Quantcast

Intrinsic Tuning thread

Patan-DH

Monkey
Jun 9, 2007
458
0
Patagonia
The Manitou Travis is IMO an exelent race fork, with a weight of 7pounds-3175gr (Ti sprung) and with a really stiff and durable chassis, if we add a reasonable good price that makes a good race fork for people in a short budget.
I have not found many threads talking about this fork (exluding the manitou bashing ones)
After playing today with the travis CID cart in my hands. I got the following data: From spring backed CID cart

When the shaft moves in at low speed: at the first 1,5 inches you get no compresion (a la zocchi style) then past that point suddenly you get a lot of SlowSpeedComp at the point it feels locked (plattform?), once you get to move more past that position the damping gets progressively softer, because you passed the first spring resistance. An then reaching the end of the shaft travel ir gets firmer again, i guess it is the second (smaller and siffer) spring in paralel coming in to play.
At high shaft speeds, there is a very supple HSC but the shaft moves without restiction to the end of the travel. And you can hear the flow of tiny bubbles as you compress the shaft.

What i'm trying to figure out is how to get a bit more of HSC and over all MORE progresiveness.
First i though about adding some elastometer from an old RST fork in the sping side, then the other idea is to somehow change the evil genius seal for some U-cup seal and raise the semi bath oil to create a pressure chamber like in the open bath forks.

I know there should be some travis users arround this forum.
If you have any theory-tunning tips-recomendations please write down here.
Thanks in advance
Cheers
 

Patan-DH

Monkey
Jun 9, 2007
458
0
Patagonia
None have experience playing with the CID damper?........ok i'll give up

Keep on the $hit talk about rennie's new shoes.......

This forum is not what it used to be.

have a nice day
 

ZenkiGarage

Monkey
Jan 9, 2007
342
0
Portland, Or
Choose a diffrent fork and you'll get some replies:busted:
Every manitou other than the tpc+ dorado has been a pice of poop. Most people I see these days running manitou forks are only using them because they got them for cheap and are running them 'till they can afford something better and never think about modifying it.
 

davep

Turbo Monkey
Jan 7, 2005
3,279
0
seattle
There is plenty of tech talk (OK maybe not plenty, but there is some). My guess is that anyone knowledgeable enough to help you has steered FAR away from manitou for the last several years.....

Manitou has insisted on continuing with a failed design (SPV) for years. If they ever realize what they had with TPC+ and go back to it, I would expect a few to warm back up to Manitou (especially if they can show any record of build quality..).
 

dhndave

Chimp
Aug 14, 2005
7
0
I've rebuilt a few of these forks and here's what I've found.... when it's making that air bubbling noise, there is a seal that is starting to leak in the cartridge. It sounds as though the cartridge needs to be rebuilt or replaced. Manitou can send a complete pre-bled cartridge to you and it's simple to change. This is somewhat common on them. If you are going to go and replace it or get it serviced, maybe think about getting the TPC internals as a replacement. These Intrinsic setups are awesome, but they either work or don't, while the TPC is more durable/reliable. I've replaced a few of the Intrinsics with TPC for a few customers that come into my shop and run (almost) exclusively Manitous and have for years with no issues. There are a few tuning/maintanance things that do need to be done periodically. Either way, I do agree that it is a great fork. Hope this helps. You can PM me if need be.
 
Last edited:

ZenkiGarage

Monkey
Jan 9, 2007
342
0
Portland, Or
Truth be told... I actually own(actually selling) a travis :shocked:.
Its been chopped down to 160mm travel with a 508mm A-C for my old hardtail. I didnt want to experiment with an expensive fork so I used a Travis. Its a tpc so its actually a decent fork.

 
Last edited:

weedkilla

Monkey
Jul 6, 2008
362
10
Well you've got me wacked, A-C for 203mm Travis is 585mm, A-C for a 180mm Travis is 562mm. How did you get a 508mm A-C? Are you sure you haven't made a measuring mistake?
Previous Manipoo experiences and the high A-C have turned me off trying a Travis, although they are almost cheap enough to get into the project realms - TPC+ was nice.
 

ZenkiGarage

Monkey
Jan 9, 2007
342
0
Portland, Or
There was a decent amount stanchion overlap, so I reduced stanchion length(from the lower) a little bit. Just went and checked again, its definatly 20in(508mm).
 

djivotno

Monkey
Oct 3, 2008
108
0
And the fork on the photo is... a Kingpin :lighten:

I was looking for a new Triple TPC with no luck, so i guess im sticking with my Boxxer. If they start making them again, i promise to buy one or two. I could use the bigger A2C :pirate2:
 

ZenkiGarage

Monkey
Jan 9, 2007
342
0
Portland, Or
And the fork on the photo is... a Kingpin :lighten:

I was looking for a new Triple TPC with no luck, so i guess im sticking with my Boxxer. If they start making them again, i promise to buy one or two. I could use the bigger A2C :pirate2:
eh, manitou, manipoo, travis, kingin, still junk(for the most part). i wouldnt buy another unless for experimenting. The new dorados are sex but a little on the um,... spendy side:twitch:. I hope for their sake they get their **** together though.
 

Patan-DH

Monkey
Jun 9, 2007
458
0
Patagonia
eh, manitou, manipoo, travis, kingin, still junk(for the most part). i wouldnt buy another unless for experimenting. The new dorados are sex but a little on the um,... spendy side:twitch:. I hope for their sake they get their **** together though.
Are you George W. Bush family or relative?
Or just another 17 y.o. kid that bought a 2004 stance and now think that everything made by Manitou is $hit?
I recomend you to try some of their high-end products like the Revox ISX6 or the featherweigh new minutes... you wont be dissapointed.
 
Last edited:

Patan-DH

Monkey
Jun 9, 2007
458
0
Patagonia
There is plenty of tech talk (OK maybe not plenty, but there is some). My guess is that anyone knowledgeable enough to help you has steered FAR away from manitou for the last several years.....

Manitou has insisted on continuing with a failed design (SPV) for years. If they ever realize what they had with TPC+ and go back to it, I would expect a few to warm back up to Manitou (especially if they can show any record of build quality..).
Why do you think that SPV is a failed desing? I think is a good design that with some years of development and fine tune could be a lot better, like the intrinsic wich i think is a great idea.
Happens that manitou decided to think for themselves instead of using existent damping tech, like marzocchi, hell... even RS now can't hide the similarities(cought-ripoff-cought) of their last dampers with the TPC that manitou invented and patented.
Marzocchi was sussesfull just beacuse in the time that big Hucks was the trend they were making forks with motorcycle style dampers with no LSC and a lot of progressiveness. Now nobody wants to race on a 05-888rc
And fox...what? they never intoduce much innovation besides the inertial valves....
 
Last edited:

davep

Turbo Monkey
Jan 7, 2005
3,279
0
seattle
Why do you think that SPV is a failed desing? I think is a good design that with some years of development and fine tune could be a lot better, like the intrinsic wich i think is a great idea.
Happens that manitou decided to think for themselves instead of using existent damping tech, like marzocchi, hell... even RS now can't hide the similarities(cought-ripoff-cought) of their last dampers with the TPC that manitou invented and patented.
Marzocchi was sussesfull just beacuse in the time that big Hucks was the trend they were making forks with motorcycle style dampers with no LSC and a lot of progressiveness. Now nobody wants to race on a 05-888rc
And fox...what? they never intoduce much innovation besides the inertial valves....
Manitou thought for themselves in the 1990s........and they came up with TPC+ which is a great system.

Then they decided to ditch the exact technology that they invented , patented and gained them a solid reputation....for a design that they BOUGHT from Charles Curnutt.
They tossed a proven and highly regarded design that provided infinite fine tuning and replaced it with a disliked, high maintainance, failure prone system.
Regardless of the reason(s), the control valve has proved to be disliked damper design in all of its configurations. All of the spin-off SPV dampers (intrinsic, etc) were ways for manitou to try to re-package and re-sell the same hated SPV that no one wanted.

Could someone do something with a Cvt valve..I am sure they could, it has some solid possibilities. But a company that takes 10 years to figure out how keep the lubrication oil in a fork (even though their consumers and aftermarket suppliers have done it for years) is simply not the company to do it.
Manitou was forced to buy back SPV dorados from consumers for the simple reason that they could not engineer nor design a way for it to work (long after they sold it to consumers)...

They have not been able to identify the good and bad in their own products. They have not been able to realize what consumers want, and why they lost all their market share.
 

Patan-DH

Monkey
Jun 9, 2007
458
0
Patagonia
What are the similarities between TPC and RS now then? And what was so special about TPC?
TPC back in the day was the first damper designed for mountain bikes.
All others were open baths, with the TPC cartidge you get the damping oil separated from the crap that may enter thru the stanchion-lowers seals.
With the tpc you get a fork with A LOT less oil with is lighter. Plus you get a easy tuneable damper.
Now evey other manufacturer fork is semi bath, like manitou forks.

And if you watch a mission control damper (Besides some extra regulations-solutions) it is identical to a TPC damper with one separate shaft and piston for rebound and other for compession.
 

ZenkiGarage

Monkey
Jan 9, 2007
342
0
Portland, Or
Are you George W. Bush family or relative?
Or just another 17 y.o. kid that bought a 2004 stance and now think that everything made by Manitou is $hit?
I recomend you to try some of their high-end products like the Revox ISX6 or the featherweigh new minutes... you wont be dissapointed.
Ive ridden more than enough forks to know when one feels like crap and this isnt the only manitou ive had.
Ive owned a nixon, travis SC, dorado, and now this fork. the only one that held up was the dorado. I gave up on manitou a long time ago. Their stuff has been relegated to lab ginuea pigs with me. I'll wait till i hear MORE good things about their products before I buy one again.
 

Jm_

Turbo Monkey
Jan 14, 2002
9,420
1,829
AK
TPC back in the day was the first damper designed for mountain bikes.
All others were open baths, with the TPC cartidge you get the damping oil separated from the crap that may enter thru the stanchion-lowers seals.
With the tpc you get a fork with A LOT less oil with is lighter. Plus you get a easy tuneable damper.
Now evey other manufacturer fork is semi bath, like manitou forks.

And if you watch a mission control damper (Besides some extra regulations-solutions) it is identical to a TPC damper with one separate shaft and piston for rebound and other for compession.
Uhh, TPC was not the "first damper designed for mountain bikes". Manitou had the EFC dampers first, then the dampers that came in the SX and FS forks (2.5 and 3" of travel respectively, I had 2 SXs and one FS). They were closed-cartridge dampers, but the later ones used the stanchion-leg to house the damper, more like TPC than the tiny-cartridges in the Judy-forks at the time.

Most people are talking about TPC+, which had a free-floating piston that provided less damping at first. This kind of made up for the lack of lubrication in the marzocchi forks to give a nice supple initial feel, I definitely liked it when I rode it. I had a TPC (not TPC+) fork and it was crap, adjusters the jammed, it wasn't very "plush", it was controlled, but the crap lubrication and other factors limited it.

The RS system may "borrow" the bottom-piston idea from TPC, but this isn't really much of a stretch of previous technology. There's a shimmed-piston in the bottom of my RS fork (got to take it all apart recently and fix some seals), but the top side is nothing like the top-side of TPC. You can't patent a shimmed-piston, so while the TPC idea is nice, it's not all that unique. Manitou simply made a pretty damn good damper. Too bad the rest of the fork wasn't designed as well, and too bad they dropped the TPC+ in favor of the SPV, SPV-snap valve, SPV-evolve, SPV-devolve, Intrinsic, and all the variations that tried to make that stuff work.
 
Last edited:

Patan-DH

Monkey
Jun 9, 2007
458
0
Patagonia
Uhh, TPC was not the "first damper designed for mountain bikes". Manitou had the EFC dampers first, then the dampers that came in the SX and FS forks (2.5 and 3" of travel respectively, I had 2 SXs and one FS). They were closed-cartridge dampers, but the later ones used the stanchion-leg to house the damper, more like TPC than the tiny-cartridges in the Judy-forks at the time.

Most people are talking about TPC+, which had a free-floating piston that provided less damping at first. This kind of made up for the lack of lubrication in the marzocchi forks to give a nice supple initial feel, I definitely liked it when I rode it. I had a TPC (not TPC+) fork and it was crap, adjusters the jammed, it wasn't very "plush", it was controlled, but the crap lubrication and other factors limited it.

The RS system may "borrow" the bottom-piston idea from TPC, but this isn't really much of a stretch of previous technology. There's a shimmed-piston in the bottom of my RS fork (got to take it all apart recently and fix some seals), but the top side is nothing like the top-side of TPC. You can't patent a shimmed-piston, so while the TPC idea is nice, it's not all that unique. Manitou simply made a pretty damn good damper. Too bad the rest of the fork wasn't designed as well, and too bad they dropped the TPC+ in favor of the SPV, SPV-snap valve, SPV-evolve, SPV-devolve, Intrinsic, and all the variations that tried to make that stuff work.
Now i have met "the owners of the truth" JM and Davep, i will stop praying to Jesus Christ. And will pray to the gods if interwebzor forums..:busted:

"Oh dear beloved lord of the intrawebzor please teach me the way to improve my intrinsic damper."
 

Patan-DH

Monkey
Jun 9, 2007
458
0
Patagonia
Manitou thought for themselves in the 1990s........and they came up with TPC+ which is a great system.

Then they decided to ditch the exact technology that they invented , patented and gained them a solid reputation....for a design that they BOUGHT from Charles Curnutt.
They tossed a proven and highly regarded design that provided infinite fine tuning and replaced it with a disliked, high maintainance, failure prone system.
Regardless of the reason(s), the control valve has proved to be disliked damper design in all of its configurations. All of the spin-off SPV dampers (intrinsic, etc) were ways for manitou to try to re-package and re-sell the same hated SPV that no one wanted.

Could someone do something with a Cvt valve..I am sure they could, it has some solid possibilities. But a company that takes 10 years to figure out how keep the lubrication oil in a fork (even though their consumers and aftermarket suppliers have done it for years) is simply not the company to do it.
Manitou was forced to buy back SPV dorados from consumers for the simple reason that they could not engineer nor design a way for it to work (long after they sold it to consumers)...

They have not been able to identify the good and bad in their own products. They have not been able to realize what consumers want, and why they lost all their market share.
Oh man you are such an "owner of the truth" i can't understand why you don't start your own suspension- or bike company and beat Dave weagle, Olivier Bossard, Roskop, etc. in their own game

Now please owner of the truth, please educate me about intrinsic damper!
That was what this thread was about after all!
 
Last edited:

davep

Turbo Monkey
Jan 7, 2005
3,279
0
seattle
Did you just start this thread just to argue?

Several people gave you honest feedback as to why Manitou forks are not widely used and thus modfication info was short.

Your response was to call people names...:plthumbsdown: figure the fork out yourself.
 

Patan-DH

Monkey
Jun 9, 2007
458
0
Patagonia
Did you just start this thread just to argue?

Several people gave you honest feedback as to why Manitou forks are not widely used and thus modfication info was short.

Your response was to call people names...:plthumbsdown: figure the fork out yourself.
:busted::busted::busted::busted::imstupid:
It is all good man! I already knew that Manitou forks are not widely used.
I just wanted to know if somebody knew something that i do not know about it.
I'm just going to made some preload spacers on the lathe and put a 1-1/2'' MCU inside the spring (like the RS vivid bottom bumpers)

Later
 

gemini2k

Turbo Monkey
Jul 31, 2005
3,526
115
San Francisco
The Manitou Travis is IMO an exelent race fork, with a weight of 7pounds-3175gr (Ti sprung) and with a really stiff and durable chassis, if we add a reasonable good price that makes a good race fork for people in a short budget.


I know there should be some travis users arround this forum.
If you have any theory-tunning tips-recomendations please write down here.
Thanks in advance
Cheers
That makes me chuckle. Sell it. It is not a good race fork. It is not stiff, it dives at the slightest thought of touching you're front brake, and most importantly, the catridge gets very sticky very quickly. And before you say I'm just a manitou basher, WRONG. I used a travis for a year, a sherman breakout plus spv years ago, and have had a swinger and a revox. I'm done with manitou. It all "worked" worked (never had leaking or blown cart problems), but just worked like poop. :'(