2010 Marzocchi is back! 6.8lb adjustable shimstack 888!

William42 said:

lthumbsdown: Sponsored riders on the internet suck. Sponsored riders in general actually tend to be full of sh1t. Either that or you need to take fox's balls out of your mouth. Fox has their share of problems too, but rather then blast the company for it despite the fact that I'm not running it and never have run it, I'll keep my mouth shut.

Click to expand...

I'm not sponsored by anyone, I'm only reporting what I've experienced in the 15 years I've been building and riding MTBs. I'm sorry it isn't consistent with what you experienced. No need to feel personally insulted by me sharing my honest experiences.

my last Marzocchi was a 888 RC in the first year they made them. it had two major flaws. 1) the c-clips that hold the springs on the shafts sheared right off -- poor fit between the c-clip and the machined groove on the shaft. 2) rider's left side axle clamp fractured and broke off while using a torque wrench at the specified torque -- and not even reaching the specified torque. they wouldn't fix the c-clip issue under warranty, but they did give me new lowers under warranty when the clamp crumbled. however, they also charged me $75 for new 888 emblem/decals (which I didn't request) and the return shipping.

I think I have good reason to talk them down compared to the excellent performance of every Fox product I've owned, ridden, or test-ridden. that would include Vanilla 130 RLC, DHX 5.0, DHX Air, RP3, RP23, F29 RLC, 36 VAN RC2, and 36 TALAS RC2. every one has been flawless. on coil forks I've had from Fox they included springs so you can tune them to your weight, rather than making you contact them to get different rate springs. This is superior to what other companies do, in my view. Also they use a lot of machined metal in their damping system, which also is superior from a durability perspective.

I also had bad experience with old-school (late 90s) RockShox forks, but then had great experience with a recent (2006) Pike 454 Air U-turn. the Reba Race 29" I used last year was a little flexy though, kinda scary at speed. I got rid of it and installed the Fox F29 and the bike was more fun to ride with better steering and smoother fork action compared to the Reba... plus lockout, which is nice for a SS bike.

I had a Manitou Sherman Firefly Plus that was the most useless fork I've ever ridden. Well overdamped (and not adjustable, practically speaking) and the SPV function was a piece of **** that has no place on a 6" travel fork. I had two Manitou Minute forks, one was a coil 1:00 with RTWD and the other was an air 2:00 at 100mm. They had a pretty decent chassis -- it steered really well for a 30mm stanchion QR axle fork. But the damping was just like the Firefly Plus. So my Manitou experiences have been negative.

If this pisses you off, you need a head check.

S.K.C. said:

Yep - davep is pretty much spot-on.

I totally forgot about the details regarding the Roco. They DID say that it would be user serviceable and have available shim kits courtesy of Marz - but there wasn't sufficient tech. support for guys who wanted to rebuild/service their Roco and the shim kits never happened... shame.

It does seem like Marz's policy has been to keep the internals somewhat inaccessible (a BlackBox if you will :biggrin: )to the customer/end user for their forks and their shocks. What's crazy is that the guys at Go-Ride probably have the most in-depth 888 service manual out there - and they don't even PRODUCE the forks... I have used their service guide on more than one occasion to rebuild my old 05' 888 RC back in the day.

It would be nice to see Marz take things in a new direction and place some of the power in the customer's hands to tune their suspension pieces but... who knows. I know that SRAM would definitely NOT approve of some of the tuning suggestions that are out there on the web due to the fear of litigation if something went wrong. But if Marz could create a safe set of parameters in which the customer could tune their suspension without making the fork/shock dangerous to ride - and sell shim kits to customers for the specific purpose of allowing them to explore those parameters as set by Marz... they might have something...

RS's QC has definitely improved from the way it used to be - and I do think that some riders out there have made the switch to Boxxers as a result. Funny how the pendulum swings... :biggrin:

...and as far as looks go: I miss the sculpted edges and lines of the old Flat-Black lowers and clean looking logos from the 05' - 07' 888's... It made the forks look badass, like a weapon... something that meant business...

Click to expand...

there will be a new website to help you at www.bombercare.com...I like what they are doing

S.K.C. said:

Yep - davep is pretty much spot-on.

I totally forgot about the details regarding the Roco. They DID say that it would be user serviceable and have available shim kits courtesy of Marz - but there wasn't sufficient tech....

Click to expand...

they will have a shim kit and will have a helpful manual for it

Dont forget Zocchi of old is not zocchi of new, new company new owners new outlook

gab26 said:

there will be a new website to help you at www.bombercare.com...I like what they are doing

Click to expand...

That's awesome... but I checked the link and it was a dead end.

Found these on mtbr...

davep said:

They have refused to provided any and all tech info (from the simplest procedures for changing oil in a fork, how to change a spring, even the basic (correct) descriptions of their own products in their 'manuals'.....to info like shock oil viscosity, res PSI, proper fork PSI, etc)...for the last 7 years.

...Roco would be user re-buildable and they would provide tuning/shims/tech info/etc. This was THE benefit used to sell the Roco...and surprise, surprise it never materialized.

Click to expand...

not to pick your bones, but I've never had any of the trouble with marz that you're talking about. I have an 06 888, and easily found oil level tables and exploded diagrams of the cart assemblies. I can vouge for the fork psi tho, their suggested pressures are wack.

also have a Roco that I've revalved for the sunday....I contacted marz both by phone and PM and they were more than helpful with the reshim (after trying to sell me a 125$ factory rebuild)

civilian said:

Found these on mtbr...

Click to expand...

NICE!

I dig the return to the simple and clean looking logos.

I think what was bugging davep was that Marz doesn't have sufficient online support for riders who want to DIY. Marz did say the ROCO would be user-serviceable... Due to this and other absent online info, I think he (and to some extent myself) got the wrong impression that ROCO shim kits didn't exist at all. (If it's not on the website, then it doesn't exist - right? )

Marz DOES have Oil Level tables, weights, and other useful info on their website, but regarding the ability of the end-user to do a full service tear-down of a fork or shock - there seems to be this "Black Hole" of online info.

If what was said in previous posts are true - that Marz. will be launching a new website that riders can use to get schematics, tuning info, service guides, part numbers, and bleed procedures then this will dramatically increase Marz's ability to connect with their customers and facilitate the exchange of a knowledge base.

Rewster: where did you get exploded diagrams of the cart assembly? I could have used this when I had my 06' 888 RC2X 3 years ago!

rewster said:

not to pick your bones, but I've never had any of the trouble with marz that you're talking about. I have an 06 888, and easily found oil level tables and exploded diagrams of the cart assemblies. I can vouge for the fork psi tho, their suggested pressures are wack.

also have a Roco that I've revalved for the sunday....I contacted marz both by phone and PM and they were more than helpful with the reshim (after trying to sell me a 125$ factory rebuild)

Click to expand...

Yes there are a few un-authorized documents out there (if you search back, I have pointed many people to windave.uk as the only partially useful official site), but none of them (bar the UK roco document) have ANY information about procedures to do anything at all. The 'exploded drawings' (that cannot be found through Marz and are only found on some pirated site) have no part numbers or descriptions. There are zero procedures for simple dis-assembly. No set-up guides. No torque values. No dimensional documentation. No current descriptions of fork adjustments. No lists of (special Marz) tools needed. No service intervals. No information about spring rates either stock or if there are spring options.

Go look at EVERY other fork mfg web site (as well as any performance moto or auto shock or fork mfg) and their supplied documentation. Set-up guides (already available at RS for the new boxxer), adjustment descriptions (with diagrams that point to said adjustment on the actual fork model in question, dimensional drawings, detailed rebuild guides with pictures, procedures, fluid specs, diagrams WITH part numbers and descriptions...

Any mechanically minded person with suspension experience will for the most part be able to figure out most of what is needed....but to spend the kind of money on a fork like this and have to 'guess' the service procedures is an inexcusable joke (multiple broken damper shafts and axle clamps due to the lack of any info, forcing consumers to experiment....and having to cough up the $$ to replace the non-documented products). The last year of the tech document CD's for shops was ~ '03. If you think that marz is on the same planet as ANY other fork mfg as to information sharing....well....

The entire body of information readily disclosed by Marz USA for any and all forks is a multi page legal document referencing a Monster (so as to be able to refer to 'front', back', etc)...that is it.

good points dave. i'm basing my comments on my experience dealing with individual marz techs, not the company as a whole.

moral of the story, marz is for ballllers! noobs beware, stick to your little boxxers and whatnot. i don't buy cans of soup based on opening instructions printed on the label

S.K.C. said:

Rewster: where did you get exploded diagrams of the cart assembly? I could have used this when I had my 06' 888 RC2X 3 years ago!

Click to expand...

Ha, sorry man. Can't remember where I found them exactly, have all the pdf's saved. Had to dig pretty deep to find them tho.

There are more manuals than you guys speak of. There are even step by step videos for the roco and 888, all be it in Italian. You need access to their intranet site. Dealers should be able to download something for you.

http://intranet.marzocchi.com/

Although Zoke don't provide anything on their website, it took me 5 min googling to come up with a full manual including exploded diagrams; part numbers; torque values; Oil volumes and procedures for completely stripping down the fork including changing the bushings.

I'd attach it, but I think it's already on this site somewhere and RM won't let me put anything up over 100kb.

Dave I understand where your coming from, Marzocchi is very paranoid about any customers working on anything which is bloody anoying, but the fact that the new cartridges are not crimped and they have by design made it easy to revalve them ect, means they might be on a different path.

Also, let's face it that aside from the bushing issues in 08', older zokes (06' and 07') 888's were about 10x more reliable than Boxxers or Manitou. The amount of MoCo cartriges that crap out is mind boggling and the seals on my Boxxers never stayed leak free for more than a couple of weeks.

all this talk of marz got me horny....decided to revalve the roco, again. it's midnight and i'm knee-deep in shimz, thanks rm!

rewster said:

all this talk of marz got me horny....decided to revalve the roco, again. it's midnight and i'm knee-deep in shimz, thanks rm!

Click to expand...

tell us moar

Humh... oil in the lowers - loads of unsprung weight, and exposed to the dirt/elements -> inconsistant damping and heavy, and rebound damping creates pressure build on the oil/dust seals (vacuum) that's why Marzo's and older Boxxers had issues with the rebound full of sh!t and oil there get's nasty faster... But gr8 for USD Forks

Oil in the uppers -> seperate damping from lubrication -> pressure build up in the lowers -> inconsistant damping (but lightest)

Oil in a pressurised cartridge - consistant damper, not that heavy, not that big on unsprung weight, not that big of a pressure build up in the lowers and seperate damping from lubrication -> better for both worlds (that's why people like Fox, Bos and if you give them a chance the new Manitou cartridge forks - I did and the Travis is pretty spot on)

It's a good thing they have the cartridge open - that way you can clean your rebound when it get's full of sh!t (like a friend's 08 66 did) rather getting a new cartridge.

djivotno said:

Humh... oil in the lowers - loads of unsprung weight, and exposed to the dirt/elements -> inconsistant damping and heavy, and rebound damping creates pressure build on the oil/dust seals (vacuum) that's why Marzo's and older Boxxers had issues with the rebound full of sh!t and oil there get's nasty faster... But gr8 for USD Forks

Oil in the uppers -> seperate damping from lubrication -> pressure build up in the lowers -> inconsistant damping (but lightest)

Oil in a pressurised cartridge - consistant damper, not that heavy, not that big on unsprung weight, not that big of a pressure build up in the lowers and seperate damping from lubrication -> better for both worlds (that's why people like Fox, Bos and if you give them a chance the new Manitou cartridge forks - I did and the Travis is pretty spot on)

It's a good thing they have the cartridge open - that way you can clean your rebound when it get's full of sh!t (like a friend's 08 66 did) rather getting a new cartridge.

Click to expand...

Maybe if he changed his oil more than once a season it wouldn't be so ****ty. I'd also point out that Bos no longer make a pressurised fork, all their stuff is open bath. Fox aren't pressurised, it's just a bladder that seperates the oil from the air.

Up untill a couple of years ago when Showa came out with the TC fork, all moto forks shared their lower and damping oil in one. My Ohlins forks never had problems.

There is nothing at all wrong with open bath and aside from weighing a bit more and the possibility of a bit more air in the oil (which can be cured with a bladder arrangement), they work well and are a **** load more reliable than most closed systems. Boxxer vrs Zoke seal life anyone?

dilzy said:

Maybe if he changed his oil more than once a season it wouldn't be so ****ty. I'd also point out that Bos no longer make a pressurised fork, all their stuff is open bath. Fox aren't pressurised, it's just a bladder that seperates the oil from the air.

Up untill a couple of years ago when Showa came out with the TC fork, all moto forks shared their lower and damping oil in one. My Ohlins forks never had problems.

There is nothing at all wrong with open bath and aside from weighing a bit more and the possibility of a bit more air in the oil (which can be cured with a bladder arrangement), they work well and are a **** load more reliable than most closed systems. Boxxer vrs Zoke seal life anyone?

Click to expand...

The marzo with the rebound issue has 2 rides on it and is less than a month old.

I did not mean pressurised but... a system with no direct contact between oil and air (IFP/bladder type) I just don't know the word for it.

As for a seal life - you can get normal seals from a moto shop as you can get proper bushings

I'm sure marzo fans will 'dig' them even with the damping in a closed cartradge oster_oops:

djivotno said:

The marzo with the rebound issue has 2 rides on it and is less than a month old.

I did not mean pressurised but... a system with no direct contact between oil and air (IFP/bladder type) I just don't know the word for it.

As for a seal life - you can get normal seals from a moto shop as you can get proper bushings

I'm sure marzo fans will 'dig' them even with the damping in a closed cartradge oster_oops:

Click to expand...

I have the blinkers on to the 08' and 09' issues because I've got an 07' wc.

Is the rebound issue because of actual dirt as you say? (which doesn't get pulled in because of vacuum created on the rebound stroke because it doesn't create any)

What do you mean "normal seals from a moto shop"? I meant that open bath systems have better seal life because of almost constant oil immersion.

Reliability wise, anyone remember the first Totems?: 2-step crapped out all the time; CSU creak; bushing problems.

Boxxers: Leaking moco; crack prone lowers (06'); bushings installed by 2 yr old.

Fox: Personally had 36 FIT cartridge lower compression bolt break off, causing all the oil to part company with the cartridge; 05' 40 lowers the arch was 2 microns thick; no real oil seal, unless cleaned every couple of weeks they leak like a sieve.

Manitou: Travis bushings ****; cartridges lasted a week in first gen; stantions hard coating could be rubbed off with your finger.

Frankly, every manufacturer has had serious issues with new forks. Rockshox more than most, but generally thier CS is excellent.

The cartridge in the new 888's isn't closed, that what the excitement's about, or did you mean there's no way they'll actually do that? They've also changed their bushing supplyer back to the old one, so that won't be a problem anymore.

Basically, give them a chance, they've had no more ****ty forks than any other manufacturer.

mmm just looked at the retail for the current wc in the land of OZ and it's only a few hundred squidles off a Bos. Bit close for something made in Taiwan.

Dilzy - I agree that everything has issues, but I think of everyone, RS improves the most and goes backwards the least.

After a couple years of 888 ownership and breaking two damper rods during use, and having a friend get weasled out of warranty on an 06 RC2X that had "bushings installed by a two year old" - that were gouging stanchions - I'd say they are no better than anything else. On top of that, the dampers are pretty lame compared to FOX/RS offerings (cartridges crimped shut until now, and if anything broke you had to replace a pricey cartridge in its entirety)... non-anodized internals so oil contaminates incredibly fast... internally un-adjustable... the list goes on. Not to mention how far backwards they went for 08 by switching to a heavier chassis with bushing play as standard. The problem with marzocchi is that they are always going to be one-step-forwards, two-steps-back. Are people really excited about 6.8lbs? The new boxxer is roughly a full pound lighter and is more adjustable both externally and internally.

I used to be an avid rockshox hater until I realised that they were one of the few companies that were constantly moving forward, while doing their best to minimise stupid mistakes. Doesn't mean it doesn't happen (see below), but it happens less than others IMO.

04 - crude damper in average chassis
05 - crude damper in better chassis
06 - new damper that worked better, first mainstream air sprung dh fork
08 - reinforced lowers, updated damper (fixed leakages)
10 - stiffer chassis, new damper, once again lighter and more adjustable than competition

My only complaints with the current boxxer is the circlip-groove breaking off (those who've seen it will know - it sucks, thankfully if you get a good stanchion they seem to last) and the stock damper is a bit average. I assume the former is fixed on the new one, and the latter has been updated heavily. As a bonus, it's also lighter and stiffer.

I don't really agree on the seal-count either, I think what djivotno meant was that you can go to a seal shop and buy a better brand of seal for a couple bucks if you're having issues. I don't think the open bath makes a huge difference to seal life, in my experience what is far more critical is the quality of the seal in the first place. Marzocchi uses NOK which explains why people like them (unfortunately they don't make the size that the boxxer takes). I've found that if you find a brand of seal that works well in the boxxer, they will continue to seal well for at least a year.

As for the BOS comparison, the boxxer is again more adjustable internally and externally, is a tonne lighter, and to my knowledge the BOS is made in taiwan too! I'll reserve judgement until I get some ride-time on the new RaRe but on paper the boxxer wins out.

All that said, it's awesome to see marzocchi finally uncrimp those cartridges!

Udi said:

As for the BOS comparison, the boxxer is again more adjustable internally and externally, is a tonne lighter, and to my knowledge the BOS is made in taiwan too! I'll reserve judgement until I get some ride-time on the new RaRe but on paper the boxxer wins out.

Click to expand...

you sure about this? my stoy was made and or assembled in france...

Where does it say that?

bos lowers and staunchions made in taiwan and only that. udi don t go spreading crap, especially about tunability of their forks!

nicho

Udi said:

My only complaints with the current boxxer is the circlip-groove breaking off

Click to expand...

Udi, I had this issue only once when the fork was brand new, my idea is that maybe the c-clip was faced wrong, i.e. not with the sharp edge downwards. Perhaps a lot of people don't realize that one side of it is sharper than the other, thus keeping it more stable in the groove once the fork is compressed hard.

????? said:

When will they stop using the Wal-Mart bike looking stanchions?

Click to expand...

and when will they abandon the cheesy graphics...it's all stupid gripes but there forks look terrible...they need to take hints from rock shox and fox.

Udi said:

Marzocchi uses NOK which explains why people like them (unfortunately they don't make the size that the boxxer takes). I've found that if you find a brand of seal that works well in the boxxer, they will continue to seal well for at least a year.

Click to expand...

Yup - right on dilz and Udi. All fork manufacturers have had issues in the past and SRAM/RS has mad some very significant changes to their DH fork line... I remember having a first-year SRAM Boxxer (04) and well... since then, I rode Zokes up until 08'. :biggrin:

About the seals - that's right! I totally forgot that they used NOK! However, Zoke 888's used to be 35mm (prior to 08' - now 38mm)... and since RS has enlarged their Boxxer chassis to 35mm for 2010 - wouldn't it be possible to find some 35mm N.O.S. 888 seals (05' - 07') somewhere? Wouldn't these fit the 2010 Boxxer?

Just curious - sorry for the slight derail.

Udi said:

After a couple years of 888 ownership and breaking two damper rods during use, and having a friend get weasled out of warranty on an 06 RC2X that had "bushings installed by a two year old" - that were gouging stanchions - I'd say they are no better than anything else.

Click to expand...

I've experienced the unbelievably bad CS of Groupe Sportif as well. I had a Z1 cartridge lunch itself after a month of use and they wouldn't warranty it. I think in the US the CS is as good as Monza is in OZ.

Udi said:

On top of that, the dampers are pretty lame compared to FOX/RS offerings

Click to expand...

As far as performance, having owned both a 40 and a Boxxer team, I've found the 07' wc I've got now to romp all over the Boxxer and be quite a bit better on the compression stroke than the 40 (rebound fox have nailed).

Udi said:

non-anodized internals so oil contaminates incredibly fast

Click to expand...

The damper rods are anodized and I presume they run a plastic glide ring on a non-anodized piston ala Fox. Give you that the cartridge tubes weren't anodized and they should have been.

Udi said:

Not to mention how far backwards they went for 08 by switching to a heavier chassis with bushing play as standard. The problem with marzocchi is that they are always going to be one-step-forwards, two-steps-back. Are people really excited about 6.8lbs? The new boxxer is roughly a full pound lighter and is more adjustable both externally and internally.

Click to expand...

I'll give you that one, 08' changes were all for the worse, except maybe getting rid of the x-side cartridge. People are excited about a 6.8lb 888 because they are usually much more forgiving of abusive riding than a Boxxer or a 40. Personally I haven't tried the new boxxer, but the old one felt like cooked paster off the front of the bike. Fox cartridges are just too delicate in many parts to take large amounts of abuse. Also, people who don't have much time to ride don't really want to be knocking their lowers off for a lube every few weeks or worrying if they might blow a seal. I've found that forks with a tiny amount of lower lube (36, 40, boxxer) need to be stripped and relubed a lot more often than they recommend as in like every 5 wet rides maximum to keep them at optimum performance.

Udi said:

As for the BOS comparison, the boxxer is again more adjustable internally and externally, is a tonne lighter, and to my knowledge the BOS is made in taiwan too! I'll reserve judgement until I get some ride-time on the new RaRe but on paper the boxxer wins out.

All that said, it's awesome to see marzocchi finally uncrimp those cartridges!

Click to expand...

As nico has said, the cartridges a French. Lowers made in Taiwan makes me happy, because they have more experience casting Mg than anyone else. New boxxer is more adjustable externally, but defininetly not internally. Boxxer may be a tonne lighter (it's not really that much and I didn't notice the extra weight from a boxxer to a 888), but I'll but money down that the Bos is more reliable, internally and structurally.

The solo air system in boxxers also sucks horribly from my experience. It feels like there's a kind of mushy puddle of marshland of the top of the stroke, not a spring.

ozzemale said:

bos lowers and staunchions made in taiwan and only that. udi don t go spreading crap, especially about tunability of their forks!

Click to expand...

Not sure how I did? I said "to my knowledge the BOS is made in taiwan too" (i.e. open to correction), but it turns out the majority of the fork (IMO the hardest part to get right) is made in taiwan. Let's face it, anyone can make a conventional damper that works fairly well when shimmed right (see TPC, FIT, Mission Control), but building a mag-alloy chassis that is stiff, strong, has bushings and seals that maximise service life, and minimise stiction plus wear is a much harder task. Particularly within the weight constraints that MTB enforces.

dilzy said:

New boxxer is more adjustable externally, but defininetly not internally. Boxxer may be a tonne lighter (it's not really that much and I didn't notice the extra weight from a boxxer to a 888), but I'll but money down that the Bos is more reliable, internally and structurally.

Click to expand...

Putting money down doesn't make anything true.

The new boxxer has externally adjustable LSC, HSC, LSR, and HSR - as well as an internally configurable compression shimstack, likely rebound as well (although I highly doubt you'd need to touch that with external LSR/HSR anyway). At absolute best the BOS might be AS tunable internally, and lag behind the boxxer externally. Someone who has opened a BOS fork cartridge can probably clarify, but to my knowledge they don't want people messing around inside their carts anyway.

dilzy said:

As nico has said, the cartridges a French. Lowers made in Taiwan makes me happy, because they have more experience casting Mg than anyone else.

Click to expand...

I think the point both of you missed, is how much country of origin actually matters (when it comes to end-product quality). It doesn't! There have been countless arguments on the topic and each time there is one right answer. Assuming a company enforces a given standard of part and construction quality (materials, tolerences, etc) then it makes no difference whether that part is made in france, taiwan, or on the moon. If the RS damper is tolerenced and built correctly, then it is in no way inferior (tune/design aside) to something made in froggy land - which is what you were implying.

dilzy said:

As far as performance, having owned both a 40 and a Boxxer team, I've found the 07' wc I've got now to romp all over the Boxxer and be quite a bit better on the compression stroke than the 40 (rebound fox have nailed).

Personally I haven't tried the new boxxer, but the old one felt like cooked paster off the front of the bike. Fox cartridges are just too delicate in many parts to take large amounts of abuse. Also, people who don't have much time to ride don't really want to be knocking their lowers off for a lube every few weeks or worrying if they might blow a seal. I've found that forks with a tiny amount of lower lube (36, 40, boxxer) need to be stripped and relubed a lot more often than they recommend as in like every 5 wet rides maximum to keep them at optimum performance.

The solo air system in boxxers also sucks horribly from my experience. It feels like there's a kind of mushy puddle of marshland of the top of the stroke, not a spring.

Click to expand...

Just on these points (you agreed with most of the others, but those where you didn't):

I agree the motion control damper is a bit average compared to something more conventional (I'm running a full TPC conversion in mine and it's brilliant) but I think where it won out was that it provided a good range of adjustment out of the box and let you get go-fast curves by merely twiddling a couple of knobs. I don't think the RC2 cart lets you run as much compression damping and you don't have a HSC / threshold adjuster either (the top-of-leg compression adjuster is just end stroke as you'd already know). But if you're happy with it then that's all that matters.

Anyway, the mission control damper is entirely different, so if you're drawing any comparison to newer forks based on the old damper (which I believe you are, when comparing to BOS), it's completely irrelevant. The mico damper uses a conventional needle valve for both LSR and LSC, and a sprung shimstack for HSR and HSC. A sprung plate preloads the largest shim/s on the stack so you can tune the rest of the stack independently of the spring loaded ones. Shimmed on the soft side out of the box (just like Fox) but quite easily fixed. After that, it feels just like you'd imagine (awesome!).

Cooked pasta comment I'm probably not qualified to discuss, given that I'm a lightweight, but considering the amount of world cups and championships won on the old chassis by hefty guys, I think the old noodle argument is a little OTT. Again if you think it's an issue then fair enough.

On the lubrication, I've found big differences in keeping the wipers and area underneath greased up, moreso than the oil in the lowers. People do an oil change and think their fork feels better, but it's actually really just the fact that they repack those seals with grease in the process IMO. I do agree that it only takes a couple of mud rides to mess things up, the dirt seems to get past the wiper and perhaps a little past the seals too. I'm happy to pay that price for a fork that is 300-500g lighter than the competition but I can understand those who wouldn't. I haven't spent much time with 36/40s but the boxxer might be marginally better due to a pressure seal instead of just the wiper.

Finally, I've had a pretty good run with the solo air, again I'm not sure if the curves change at higher pressures (for heavier weight riders) but in my experience apart from a slight midstroke rate falloff, it feels and works pretty nicely. Feels fine at the top of the stroke too, so maybe there was something wrong with yours.

S.K.C. said:

About the seals - that's right! I totally forgot that they used NOK! However, Zoke 888's used to be 35mm (prior to 08' - now 38mm)... and since RS has enlarged their Boxxer chassis to 35mm for 2010 - wouldn't it be possible to find some 35mm N.O.S. 888 seals (05' - 07') somewhere? Wouldn't these fit the 2010 Boxxer?

Click to expand...

Yeah I think that's entirely possible! The boxxer might not use the same seal as the 888 (the OD and height could be different) however it *might* be the same, and if not, it still *might* be available in the NOK lineup. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

The biggest difference I found with the 888 over the stock boxxer is the extra front end grip and the smoothness of the compression. What I mean is the boxxer alway's felt kind of jittery on higher compression settings even with the floodgate all the way off.

What I meant re Bos internal tunability is that it's no less tunable than the Boxxer.

When you say a spring pre-loads the larges shims, do you mean like Fox does it, or do you mean a proper high speed spool where the whole stack seperates from the piston depending on spring stiffness and pre-load? What I would really like to know is how they packaged the dual rebound into the cartridge, as that's the best adjustment, maybe not quite as wonderous as it is in rear shock form, but still, it's exciting. I run a vivid and the adjustments on that are very logical and useful.

On the stiffness of the old boxxer, I think it comes down to the fact that if your a great rider you can make anything work for you. I'm not a great rider and I need all the help I can get from the tracking of my fork.

On the Solo-Air, I deliberately said boxxer, because I rode a Totem solo-air and it felt fantastic compared to the coil version which I spent quite a lot of time on. I never rode a solo-air boxxer, this was just a parking lot test, but it was in a fork owned by a mechanic whose had plenty of boxxer's and know's his stuff, so I don't believe there was anything wrong with it. I asked him and he said that's how they all feel.

Oh yeah, on the country of origin thing. If your parts are all made in house you'll find that your ability to keep consistancy in quality is much higher. Fox for instance although they've definitly had some problems, keep arguably the highest quality constistancy in the industry. Their cartridges are made in house, but I'm pretty sure the lowers are an outsourced jobby, but the fact that they are assembled in house, means the quality of the parts is check again before being handed to Joe impressionable customer.

The reason I say I'll bet the Bos would be stronger is because it weighs so much, with larger diameter stantions than the new boxxer and their really isn't that much oil in those things, so it has to be in metal. A mate just bought an Idylle a few weeks ago, so I guess I'll get to see how the reliability goes. I do think they made a mistake not putting the hydraulic bump stop in them though, it makes a mighty tunk off some large drops.

they had better hire someone new to do their manuals.

offtheedge said:

they had better hire someone new to do their manuals.

Click to expand...

And make them freely available on the Internet

If anyone's interested I have a brand new set of BOS 888 dampers I'll sell for crazy cheap. They fit the original 888 04-07. If you are a big guy you will want to run one in each leg, if you are 180 or under you probably only need one damper. This is also a great way to upgrade a cheaper VF 888.

THESE ARE NOW SOLD OUT

looks like Dirt Mag will have a review next issue:
http://dirtmag.co.uk/news/category/press release/2010-marzocchi-888-rc3-evo-wc/dirt-1235343.html

looks like Dirt Mag will have a review next issue:
http://dirtmag.co.uk/news/category/press release/2010-marzocchi-888-rc3-evo-wc/dirt-1235343.html

Did anyone else see the price? Dorado, here we come!

£1399.95 = $2248.32

In other words, your 888 is going to weigh the same unless you spend and extra $1000. Well worth some Ti bits.

im hoping that the GBP sucks compared to the American peso.




wishful thinking, i know

That GBP figure probably includes VAT which us Yanks don't have to pay.

VAT is only 15%, the price difference is more likely the extortionate import duties the uk customs charge! we get shafted on price on pretty much everything