[yos1s25]

have you see earthed?
in the first 2 minutes there is ashout of peat and his boxxer lower legs.
it seems like he have longer lower legs.....
check it out:

 

[DßR]

yeah I noticed that too...... I saw a couple of the '05 boxxers this weekend which I believe are 8" as well.... they look slick but nothing like that Peaty thing...

 

[Jm_]

pete's lower legs look fine to me.

I do believe that the 05 boxxer is going to be 8" of travel, and 35mm stanchions, and then there'll be a "boxxer race" like model as well which will be based on the old boxxer.

There was a picture of all three models a while back.

 

[Tenacious Doug]

Apparently Tim Flooks, ex RS race tech will be producing an 8" kit for older Boxxers so those with pre 05 ones wont feel left out having an inch less

 

[PoserNewbie]

This past weekend in Whistler I saw a guy riding an M1 with a boxxer with adjustable travel. Is that an 05 model?

 

[buildyourown]

On Saturday in Whistler I overheard a guy telling his buddy that Rockshox was now making a 11" travel single crown. He also said that it had some new super metal in it. He was completely serious. I almost pissed myself.

 

[Jm_]

Originally posted by Tenacious Doug
Apparently Tim Flooks, ex RS race tech will be producing an 8" kit for older Boxxers so those with pre 05 ones wont feel left out having an inch less

Um....that puts the overlap at less than 4", good idea? I highly doubt it.

 

[Slugman]

Originally posted by buildyourown
On Saturday in Whistler I overheard a guy telling his buddy that Rockshox was now making a 11" travel single crown. He also said that it had some new super metal in it. He was completely serious. I almost pissed myself.

Sounds exactly like the "april Fools" post on PinkBike... sorry I don't have the link.

 

[Tenacious Doug]

Originally posted by Jm_
Um....that puts the overlap at less than 4", good idea? I highly doubt it.

Thats what I thought........dont shoot the messenger!

 

[Jm_]

Originally posted by Tenacious Doug
Thats what I thought........dont shoot the messenger!

Well, im not out to shoot the messenger, but there's a reason that RS is moving to a different chassi to make an 8" standard fork, there's a reason why marzocchi moved to a 35mm chassi to make an 8" standard fork, and there's a reason why fox is using 40mm stanchions for an 8" standard fork.

It'd be a way better idea to put mojo, marzocchi, or fox-type cartridges in a 7" boxxer IMO, the Monster T proved that "amount" of travel does not make up for "quality" of travel.

Oh well......

 

[Repack]

Originally posted by Jm_
Um....that puts the overlap at less than 4", good idea? I highly doubt it.

But how often is a dh-fork in the first 1" of the travel? If the bushings are still the same distance apart, I don't think you would notice the difference while riding.

 

[Jm_]

Originally posted by Repack
But how often is a dh-fork in the first 1" of the travel? If the bushings are still the same distance apart, I don't think you would notice the difference while riding.

It's the whole reason why many fork makers go to inverted forks for over 7" of travel, like manitou and others. It's surely possible to build a standard-fork with 8" of travel, but you have to increase the diameter of the tubes to keep it "stiff" and flex-free.

When the 6" boxxer when to 7", I didn't think there'd be a huge difference, but going from 7 to 8, the bushings and overlap starts to get really questionable.

 

[binary visions]

Originally posted by Slugman
Sounds exactly like the "april Fools" post on PinkBike... sorry I don't have the link.

It was actually NSMB that posted that. They finally posted a little line of text at the bottom that stated that it was an April Fools joke because so many people took it seriously. Absolutely rediculous. I don't think people think for themselves anymore.

 

[Repack]

Originally posted by Jm_
It's the whole reason why many fork makers go to inverted ......

I should have said that I understood all that. I was only thinking of the difference between a 7" and 8" Boxxer with the same lowers. For a fork to be as stiff as possible, it would need to have the same style bushing built into the uppers as what is on a Monster T, but that adds a ton of weight.

And with the bushing pverlap, the about of overlap is constant, but the more the fork is compressed, the less leverage is being applied to the legs/crown because the lever (fork leg) is shorter. Or something like that. Wow. I hope I didn't just start another stupid "Which is better/ theoretical physics" thread. I really don't care. I won't buy the kit, and a Boxxer ss fairly low down on my list of potential forks to buy next. To me:

 

[Slugman]

Originally posted by binary visions
It was actually NSMB that posted that. They finally posted a little line of text at the bottom that stated that it was an April Fools joke because so many people took it seriously.

Oh yeahm it was NSMB - I only remember it was one of the Canadian sites... maybe that's why they needed to add in the disclaimer?

 

[vitox]

do you guys mean that the oem book pictures that leaked out were april fools stuff?

remember there was the whole argument with the letter from marzocchi and all?

well anyway i seem to remember there were drawings of a 7" boxxer "ride" with uturn. and also of the 8" boxxer that showing up at the races. not sure about it being 35mm though

 

[PoserNewbie]

That's the one I saw, the boxxer with the U-turn. It looks pretty real to me. I asked about the fork but the guy didn't elaborate too much, he just said that it is an 05 model.

 

[Slugman]

The one I was talking about was clearly a joke - 12" single crown...
http://www.nsmb.com/gear/rockshox-bigfoot_04_03.php