[dropmachine]

I dunno, I just wouldn't feel safe running 32mm legs on such harsh conditions. Just looking at the legs on Boxxers sends a chill down my spine..... all skinny and weak looking

Yeah it sure has slowed down Hill, Rennie and Peat. Poor guys can't make it downt he damn hill at all anymore.

The idea between the Boxxer and 40 is pretty clear. The Boxxer will probably stay with the 32mm legs (I would guess) because the fork has always been designed to give you a little bit of deflection, rather then the super stiff ride of the 40. Both are excellent forks, but I prefer the WC myself just due to the incredible tunability of it, the ease of rebuild, and the smoothness of the ride. I have yet to have an issue with mine, although I am perfectly aware of the problems they are known to have. My 40 was a great fork, but I was never able to dial in the spring right where I like it. The stock was way too soft, and I found the firm too firm.

That said, I'd love to try the new 07 40s out, see whats shakin with them. Giggidy.

 

[SinatorJ]

Ha, he does not work on his own bike, much less mine.
I'll miss you at Windrock this weekend.
I will tell a 9 year old girl joke in your honor.

Yea, trying to move away from those, too many people I know have kids. Have fun at the Rock I may try and make it out next fall, want to show my Fiance' knoxville

 

[Jm_]

The idea between the Boxxer and 40 is pretty clear. The Boxxer will probably stay with the 32mm legs (I would guess) because the fork has always been designed to give you a little bit of deflection, rather then the super stiff ride of the 40.

What's that smell? The smell of BS?

You're telling me a 152mm travel boxxer was designed to deflect?

 

[dropmachine]

Nope, I'm talking about the newer ones. I have heard that the reason they are still on 32mm stanchions is so that the fork retains a small bit of flex, so that the wheel will find its own way through really rough spots. Not enough flex to really complain in corners, just enough to not get stuck on one line.

Its like the old monster T's. With those forks, you pretty much went where the fork wanted you to, regardless of if you wanted to go there or not. A lot of this had to do with the rigidity of the fork. The idea with the smaller legs is to allow the fork to find the optimum path.

Again, i dunno if thats true, just something I heard here or there.

 

[dropmachine]

- I actuallyjust remembered that the old Sunn team was experimenting with this idea back in the day, so there must be something to it. I think there are a few current Moto GP teams trying it with thier bikes too, to improve traction on the track.

 

[LOOnatic]

Since when have Boxxers had 152mm?

Back to topic: I ride a Boxxer but had the chance to ride a 40 for a day and impressed i was at how it ate up nasty sections of Plattekill with ease.
Next day back on my bike and Boxxer even more so painfully obvious how good the Fox fork is.
I think price and *gasp* the looks of the 40 have been a factor and lets not forget that the 40 is not really user serviceable friendly like other brands.

 

[rockwool]

- I actuallyjust remembered that the old Sunn team was experimenting with this idea back in the day, so there must be something to it. I think there are a few current Moto GP teams trying it with thier bikes too, to improve traction on the track.

A buddy of mine lifted Matti's Honda down from the roof of a car (even though he wasn't alowed to do that) and he said it's like that in the rear aswell.

 

[Cant Climb]

Very expensive and prone to breaking.
If they didn't break more people would make the leap.....

Anyone hooked up with some kind of sponsorship gets them dirt cheap, so alot off them are out there floating around because of that.......buying them retail is ridiculous if you ask me......

 

[Cant Climb]

A buddy of mine lifted Matti's Honda down from the roof of a car (even though he wasn't alowed to do that) and he said it's like that in the rear aswell.

Nico liked a bike with Flex. Even read somewhere he liked some flex in his wheels.

 

[InsideMan]

Nothing wrong with flex, i even run 22psi in my maxxis minions and never have had a flat in the past 5 years.

 

[InsideMan]

has anyone tried filling their boxxer WC air with helium or nitrogen? I wonder how that would work out?!?

 

[go-ride.com]

Having some flex is important. I remember when I first tried a Monster T years ago and was really disappointed. It was great riding down a flight of stairs with straight on hits, but in the rocks it jerked the bars and caused your hands to get tired from trying to go straight. Fortunately for Fox 40 owners this is not a problem. Fox uses lighter legs and sculpted lowers to allow for enough flex for a smooth ride without being vague.

It’s not just MTBs that need some flex. Every year MX mfgrs tweak their frames, swingarms, and sometimes forks and crowns to change the flex pattern. A MX bike with too stiff of frame or fork is down right dangerous at speed.

 

[Thrillkil]

real men ride rigid

 

[SPDR]

has anyone tried filling their Boxxer WC air with helium or nitrogen? I wonder how that would work out?!?

As a weight saving thing or for some other reason? If the former - how much can the air in a fork or shock weigh? That would have to be the ultimate dumb weight weenie thing to do.

 

[julian_dh]

im pretty sure the fox 40 has loss popularity because the boxxer world cup can be had for less money and IMO is a much better fork for the average rider, racer. a couple of my ridding buddys have 40's and they are amazing forks but are not worth the extra scratch.

and im pretty sure the totem is just a little preview of the 08 boxxers, like the pike was. 37mm? stantions, beefy shaped lowers, speed lube ports, mission control damping, maby different air options? as for the flex factor i think thats why they use a round axle. because a hex axle would clear alot of that flex up, i think they want to adjust flex issues at the arch and stantions leaving a bit of flex at the dropouts.

 

[Yeti]

there are two reasons why i don t have a fox on my bike:
1.- the service here in switzerland sucks..and in an amazing never ever seen before way..they really suck(example: keep a fork two weeks, without calling. we call them to see what s going on and then they ask what they had to do with it. two more weeks and we get the fork back. try it out and it s worse than ever, i mean all the oil came out in like 5m)
2.- price

 

[Mugger]

Nothing wrong with flex, i even run 22psi in my maxxis minions and never have had a flat in the past 5 years.

touche wood.

 

[CrabJoe StretchPants]

real men ride rigid

i found that paired with your signature to be quite ironic

 

[vitox]

Since when have Boxxers had 152mm?

1998 and 1999

 

[Udi]

I don't know about the 07 but there has been reliability problems with the 40 we have seen at the shop with a lot of wear on the damper rod that compresses into the rest of the damper unit. The cause is the natural movement in the bushings that then translate into slight bending of the damper so the inner rod rubs when compressing. Its not even people who ride a lot or go big. I don't know if there are other people with the same problmes.

How about a ball joint on the damper rod for 08?
I too have heard about the issue, albeit only about thrice... makes me wonder if it's an isolated issue, though that doesn't really make sense.

 

[InsideMan]

im pretty sure the fox 40 has loss popularity because the boxxer world cup can be had for less money and IMO is a much better fork for the average rider, racer. a couple of my ridding buddys have 40's and they are amazing forks but are not worth the extra scratch.

and im pretty sure the totem is just a little preview of the 08 boxxers, like the pike was. 37mm? stantions, beefy shaped lowers, speed lube ports, mission control damping, maby different air options? as for the flex factor i think thats why they use a round axle. because a hex axle would clear alot of that flex up, i think they want to adjust flex issues at the arch and stantions leaving a bit of flex at the dropouts.

You may be right. Seems like the totems may be a testbed of sort for future forks. But IMO why would Rock Shox fix something that isnt broke, that fork has been dominating the World Cup ciruit for how many years?! I dont think they need a bigger fork to compete with the 40, its not like that thing is all over the podiums. I bet Fox will come out with something lighter (air) and slimmer to compete with the WC.

 

[InsideMan]

touche wood.

Eehhhh i dont get it?!? You want me to touch youre wood?! Not going to happen unless its mesquite, then ill use to cook my steaks this weekend by the pool.

 

[Udi]

I bet Fox will come out with something lighter (air) and slimmer to compete with the WC.

I think that is an interesting point, and if they want to win in the weight stakes they will probably have to. The 40's spring is reasonably light, and replacing it with an air cartridge is likely to save very little weight... I think a casting or stanchion redesign may be on order, or they will just remain heavier. A 40 float would still be nice to see nonetheless!

 

[no skid marks]

UDI just buy another 40,you know you want to.

 

[Jm_]

Nope, I'm talking about the newer ones.

Well, you did say the "boxxer has always been designed to have a little flex", since the boxxer has existed for a while, that would include the older boxxers. I was wondering if you were considering that or not, but a 1998 and 1999 boxxer is still a boxxer...with 32mm stanchions.

 

[dropmachine]

Oh jesus, drama grammar queen...gimme a break.

If thats not obviously you looking for an excuse to go on a boxxer rampage, I dunno what is.

Sorry, from here on when referring to Boxxer models I will make sure to include the year, travel, color, model, serial number, oil level, lower diameter (with and without paint), pantone code for the stanchion color, the names of all riders who have touched that particular fork, its favorite song and of course, the number of pushups it can do (proper form, of course.)

 

[Jm_]

Oh jesus, drama grammar queen...gimme a break.

If thats not obviously you looking for an excuse to go on a boxxer rampage, I dunno what is.

Sorry, from here on when referring to Boxxer models I will make sure to include the year, travel, color, model, serial number, oil level, lower diameter (with and without paint), pantone code for the stanchion color, the names of all riders who have touched that particular fork, its favorite song and of course, the number of pushups it can do (proper form, of course.)

I'm not going on a rampage, I'm calling you on your statement. Now you're saying that they have not always been designed to "flex". You originally said they were designed from the beginning to "flex".

And to further it, if you think that they were designed to flex, why did they go to the straightwall stanchions?


All I'm saying is that the thought; "they are supposed to flex" doesn't add up.

 

[dropmachine]

Right cause what, Straightwall stanchions can't flex? They are the universally sought after ultimate rigid structure with absolutely no deflection whatsoever?

How the hell should I know why they do what they do. last time I checked, I don't work for Rockshox, and i can't speak for them. All i know is that I have heard, from pro riders and industry types, that the Boxxer is designed to have a degree of flex to it so that it doesnt' toss you offline through the rough stuff. Last time I checked, that isn't revealing some huge conspiracy, its just a plausible idea from a company with a pretty impressive degree in the sport.

Quote: I'm not going on a rampage, I'm calling you on your statement

Yes, you are calling me on my statement, but for a reason other then to contribute ideas. You are picking stupid little points to start another e-arguement to show that all the companies out there are dumb, and you know better. Rabble rabble shim stack boxxer poo argagagrr hulk smash!!.

Its old, been seen, and sucks as much as it ever did.

Point is, the newest boxxers are kicking some major ass, designed flex or not. Yeah they got some issues but what doesn't. Show me a fork without some sort of problem, and I'll buy the company.

 

[bdamschen]

Show me a fork without some sort of problem, and I'll buy the company.

Stratos.... But I think specialized has dibs

 

[Jm_]

its just a plausible idea from a company with a pretty impressive degree in the sport.

Yeah, totally plausible.


People must get tossed off-line when they ride Monster Ts...

I have to say that your logic is the exact opposite of what I've experienced on every single mountain bike fork, single, double crown, XC, downhill, whatever. When's the last time a stiff fork threw you off-line? Big time BS IMO.

I also remember when that "impressive company" told me they just put the ti-ni coating on the stanchions to make them visible, it was a marketing thing. Except for the last season or two, that "impressive company" made complete crap, there's no way you can defend the psylo, jetts, judys, and so forth.

 

[dropmachine]

I wouldn try defending Psylos and Jetts and all that, and believe it or not, neither will they. But the simple fact is, the Boxxer has been a great fork for years, and better then most of its competition. Of course they've had thier issues, but who hasn't? Show me the perfect company, i dare you.

and I am not saying that a stiff fork will toss you offline, I am saying that a fork thats TOO STIFF, like a monster T, is considerably harder to control through really rough stuff then something with a little give. Its a hard balance to reach for sure, but I think they've done ok. Its not BS at all, and is a factor thats considered in many sports. I can't speak for cars, but like i mentioned earlier the Moto GP guys are even looking at it, as bikes that are too stiff tend to not have as good traction.

 

[bikenweed]

Reasons why I'm not getting rid of my 40:

*Easy, easy travel adjustment between 6-8", so it can be used on either my ENDURO or my Demo-8.

*Only .5lb heavier than a Boxxer WC.

*Sealed cartridge that allows seal changes to take 20 minutes and not require tons of tools. I have better things to do with my time than rebuild cartridges. Besides, the 40 cartridge, in over a year and a half of racing and riding, hasn't needed re-building. New seals every 4-6 months, or about 2-3000 miles.

*The 40 is good and linear, keeping it from getting stuck at that stiff spot my Marzocchi always got stuck in.

*The adjustments work super well. 2 clicks out from full rebound, 2 clicks out from full slow speed, and 4 clicks out from full high speed seems to work great on 90% of all race courses.

*I've yet to see a 40 break IN HALF like I have seen a couple Boxxers. At a couple of the races (Vigo and Willingen) the lowers turned into an L, with the stanchion poking out and into the ground.

*Everyone on campus thinks I'm riding a tractor and gets that Deer-in-the-headlights look when I ride towards them really fast.

 

[no skid marks]

Moto GP bikes are irrelivent,completelly different kettle of fish and that's all about frame flex anyway.
I found that Boxxers made me get put off line down bumpy stuff and that's why I no longer run them,I think 888s have the dimentions sorted accept for height maybe,but I do like my 40s.

 

[dropmachine]

Its not a completely different idea though, thats the point. Engineered flex is a part of many things, so saying that its implausible with a Boxxer is ridiculous. Thats my point.

 

[Bicyclist]

Its not a completely different idea though, thats the point. Engineered flex is a part of many things, so saying that its implausible with a Boxxer is ridiculous. Thats my point.

I think in this case it's RS covering their asses on why they haven't redesigned the chassis for a long time.

 

[hbfrdh]

Well that's enough for me. I'm going to throw away my boxxer.

Yeah, and might as throw away your old Super Ts as well. {sarcasm}My Super T sucked!!!{/sarcasm}

 

[driftsrfun]

everyone is to picky, get a bike and ride it fast, sam hill would beat all you guys on a rigid.

 

[davep]

Sam gets his stuff for free. If i got stuff for free, I would have nothing to complain about. It's that simple!

If you are looking at a new fork, and paying retail $$......it is not so cool to be used as a testing cycle.

I am chomping at the bit to buy two new forks, only if i was that stoked on anything, but i am not. They all have issues and are too expensive for what you get.

overpriced medocrity IMO.

 

[vitox]

And to further it, if you think that they were designed to flex, why did they go to the straightwall stanchions?

because they cost roughly half of what the variwall ones did. and with that design change they could also simplify the damper design and eliminate the glide rings that were a common cause for problems, which meant less parts, less warranties, less cost.

remember the original 98 boxxer was a no hold barred no cost is too great enterprise, it came with extra crowns and springs, really neat stuff.
by 2002 when they went straightwall, RS was about bankrupt and the fork had to compete on price with other more modern offerning like dorado and shiver.
not surprisingly they dropped the price 20%.

 

[FastTimes]

Its not a completely different idea though, thats the point. Engineered flex is a part of many things, so saying that its implausible with a Boxxer is ridiculous. Thats my point.

They DO NOT "design" the fork to have “deflection”. If they do, it’s to mask other design/performance flaws. Deflection, flex or give are not qualities that would be considered positive in a fork. Proper suspension will absorb/track correctly through the terrain. Flex hinders, not advances these functions. If your fork is flexing, it’s not damping/tracking as well as it should be. Getting stuck is a damping/rider flaw that is actually amplified by flex. As far the “automatic tracking” you’re talking about, that is a lack of torsional rigidity and is also not a desired quality. If this is a quality you like is a fork, you need to take a closer look at your setup/ability. If there is perceived deflection (read flex) in rocky sections, there is flex everywhere else on the trail, whether you feel it or not. Flex is flex and it’s not a performance advantage IMO. Using Sam, or any other pro rider, to back a forks performance is moot. These guys are phenoms and their performance ads little validity to a fork IMO. I would much rather read the impressions from a knowledgeable fellow rider who rides the fork in real world conditions - or better yet, ride the bloody thing for myself. I have been super happy with my 40. All the negative BS I read about before I bought it, arches, bottoming, seals… are a non-issue. I have yet to feel it bottom harshly and it tracks(which is what a fork is supposed to do) like mad. No complaints here. That fork can be setup for any rider, if you were unable to do so, you didn’t spend enough time on it dialing it in. Boxxers are fine, but “deflection” isn’t something I would be endorse or rave about in a fork.