Quantcast

What fork for a 2003 Specialized SX?

Discussion in 'Downhill & Freeride' started by atomcf, Oct 22, 2009.

  1. atomcf

    atomcf Chimp

    Rep/Likes:
    0 / 0
    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2009
    Messages:
    1
    Hi, I'm new so if i do something readers wivesish, please dont go too over the top.

    Right, I've got a 2003 Specialized SX and at the moment i've got some old marzocchi bombers on it. I want to move up to 200mm travel (at the moment I think I only have around 150mm or suming), but I don't know
    a) What fork to get (I'm a poor teenager so going brand new isn't an option, I got to go on ebay) .
    and b) If I get a 200mm travel will it mess up the geometry, and mean that I'll **** up my frame?
     

    Please register to disable this ad.

  2. AtTheGates

    AtTheGates Monkey

    Rep/Likes:
    0 / 0
    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2003
    Messages:
    259
    The geometry of the frame is definitely designed around a much shorter fork. I ran mine with a 150mm fork for light dh/freeriding and it felt pretty good. A 200mm fork would probably make for a very slack, very strange feeling bike.
     
  3. al-irl

    al-irl Turbo Monkey

    Rep/Likes:
    5 / 0
    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,087
    Location:
    A, A
    Don't go near a 200mm fork it will ruin that bike. I had a 150mm fox 36 on mine and even with that it was a bit too long. I had travell adjust and used to run it at about 135mm travell and it felt sweet. Id reccomend getting a rockshock pike with bolt through or something like that for the front of it. They are such a sweet frame with great angles a 200mm fork will ruin it. Still have my frame hmm would love to build it up again
     
  4. rigidhack

    rigidhack Turbo Monkey

    Rep/Likes:
    5 / 1
    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2004
    Messages:
    1,210
    Location:
    In a Van(couver) down by the river
    I would run a Fox 36 RC2, a Lyrik or maybe a Totem (but likely not), but definitely not a 200mm fork. Come to think of it, the AC on the Totem is the same as a Boxxer, so definitely too long. Not only would this mess up the geo, but you could void the warrantee. A 160mm fork is plenty for that bike.
     
  5. Mr. Furious

    Mr. Furious Monkey

    Rep/Likes:
    0 / 0
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Messages:
    161
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    I had a 6" sherman slider on mine. Even then the geometry was pretty slack, so 200mm would be a little too raked out. With 6" up front the bike felt like a mini DH bike.. with rediculous standover. I loved it but my body reminded me it wasn't a DH bike after weekends riding Garbanzo at Whistler
     
  6. jcook1989

    jcook1989 Chimp

    Rep/Likes:
    0 / 0
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2008
    Messages:
    11
    Location:
    San Luis Obispo/San Diego
    Buddy of mine has a 40 on his sx trail and he loves it. The axle to crown on DC tends to be on the shorter side because the upper crown doesn't need to be so big. The 40 had the same AC as the 160mm Z1 he had on the bike. He has an 06 though with 6.5ish inches of travel. I'm not sure what the 03s have but you might not want to go that big. Maybe a 170 fork like a 66 or a totem. A 05 66 can be pretty affordable and super reliable.
     
  7. spocomptonrider

    spocomptonrider sportin' the CROCS

    Rep/Likes:
    0 / 12
    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    1,336
    Location:
    spokanistan
    what he said.
    Fox 36 Talas, FTW. Some of these Jongs in here have some terrible ideas ^I'm sure your friend loves the 40 on there because he doesn't know any better (no offense) the 40 is a great fork, but the amount it would raise the BB and slack the geometry out would be less than ideal. Just my .02, you can find Talas' on the fleBay cheap all day, wind it down when you want to use it to climb or even ds, wind it back out when you want to slay some dh or hit some sweet jumps. I've seen a few people on here rave about dual crowns on the SX but a longer travel single crown would be way more versatile.

    If you're on a tight budget I would suggest looking for a Rockshox Domain. Good bulletproof chassis and a great price point.

    Life is all about compromise, but you can't make your 150mm frame into a DH bike no matter how big of a fork you strap on the front. If you really want a DH bike, I would suggest rallying the SX till the end of the year saving up some cash and selling it at the beginning of next season to fund a full on DH sled.
     
    #7 -   Oct 23, 2009
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2009
  8. contactjt

    contactjt Monkey

    Rep/Likes:
    0 / 0
    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2007
    Messages:
    167
    Location:
    A nice halting site, Switzerland
    A 2003 SX has only 4.5 inches of travel and is a 4X/MTX frame.

    I think most responses above are assuming you are talking about the 2005 Enduro or SXTrail which had 150mm travel and was much burlier.

    2003 SX - http://www.specialized.com/gb/en/bc/SBCBkModel.jsp?arc=2003&spid=20948&menuItemId=0

    You'd want to be on crack to put a dual crown fork of any height on that, let alone 200mm.

    I'd stick with a 130 to 150mm at the most if you really have too, but I reckon it would be poxy at climbing with that.

    Good luck,

    JT
     
  9. Gary

    Gary "S" is for "neo-luddite"

    Rep/Likes:
    47 / 705
    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    2,686
    Location:
    UK
    Pikes work really well.. here's my old Skool SX enduro..


    Built this up from mainly old parts I had kicking around with the intention of using it as a mini DH bike that's easier to push (or even ride) up local DH tracks but just as fast as my DH bike down... Let's just say I wasn't dissapointed ;)

    with the pike at 140mm and the linkage in the low/slack setting it's:

    65deg HA, 12.6" BB, 43.75 WB, 4.5" rear travel, 5.5" front

    with the pikes, if I wound them down to 100mm and set the linkage in the high/steep setting I could have a tight trail bike set-up. (not that I ever will mind ;))
     
  10. Gary

    Gary "S" is for "neo-luddite"

    Rep/Likes:
    47 / 705
    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    2,686
    Location:
    UK
    contact - a boxxer ride would work well if you were using it for DH only.. could be set up with 160-170mm upfront and nice slack/low DH geometry
     
  11. thom9719

    thom9719 Turbo Monkey

    Rep/Likes:
    6 / 0
    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2005
    Messages:
    1,105
    Location:
    In the Northwest.
    since you are on a budget, try to find a boxxer ride with the U turn. you can have different travel settings (that won't be very expensive) and then you can decide how you want to run it.

    *wow, didn't read the post above mine*

    -KT
     
  12. monkeyfcuker

    monkeyfcuker Monkey

    Rep/Likes:
    2 / 2
    Joined:
    May 26, 2008
    Messages:
    903
    Location:
    UK, Carlisle
    Thought I would see you in this thread Gary ;)

    Anyway for the OP, this ^^^^^ set up is sick, easily as fast as a full DH sled on the right trail and not that much slower on horrible choppyness.
     
  13. 4130biker

    4130biker PM me about Tantrum Cycles!

    Rep/Likes:
    64 / 441
    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    3,904
    Location:
    Lizard Town
    I would not run a dc of any kind on that frame. Even a low boxxer ride is going to be huge enough on that bike to destroy the geometry. I think the pike is the best idea. Not too beefy, not too expensive, adjustable travel in a range that would be perfect for that bike (4-5.5").
     
  14. jcook1989

    jcook1989 Chimp

    Rep/Likes:
    0 / 0
    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2008
    Messages:
    11
    Location:
    San Luis Obispo/San Diego
    Did you not read what I said? The 40 had the same axle to crown as his z1. There was no geometry change.
     
  15. spocomptonrider

    spocomptonrider sportin' the CROCS

    Rep/Likes:
    0 / 12
    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    1,336
    Location:
    spokanistan
    Thats hard to believe unless it was set up in a lower travel setting, 6 or 7 inches. In which case a 40mm stanchion dual crown fork is pretty much completely overkill. Either way a 200mm fork might be fine for the newer style SX trail with 160+ mm travel but not so much for the older style with <150mm.
     
    #15 -   Oct 23, 2009
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2009
  16. Gary

    Gary "S" is for "neo-luddite"

    Rep/Likes:
    47 / 705
    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    2,686
    Location:
    UK
    I wouldn't run a dual crown on mine either (did think about it for a minute or two tho, hence what I said earlier about a Boxxer ride working really well for DH).
    set to the same travel a Boxxer is LOWER than a Pike. even with a boxxer at 170mm and the frame in the low/slack setting the BB would still be sub 13" and HA around 63.5

    rock shox A-C height chart:

    http://www.sram.com/_media/techdocs/08_RockShox_Axle2Crown.pdf
     
  17. illnotsick

    illnotsick Monkey

    Rep/Likes:
    0 / 0
    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2009
    Messages:
    257
    The truth has arrived. The axel to crown is what matters for geometry, not travel. The a2c of my old Z1 was right around 22.75". on my 40 it's about 1/8th of an inch longer. I've had the 40 on there for over a month now and it feels soooooo sick. The geometry hasn't changed anything noticable.

    Everyone I asked before I did this said I was going to ruin the bike. "it wont be nimble, it will be too slack, it's going to break your head tube" blah blah blah blah it's amazing. It's still nimble because it's still a super light bike and the 40 is just an amazing feeling fork.

    BUT! I ride and race this bike downhill. I don't use it for park stuff or slopestyle. If you're going to use the bike for downhill, do it. If not, go with a totem or a 66.

     
  18. Gary

    Gary "S" is for "neo-luddite"

    Rep/Likes:
    47 / 705
    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    2,686
    Location:
    UK
    :pleasantry:The truth arrived? :pleasantry:
    pity it missed it's destination! :clapping:
    this thread is about the 2003 SX Supercross, the clue's in the title ;) you have a completely different frame there mate ^^
     
  19. illnotsick

    illnotsick Monkey

    Rep/Likes:
    0 / 0
    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2009
    Messages:
    257
    It doesn't make a difference what frame it is! If the axle to crown of two forks are the same it wont change the geometry, no matter how much travel it either fork has, mate.

    If this kid wants a good answer about putting a longer fork on there, he needs to know the axle to crown of his current fork then go from there.
     
  20. davep

    davep Turbo Monkey

    Rep/Likes:
    0 / 0
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2005
    Messages:
    3,279
    Location:
    seattle
    Congratulations, you have just shown yourself to be the winner of the 'Dumbest New Post"....

    This is not an issue of changed A-C (and BTW, we/YOU dont even know what kind of fork the OP has), it is an issue of putting an 8" fork on a 4" frame. The fork the OP "might have" is stupid, the one he wants will be more so. The incremental change might be small (might be quite large), but it is still an awful decision (and unfortunately quite typical of young beginers) to try to make a DH bike out of something COMPLETELY different by putting a super long fork on it.

    FYI, if you want to be taken even the smallest bit seriously around here, I would suggest a few thing:
    1 Actually read the thread you are responding to.
    2 Take you attitude down a few notches.

    Acting like you know everything while proving that you know very little....is not going to make you well received. You might start with understanding that sx != sx trail.
     
    #20 -   Oct 25, 2009
    Last edited: Oct 25, 2009
  21. illnotsick

    illnotsick Monkey

    Rep/Likes:
    0 / 0
    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2009
    Messages:
    257
    Thank you dave, for that wonderful lesson on internet etiquette! I'll be sure to let you proofread my posts from now on! I don't care if you take me seriously over the internet, I was speaking to the OP about my experience with the situation. I clarified at the end of my post how I use the bike, then the second post I responded to was (again) about the geometry.

    I know that his bike has less rear travel than mine, however the majority of the responses to his post said that it would mess up the geometry of the bike, which isn't necessarily an issue if it's dealt with correctly. He wants a bigger fork. I'm trying to help him go about it to see if it will work, instead of ****ting all over the idea.
     
  22. Mr. Furious

    Mr. Furious Monkey

    Rep/Likes:
    0 / 0
    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Messages:
    161
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
  23. spocomptonrider

    spocomptonrider sportin' the CROCS

    Rep/Likes:
    0 / 12
    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    1,336
    Location:
    spokanistan
    Thank you! Perfectly stated. I didn't want to get in another e-fight by pointing out what you just said, glad to know every one on this site isn't a complete JONG.