Quantcast

380 - anyone put a season on one?

Udi

RM Chief Ornithologist
Mar 14, 2005
4,915
1,200
How are these things holding up, same long service intervals as the old ones?

What's the new damper like? Can you revalve the compression and rebound pistons easily enough?

The new ones look pretty nice with the brown stanchions instead of chrome.
 

Tdiddy

Monkey
Apr 8, 2009
222
1
I've been riding mine since July, and it's as smooth as ever. I haven't monkeyed with any of the valving as I feel it's running pretty prime for what I'm looking for. I came off of a 888 rc3 evo with an Avy damper with midvalve. I had the heavy spring in that, but have the medium spring weight in the 380. Low speed two clicks from full. Traction is quite good, and the rebound adjustments are well within what I've needed. I did run a heavy spring for the Canadian Nationals at Sun Peaks as it was a very high speed course with lots of fast impacts, but for everyday riding I find the stock spring quite good.

I feel the new damper is a little better than the Avy, and miles ahead of the old Marz. I don't notice any difference on 1000 meter plus descents from top to bottom in terms of damping consistency, whereas even on the Avy I would find the rebound and compression varying quite a bit on longer/rougher runs. The two pound weight drop from the Avy 888 was also greatly appreciated.

Having ridden the new Fox Float 40, I feel the 380 is much more consistent with the no need for maintenance. I also went to a 55 on my trail bike because I was so impressed (same dbc damper). I haven't ridden any of the new chargers though, so can't comment on that, but overall I'm pleased as punch.
 

Tdiddy

Monkey
Apr 8, 2009
222
1
wow, its adds that much to the fork?
Should have made that clear, the 888 rc3 evo with steel spring going to the new 380 was about two pounds. I also ran a little more oil in the 888, so that contributed to the weight
 

JohnnyC

Monkey
Feb 10, 2006
399
1
Rotorua, New Zealand
How are these things holding up, same long service intervals as the old ones?

What's the new damper like? Can you revalve the compression and rebound pistons easily enough?

The new ones look pretty nice with the brown stanchions instead of chrome.
Pretty comparable service intervals, spring leg is just as good as the 888, especially with a good lube in there. Damper possibly lasts better than the 888. Makes for easier servicing.

Compression is easier to revalve than anything else around, rebound is pretty straightforward too, not much different to any other cartridge fork
 

Udi

RM Chief Ornithologist
Mar 14, 2005
4,915
1,200
Pretty comparable service intervals, spring leg is just as good as the 888, especially with a good lube in there. Damper possibly lasts better than the 888. Makes for easier servicing.

Compression is easier to revalve than anything else around, rebound is pretty straightforward too, not much different to any other cartridge fork
Cheers. Do you know if the 40 springs fit without friction / interference by any chance? I compared the two springs and the diameters look the same, although the Marzocchi spring had very thin plastic wrap.

Also this is probably a long shot, but is there any way to make the damper an actual sealed damper so it doesn't exchange oil with the bath? The circumstances under which this happens is not very clear from the marzocchi description - is it a velocity or position sensitive blowoff, and is it actually necessary?

I ask because the new damper would functionally be a much lower volume damper than the old open bath items (if it is only rarely exchanging oil with the bath) and in that case it would benefit from a damper specific fluid. Unfortunately these aren't the best for lubrication purposes, so it'd be nice to seal it off and use a separate oil for lubrication.
 

tacubaya

Monkey
Dec 19, 2009
720
89
Mexico City
Cheers. Do you know if the 40 springs fit without friction / interference by any chance? I compared the two springs and the diameters look the same, although the Marzocchi spring had very thin plastic wrap.

Also this is probably a long shot, but is there any way to make the damper an actual sealed damper so it doesn't exchange oil with the bath? The circumstances under which this happens is not very clear from the marzocchi description - is it a velocity or position sensitive blowoff, and is it actually necessary?

I ask because the new damper would functionally be a much lower volume damper than the old open bath items (if it is only rarely exchanging oil with the bath) and in that case it would benefit from a damper specific fluid. Unfortunately these aren't the best for lubrication purposes, so it'd be nice to seal it off and use a separate oil for lubrication.
You would have to modify/change the sealhead so it seals both ways and then just seal shut the blowoff ports on top.

Also, I posted some info regarding the Fox sealheads (you know where).
 

4130biker

PM me about Tantrum Cycles!
May 24, 2007
3,884
448
Also, I posted some info regarding the Fox sealheads (you know where).
Aren't you the guy that originally "said too much" about the RS R-1 on here? If so, I'm glad to see you're being a bit more sneaky with that insider info these days! ;)
 

Mo(n)arch

Turbo Monkey
Dec 27, 2010
4,441
1,422
Italy/south Tyrol
What about that plastic bumper for hard impacts? I read in a german forum, that light riders don't get full travel out of the fork. They have to remove this drop stop thingy...
 

JohnnyC

Monkey
Feb 10, 2006
399
1
Rotorua, New Zealand
Cheers. Do you know if the 40 springs fit without friction / interference by any chance? I compared the two springs and the diameters look the same, although the Marzocchi spring had very thin plastic wrap.

Also this is probably a long shot, but is there any way to make the damper an actual sealed damper so it doesn't exchange oil with the bath? The circumstances under which this happens is not very clear from the marzocchi description - is it a velocity or position sensitive blowoff, and is it actually necessary?

I ask because the new damper would functionally be a much lower volume damper than the old open bath items (if it is only rarely exchanging oil with the bath) and in that case it would benefit from a damper specific fluid. Unfortunately these aren't the best for lubrication purposes, so it'd be nice to seal it off and use a separate oil for lubrication.
Stanchions are the same as a 888 so a yellow fox spring will fit the ID of the tube, as long as it sits on the spring seat OK.

Damper bleeds off excess oil at full bottom out, so position sensitive. There is a port that sits where the spring-backed IFP reaches at BO for it to bleed out. As for cycling oil back in, it simply relies on the fact that most sealed cartridge forks suck in oil over time (ie old FIT cartridges and teh same reason Pikes can only have 5cc of oil in the damper leg) unless you use a tight quad ring. You could replace the oil seal with a quad seal, but I have noticed in the C2R2 that while the lower lube starts to discolour the damper oil will still be totally clean so I don't think there is much mixing going on, nor is it actually necassary, more of a failsafe to prevent total damping failure or damage.. In the CR forks the lube oil and damper oil would appear to degrade at the same rate. You could experiment with a dark coloured lube oil and clear damper oil to see if they did mix! I have a hunch you could get away with just running a better lubricating oil in the lowers without running in to any problems.
 

Udi

RM Chief Ornithologist
Mar 14, 2005
4,915
1,200
I have a hunch you could get away with just running a better lubricating oil in the lowers without running in to any problems.
Thanks, that whole reply was exactly the detail I was looking for. What type of seal does the sealhead use from factory, could you elaborate on the design? Is it specifically designed to let oil in or is it just a standard energized hydraulic shaft seal with oil occasionally getting in due to the pressure imbalance (that exists in any fork like you said)?

Sounds to me that in the best case you could just use different oils as-is, worst case upgrade/modify the seal head with a different seal and leave the upper blowoff mechanism as a failsafe.

How about the removal of the cartridge from the fork (to bleed it or whatever) - does the entire unit come out completely in one piece like a Charger or FIT cartridge? I mean aside from the top-loading compression assembly. What's the process to bleed it, just remove the compression assembly to fill and cycle air out, and then load it back in?

Also while I'm rattling off questions - are the spring/damper rods inteference fit into the lowers yet (like RS/Fox) to make it easier to service? Pop the lowers off and drop in 50-60ml of lube oil per lower leg without losing any damper oil?

Thanks again. Sounds to me like they have fixed a lot of their issues with their older products.
 

JohnnyC

Monkey
Feb 10, 2006
399
1
Rotorua, New Zealand
Thanks, that whole reply was exactly the detail I was looking for. What type of seal does the sealhead use from factory, could you elaborate on the design? Is it specifically designed to let oil in or is it just a standard energized hydraulic shaft seal with oil occasionally getting in due to the pressure imbalance (that exists in any fork like you said)?

Sounds to me that in the best case you could just use different oils as-is, worst case upgrade/modify the seal head with a different seal and leave the upper blowoff mechanism as a failsafe.

How about the removal of the cartridge from the fork (to bleed it or whatever) - does the entire unit come out completely in one piece like a Charger or FIT cartridge? I mean aside from the top-loading compression assembly. What's the process to bleed it, just remove the compression assembly to fill and cycle air out, and then load it back in?

Also while I'm rattling off questions - are the spring/damper rods inteference fit into the lowers yet (like RS/Fox) to make it easier to service? Pop the lowers off and drop in 50-60ml of lube oil per lower leg without losing any damper oil?

Thanks again. Sounds to me like they have fixed a lot of their issues with their older products.
I never had a close look inside the seal head (complete disassembly of the rebound piston to remove it was a tad fiddly so didn't go that far just for a look.) but I am certain it is a standard hydraulic shaft seal.

Cartridge service is easy, the damper removes in one piece and you can remove the compression assembly from the top. From there removing the comp piston to change shims is just a matter of unscrewing the HSC adjuster until the piston thread off the bottom and then you will discover enough shims to make the most hungry MOAR SHIMZ person happy! Reassembly is basically as you say, fill it with oil, cycle as much air out as you can, set the oil height and drop the compression assembly back in. Next bottom out bleeds the system and sets the oil volume. From memory the factory oil height was 60mm but Pedro recommended 67mm (but don't quote me on that) to make it a little easier as you are compressing the compensator spring when you install it. That height doesn't affect the final oil volume either.

Spring and damper rods are not interference fit but generally come apart easier than the old bombers. The spring leg has a hex in the end so you can hold the shaft if need be but not really on the damper so that might be a little tricky sometimes. I always used an impact wrench anyway.
 

Udi

RM Chief Ornithologist
Mar 14, 2005
4,915
1,200
All good news apart from the lack of interference fit. I heard for 2015 the 380 Ti also includes the 6.5 spring stock - presumably this means 6.5 Ti - much more useful for most people than the 5.5.

Do you know what they're like with honoring warranties? I know this changes in different locations but just to get a rough idea.

Finally while you're talking about the compression assembly - they mention that the whole HS stack is able to lift away from the piston - is this just poor terminology for a conventional shimmed piston with spring-preload mechanism for the face shim, or is it actually a different design? Do you know what the stock damper oil is?

Edit - if anyone is interested, I got some info and pricing from Marz US:

- Espresso stanchions $464 (pair - cannot buy singles)
- Lower leg assembly $291 with bushings, no seals
- SKF seal kit $82
- 2015 380 includes 6.5 Ti spring and 7.7 Steel spring in box
- Warranty: "2 year warranty as it has been since 2012. Covers any manufacturer defect. Stanchion up/down lines are covered if they cause oil leakage from seals. Otherwise it's normal wear and tear."
 
Last edited:

JohnnyC

Monkey
Feb 10, 2006
399
1
Rotorua, New Zealand
All good news apart from the lack of interference fit. I heard for 2015 the 380 Ti also includes the 6.5 spring stock - presumably this means 6.5 Ti - much more useful for most people than the 5.5.

Do you know what they're like with honoring warranties? I know this changes in different locations but just to get a rough idea.

Finally while you're talking about the compression assembly - they mention that the whole HS stack is able to lift away from the piston - is this just poor terminology for a conventional shimmed piston with spring-preload mechanism for the face shim, or is it actually a different design? Do you know what the stock damper oil is?

Edit - if anyone is interested, I got some info and pricing from Marz US:

- Espresso stanchions $464 (pair - cannot buy singles)
- Lower leg assembly $291 with bushings, no seals
- SKF seal kit $82
- 2015 380 includes 6.5 Ti spring and 7.7 Steel spring in box
- Warranty: "2 year warranty as it has been since 2012. Covers any manufacturer defect. Stanchion up/down lines are covered if they cause oil leakage from seals. Otherwise it's normal wear and tear."
Marzocchi was always really good at honouring the warranties I processed, things like abnormal stanchion wear was usually covered no worries (unlike some other brands)

And yes the whole HS stack can lift away from the piston, ie the preload is applied to the clamp shim instead of the face shim. So changing the shims has more effect on the mid speed rather than higher speeds like a conventional assembly with HSC adjuster
 

Udi

RM Chief Ornithologist
Mar 14, 2005
4,915
1,200
And yes the whole HS stack can lift away from the piston, ie the preload is applied to the clamp shim instead of the face shim. So changing the shims has more effect on the mid speed rather than higher speeds like a conventional assembly with HSC adjuster
I don't think that's completely true - on a conventional HS adjusted stack you can get a strong mid-speed (compared to low speed) because once the port area's speed threshold has been crossed, velocity needs to increase to a certain level (defined by face shim preload force) before the damping curve can linearise again - thus you get a progression in the curve until that force is overcome.

Moving the preload to the clamp shim means that you can't actually generate that non-linearity, at least not to the same extent, because the face shims are free to deflect past LS port-spike velocity (like in a non-preloaded stack), thus the damping will be more linear. Instead, what you'd get is greater digression at higher shaft speeds once the clamp shim's preload is overcome. In that sense you're right but I'm not sure that would offer a functional benefit over a conventional damper.

That said, depending on the geometry of the piston and shimstack, you could have a more poppet-valve like behavior (and thus more like a regular face-preloaded shimstack) - if for example there was only a small differential between face and clamp shim diameters. If you have one apart for revalving, snap some pics for us.
 
Last edited:

Trasselkalle

Monkey
Oct 28, 2014
138
25
Sweden
Just a little curious (i.e. I ofc understand that settings are highly individual):
  1. How are you all getting along with your 380 at this point?
  2. What spring are you running (vs your weight)?
  3. What settings have you dialed in as your preferences?
I just got mine, so I need to ride mine as it came a bit before I start fiddling. I got the 7.7 spring to make sure I wasn't undersprung. At least I read between the lines of the Pinkbike review that the fork was slightly undersprung in 6.5, even though he at the same time states that it felt perfect for his 170 lbs (which is about what I weigh fully geared up).

I need to take it where I can actually ride it to know better, but so far I don't have a chance to get it to ever bottom out, however low I set compression (leaves the 4-5 cm that some mentioned earlier that lighter riders may struggle to use - any more news on this, i.e. is it still an issue?). I also had to back-off preload as much as I could (and then one click in), to get closer to 40% sag but I need my wife to come home to help me measure actual sag and not just estimate (no o-ring on, and out of clips atm).
 
Last edited:

tabletop84

Monkey
Nov 12, 2011
891
15
Edit - if anyone is interested, I got some info and pricing from Marz US:

- Espresso stanchions $464 (pair - cannot buy singles)
- Lower leg assembly $291 with bushings, no seals
- SKF seal kit $82
- 2015 380 includes 6.5 Ti spring and 7.7 Steel spring in box
- Warranty: "2 year warranty as it has been since 2012. Covers any manufacturer defect. Stanchion up/down lines are covered if they cause oil leakage from seals. Otherwise it's normal wear and tear."
What about the dbc cartridge? Probably compatible with 888-chassis if the stanctions are the same.
 

Trasselkalle

Monkey
Oct 28, 2014
138
25
Sweden
Following up what I asked implicitly in my earlier post, in case others are interested also:

I did some reading on the German forums that have much more discussion about the 380. As Monarch was saying (and as he is also discussing in those German forums), ppl cut away anything from 1 cm to even completely removing the elastomer. However, the fork remains quite firm in the final bits of the travel anyway, so the fork is inherently designed with very strong bottom-out protection. I guess the FR fork gene is strong in Marz still.

Anyhow, in the German forum, someone also commented that the 888 had an elastomer similar to the 380 that became more generous in give after a while, and that cutting it (at least right away) therefore could be a mistake. I could speculate that the additional give over time might be because the riders had gotten more used to the fork behavior and simply charged harder, thus using up more travel. Given how little resistance the elastomer offers, according to those who have inspected it, it makes sense that it's not just that little piece of rubber that saves the last bit of travel.

The elastomer is thus only a small part of the final travel use as the shim stack apparently is designed to protect very well (too well for some?) against bottom-outs. I suppose this has impact on the HSC, as it may be possible to leave it pretty open (or even fully open if you have a firm spring compared to your weight), but I'm not competent enough to speculate on suspension tuning (ergo the reason for my earlier three questions, that I'd still love to hear ppl chime in on).
 

no skid marks

Monkey
Jan 15, 2006
2,511
29
ACT Australia
Cheers. Do you know if the 40 springs fit without friction / interference by any chance? I compared the two springs and the diameters look the same, although the Marzocchi spring had very thin plastic wrap.
In 888s I found the forty springs binded, conclusion was because the 40 springs get wider when compressed due to the steeper/less windings. I even had one snap due to it I think.
 

yd35

Monkey
Oct 28, 2008
741
61
NY
I got the 7.7 spring to make sure I wasn't undersprung. At least I read between the lines of the Pinkbike review that the fork was slightly undersprung in 6.5, even though he at the same time states that it felt perfect for his 170 lbs (which is about what I weigh fully geared up).
Is there some sort of consensus on the proper spring? I weigh around 175-180, and the Pinkbike article made me think that the reviewer was definitely undersprung. Anyone around my weight have time on both the 6.5 and 7.7 springs?
 
Last edited:

Trasselkalle

Monkey
Oct 28, 2014
138
25
Sweden
Is there some sort of consensus on the proper spring? I weight around 175-180, and the Pinkbike article made me think that the reviewer was definitely undersprung. Anyone around my weight have time on both the 6.5 and 7.7 springs?
FWIW, I've spoken with one person (165 lbs with gear, exactly like me) who has tried both the 6.5 and 7.7 spring. He could ride both, but felt the 6.5 was a bit mushy and also didn't like the mid-support of it compared with the 7.7. The 7.7 felt snappier to him and also - subjectively - felt as if it didn't dive into the travel at every little bump. He rides much harder than I do and is using up ~185 mm of travel during hard rides. He wanted to keep the last bit in reserve for major 'oh shit' moments, and has only bottomed-out a few times, so he felt the elastomer (rubber tube at the bottom of the spring) was perfect length as shipped with the fork.

I based my pick entirely on his experiences, as I haven't seen many going for the 7.7 - much less try both the 6.5 and 7.7. After some initial riding, I like how it feels in mid-travel and wouldn't want it any softer in that region. Sure, it probably rides a tad less smooth in early travel, but to me it still feels great in the early travel. I run it quite open in terms of LSC though, and will change that based on where I ride. The only thing I might do is change the ramp-up point of the progression towards the end of the travel. That is easily done by shortening the elastomer, which kicks in when you have 7-8 cm left of the travel. I'll need to ride it much more, and in harder terrain before I make any such decisions though.
 
Last edited:

yd35

Monkey
Oct 28, 2008
741
61
NY
FWIW, I've spoken with one person (165 lbs with gear, exactly like me) who has tried both the 6.5 and 7.7 spring. He could ride both, but felt the 6.5 was a bit mushy and also didn't like the mid-support of it compared with the 7.7. The 7.7 felt snappier to him and also - subjectively - felt as if it didn't dive into the travel at every little bump. He rides much harder than I do and is using up ~185 mm of travel during hard rides. He wanted to keep the last bit in reserve for major 'oh shit' moments, and has only bottomed-out a few times, so he felt the elastomer (rubber tube at the bottom of the spring) was perfect length as shipped with the fork.

I based my pick entirely on his experiences, as I haven't seen many going for the 7.7 - much less try both the 6.5 and 7.7. After some initial riding, I like how it feels in mid-travel and wouldn't want it any softer in that region. Sure, it probably rides a tad less smooth in early travel, but to me it still feels great in the early travel. I run it quite open in terms of LSC though, and will change that based on where I ride. The only thing I might do is change the ramp-up point of the progression towards the end of the travel. That is easily done by shortening the elastomer, which kicks in when you have 7-8 cm left of the travel. I'll need to ride it much more, and in harder terrain before I make any such decisions though.
Great info, thanks. As I suspected, sounds like 7.7 (that's the extra firm, correct?) is the way to go. I'm on a Fox 40 Float right now, and I'm willing to bet that the 7.7 spring being a "tad less smooth in early travel" is still gonna be way better than what I have on my current fork.
 

yd35

Monkey
Oct 28, 2008
741
61
NY
Yes, 7.7 is extra firm. Hope you like how it feels also!
I have to sell my 40 first, and then find a good deal on a 2014 380. If all goes well, I'll be riding Zocchi next year.

I wish Marzocchi had better tech documentation about spring rates, tuning, servicing, etc. They're really awful in that regard. Or maybe all that information is just written in the 30 languages that I don't read on their manual.
 

Trasselkalle

Monkey
Oct 28, 2014
138
25
Sweden
lol - that's true for sure. My hopes are that there will be plenty of German riders (the 380 seems popular there for some reason) that will be able to help out. So far, the Swedish rep has been great with my questions to him also. I would love to see more videos and such on what ppl are doing with them and the effects, etc, though. With time...
 

blindboxx2334

Turbo Monkey
Mar 19, 2013
1,340
101
Wets Coast
Edit - if anyone is interested, I got some info and pricing from Marz US:

- Espresso stanchions $464 (pair - cannot buy singles)
- Lower leg assembly $291 with bushings, no seals
- SKF seal kit $82
- 2015 380 includes 6.5 Ti spring and 7.7 Steel spring in box
- Warranty: "2 year warranty as it has been since 2012. Covers any manufacturer defect. Stanchion up/down lines are covered if they cause oil leakage from seals. Otherwise it's normal wear and tear."
Is that a typo? and i thought paying 40 bones for XF seals were bad.
 

ChrisRobin

Turbo Monkey
Jan 30, 2002
3,346
190
Vancouver
Interesting video... but how often do you change seals on a zocchi fork?

I'm curious to know the difference between the chassis weight of the basic 380 and the higher end Ti one.
 

Trasselkalle

Monkey
Oct 28, 2014
138
25
Sweden
Shipping and importing + weaker currency atm seems to add up for you guys. I think I saw them for what translates to 35 USD in a store over here.
 

troy

Turbo Monkey
Dec 3, 2008
1,006
739
still though, 85 god dammed dollhairs for bicycle suspension seals seems a bit much... do you think?
NOK seals cost 45$ for 38mm marzo. SKF cost 75$ in Europe for 38mm marzo. Considering that those seals last 2 seasons easily and offer much better performence, I don't think it is a bad pricetag. We are talking about 1000-1700$ forks... You can always buy "regular" ones and save some cash.
 

blindboxx2334

Turbo Monkey
Mar 19, 2013
1,340
101
Wets Coast
agree to disagree i suppose. Fox 40 skf seals are 28-35 online; not sure if they are the same thing or not but i still think its absurd that marz skf seals are twice as much. Hell i just paid 32 bones for a 34 skf seal kit..

its amazing how expensive certain commodities are getting now.
 

troy

Turbo Monkey
Dec 3, 2008
1,006
739
agree to disagree i suppose. Fox 40 skf seals are 28-35 online; not sure if they are the same thing or not but i still think its absurd that marz skf seals are twice as much. Hell i just paid 32 bones for a 34 skf seal kit..

its amazing how expensive certain commodities are getting now.
FOX has only 2 seals and Marzo has 4 of them...so the price difference is kinda obvious...