[Hougham]

I am just intrigued by them. Have any of you had experiences with any of these? Are there any good upside down forks out there? What do you get for your money? Are the foes ones really that great? Are a old set of Risse any good? How cheap is to cheap? Just generally want to hear a little about the subject from people that know.

Thanks

 

[4xBoy]

Maverick forks,

Best damping super tunable, stiff, Light.



Well kind of light anyways.

King will build a hub for that ---- fork and won't make a 150 hub, or a 1.5 H/S


The Foes looks cool,


So in the end, I have nothing useful to add.

 

[coma13]

Generally, you'll find them to be torsionally more flexy than a tradtional fork due to the lack of the brake arch. Pretty much always heavier than a comparable traditional fork.

Looking at the market now you're better off buying a traditional fork, IMO.

 

[zedro]

Looking at the market now you're better off buying a traditional fork, IMO.

yeah all the big companies abandoned the design, but i do prefer the stanchion protection of the invert.

 

[Sandwich]

USD forks theoretically perform better due to lower unsprung weight...but that's kind of a moot point because there were huge differences in quality in the past so a boxxer was still a pretty good match for a risse or whatever... They also tend to twist when you wreck. I've had it happen twice, after a big wreck each time, and it sucks to loosen all the bolts and then straighten it and retighten. You get better lock-to-lock radius than a regular fork, and tire clearance is rarely an issue.

That being said, I love my Avalanche. Damping is superb and it's super adjustable. It's very stiff too.

Avoid the Risse forks, unless you can pick up a champ for cheap. They had poor customer service and quality control, but the champ was pretty good out of the box. The problem is that it uses a funky axle spacing (something like 120, rather than 110 or whatever) so you have to use a spacer for normal hubs, and that's it's really heavy, like 9.5 lbs. Damping quality was really good on the champ, and bad on everything else risse made.

 

[kidwoo]

i do prefer the stanchion protection of the invert.

By that you mean like.......putting the stanchions all nice and low right next to the rocks?



White brothers
Shiver
If you're lucky and get a good dorado
(never ridden a foes)

Those are the good ones out there in my opinion.

 

[MinorThreat]

Generally, you'll find them to be torsionally more flexy than a tradtional fork due to the lack of the brake arch. . .

I think you'd have a hard time convincing Showa of this.

There were flexy designs (like the Shiver); but the advantage goes to the inverted. Other pluses: larger bushing overlap; and less unsprung weight (much more important than overall weight when we're only talking a few ounces difference anyway).

 

[zedro]

By that you mean like.......putting the stanchions all nice and low right next to the rocks?

strangely enough, but thats what guards are for.

Now take your bike, place on sharp jaggedy rock garden, and drop it. Guess who's gonna get the ding?

 

[kidwoo]

I think you'd have a hard time convincing Showa of this.

How do you know those things aren't noodles?

I don't.

 

[coma13]

I think you'd have a hard time convincing Showa of this.

There were flexy designs (like the Shiver); but the advantage goes to the inverted. Other pluses: larger bushing overlap; and less unsprung weight (much more important than overall weight when we're only talking a few ounces difference anyway).

I'm sure you can design either format to be stiffer than the other, but as far as production mountain bike forks are concerned, there's no contest.

 

[Zark]

The foes fork is not flexy, but its not light either. The fork uses a 30mm axle (need a custom rotor) which stiffens things up nicely.

 

[Hougham]

Thanks for the replys. For some reason I just really like the look of them. I have some really old forks on my play bike now and just fancied a go with some up the other way. So can any one recommend any new or used ones for me and how huch would I look at spening? I see the Risse champs sounds ok. I think I could get a used set and then send them off to have a once over. Are there any others I should consider? Are there any white brothers in particular you may recommend? I don’t know the dorado at all. I may have to look them up.

 

[Zark]

Do NOT get a Risse. You will regret it

 

[kidwoo]

White brothers UD180 (pretty old though), DH2, DH3, DH2.0, DH1.8 are all good.

 

[xy9ine]

the wb dh2.0 is a solid fork. i ran mine for 3 seasons without a glitch. still have it kicking around as an emergency backup. i had a dh2 previously that also worked well, and had several friends on dh3's that had good experiences. (our shop sold wb & we moved a decent number of these forks).

 

[dhkid]

How do you know those things aren't noodles?

I don't.

i was thinking that too, but i am sure a company like honda wouldn't use a flexy fork... i am sure showa have some tricks up their sleeve.

first i though that they used the usd design because thats what they are used to in moto x but then its also very hard to make normall forks in low production runs due to the one piece magnesium lowers. making the decision to go usd was probably a no brainer for them.

 

[zedro]

I think you'd have a hard time convincing Showa of this.

There were flexy designs (like the Shiver); but the advantage goes to the inverted. Other pluses: larger bushing overlap; and less unsprung weight (much more important than overall weight when we're only talking a few ounces difference anyway).

bushing overlap can be an apples/oranges argument since the invert may need more overlap to make up for its structural shortcomings, and tube sizes/stiffness come into play. Plus a few makers continue the lower leg past the axle to gain more overlap than typical designs.

 

[Sandwich]

Do NOT get a Risse. You will regret it

When I mentioned the champ, I meant a 5 year old 100-200 dollar fork on your backup bike...NOT a 500 dollar fresh fork.

White brothers make good forks, and the dorado was excellent until they SPVed it, apparently. Foes are supposed to be good but are hideiously expensive.

Kidwoo, I noticed that you left the avalanche off your list...just curious, but why?

 

[thruster]

I have always like how my Shivers felt. With the flex it has saved me big time. They are somewhat flexy but when you start getting into the travel they stiffen up. Now my shivers are resting peacefully in a box and is waiting for the right bike to put them on.

 

[kidwoo]

Kidwoo, I noticed that you left the avalanche off your list...just curious, but why?

I was just thinking of popular, easy to find used ones.


I've ridden 3 of those things, one of them being the big mtn 10 or whatever it was.

I swear to gawd if that thing wasn't 30lbs I would have bought one. It was like resting your wrists in warm massage oil. More novelty than anything but it was neat. It was on an old canfield fatty fat so the whole bike was pretty much a couch.

I wasn't blown away by the 'real' (lighter 8" one) fork I rode but I certainly wasn't disappointed either. So yeah, throw it on the list if you can find one for cheap.

 

[Avy Rider]

I rode an Avalanche DHF 8 for a few years and it never felt flexy to me in the least. The reason I made the switch to the Marzocchi 66RC2X forks I now run was the weight savings. After setting them up with fresh oil, doing the little mod on the spring holders to eliminate any binding that they had, they are as plush and smooth feeling as the Avy's. The only difference I feel is that there is less travel and less weight but the plush feel is the same. Craig has considered building a non inverted fork and I told him I'll be first in line if he does!

 

[MinorThreat]

How do you know those things aren't noodles?

I don't.

I wish I could say I had personal experience on a Honda RN01 >sigh< . However, Showa's experience goes long and deep in dirt bikes, motocross racing, and even street sport bikes with the inverted design. I'm sure there are myriad other factors at play; but I'm confident that they would not go with such a design so extensively if they found it flexy.

but then its also very hard to make normall forks in low production runs due to the one piece magnesium lowers.

Actually, you could sand-cast one magnesium lower if you chose to. Production run has nothing to do with it. Machining costs will be higher with an inverted because both inside and outside have to be turned.

bushing overlap can be an apples/oranges argument since the invert may need more overlap to make up for its structural shortcomings, and tube sizes/stiffness come into play.

...if there were any structural shortcomings - - which there aren't.

Plus a few makers continue the lower leg past the axle to gain more overlap than typical designs.

Which is another design feature borrowed straight from motorcycle suspension pioneering.

 

[zedro]

...if there were any structural shortcomings - - which there aren't..

no lateral bracing above the tire is the shortcoming, its a no-brainer from a structural engineering point. The question is can the designer overcome that to achieve desired stiffness and maintain the positive aspects of the design. Problem is, most seem to come out heavier which is why i believe the weight-race for the upper tier manufacturers have mostly abandoned it.

 

[kidwoo]

I wish I could say I had personal experience on a Honda RN01 >sigh< . However, Showa's experience goes long and deep in dirt bikes, motocross racing, and even street sport bikes with the inverted design. I'm sure there are myriad other factors at play; but I'm confident that they would not go with such a design so extensively if they found it flexy.

So with a fork neither of us has even touched, I'm saying I have no idea and you're saying it can be used as a benchmark for stiffness in an inverted design.

That thing could twist way worse than a shiver (and maybe not) but just because showa has built good moto forks doesn't mean they've achieved in a smaller, lighter mountainbike version what every other manufacturer who has focused on the cause could not. It's an assumption on your part and coma13's original assertion might very well apply to this thing.

If it doesn't......great.....I'd like to ride it. But until then, I don't know either way and can't say it's a standout just because it says 'showa' on the side and minnar happens to ride it fast.

 

[dhkid]

Actually, you could sand-cast one magnesium lower if you chose to. Production run has nothing to do with it. Machining costs will be higher with an inverted because both inside and outside have to be turned.

...if there were any structural shortcomings - - which there aren't.

wouldn't there be problems sand casting lowers with the low wall thickness use these days?

and like zedro said, usd forks dont have arches, isn't that a shortcoming?


then again, why dont moto-x move to normal forks instead of usd forks? i am sure they are interested in loosing some weight too.

 

[Sandwich]

You can also get a lower axle to crown without an arch....but people are starting to get around that. Still, should make all the same hill low front end wannabees happy.

 

[zedro]

then again, why dont moto-x move to normal forks instead of usd forks? i am sure they are interested in loosing some weight too.

dont quote me, but i think theres a lower weight limit in race classes. So they might see a bigger benefit in reducing unsprung weight over overall weight if this is the case.

 

[MinorThreat]

wouldn't there be problems sand casting lowers with the low wall thickness use these days?

There may be. It might have to be some sort of vacuum-assisted investment-casting process to assure that there are no voids and proper densities. I threw that out as an example in the low-tech extreme.

and like zedro said, usd forks dont have arches, isn't that a shortcoming?

I don't think so. First of all, you have probably at least 36mm stanchions; then the outer tubes are large-diameter. Plus, you only need enough stanchion poking out of the uppers to accomodate your length of travel plus some - - hence a lot of potential bushing overlap. The arch HAS to be there on a rightside-up fork to give it any chance of rigidity in a lightweight bicycle configuration. Lack of an arch in an inverted doesn't make it inferior; presence of the arch on a conventional fork is evidence of its inherent weakness.

then again, why dont moto-x move to normal forks instead of usd forks? i am sure they are interested in losing some weight too.

Oh they did, many years ago. Typical example was the Ceriani -- an Italian fork (what do you know?) - - considered one of the best of its time (like mine, pictured on the #777 bike):

Motorcycles overcame flex issues to a degree by having steel stanchions. But many aftermarket companies sold fork braces for conventional forks (bolt-on "arches"). Racing dirt bikes went inverted for all of the advantages I listed earlier, not the least of which was unsprung weight.

 

[humprabbit]

Tech-in are probably one of the most used fork in the japanese DH series if you look at some of the race pics on Downhillagogo, bloody expensive mind.

 

[dhkid]

MinorThreat, then why is it that mtb fork manufacturers have pretty much abandoned the usd fork design when according to you it is still a superior design? or does it have to with how materials dont work well when scaled down to the needs of mtb, where wall thickness's are in the mm's?

 

[zedro]

or does it have to with how materials dont work well when scaled down to the needs of mtb, where wall thickness's are in the mm's?

well the scaling for materials is linear (upto their usability limits), but scale is a good point: the two aren't scaled products. Axle/crown heights, width, rake, axle design, stress requirements, weight....this is why i don't buy the "if it's good for moto...." arguments. The only thing we have in common with moto is two wheels with spiky rubber; some major design requirements for each vehicle are entirely different.

 

[Jm_]

motos would have a "stiffer" fork tortionally if they used a non-inverted design, but to counter those huge jumps which get transfered right to the fork, they need to be inverted. That's why motos use inverted forks these days, better strength fore-aft.

We aren't really doing that with mountain bikes, so it's not really needed.

Make no mistake, a non-inverted fork is going to be far stiffer tortionally, and that will mean it takes off-camber hits and bumps much better, rather than just deflecting and taking the path of least resistance.

When you get too much travel though, you have to go inverted to retain enough bushing overlap.

 

[Sandwich]

To note:

even though everybody takes stiffness as gospel, the SUNN DH team was experimenting with making their forks/wheels more flexy, to aid in shock absorbtion and cornering, where a little flex could allow the wheel to track better.

Makes you think, donut?

 

[kidwoo]

Makes you think, donut?

Makes me think they're fvcking retards.

 

[beaverbiker]

the sunn team was just thinking too hard along the lines of how wheels/tires play a role in the overall springrate of the bike. that's like building flex into the tubes of the frame.

 

[MinorThreat]

Most of the torsional stiffness losses are due to either poor triple-clamp design or at the axle-fork interface - - a situation not helped by the need for some industry consistency in the design (i.e. - the 20mm thru-axle). Both of these can be and have been overcome. Plus, as zedro and Jm admit, lateral and fore-to-aft stiffness is superior in the inverted fork - -because it puts the strongest part of a fork (the 'lowers') at the point of most flex in a telescopic fork: the crown.

I would differ with Jm that DH bikes are not subjecting the front suspension structure to the same kinds of loading as a motocross bike; in fact, any stresses a bike puts on suspension is only magnified on a dirt bike.

I think the main reasons things have swung back to conventional on bicycles is: 1) manufacturing costs; 2) consumer resistance (as evidenced by zedro's "not buying the if it's good for moto argument." - - it "doesn't look right." Bicyclists - - especially the supposed 'push the envelope' DH crowd - - are some of the most provincial thinkers I've ever encountered on wheels.

 

[Hougham]

Thanks for all the replys. There is way more information there than I hoped for. Some great tecnical stuff as well. Those Tech In forks look amazing but a but past what im looking for. May just see if any WD pop up at a ok price.

 

[dhkid]

so basically, the main 'weak point' so to speak of a usd fork in mtb applications is the axle to lowers interface, the 20mm standard?

 

[kidwoo]

Bicyclists - - especially the supposed 'push the envelope' DH crowd - - are some of the most provincial thinkers I've ever encountered on wheels.

You've obviously never seen the bike zedro designed and built

.....or the modifications he did to his shiver.........

I think the main reasons things have swung back to conventional on bicycles is:

the fact that every readily available (affordable) inverted fork twists like a beyotch compared to the recent offerings in a traditional design.

Seriously man: Not saying it can't be done but it certainly hasn't up to this point. Mountain bikers almost universally want stiff, light structural components. Right now, relatively speaking....common inverted forks aren't up to par with the alternative.

And last time I checked, most moto tracks don't involve steering through rock gardens.

 

[kidwoo]

so basically, the main 'weak point' so to speak of a usd fork in mtb applications is the axle to lowers interface, the 20mm standard?

It's certainly one area that can be used to stiffen them up. Which is why foes, and maverick went bigger.


But then again you can do that with a traditional fork as well........and make it stiffer too.