[Kornphlake]

I'm not too sure what it does, I caught this pic of some chick with one on her bike. I wasn't about to approach 4 biker chicks and start talking about a fork though. Let the specualtion begin!


There was also one at the fox booth but it was partially covered with a beach towel.

 

[BigMike]

Where was this?!?

Are you sure its Fox?

 

[Espen]

It looks like a Fox. The back of the arch and the red adjusters knobs.

e

 

[MMcG]

who cares about the fork - I want to see more photos of those four women!

 

[Kornphlake]

Twas at the Norba Nats in BB this weekend. It said fox all over it, also notice the signature webbed arch.

 

[Kornphlake]

Originally posted by MMcG
who cares about the fork - I want to see more photos of those four women!

I'm such a tech geek I didn't notice the girls were kinda hot until I got home and looked at the pics.

 

[BrayDownhill]

very tasty, they look very very beefy. reckon we could see quite a few shots of new bits and pieces on new team bikes.

brock*

 

[911]

Yeah... there were a few of them at the Big Bear National. Although they look kind of like an old Monster T, from what I heard they're actually really light. I also heard that the fork will probably look a lot different by the time it's available for sale. The lowers are just prototypes to house the internals.

 

[Espen]

Hopefully it will feels like the old Monsters too.

E

 

[math2014]

Ok i will start the rant!

[/Rant]

It is clear that even though its a DC fork aimed for DH, again like any other Fox Forx cannot handle disc rotors of more than 180mm, hence we see it with 160mm rotors here.

[/Rant/]



Just meant to be funny, it looks top notch.

 

[Kornphlake]

they're probablly hopes, if you have hopes a 6 inch rotor stops as well as an 8 inch hayes

 

[math2014]

Originally posted by Kornphlake
they're probablly hopes, if you have hopes a 6 inch rotor stops as well as an 8 inch hayes

yes maybe, if it doesnt leak.

 

[math2014]

Originally posted by BrayDownhill
very tasty, they look very very beefy. reckon we could see quite a few shots of new bits and pieces on new team bikes.

brock*

are you talking about the girl's legs or the fork's legs?

 

[Jm_]

looks nice.

And yeah, I hope it rides like a monster, but 2lbs less. That would essentially be like a 7 or 8" fox vanilla of course...the quality of travel with fox forks is extremely high, if it's anything like other fox forks, it will be simply awesome, smooth, etc...

Doesn't even look too visually flexy either!

 

[DLo]

Originally posted by Espen
Hopefully it will feels like the old Monsters too.

E

What's so great bout the older monsters? I got a 99. It's great and all, but.. I thought they added little stuff year by year and it would have gotten better?

Back on topic, that fork looks burly - I thought they would have made somethin really light for racing. How would you make that 2 lbs lighter with all the extra material? Curious to see what the finished product will be!

 

[The Kadvang]

Yeah, it does look kinda like a monster. Hm.

 

[-dustin]

yep, this is one of the few times where want to see more pics of the girls.

the fork is interesting, but i have no need for a DC...hence the desire to see pics of the chickies.

 

[Jm_]

Originally posted by DLo
What's so great bout the older monsters? I got a 99. It's great and all

Besides the obvious contradiction

the old monsters had huge damping carts for essentially "real good damping", and over the years, the "changes" were only the HSCV in 2002, but compared to the old cartridge, that is a very minor "change". The new monsters are obviously pretty darn good with their 26mm shiver MX cartridges, and something like that would be an "improvement", but most people don't want the 13lb fork that they are in, but marzocchi cartridges change very little over the years, same carts for 1997 and 01 Super Ts, monsters were unchanged from 1999 to 2002 essentially (the 2000 compression-cartridge turned out to be a flop and they went back to dual rebound-adjustable carts). Shivers have had the same exact cartridges from 2001 to present day. Stuff doesn't change quite as fast as some companies would lead you to believe, sure they're are "improvements" like travel adjusters and other stuff, but what "works" in terms of damping doesn't change every 6 months, it does change, but not at crazy rate we are lead to believe in many cases IMO.

Of course for the monster T, all Marzocchi really did was take a trials MX fork and machine crowns to fit a mountain bike, but it worked like nothing else before, and there's not much present day that works as well. It was a product that already existed virtually, and had a proven damping system, when at the same time-period other suspension companies were starting off from "scratch" trying to make a fork for mountain bikes.

I've ridden a lot of forks, and while my Stratos S8 was pretty close, it still didn't match the travel-quality of a Monster T, even though it had 1" more travel, I would have rather had the monster, no question. Back in those days I used to switch-bikes with my riding buddy a lot, who had a monster T, it was "only" 175mm of travel, but it made use of that travel better than any other fork.

 

[anarchyUK]

kinda uggly
would like to see how it rides tho

 

[chillindrdude]

my next fork....i just hope its not "dorado expensive"

 

[zedro]

Originally posted by Acadian
Also my initial impressions when I first saw it. But the lowers are only prototypes. they claim the fork currently weight 7.something lbs, but once they have the final lowers it should be .5lbs lighter.

at that weight, for sure its not an oil bath system.

 

[chillindrdude]

Originally posted by Acadian
you should see how burly it looks!! Those 40mm stanchions are stout!

They have the same controls on top as the single crowns, plus some knobs under, which kindda looked long (sticking out).

whats the axle to crown height of the fork???
will it fit a 3.0 gazzi?



i think they will give the dorado a run for its money

 

[Incubus]

I can't believe nobody has said it already:

I heard it's flexy.

 

[steve45]

Hmmm, to me it looks like a cross between boxxer, sherman, monster T and go-ride lowrider crowns.

i'd love to find out what its like. but if the time it took to get a proto out on the race scene is anything to go by, it wouldnt suprise me if it took another couple of years for it to hit production
ah well, if there singlecrowns are anything to go by i'm sure its gonna be a kick ass fork.

 

[mack]

i wanted a inverted desing, not a monster T with talas cartiges...

 

[CBJ]

Finnally a photo of the fox DH and if its tested now it should be on sale next year - I will start to save.

 

[Kornphlake]

I wonder if there'll be a version for freeriding? Can it be Pushed? Will it be available in scuba yellow?

 

[HTFR]

dude. i still cant belive that you didn't even get their faces in the shot!:angry:

 

[The Kadvang]

Originally posted by Kornphlake
I wonder if there'll be a version for freeriding? Can it be Pushed? Will it be available in scuba yellow?

So many important questions, and so few answers. We can only hope.

 

[Curb Hucker]

does anyone have a full shot of the thing, as in front of it?

it looks sick, with the new lowers it will look even better. Hopefully it will feel just like their vanilla forks

 

[Jm_]

Originally posted by Incubus
I can't believe nobody has said it already:

I heard it's flexy.

Originally posted by Jm_
looks nice.


Doesn't even look too visually flexy either!

Anyhow, zedro is right, if those are 40mm stanchions (they don't quite look like 40 though, maybe 35-38, but even still) then there's no way it's 7lbs with a full open bath, because oil weighs a lot, especially when you got something as big as a monster and it's huge weights. I'd imagine though that this has one cartridge like the single crown forks, so one leg doesn't need much oil at all, while the other has either a closed cartridge and some oil like the 888 and mojo, or just a full open cart, but we'll see...it's definitly looking good.

 

[Bulldog]

Maybe Marzocchi will realize that flat crowns = low to normal axle-to-crown heights. See also: GoRide 888 crowns.

That Fox looks nice. I'll take a 6" single crown version please!

 

[anarchyUK]

some full fruntle pics would be nice

 

[eastcoastzigzag]

so.......ru afraid of girls?

 

[Rik]

Originally posted by mack
i wanted a inverted desing, not a monster T with talas cartiges...

But c'mon, how often have you wanted to change your travel and ride height mid-run? Having the easy to use TALAS travel adjuster knob on top would be handy, half a turn of the knob and you've dropped your travel by half! Sounds like a winner to me!

 

[jimengdh]

Excuse me,is that a F4 Frame?

 

[Jm_]

Inverted forks are nice, but all other things being equal, they are not as stiff as a good standard fork. Ok, they are a little stiffer for-and-aft, and that is because of the large-diameter uppers that are fixed to the crown, but you can offset this by increase the size of the stanchions on a standard fork, and end up with much better torsional and the same for-aft stiffness.

Inverted forks aren't bad, but if you want to make a fork as efficiantly as possible, with the least amount of materials and hours of design, it's going to end up as a standard fork.

Of course, once you get to a certain amount of travel, like above 7", in most cases you are going to need to extend the lowers (like a 03 monster T) or drastically increase the ride height, so after that inverted forks make a lot of sense.

 

[Kornphlake]

so.......ru afraid of girls?

some full fruntle pics would be nice

I'm more intimidated than afraid, especially when they're in a pack standing around a fork looking sexy, I don't like shopping at michael's either, and I don't listen to dixie chicks. I guess that means it's a chick fork like a miata is a chick car.

I couldn't have gotten a full frontal without pushing the girls out of the way (see above paragraph,) unless you're referring to the girls (see paragraph above.)

 

[thaflyinfatman]

Originally posted by Jm_
Inverted forks are nice, but all other things being equal, they are not as stiff as a good standard fork. Ok, they are a little stiffer for-and-aft, and that is because of the large-diameter uppers that are fixed to the crown, but you can offset this by increase the size of the stanchions on a standard fork, and end up with much better torsional and the same for-aft stiffness.

Inverted forks can run heaps more overlap too...

 

[Jm_]

Originally posted by thaflyinfatman
Inverted forks can run heaps more overlap too...

yeah, especially when you are at like 8" of travel, that's what I meant about the travel, but I probably should have clarified it with the "overlap", since that's what allows you to have more travel.