, I would think it would show up in world cup DH results where times are extremely tight, and in recent years tracks have been very high speed. As far as I can tell every race in 2022 and 2023 except for 2 has been won with a 27.5 rear wheel. I don't think at the current level of competition any racer is going to leave free time on the majority of the track just for a couple tight corners.
Where descending a full 29'er does seem to be an advantage is in fatigue reduction after having done 5000 feet of climbing. But this idea that 29'ers are faster on high speed downhills seems to be true only on paper, and the perceived experience of that speed is placebo created by the constant repetition of "rollover! rollover! rollover!" in media. In the real world that rollover makes no effective difference on the trailing wheel.
It's only 5mm more than my Ripmo's, but 5mm + a tiny bit more from sag + the longer wheelbase makes me wonder if I'm going to be scraping my chainring all the time if I'm good enough to just jump everything.
Micro dh = trail
Mini dh = a little gnarlier than enduro, aka all mountain plus plus
I think that helps. Maybe.
im really really torn about the ebike. looking at the transition relay...my minds telling me no. but my b!tch tits..my b!tch tits are telling me yeaaahuhuhhh
Like myself buying a Raaw frame due to the import duties and tax’s to get it into the UK
You guys should do an aluminum field test...Raaw, Banshee, Commencal, ect... Could be fun!
Please pb editor, translate in IS unit
Any chance you’ll get a UK distributor one day??
For me this BB is too low for a 160mm bike even with 165mm cranks and I'm not willing to go shorter (I prefer 170mm). But the BB height is not too far from the current average entity bike and I think a lot of people who are mostly pedaling fire roads won't notice.
Personally I am not skilled enough to notice the difference from 1cm of BB drop going down, but I do notice the pedal strikes going up! I put a reversed offset bushing on my Gnarvana as well as an EC lower cup to keep the angles pretty constant and all I notice is less pedal strikes.
Do you have huge arms and tiny legs?!
So you want a bike that you can ride to work, goes really fast, is good for that triathlon you're doing this summer (snicker), is good on trails and mud, and costs less than $300. Yeah. Listen, I want a car that can go 200 miles an hour, tow a boat, has room for five adults, is easy to parallel park but can carry plywood, gets 60mpg, and only costs $3,000. I also want a unicorn to blow me. What are we even talking about here? Oh yeah. Listen, bikes can be fast, light, cheap and comfortable. Pick two, and we're all good.