[Kornphlake]

Welcome to 2003.

Exactly the world went topsy turvy when marzoochi announced 32mm stantions and 1 piece lowers, what they didn't mention was that the lowers would have less tire clearance (really a moot point unless riding in mud), the castings would be prone to cracking although the (02's were to an extent too so it's really not an improvement,) the stantions would be cryofitted, the fork would be heavier, the QR20+ system would still be as crummy as the QR20, and to top it all off if you waited for a 2004 model that addressed the clearance and cracking issues you ended up getting a downgraded cartridge. I don't see the logic... if Marzocchi was so gun-ho about selling 888's and felt that anybody who wanted or needed dual hscv should buy the 888 then why not just discontinue the super T and stick with a junior T for a low end fork, no sense in having a low end fork, a slightly less low end fork and a high end fork. For $600-$800 any fork should be considered high end.

I'm still waiting for a company, really any company at this point to, come out with a DC fork that offers stiffness, and light weight without the tradeoffs. All I'm seeing is marketing hype and features that nobody ever asked for, consider the FoxForx Vanilla rlc, I don't know anybody who uses lockout on a 5" fork, I haven't noticed that the compression blow off is really useful on a freeride fork, yet Fox insists on selling them when in actual use the vanilla R would be just as functional. I guess we can blame the yuppie generation for the "if it costs more it's better and will make my SUV more blingin'" mentality.

 

[Tully]

But by having lock-out available on the Vanilla, it appeals to a lot of folks who think they need it, and sells that many more forks, making Fox that much more money. I personally wouldn't want to pay extra for lockout, but if it was one there anyway, and didn't compromise the ride quality or any other adjustments, who cares?

 

[Jm_]

Exactly the world went topsy turvy when marzoochi announced 32mm stantions and 1 piece lowers, what they didn't mention was that the lowers would have less tire clearance (really a moot point unless riding in mud), .

Welcome to 2004

I think the 888 has taken the place of the Super T for the most part, that's why the Super T is no longer 900 bucks in most places, it's been downgraded, the 888 is lighter, better damped, 7 or 8" of travel., one peice lowers, room for THREEPOINTOOHHS!, etc...


And yeah, I agree, Vanilla or Talas "R" forks are an excellent value, especially compared to Z1s and breakouts. I do like the idea of a travel adjust (talas) that allows you to kick the travel down to 3" (talas) or 4" (36). It is really helpfull for keeping some sort of suspensoin performance but still allowing you to climb by lowering the front end significantly. I agree that lockouts that work in the extended position are pretty darn useless...

 

[Tully]

In my mind, the 888's only weakness is that it's so darn tall.

 

[PepperJester]

PepperJester, the Z150 is quite a bit heavier than the equivalent Breakout or Breakout+ with an aluminum steerer. that goes against "marz proved we don't need 1.5 for 6in SC forks"...

i dont see how? they did prove that that a 1.125 steer tube would not snap under the stress of 150mm travel forks. yes their heavy but they do work with the standerd steerer.

anywho: the 66 is what marz should have made the z150. at least they should have given the z150 a dedicated axle like the 66. I'm pretty sure i'd still have my Z150 if the had done that. Marz's QR20 tabs just arnt strong enuff to combat the forces from the bigger hits.

Im glad to see manitou was smart enuff not to make the flick150 a standed axle fork. that was a wise choice on their part.

 

[The Kadvang]

PJ, are you the guy on pinkbike who broke his z150 clean in half?

 

[Kornphlake]

Welcome to 2004

I think the 888 has taken the place of the Super T for the most part, that's why the Super T is no longer 900 bucks in most places, it's been downgraded, the 888 is lighter, better damped, 7 or 8" of travel., one peice lowers, room for THREEPOINTOOHHS!, etc...

Still the 888 is an un-proven platform for marzocchi. Not that I am saying the 888 is a bad fork, I'm just saying that it doesn't have the heritage that a super t does. Out of the box 888's are known for having problems of their own, some of which are quality related and some of which are design flaws... I'm not necessarily bashing marzocchi here, I just picked them as an example. I don't see where they or any other manufacturer has gotten rid of the problems and shortcomings of their product. They simply trade one set of problems for another, at the premium price one pays even for something in the $600 range I expect a little more performance and quality especially in light of the claimed improvements year after year. How difficult would it be to eliminate one problem without creating another in its place?

 

[lesburn]

the magura thor freeride single crown 150mm travel is available in 1.125 and 1.5.

 

[djjohnr]

James -

Do you have an axle to crown measurement on that?

 

[James | Go-Ride]

James -

Do you have an axle to crown measurement on that?

It's 20.875".

 

[smedford]

OK. I am convinced. I just bought an '05 Sherman Flick. I am going to take off my Z150 and use the Sherman for a couple months of hard riding. Longevity is not really much of an issue for me as I am always trying out new things. Forks are a slight exception though. I have only used Marzocchis and nothing else for the last 5 years and I have been happy with them. Lets see how this Flick feels.

 

[Spunger]

I read this and think it's funny.

Eventually, if the 1.5 head tubes prove to be just that, a big strength point, bike makers will go that route and fork builders are to follow. It takes time though. Look how long it's taken for them to adapt to the 1.5 HT deal. What about rear ends? I'd be pissed to build a frame and make a 20mm rear dropout to find out only 1 company will make me a hub. BUT give it some time and you'll see it as a standard. Bikes are evoloving, just at different paces (first headtube 1.5, rear end going bigger in axle widths and axles alone, and outboard bearings used in bottom brackets). I said it now, they will be in the future of DH/FR/Trail bikes.

As far as forks go, I'm a loyal Marzocchi owner. I own just shivers. Both the SC and DC. Have I tried other forks YES in fact I liked the Boxxer. Do I have another $1,000 to piss away on a fork that offers no better performance than what I currently have, NO. Is SPV worth $600? Not to me. Manitou has great ideas and intentions with the Sherman line of forks. If the threads don't strip, the fork is reliable, and you can abuse it it's all money well spent. Their forks are on par with Marzocchi and RockShox pricing so that's not the issue. It's all a prefrence.

As far as Fox forks go, well.......you are paying a premium for their line of forks. How much is their new DH fork? Like $1400+? That's alot of money to spend on a 8" travel, huge lowers, and probably something similar in cartridge to the Marzocchi 888R and Shivers with the HSCV. Fox forks cost alot, and their are built very well, but time will tell on the end of them entering the DH market. They are last to jump on most wagons atleast now days. They still used the Fox Vanilla RC when the 5th element and the swinger owned the rear shock market. They entered the fork market and have done very well, but I'm gonna say on a $1000+ fork, that is 8" of travel, it's just that. You're getting a great fork no matter what brand you choose.

Take the Boxxer as Kornphlake said eariler and I'll say the Shiver. They have remained unchanged for what, 4-5 years now except for adding new stickers and paint maybe? Same goes with the Dorado's. If it's not broke don't fix it.

Time will tell in the end but this 6" and 7" single crown fork deal will meet it's maker somewhere along the line. I can see it now. Frame companies void warrenty on using dual crown forks but no disclaimer about a single crown fork. It's nice to see that you can get a 7" single crown fork in the 1.25" head tube but it'll cause it's problems. Just as all forks and frames do.

 

[Captain Crunch]

Sign me up for the FOX 40 DH.

After two summers at Whistler, I can honestly say there's no substitute for a Dual Crown when Dh riding. Freeride, I can see myself having a good time on a SC, but my GF took her Breakout off her Gemini, and we both like her bike better with the dated 2002 Super T, than we ever did with the Breakout.

 

[OGRipper]

Still the 888 is an un-proven platform for marzocchi. Not that I am saying the 888 is a bad fork, I'm just saying that it doesn't have the heritage that a super t does.

I don't know about this Korn, people have been riding the 888 for over a year now and other than a some production problems with the lowers (porosity) and the opinion of some (including me) that's it's just too tall, the 888 has established itself as a great fork.

Yeah, it's not as old as the Super T but ya gotta move forward. They never would have released the Super T if heritage is all that matters.

And a few have said SPV and other platform damping is just a gimmick. Well, it's probably not needed for DH but to me it's a great feature for just about anything other than shuttle runs. I'll trade a little small bump performance for less dive and better climbing performance. Plus I find that if you run a platform shock in the rear, a fork with spv or other platform damping makes the bike feel more balanced once you've got both ends dialed. I think a lot of people who complain about the feel of some of the more sophisticated shocks and forks don't have the patience to find the settings that work best for them, so they ride with things all screwy and think it sucks compared to their old z1/vanilla set up, which is (forgive me) pretty much idiot-proof. Not directed at anyone in particular, just an observation.

And don't get me started on 1.5...I've beaten enough dead horses lately. (Where's that graphic, Acadian?)

All of this is about personal preference, not whether something is objectively better or worse. With that in mind, I think more choices are better.

 

[-BB-]

I don't know anybody who uses lockout on a 5" fork, I haven't noticed that the compression blow off is really useful on a freeride fork, yet Fox insists on selling them when in actual use the vanilla R would be just as functional.

Uh... I use the lockout all the time, as do my friends. IMO, the longer the fork, the MORE the lockout is needed. Unless you are on a full DH fork that you never plan on climbing.

IMO, the perfect fork would be a 6-7in SC with lockout, ECC or something to lower the front for climbs (even if locked out) and in the 5.5lb to 6lb range.
If you need to use a 1.5 to get this, then so be it.

 

[azonicbruce]

IMO, the perfect fork would be a 6-7in SC with lockout, ECC or something to lower the front for climbs (even if locked out) and in the 5.5lb to 6lb range.
If you need to use a 1.5 to get this, then so be it.

Your prayers have been answered

 

[Kornphlake]

geeze you guys dig up a thread that's 4 months old just to disagree with me? My point was that companies are releasing new products rather than working all the bugs out of thier current products. I can see where the Sherman was groundbreaking and needed a new design entirely to accomodate the 1.5 steerer and 32mm stanchions, besides manitou never really had a freeride fork to work off of. I just didn't think it was wise on marzocchi's part to keep the jr t, super t and 888, well now they've dropped the super t for '05 so I guess that ended one gripe. On the other hand Marzocchi has given us only one option for a high end fork and that's the 888, which is still unproven in that it uses thin wall magnesium castings for the lowers and a reduced oil volume. It in no way resembles the design of the super T. I don't see where Marzocchi completeley redesigned the super T and named it the 888 as an attempt to refine a product that was near, dare I say, perfection. I'd rather see marzocchi keep the same platform and refine it to make it perfect. Take a super T, give it 32mm stanchions for stiffness, adjustable crowns for versatility, one piece lowers that won't crack, real through axle dropouts and the same dual HSCV that have been the Super T's selling point for years and I'd say the super T had been improved. The same goes for any fork, there's no reason, in my mind, to cut weight when the real issue is that crowns break or seals leak, or the damper spikes or whatever the problem may be. I see a lot of forks on the market that have functional problems, meaning the features that are meant to be selling points don't actually work IE SPV. I guess a company can attempt to address all the problems from one model year to the next but it seems like in most cases they try so hard to fix EVERYTHING they don't do a good job on anything. They should pick one feature to improve and get that one feature to work perfectly before tackling the next problem.

 

[OGRipper]

Take a super T, give it 32mm stanchions for stiffness, adjustable crowns for versatility, one piece lowers that won't crack, real through axle dropouts and the same dual HSCV that have been the Super T's selling point for years and I'd say the super T had been improved. The same goes for any fork, there's no reason, in my mind, to cut weight when the real issue is that crowns break or seals leak, or the damper spikes or whatever the problem may be.

Doesn't this pretty much describe the 888, along with another inch of travel and lighter weight that (even if you don't agree) has been pretty much demanded by the riding public?

Where's Brian P when we need him? Just saying no to beating dead horses?

And PS, SPV works on every fork I've ever tried with it, and except the X-works debacle I've never heard anyone say it doesn't work...they just express an opinion that they don't like it, or can't figure it out...

(Edit - Not to say you can't figure it out Korn, didn't mean for it to sound that way.)

 

[Kornphlake]

Doesn't this pretty much describe the 888, along with another inch of travel and lighter weight that (even if you don't agree) has been pretty much demanded by the riding public?

Where's Brian P when we need him? Just saying no to beating dead horses?

And PS, SPV works on every fork I've ever tried with it, and except the X-works debacle I've never heard anyone say it doesn't work...they just express an opinion that they don't like it, or can't figure it out...

(Edit - Not to say you can't figure it out Korn, didn't mean for it to sound that way.)

I don't mean to be ripping on Marzocchi, I really do think they make good products and I don't feel that the 888 is really as bad a fork as I might be making it out to be. I'm just using them as an example.

No I don't see the 888 as being an improved super T, I see it as a different fork with different problems, it doesn't have the problems the super T had but it does have problems that the super T didn't have. I'd think that the improved product shouldn't have any problems that are a suprise. Let's say some imaginary fork has a problem leaking oil, next year they release a design with some new seal and travel adjustment and a different lower casting. So I get in line and buy this fork and find that it doesn't leak oil like last year's did but now I have problems with the travel adjuster working properly and the castings although lighter and stiffer seem to break easily. Is the product really better? I'd say no, the imaginary fork company should have found a way to make the seals better without all the other stuff, once they get a handle on how to get seals working right they can make one change at a time to make it lighter or more adjustable.

 

[OGRipper]

Yeah Korn, I hear what you're saying and don't completely disagree, it's just that your laundry list seems to describe the 888 to me and it's a little odd to say "no thanks" to the 888 and then ask for something really similar.

I mean if you sent that request to 'zoke they would say, congrats, we already did it, it's called a 888.

Ride on