Voima Sizing Questions/Views/Opinions

[BigG]

I kinda agree with above statement.
Sizing chart is accurate.

There’s size overlap with more playful or stable feeling. That’s for preference. And it works for 90+% folks, except for some unusual cases like noticeably longer torso/arms or legs or something else.
Riser bars is needed for longer inseam anyway, just to get bars level with extended saddle height at that angle. Riser bars also helps with lifting the front end for hops, surf etc.
Dialing in bar/stem to preference is normal and works as expected.
Fighting this geo is like that review where reviewer tried to change bb height and got wrong bike impressions.

Embrace the long =) it works. Don’t fear the reach. Treating this bike like standard geo bikes is a mistake (unless you REALLY going for specific feel and have knowledge of how this fit feels).
My 2nd Pole bike and 3rd bike with 520+ reach, no chance I’m going to buy a bike with sa slacker than 78, and reach below 520, ever.

I went from fit like this:

To this:

 

[Plummet]

I kinda agree with above statement.
Sizing chart is accurate.

There’s size overlap with more playful or stable feeling. That’s for preference. And it works for 90+% folks, except for some unusual cases like noticeably longer torso/arms or legs or something else.
Riser bars is needed for longer inseam anyway, just to get bars level with extended saddle height at that angle. Riser bars also helps with lifting the front end for hops, surf etc.
Dialing in bar/stem to preference is normal and works as expected.
Fighting this geo is like that review where reviewer tried to change bb height and got wrong bike impressions.

Embrace the long =) it works. Don’t fear the reach. Treating this bike like standard geo bikes is a mistake (unless you REALLY going for specific feel and have knowledge of how this fit feels).
My 2nd Pole bike and 3rd bike with 520+ reach, no chance I’m going to buy a bike with sa slacker than 78, and reach below 520, ever.

I went from fit like this:

To this:

That looks like top photo bike way to small, Bottom photo way to big.,,,,,

I think reach is a personal thing. Some people like longer and some liker shorter. I definitely enjoy the shorter side of reach. I have always tended to go for medium sized bikes when i'm firmly in large bike size category. That is why the pole size is conflicting to me. I rode a mates bike with a 475 reach and didn't like it and another mates 450 reach and loved it...

The thing i like about the pole is the travel, bb height and slackness. Not the crazy steep seat angle geo. If it was a bit more standard that would suit me better. If that meant it was slightly worse at climbing but slightly better at flatter stuff with a slighter less cramped seated cockpit I wouldnt mind.

I'll be honest I like the geo of the Crestline better. If I can find a way to get that into the nz at not buy a brand new car prices I'll get that instead.

Well i'll keep internally battling and see who wins the internal battle.

 

[BigG]

That looks like top photo bike way to small, Bottom photo way to big.,,,,,

I think reach is a personal thing. Some people like longer and some liker shorter. I definitely enjoy the shorter side of reach. I have always tended to go for medium sized bikes when i'm firmly in large bike size category. That is why the pole size is conflicting to me. I rode a mates bike with a 475 reach and didn't like it and another mates 450 reach and loved it...

The thing i like about the pole is the travel, bb height and slackness. Not the crazy steep seat angle geo. If it was a bit more standard that would suit me better. If that meant it was slightly worse at climbing but slightly better at flatter stuff with a slighter less cramped seated cockpit I wouldnt mind.

I'll be honest I like the geo of the Crestline better. If I can find a way to get that into the nz at not buy a brand new car prices I'll get that instead.

Well i'll keep internally battling and see who wins the internal battle.

I have mixed a tall-guy-fit and long-reach arguments a bit, probably made my message more confusing.
Key message is: one shouldn’t compare pole reach with conventional geo bikes. Voima k4 with 535 reach doesn’t feel 4cm longer than
Trek rail with 495. Voima actually feel shorter in that case.
I still remember days when nobody used or even published reach as measurement and everyone looked at ETT.
Nowadays it’s other way around- people freak out by long reach and downsize, yet ETT is actually shorter than on slack SA bikes.

But yeah - best way is to seat on bike and ride one, not everyone can demo though.

Just want to warn about situation when person likes other brand bike with 480 reach and assume they need Voima in K2.

 

[Plummet]

I have mixed a tall-guy-fit and long-reach arguments a bit, probably made my message more confusing.
Key message is: one shouldn’t compare pole reach with conventional geo bikes. Voima k4 with 535 reach doesn’t feel 4cm longer than
Trek rail with 495. Voima actually feel shorter in that case.
I still remember days when nobody used or even published reach as measurement and everyone looked at ETT.
Nowadays it’s other way around- people freak out by long reach and downsize, yet ETT is actually shorter than on slack SA bikes.

But yeah - best way is to seat on bike and ride one, not everyone can demo though.

Just want to warn about situation when person likes other brand bike with 480 reach and assume they need Voima in K2.

I'm not sure I agree that the Pole geo is so different that it cant be compared with other bikes in the reach department for standing/decending cockpit. Once your standing then its reasonably standard geo, chainstay length hta. I'll admit that its closer to dh bike geo than enduro bike.

I will agree that comparing it to a 150/160 trek rail which is in the trail bike category is not a fair comparison. But in my instance i'm comparing againts 165/180 enduro bike and 200/200 dh bike. The K4 pole i tried as far as suspension feel fell in between the my 2 current bikes, and i liked that feel. It was too long to get a true descending feel, but i felt the potential.

I do agree that its hard to compare it to other bikes for seated reach for steep seated climbing. Its obviously optimised for climbing performance. In that instance it makes perfect sense. If my main goal was climbing i would go for K2.

I will be honest, the K4 climbed like a bloody mountain goat. It was truely insane! I rode 85% up one of my hike a bike tracks that I can only ride 40-50% up on my mountain bike. I just kept riding up until it was so steep that the bike flipped out in front of me like one of those moto hill climb events.

So for climbing K2 for my size, general riding around K2. Descending, which is by far my favourite and why I want an e bike for, to get more descending, K1 is what I want. Argh!!!

 

[Paulquattro]

I will agree that comparing it to a 150/160 trek rail which is in the trail bike category is not a fair comparison.

I would put the pole more in the DH area as you say although the seat angle doesn't reflect this
But i wouldn't put a Trek Rail in the Trail category , its definitely more enduro
Also travel is less of an influence on the trail to enduro thing than geometry which plays a bigger part in the crossover than travel does .
We all see things different thou .

 

[Plummet]

I would put the pole more in the DH area as you say although the seat angle doesn't reflect this
But i wouldn't put a Trek Rail in the Trail category , its definitely more enduro
We all see things different thou .

I call trail less than 160mm rear end. The rail is 150. Enduro 160-180? DH 180+? or maybe there is a cross over 170-190 for superenduro?

 

[Plummet]

Got my Voima ID after my factory visit. The factory is amazing really, the work they achieve and attention to detail is superb.

It really is such a unique manufacturing method to these bike. Leo can make any design changes as required and send to production immediately - the very same day a frame is produced with that change.

By the way, I got a K2 and am 190cm

View attachment 110641 View attachment 110642 View attachment 110643

What is your height Rob and what reach do you typically want to ride on standard geo bikes?

 

[Rob Rides EMTB]

What is your height Rob and what reach do you typically want to ride on standard geo bikes?

190cm / 6’3” and can ride anything from 480-515mm.

I plan to put a +5mm works reach adjust on this.

 

[Plummet]

190cm / 6’3” and can ride anything from 480-515mm.

I plan to put a +5mm works reach adjust on this.

Interesting, so you are under sizing almost by 2 sizes. I'm interested to know why.

Wheelbase too long in the k3 size?

Assumingly TT is way shorter than your normal spec.

 

[Rob Rides EMTB]

Interesting, so you are under sizing almost by 2 sizes. I'm interested to know why.

Wheelbase too long in the k3 size?

Assumingly TT is way shorter than your normal spec.

Long wheelbase, 63.5 head angle and 190mm travel = inherently stable, opted for shorter reach to make it feel as lively and agile as possible whilst still retaining stability.

Will run 50mm stem and 50mm rise bars. If it’s shit and I prefer K3 I’ll let you know!

 

[Plummet]

Long wheelbase, 63.5 head angle and 190mm travel = inherently stable, opted for shorter reach to make it feel as lively and agile as possible whilst still retaining stability.

Will run 50mm stem and 50mm rise bars. If it’s shit and I prefer K3 I’ll let you know!

Its the same thought process/internal battle im having at the moment. I'm 10cm shorter than you so my battle is k2 to k1 size.

I'm convinced for me the K1 size is the size I need for descending. I don't think it will be that bad for super steep climbing as you are typically riding the nose of the saddle anyway on a standard bike. But, I'm worried about the cramped seated cockpit for standard pedalling around and longer days on the bike. I'm keen to hear your impression on general riding with the more cramped cockpit when you get some time on the bike.

I could go k1 with 5mm reach extender....

 

[slickrock]

Long wheelbase, 63.5 head angle and 190mm travel = inherently stable, opted for shorter reach to make it feel as lively and agile as possible whilst still retaining stability.

Will run 50mm stem and 50mm rise bars. If it’s shit and I prefer K3 I’ll let you know!

Nah, your K2 will be sublimely playful.

 

[slickrock]

Its the same thought process/internal battle im having at the moment. I'm 10cm shorter than you so my battle is k2 to k1 size.

I'm convinced for me the K1 size is the size I need for descending. I don't think it will be that bad for super steep climbing as you are typically riding the nose of the saddle anyway on a standard bike. But, I'm worried about the cramped seated cockpit for standard pedalling around and longer days on the bike. I'm keen to hear your impression on general riding with the more cramped cockpit when you get some time on the bike.

I could go k1 with 5mm reach extender....

When you push the riser bar height (which is a must for this bike), you are more upright, which makes long casual routes more enjoyable (think old fashioned risers when we were tykes), which does wonders for the smaller box aspect of the K1. I noticed early on that Rob moved quickly to the 50mm Burgtecs in his now months-old review video. Heck, take a look at this beast for a possible handlebar choice.

Also, don't forget about that wheelbase. The K1 is nearly 9cm longer than the Crestline you are eyeing! That's a huge difference, let alone 1.5cm longer stay. This bike is just a different animal to draw comparisons to other rides. I have a small Levo next to my K1 and they couldn't strike a more different pose.

Rob spent some time on a K3 for that review and he bought the smaller size. Seb Scott's review hinted the same thing that the smaller size felt more capable after initially reviewing the bike on the larger size. In an ideal world would be to train on the target size and then drop one size down as you become more accomplished with the geo, especially those who are stradling sizes. Unfortunately, our world is fnot.

 

[ChillyWilly]

I'm 188cm and prefer a ride with 480-510mm reach. But reach is just a factor when out of the saddle. Top tube is the reach when you seated. My current bike is ~495mm reach and 670mm top tube. I do slam the seat forward. I also prefer a 40mm stem length.
When riding more flat trails, a short top tube can give you a cramped feeling. Your knees will be close to the handlebars.

I'm really curious on how the 80 degrees and short top tube on the Voima feels when riding seated and on flatish trails.

 

[Onetime]

I'm 188cm and prefer a ride with 480-510mm reach. But reach is just a factor when out of the saddle. Top tube is the reach when you seated. My current bike is ~495mm reach and 670mm top tube. I do slam the seat forward. I also prefer a 40mm stem length.
When riding more flat trails, a short top tube can give you a cramped feeling. Your knees will be close to the handlebars.

I'm really curious on how the 80 degrees and short top tube on the Voima feels when riding seated and on flatish trails.

As myself and many other owners have said, with a high rise bar, (mine was about 1-2” higher than my seat at full extension) it’s quite comfortable on the ups, downs and everything in between. It’s literally a do it all bike. One of the many reasons it’s soo good.

 

[dobbyhasfriends]

Done.

View attachment 110952 View attachment 110953 View attachment 110954 View attachment 110955

its a huge bike but still concerned for you with the K2

 

[Rob Rides EMTB]

its a huge bike but still concerned for you with the K2

Actually it’s fine! 485mm reach 1313 wheelbase!

 

[dobbyhasfriends]

Actually it’s fine! 485mm reach 1313 wheelbase!

well damn, my Large Levo is 455 reach with 1235 wheelbase
My XL Levo had a 480 reach with a 1266 wheelbase

you're still a brave man ! but if it fits you it will deffo fit me

 

[Rob Rides EMTB]

well damn, my Large Levo is 455 reach with 1235 wheelbase
My XL Levo had a 480 reach with a 1266 wheelbase

you're still a brave man ! but if it fits you it will deffo fit me

No chain guide required with the new Sram?
Looking good

I ran the new SRAM without a guide for months and no issues. So will see how it goes on the Voima

In terms of sizing @dobbyhasfriends - overall geometry is the most important factor to consider IMO. For example, I’d prefer something a bit longer if I was riding a 65 head angle and 150mm travel bike - because it’s not quite as stable / forgiving on the steep tech. They can feel a bit twitchy, especially if short reach and short wheelbase with steeper head angle.

For the Voima, wheelbase in K2 is still longer than most L and XL bikes. It’s slack, and has long travel - and it’s just so stable with this geo. Reach at 485 is totally doable.

I still have the K3 demo bike so can share more comparisons when I’ve ridden the K2, but after a quick test it feels great so far.

In summary=
Slack bikes, long travel, modern geo = can go shorter
Trail based bikes, conservative geo = a bit longer

 

[dobbyhasfriends]

I still have the K3 demo bike so can share more comparisons when I’ve ridden the K2, but after a quick test it feels great so far.

I can help you with that on my way !

good info, I've not ridden enough different bikes to know this stuff, thanks

 

[CliffP]

I have mixed a tall-guy-fit and long-reach arguments a bit, probably made my message more confusing.
Key message is: one shouldn’t compare pole reach with conventional geo bikes. Voima k4 with 535 reach doesn’t feel 4cm longer than
Trek rail with 495. Voima actually feel shorter in that case.
I still remember days when nobody used or even published reach as measurement and everyone looked at ETT.
Nowadays it’s other way around- people freak out by long reach and downsize, yet ETT is actually shorter than on slack SA bikes.

But yeah - best way is to seat on bike and ride one, not everyone can demo though.

Just want to warn about situation when person likes other brand bike with 480 reach and assume they need Voima in K2.

I like my 485 reach and want to order a pole and thinking K2. Is the Pole reach numbers accurate with regards to other reach numbers? I am a little confused.

 

[Rob Rides EMTB]

K2 works amazing for me. I know it sounds crazy to a lot of people but sizing down on these bikes is totally doable. Having spent an hour or so on the bike today it’s so much better to ride than the K3.

There’s a lot of scope to move things around with bar height / backsweep / stem length etc to fine tune fit.

I’m 190cm / 6’3” and with the 480 stock reach and the +5mm works components reach adjust the bike handles sweet.

Had a knocking sound coming through the bike that I had to solve. Fox X2 is already toast sadly. Super Deluxe back in and knocking sound has gone!

Bike is superb, so happy with how it rides.

 

[BigG]

I like my 485 reach and want to order a pole and thinking K2. Is the Pole reach numbers accurate with regards to other reach numbers? I am a little confused.

Reach is accurate but feels just a bit different due to geo and you usually can go longer, but you don’t have to.
Depends on the bike you’re comparing it to.

Check sizing chart first. Check feel/style recommendation that suits you ( most people prefer top portion of the cart, not bottom), if you’re right between sizes- consider smaller one. For example if you are 185cm - choose K2.
That’s your starting point.
For example I have a conventional geo bike with 505 reach. It feels more stretched seated than pole with 535, but feels shorter then standing ofc.
Since it’s not a dh bike and you need to sit too - you need to compare ETT as well, not just reach. Takes 2 numbers to measure pants, don’t try to measure a bike width reach only.

 

[Ridelow]

Robs feedback on size made me change my order from K3 to K2.. Hope that's the way to go Im 185cm

 

[Dave_B]

@Rob Rides EMTB what handle bar is that?

It’s interesting that you are now liking shorter reach bikes. It wasn’t so long ago that you wanted long reach and builders to extend their geo to accommodate larger riders. What’s changed?

 

[Lightme]

I’m 188cm, very happy with my decision of a K3 frame (when it arrives…). I have a K3 Stamina 180, it’s big but confidence inspiring.

 

[Rob Rides EMTB]

@Rob Rides EMTB what handle bar is that?

It’s interesting that you are now liking shorter reach bikes. It wasn’t so long ago that you wanted long reach and builders to extend their geo to accommodate larger riders. What’s changed?

Its from a brand called Title. Great quality Alu bars (mines 31.8)

@Rob Rides EMTB what handle bar is that?

It’s interesting that you are now liking shorter reach bikes. It wasn’t so long ago that you wanted long reach and builders to extend their geo to accommodate larger riders. What’s changed?

Definitely wanted longer bikes - most bikes 2-3 years ago were 480 reach, 150 travel and 65 head angles. Longer reach for me helped with stability (less crashing / over the bars!), as well as a general feeling of 'fitting' on bikes with bigger reach.

What happened also is that bikes reaches grew, but proportianally, the rear centres actually got shorter. So the bikes in my size became too unbalanced (weight too rearwards, because 520 reach short chainstays on ebikes is not ideal for me).

As bike geometry has evolved, we now have 63 head angle, very long wheelbases (Voima in K2 is 1313mm!) and 190mm travel. There's less need to have a very long bike, because the bike is crazy stable as it is. And with the Voima, its 455mm chainstay and 480mm reach, its extrememly balanced when the rider is standing on the bike with the pedals weighted. I no longer have to shift my entire body weight forward to get the front tyre to grip on corners.

As my riding has progressed I've also found that I like a more nimble / easier to corner bike, and have found that I can have my cake and eat it; stable, planted at speed, slack, long travel, but also corner easier and a better balanced overall bike.

So with my bike now, 190mm travel, 63 head angle, 1313 wheelbase, 485mm reach, its a great all rounder. I can ride DH trails or pavements to the shops. I'd do a 30mile XC loop. Or Fort William (well, the 'doable' stuff for my skill level!).

Also, to add, reach is one single factor in bike geo and I think that its quite easy for us all to get too hung up about it. It's about the overall package. You can easily move things around to account for 20mm reach and your body will naturally adapt to sizing quite quickly (obvs someone 6'7" would bee foolish to bike a XS bike, but you get what I mean!)

 

[Dave_B]

It’s interesting for sure.
I had an S4 Levo, thought that was great. Then got the Rail, much longer, thought that was better. Now back on a Levo but this time an S5.

Tried my mates S5 down a trail and then sat on an S4 and it felt really short.

Horses for courses and all that….

 

[Rob Rides EMTB]

It’s interesting for sure.
I had an S4 Levo, thought that was great. Then got the Rail, much longer, thought that was better. Now back on a Levo but this time an S5.

Tried my mates S5 down a trail and then sat on an S4 and it felt really short.

Horses for courses and all that….

Look at the wheelbase and front centre of the Voima. The Voima wheelbase, even on a K2 is 29mm longer than an S5 Levo, and the front centre is 44mm longer. So an S4 Levo will feel short (more than just a short reach, its a short bike!)

 

[dobbyhasfriends]

View attachment 111327
Look at the wheelbase and front centre of the Voima. The Voima wheelbase, even on a K2 is 29mm longer than an S5 Levo, and the front centre is 44mm longer. So an S4 Levo will feel short (more than just a short reach, its a short bike!)

really assures me that the K2 is the right size for me, im 186cm and when you compare what im riding now with the voima it all looks right. My levo is too short for me when standing but perfect when seated.
I have to lean over the front to get weight over the front tyre quite a bit and that leaves (in some situations) perilously close to tipping over the front.. I want the voima..