[rigidhack]

I'm looking at these two forks (150mm) and I'm wondering if I am missing something. From what I can gather, the Z1.1 is basically a 66RC with the ETA feature for a lot less money.

Can somebody confirm my suspicions, or show me the error of my ways?

 

[RhinofromWA]

Have you actually seen pictures of them?

Think of the 66RC as a 888 with all the hieght and weight with less travel.

 

[buildyourown]

I'm looking at these two forks (150mm) and I'm wondering if I am missing something. From what I can gather, the Z1.1 is basically a 66RC with the ETA feature for a lot less money.

Can somebody confirm my suspicions, or show me the error of my ways?

And 1" less travel.
The 66 only comes in 170mm, right?
The 66 is way heavier and taller. If you want a trail bike fork, get the z1. If you want a single crown DH fork, get the 66.

 

[Craw]

And 1" less travel.
The 66 only comes in 170mm, right?
The 66 is way heavier and taller. If you want a trail bike fork, get the z1. If you want a single crown DH fork, get the 66.

The 66 also comes in a 150mm version too.

 

[RhinofromWA]

The 66 also comes in a 150mm version too.

And how much taller is that fork over the z-1 over all at the same travel amount? Isn't it substantially taller and heavier than the z-1?

 

[math2014]

It is 45mm taller (150mm 66RC vs 150mm Z1).

Z1 has 32mm legs, 66RC has 35mm legs

 

[rigidhack]

Thanks!
It looks to me like the Z1.1 is more the fork I'm after.

 

[RhinofromWA]

It is 45mm taller (150mm 66RC vs 150mm Z1).

Z1 has 32mm legs, 66RC has 35mm legs

Holy crap.....almost 2 inches!

 

[Toshi]

Holy crap.....almost 2 inches!

good lawd. i like to harp on this, but iirc the 150mm 66 is nearly an inch taller than a '02-earlier monster T

 

[RhinofromWA]

good lawd. i like to harp on this, but iirc the 150mm 66 is nearly an inch taller than a '02-earlier monster T

Because the lower crown needs to be beefier to hadle the load?

 

[math2014]

Because the lower crown needs to be beefier to hadle the load?

Yes and bear in mind that the 7 and 6" 66RC forks are the SAME thing... you just reposition a spacer and flip a spring holder inside the fork to go from 6 to 7 and vice versa...

hence the need for the beefier crown even on the 6" version (which is a 7" as well)

 

[Toshi]

Because the lower crown needs to be beefier to hadle the load?

i realize why it is as tall as it is, and i think that's silly. just run a monster, sheesh . you can do mad turnbars on monsters, more so than on most any other dc fork...

 

[Bicyclist]

Have you ever picked up a 66? It's REALLY light. Now a Monster on the other hand...

 

[punkassean]

Hucker,
the 66 is not REALLY light by any stretch! It is lighter than a Monster but not light.

Yannis,
You are saying that the 66 set to either 150mm or 170mm is the same axle-to-crown height? Can you verify this?

 

[joelsman]

the 150 is 20mm shorter than the 170, just like any other travel adjustable fork

 

[The Kadvang]

the 150 is 20mm shorter than the 170, just like any other travel adjustable fork

Yeah... all it means is you get a little more bushing overlap when running it at 150.

 

[punkassean]

So then what is the A2C number for the 66?

 

[Bulldog]

good lawd. i like to harp on this, but iirc the 150mm 66 is nearly an inch taller than a '02-earlier monster T

To be fair, you need to compare a pre-'03 Monster WITH the rare Marzocchi 3.0 arch KIT (not just the aftermarket arches), which includes spacers that extend the fork, making it taller. Not 66 taller, but still.

Now consider that SC forks pretty much always have taller crowns that DC forks (the 66's is at least 20mm taller than the 888's) for deep stantion insert.

Lastly, the wider the SC fork is (my 66 is w i d e), the more downsweep the crown needs to have to allow the fork to pass under your downtube.

Given all that, the 66 is about the height it needs to be.

 

[Bulldog]

So then what is the A2C number for the 66?

My 150mm is 22.5".

 

[punkassean]

My 150mm is 22.5".

Thanks!

Can you verify what some have said, that even when set to 170mm it will also be 22.5"?

 

[Toshi]

no one is saying that, sean. what they're saying is that all 66 forks can be switched between 150 and 170mm by reworking the spring stack.

 

[The Kadvang]

Thanks!

Can you verify what some have said, that even when set to 170mm it will also be 22.5"?

I don't think that is right. The 170 is going to be 20mm taller than the 150, but because they use the same chasis, the 150 is just like a 170 pushed down... if that made any sense.

 

[Bulldog]

It is 45mm taller (150mm 66RC vs 150mm Z1).

37mm, but who's counting? 575-538=37.

 

[Bulldog]

Thanks!

Can you verify what some have said, that even when set to 170mm it will also be 22.5"?

No one said that.

 

[DßR]

I thought it was 575 and 595, but hey I'm not the one who has one in hand...

 

[Bulldog]

I thought it was 575 and 595, but hey I'm not the one who has one in hand...

I measured my 150mm to 22.5"=571.5mm, but with no levels or squares. So I'll go with Marzocchi's quote. So yeah, 575 and 595.

 

[math2014]

37mm, but who's counting? 575-538=37.

my bad...damn and i am a mathematician...

 

[punkassean]

Yes and bear in mind that the 7 and 6" 66RC forks are the SAME thing... you just reposition a spacer and flip a spring holder inside the fork to go from 6 to 7 and vice versa...

I mistook this statement to mean the same height since height is primarily what was being talked about. I didn't think that was true so that's why I kept trying to verify it.

 

[RhinofromWA]

i realize why it is as tall as it is, and i think that's silly. just run a monster, sheesh . you can do mad turnbars on monsters, more so than on most any other dc fork...

I can't do any....no fork will fix that.

 

[punkassean]

Rhino, I'n sure you can do mad stylie turn-bars!

 

[RhinofromWA]

Rhino, I'n sure you can do mad stylie turn-bars!

If it requires me to get my carcass in the air.....

it aint happening

 

[punkassean]

You can bust a turn-bar off of a curb!

BRAAAAHP!!!