Do you think Dual Crown Forks are on their way out?

Toshi said:

i'm not arguing your other (good) points, but i can't really see why you wouldn't want 7" or 8" of travel if you're already paying the price in a-c length. it makes sense that you'd accept the extra height as a tradeoff for the other positive things you mention, but to actively search for a tall fork without as much travel as possible for its height is kind of strange imo.

Click to expand...

I believe in balanced travel (6" bike) and don't want a DC. So the 66 happens to be the only fork taller than a Z150/Breakout+/Fox36. Thankfully it's a fork I dreamed up before it was ever a reality so I'm a fan of it. Honestly if my bike wasn't so old-skool (steep geo) I'd be fine on a Z.1. But since I actually want a 66 though, everything seems to be working in my favor.

Bulldog said:

I'm pretty sure my old beater '99 Xvert had 28mm stantions. Also pretty sure it was a big deal when the Black series came out with their 30mm stantions as it was a new thing for them. Regardless, because I wasn't sure in my first post I placed a (?) after the size. Sorry you missed that, and sorry if I'm wrong.

If you need to use the Xvert Carbon for an example now, why did you use the short travel versions earlier? Ohhh, cuz the lighter weight numbers helped fabricate your point. Gotcha. Go ahead and beef up the Carbon all you want, but 7" travel with 30mm stantions ain't gonna cut it today, regardless of maker. They weren't a flop, but can't remember anyone being thrilled with the stiffness of the 30mm DH/FR forks. The Carbon was the biggest noodle, but people realized it was an acceptable trade-off because it was lighter than its competition.

:

Click to expand...

I had a 33mm bulge

Xverts were 30mm, marzocchis were the first 30mmers, and the Xverts came next, the black was the first 5" manitou. Anyhow, with the stiffness of a DC, the bulge stanchion interfaces allowed the use of a lighter crown, without taking much, if any, stiffness away. It was a pretty good idea to get a little "extra" without adding much weight.

BTW, I'm just trying to match whatever you change the subject to, I wasn't responding initially to you, but you tried to compare a 120mm Xvert DC and a 150mm Xvert Ti to what is a 170mm fork, not apples to apples IMO. I don't know how it is that you can claim that I change the facts to suit myself, when you did it in the first place and claimed it was me. I was simply responding to the thread. If it's 150mm forks you want to talk about, I can offer up a few, 150mm Super T, 150mm Xvert Ti, the 150mm right-side up White Brothers, etc. Yes, they dont have 35mm stanchions, only 30-32mm, but with a much shorter A to C, the extra stiffness that comes from the DC design, they dont need it, and they weigh from just under 6lbs to about 6.6. Compare that with about 7.5lbs for the marzocchi 66, or think about the fact that the 03 and 04 Super T weighed about the same as the marzocchi 66.

What this comes down to is the turning radius, it's the only logical reason someone would want a single crown long-travel fork, and this isn't a bad thing, but it takes a while to get "honest" sometimes. Your criteria of a 6" travel fork that's as long as a dorado or similer fork is very unique, there aren't a whole lot of other people trying to do that, so while what you posted makes sense, it's not much of a valid reason from the companies point of view.

I was surpised that marzocchi has jumped on board the "long travel single crown" market as much as they have, I guess the competition is real and not going away.

BD, all xverts were 30mm.

JM im not sure if with your examples are implying that the xvert carbon was stiffer than the 66, but if so my very limited time on the 66 and fair amount of time on the xvert carbon (even on the 6") makes me think its not.

Jm_ said:

stuff...

Click to expand...

I was talking about 150mm forks with Toshi. I was talking about 170mm forks with you. Sorry for the confusion. Like I said, I'm done with each of us twisting quotes and facts, at least for today.

I would like to know where you got 7.5# for the 66 from? The heaviest report I've seen has been 7.0 or 7.1 (others closer to 6.1). I'm guessing that because the SuperT you were talking about is 7.5-7.7# you had to fudge the numbers again to make a point.

As for my specific requirement, yes it is pretty rare. But Marzocchi didn't read my mind and make the 66 just for me. And the fact they are sold out currently means there are plenty of people who will find a use for them. Something for everyone. Marketing can only sell a product for so long. After actual users give actual ride experiences then we can judge a product and observe its sales. So for now it's too early to tell. Give me a year!

Jm_ said:

I was surpised that marzocchi has jumped on board the "long travel single crown" market as much as they have, I guess the competition is real and not going away.

Click to expand...

They pretty much created that market with the early Z1's, didn't they?

Rik said:

They pretty much created that market with the early Z1's, didn't they?

Click to expand...

How did marzocchi get more travel than 5" though? By going to dual crown forks. It's kind of hard to make comparissions because marzocchi was the only fork maker that made any forks between "cross country" and "downhill" for a long time, at least seriously, but it seems that it's only competition from manitou that sparked the Z150.

leprechaun said:

If 1.5 catched on then this could be a more valid arguement,otrher than the sudden failure argument.
Where's BCD??? He rode a SC sherman 170 for DH all season.I'm curious of his response.

Click to expand...

here is my review on the fork for the season

over all
i will run it next year.
lighter
as stiff as dc
turnbar freindlly

narlus said:

so after a couple of years on the market, what are people's thoughts re: long travel SC forks now?

Click to expand...

with the advent of air-sprung dh forks i think that dc forks are here to stay for at least a little while longer. but once they move those internals down to the single crowns then who knows. but i think im going to stick with a dual crown for a while.

Mine are exactly the same as when they started on the market.

I still think they're great, and I still don't think they'll replace double crown forks.

People have woken up to the fact that they should have mid weight parts that take a medium level of abuse. It's a huge part of the sport, and manufacturers are making trail bike frames - these long travel single crowns fit right in.

It doesn't "replace" anything. If some downhillers are taking these lightweight forks and running them, well, great, but Joe Weekender or a clydesdale rider still wants a burly DC that he's not going to destroy. Take two equivalent forks, one DC and one SC, and the DC will obviously be stiffer. It doesn't mean that the SCs are noodles, but if you can design a SC to be a certain stiffness, you can design a DC to be stiffer.

dc forks are here to stay.. theyre getting lighter and better. im sure we will reach a peak with performance and weight in the near future. its also one of those things,, *not broke? dont fix it*....

Why in the world would fork producers only make SC's. Thats just stupid. So I think DC's are staying in production. They might even take over single crowns. lol, jk.

think about it guys, do you guys remember four years ago, i never would have thought there would be a 7" single crown fork but there is. there is an 8"! yes there are disadvanteages now but i dont see why in a few years that sc's could be just as good as the dc's now. look at fox's '07 lineup its absouletly sick i would feel comfortable riding at a very competitive level on a single crown fork. granted yes dc's do offer more stiffness but honestly i cant feel much to any wobble in my sc fork

face said:

think about it guys, do you guys remember four years ago, i never would have thought there would be a 7" single crown fork but there is. there is an 8"! yes there are disadvanteages now but i dont see why in a few years that sc's could be just as good as the dc's now. look at fox's '07 lineup its absouletly sick i would feel comfortable riding at a very competitive level on a single crown fork. granted yes dc's do offer more stiffness but honestly i cant feel much to any wobble in my sc fork

Click to expand...

You are right. I love DC's but SC's are taking over. Duncan Riffle races DH on Fox 36. (I think thats him) Even Marzocchi is making less DC's.

only issue now is axle-crown height (and doubt that will go away). had some time on a 203mm tpc+ travis and it felt great. stiff, lightweight, felt great. only problem was the 595mm a-c height... :mumble:

I would definately consider riding a Totem next year.

dante said:

only issue now is axle-crown height (and doubt that will go away). had some time on a 203mm tpc+ travis and it felt great. stiff, lightweight, felt great. only problem was the 595mm a-c height... :mumble:

Click to expand...

hmm 595 isnt all that bad you know, its just 13mm worse taking into account its travel, than the 06 888, how long did you use it? any idea on the real weight?

im thinking its 595 minus 203mm thats 392 FLI* (*fork lenth index, i just made that up)
compare with 888 at 379,3FLI

I will make some extremely accurate predictions, thanks to my amazing insight abilities:

a. the rock shox Lyrik and Totem will increase the trend toward 1.5 ST for long-travel SC forks as an industry standard. i.e. people will look at the 1.125 and 1.5 versions of these, and see that RS sez the 1.5 version is stiffer and lighter. (duh). there are more and more 1.5 HT frames these days, mostly 'cos of the frame and headset advantages (and flexibility to use 1.125 DC or 1.5 SC). personally i have no interest in a 1.125 ST long-travel fork (i.e. 6+ inches )---i think it's a poor engineering compromise.

b. the RS Ride fork was an interesting marketing experiment -- long-travel DC fork with travel adjust for going up the hills -- that failed. RS is discontinuing it, I assume because of low sales. For long-travel bikes that will get ridden uphill pretty regularly, it seems that 1.5 head tube and 7 inch travel and some sort of travel adjust will become the norm. The RS totem has 40 mm stanchions, 180 mm travel, and 565 mm a-to-c. I.e. it has even lower a-to-c than a comparable Manitou 1.5 ST fork. But for reasons others have noted, I don't think SC forks with 200+ mm travel (8 inch +) will become dominant. But in the 7 inch and less category, SC will become even more prevalent. I can't recall if the "7 lb" weight of the Travis DC fork includes the integrated stem---at any rate, it's still a bit heavier than the single crown Travis with the same travel.

c. for a downhill-only bike in the 8+ category, DC just seems to be the best engineering solution from nearly all angles. relatively easy to adjust a-to-c and geometry. integrated stems. lots of room for damping/spring hardware (on the other hand, having longer stanchions and longer hardware tends to increase weight---see the Travis SC vs DC example). from an engineering design point of view, about the only issue is that large diameter tubes must still have enought wall thickness to resist deformation when the DC clamps are tightened (as opposed to cryogenic insertion on a SC crown). from a riding point of view, if it mostly gets used for descents, it seems like there are really no downsides to DC unless the trails involve supa tight switchbacks.

d. for bikes that get ridden hard but aren't pure downhill race bikes, the trend seems to be toward flickability/maneuverability. i.e. not just light weight, but low center of gravity frame designs. SC forks fit into that trend well. there's something about getting on a 7 & 7 bike with SC fork that feels more flickable than a DC version. Is it the lower c-of-g of a SC fork? greater turning radius? nothing near your knees? combination of the above?

so, bottom line, SC and DC will continue to co-exist but SC will become more prevalent in the approx 7 inch category---and will use 1.5 ST more prevalently.

btw the RS Totem in a 200 mm version would have 585 mm a-to-c...not terrible. but RS chose not to introduce a 200 mm version.

with the 40 mm stanchions, bulged lowers, etc, the Totem appears to reflect a lot of thinking from RS about how far to take SC fork technology...so i find it interesting that they chose not to go all the way to 200 mm, despite the Travis competition. to me it indicates that while RS certainly 'could' have a 200 mm Totem, they decided it wasn't the best solution overall.

I wish they had a 200mm verson...

So in 2007 Specialized is puting an SC on a demo and a DC on a trail (AM) bike.

Hmmm....

no way, they are just so much less flexy than single crowns.

but I do think that they are being phased out of freeride

Marketing.
Take me too the water sure,but I aint drinkin.
DC for me.
Bushing overlap
Stiffness
Longevity
Internal space for better internal design.

i think the bottom line is that dc forks look way more moto, so they will never die!:love:

dc all the way, but I must say SC feels so much lighter and makes you feel like throwing the bike around, but again like every one has said, the sc market has nothing to do with super fast racing and durability, only the ability to play around and have fun

look at the date man, gheeeeesh

bcd said:

look at the date man, gheeeeesh

Click to expand...

the last posted was only 5 days ago so whaT?

no skid marks said:

Marketing.

Click to expand...

There's the only real answer as to why we need an 8" SC fork.

and shorter lifespan for probably bushes and definatelly forks,not to mention frames and headsets.

DC forks are here to stay just because some types of ridding you cant do with out it. SC forks are gaining fast ground though. Remember in early 2000's when skate park/street clips were done with 4 or 5in travel forks. Now everything especially my buddies Chase, lenosky and G Ryan all use 90mm or less with a quality made fork. Same goes for me

if DC were done for, I wouldnt ride shore stuff anymore, well at least not the big stuff, and that would make me sad

bcd said:

look at the date man, gheeeeesh

Click to expand...

If you scroll up a bit, you'll see that narlus intentionally bumped the thread to spur further conversation

dc for loooong tiime...yup..
SC will never be as good in every way that a DC can be..and the most important is the stiffness that this ones can give..
maybe in 10 years from now this will change, but for the moment, this thing is going to stay for a while..

the sc are pretty good for jumping, freeriding and some types of dh tracks..
that's what I think...

theres no need for a dc unless your racing, at least thats how i feel. a majority of the bighit big name riders are riding sc's and are going HUGE with them. how about slopestyle, half that stuff is bigger then anything youll see and all the guys that compete in the pro level run SC's.

brad (wyld willy) for instance. he isnt a competitive rider, but DAMN he goes big 95% of the time he rides. and he runs a 66.


vid of the drop
http://www.pinkbike.com/video/1895/


unless your just a hack huckster landing flat, or a DH racer then i dont see the need for a DC. yes they will still be around...options

Wow. This thread is over a year old and you dug it up to tell us this. Thanks.

i was bored

Wow, I took the time to read the whole thing, Check it here is my take. Long travel SC forks are going to Put DC forks in there proper place. More options, different styles, more exacting feel for each riders. Both are here to stay, Neither are going away. They both kick ass, they both work well. So with that said, early on someone wanted to know how a 6 and 6 setup lasted for a bigger rider, GREAT, rode mine for 3 seasons of hard riding crashing smacking dropping all out fun. Recently retired the bike Due to getting a new frame at a killer price, Now i am running 7 and 7 Still single crown, Marz 66 on a TB dirtbag. Wonderfull combo, rides absolutly great. The 66 is rediculously stiff, specially for a sc. Yes it competes with the 888 for stiffness, Combined with Ti springs, you get all most will ever need out of a fork, Plus the added benefits of teh SC fork, IE Manuverability, climbability ETC. Specially with systems like ETA, Utrun and other travel reducing systems that operate On the fly. As for ripping your Hydrolines when crashing..... Come on, if you hit that hard, chances are your not riding home. I Yanked mine hard enough to make the lever slide and twist on the bar and never had a problem with the lines getting damaged. I really like the info this thread has had in it, most was inteligent and well thought, while some was just speculation.


Some personal expeirence with forks, I have ridden Junior t's super t's boxxers, sliders, breakouts, 36's 40's 888's, dorados, shivers, monters, but never a super monster. And I can honeslty say, that the 04 and alter 6in forks blow the older stuff out of the water for stiffness, like the super t and junior t, older boxxers. But so do the new DC forks, As far as 07 888 to 07 66, man its really hard to feel the difference in stiffness and performance, they both feel great, and they both have there places. Enough ranting on for me on this subject, I will repost again after i hammer the Dirtbag and 66 in Mammoth next summer, also going to hammer out the winter series at southridge, last time i was racing i was running the z150 which worked out excelent in Fontuky.



P.S. One alst thing to remember whenver looking at suspension

Quality/quanity. more travel isnt always better. But sometimes it is

69"

.
.
.