Quantcast

I got a new toy....

Stoked

Turbo Monkey
Nov 28, 2004
1,813
1
LI, NY
ziggy stardust. fork is great. i'm bummed they didn't do anything new with the dropout system in 08.
 
it will be amazing. You can't go wrong with their DJ line, they are simple, stiff, short, light. Should be perfect.
I love stiff DJ forks that hardly use suspension unless you mess up, I practially run mine locked out. But if you are gonna run a fork that works so poorly and doesnt allow any travel to actually move, why not just get a rigid, they are cheaper, lighter and have more travel than that thing does.

But hey it looks cool

Just messing around, I havent ridden as much of their new stuff as in years past, and I understand they are getting much better, now they just have to get past that bad reputation they have
 
Sep 20, 2007
443
0
Champaign, IL
Looks alright.... I don't trust Manitou though. Too many leaky forks have come into my shop. Haha I looked at that when I was spec-ing my new bike thoug, but I'm happy with what I went with. Hope it works well for you.
 

BikeSATORI

Monkey
Apr 13, 2007
723
0
one world...
haha, so this is what hayes has in store, huh/
Righteous label of gold... not sure what that red thing is, but the "gold label" is making want to ride with my collared shirt unbuttoned and chest hair flyin' in the tangled cuban links...


never could get over the fork lowers that actually go lower than the axle either... I know, a worthless pet peeve, but it just bothers me.
 

snaky69

Monkey
Feb 10, 2007
188
0
Quebec, Canada
A 80mm DJ series fork has a 465mm a2c height, a 80mm gold label is at 455mm. So at equal travel 10mm less. Now look at the pic, and place the dropouts at the same place the ones on a DJ series are, see where I'm going?

I think it has to do with the reverse arch clearing the downtube on compression, the stanchions have got to be longer so the a2c is inherently longer, they remedied it by moving the dropouts up on the fork leg.
 

Bulldog

Turbo Monkey
Sep 11, 2001
1,009
0
Wisconsin
A 80mm DJ series fork has a 465mm a2c height, a 80mm gold label is at 455mm. So at equal travel 10mm less. Now look at the pic, and place the dropouts at the same place the ones on a DJ series are, see where I'm going?

I think it has to do with the reverse arch clearing the downtube on compression, the stanchions have got to be longer so the a2c is inherently longer, they remedied it by moving the dropouts up on the fork leg.
I don't really follow where you were going with all of that or why 10mm sounds like a foot to you. The length a fork chassis is based on several things: the drop/width/offset of the crown to clear downtubes, the beefiness of the arch, stantion length vs desired bushing overlap and of course like you said where they put the axle on the legs which will affect tire clearance at the crown,. ALL those add up to a 10mm difference in this case. No big deal, 10mm is the difference in height between different tires choices. Factor in frame geo and the differences really get blurred. To me that wouldn't stop me from riding the fork I want from the company I want to support. Inches yes, less than 0.4" no. :)
 

ThePriceSeliger

Mushhead
Mar 31, 2004
4,861
0
Denver, Colorado
I don't really follow where you were going with all of that or why 10mm sounds like a foot to you. The length a fork chassis is based on several things: the drop/width/offset of the crown to clear downtubes, the beefiness of the arch, stantion length vs desired bushing overlap and of course like you said where they put the axle on the legs which will affect tire clearance at the crown,. ALL those add up to a 10mm difference in this case. No big deal, 10mm is the difference in height between different tires choices. Factor in frame geo and the differences really get blurred. To me that wouldn't stop me from riding the fork I want from the company I want to support. Inches yes, less than 0.4" no. :)
True. The AC on my Gold Label is 460 for the 80mm travel version. The AC on my Argyle is currently unknown because we tore it apart and shortened it, and put a screw driver handle inside as the preload spacer. Holding them side by side, the AC is going to be a few mm difference. That's fine, I can just move my handlebars down a spacer or two.

But I also need to open the Gold Label up and see what I'm working with, and maybe shorten it a bit more.
 

Bulldog

Turbo Monkey
Sep 11, 2001
1,009
0
Wisconsin
The AC on my Argyle is currently unknown because we tore it apart and shortened it, and put a screw driver handle inside as the preload spacer.
OMG, screwdriver handle lol. Nice.

I'm really wondering with how short travel is cool again when we will see the return of a simple elastomer fork?! With ~2" of travel for street/park/trails you really don't need much damping and could save a ton of weight by gutting a fork of it's oil, dampers, springs and just throw some old-fashioned bubblegum (elastomers) in there! Tons of cheap and easy combinations to get the feel you want. Makes sense to me! :lighten:
 

Stoked

Turbo Monkey
Nov 28, 2004
1,813
1
LI, NY
OMG, screwdriver handle lol. Nice.

I'm really wondering with how short travel is cool again when we will see the return of a simple elastomer fork?! With ~2" of travel for street/park/trails you really don't need much damping and could save a ton of weight by gutting a fork of it's oil, dampers, springs and just throw some old-fashioned bubblegum (elastomers) in there! Tons of cheap and easy combinations to get the feel you want. Makes sense to me! :lighten:
new atomlab fork...
 

BikeSATORI

Monkey
Apr 13, 2007
723
0
one world...
I don't really follow where you were going with all of that or why 10mm sounds like a foot to you. The length a fork chassis is based on several things: the drop/width/offset of the crown to clear downtubes, the beefiness of the arch, stantion length vs desired bushing overlap and of course like you said where they put the axle on the legs which will affect tire clearance at the crown,. ALL those add up to a 10mm difference in this case. No big deal, 10mm is the difference in height between different tires choices. Factor in frame geo and the differences really get blurred. To me that wouldn't stop me from riding the fork I want from the company I want to support. Inches yes, less than 0.4" no. :)
I'm not quite sure I'm picking up exactly what you're arguing for or against? Is it some american patriotic thing where you reject the metric system in favor of english standard?

And yeah, as for your other idea, seems the folks at atomlab thought they'd give it a try! Seems somewhat logical to me... but then again, I've still got an old Manitou 4 fork, made by bradbury from the early 90's. The elastomers are dust now, haha. Replaced with a steel coil.
 

t1maglio

Monkey
Oct 29, 2001
855
0
southern wisconsin
I kinda agree with Tony, but I'm also strongly opposed to going back to elastomers. Tony, I think you maybe missed that phase and lucked out with good forks that had springs. Elastomers suck, they compress over time and turn essentially rigid, not to mention they are effected by temperature changes. A good spring always is a good idea.

I was actually just thinking about fork progression the other day when I lowered mine. The Judys, back in the day, were set up at under 2.5 for XC and just under 3 for DH. Those forks were skinny, flexie, and not that great in the grand scheme of things. The best part is my Pike, with tons of more technology, is stiffer, better tuned, and lighter! I went from 3" to 4" on my DJ bikes, and now I'm heading back down to around 2.5". I guess this is a lot of randomness, but it was just on my mind and I felt like saying something about it.
 

Bulldog

Turbo Monkey
Sep 11, 2001
1,009
0
Wisconsin
I kinda agree with Tony, but I'm also strongly opposed to going back to elastomers. Tony, I think you maybe missed that phase and lucked out with good forks that had springs. Elastomers suck, they compress over time and turn essentially rigid, not to mention they are effected by temperature changes. A good spring always is a good idea.

I was actually just thinking about fork progression the other day when I lowered mine. ...The best part is my Pike, with tons of more technology, is stiffer, better tuned, and lighter!
THAT elastomer technology is also what, 10-15 years old now? I had to scrape the gooey jelly elastomers out of a few old forks back in the shop but you're right I only rode one hard myself. It worked great for DJ. I'm thinking, as the fork chassis technology has improved so much why can't elastomer technology match it? How often does someone say "my rear shock rocks but the bottom out bumper is shot"? Never, right? And that's at ~3:1 ratio. A fork at 1:1 (and with two legs, two stacks) has got to be a lot easier on elastomers. I see a fork with 2-3 elastomers of different durometer stacked up to do what you ask of your fork. You want soft initially for trails and stiff against bottom out cool, you want it so stiff it only moves when you mess up ok, your choice. Again, this is only for these super short street/park forks. My Trail/FR forks will remain coil/oil with real dampers. :) I can't argue the temperature argument - ya got me there!
 

t1maglio

Monkey
Oct 29, 2001
855
0
southern wisconsin
I'll agree to disagree.

The old forks would actually get shorter and shorter travel as the elastomers would become permanently compressed (and the more they compressed the less your fork worked). If you rode your forks hard you probably replaced those silly things every year or so. Perhaps there is new rubber technology that will make this not happen, but I'm skeptical. As for the rr shock thing, I can't think of any all elastomer rear ends anymore. The bottom out bumper only gets slammed once and a while if things are set up right, its not like constant abuse like you get if thats the only thing absorbing your shock.