[vitox]

agree with fasttimes and i think an important issue has been left out in all the "engineered flex debate", one has to realize if that if flex due to stanchion diameter happens, there will also be the unavoidable consequence of friction in the bushings due to the fact that the lowers wont flex in the same manner as the stanchions, thus creating a situation where you are trying to jam a stanchion inside a lower, that has a different shape. so no, i cant see any situation where lateral or frontal flex at the stanchions would be desirable in a fork, save for perhaps that it might make frames last a bit longer at the head tube.

 

[Bikerpunk241]

I chose the boxxer over the 40 because if you blow the 40, it has to go back to fox, if you blow a boxxer, you can rebuild it.

 

[julian_dh]

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.

but remember a larger outter casting can be used for lower weight, like with the 40 while giving a boost in strength and stiffness. also larger diameter piston of the damper. i dont think they will go super large with the 40 but the boxxer would look alot better with a bit of meat on it.

 

[basikbiker]

i have a chance to get one, its an 06 with new internals and stanchions, if i trade the person for a 04 888rr?

 

[Bicyclist]

i have a chance to get one, its an 06 with new internals and stanchions, if i trade the person for a 04 888rr?

That sounds like it's too good to be true, but if it's not that's a hell of a trade. The thing is, though, on a Demo 9 it may not be the best fit because it'll steepen the HA more 'cause it's lower, and your bike is kinda a huck bike so I don't know if you want a race fork. If you do then I say good trade.

 

[kidwoo]

Someone lists the cons of the 07 40 beside the price.
The damn thing rides perfect.

ooh I just found this thread!

1. Never get them as smoove as an 888. I know it feels like it when you've been on it for a while......go back and forth, you'll see what I mean

2. They bottom out like martha fockers with the spring that feels right. Cranking up the HS Compression damper makes them ride spikey so that's not the answer

3. Getting the right spring to avoid bottoming makes them ride less plusherer than an 888

4. They don't come in black

 

[Udi]

basikbiker/bicyclist -
They suit the demo9 quite well actually. Not sure if we're talking about the 40 or the boxxer here, but they're about the same height anyway.

The demo9 is fairly slack, so dropping on a lower fork just means you get the BB lower (always welcome), because while the HA gets steeper it still stays healthily slack.

I'm a pretty small guy (sub 65kg) and did a few runs on a friend's demo9 with TF Tuned boxxer teams.... was expecting the bike to be a real slug, but was pleasantly surprised. Launched everything quite well and was a fair bit of fun.

 

[Jeremy R]

ooh I just found this thread!

1. Never get them as smoove as an 888. I know it feels like it when you've been on it for a while......go back and forth, you'll see what I mean

2. They bottom out like martha fockers with the spring that feels right. Cranking up the HS Compression damper makes them ride spikey so that's not the answer

3. Getting the right spring to avoid bottoming makes them ride less plusherer than an 888

4. They don't come in black

My 07 has none of those problems, well except it comes in a sweet silver color instead of the awesomeness that is black.
My 40 is "smoother" than my old 888's because it rides smoother from the beginning of the travel to the end. There is no diving.
I only run one to two clicks of low and high speed compression or sometimes none at all. I only bottomed it one time all year.
I try to be honest about the products I use, and after being on the 40 all season, I can't think of anything negative in the ride...well except since it is fatter, you run into more $hit with it.

 

[Rye_Bread]

because they suck

 

[rockwool]

To go back to the Flex vs. Noflex issue in forks;
Then for what reason do some WC mechanics build soft wheels? Doesn't that have the same effect as if your fork has some give? Some frames come, whole or partly, in steel. Isn't one of their purposely built in qualities that they have some give?

 

[kidwoo]

My 07 has none of those problems, well except it comes in a sweet silver color instead of the awesomeness that is black.
My 40 is "smoother" than my old 888's because it rides smoother from the beginning of the travel to the end. There is no diving.
I only run one to two clicks of low and high speed compression or sometimes none at all. I only bottomed it one time all year.
I try to be honest about the products I use, and after being on the 40 all season, I can't think of anything negative in the ride...well except since it is fatter, you run into more $hit with it.

Those are just my complaints (only one really) about the 06 and earlier forks. I haven't ridden an 07. I know they changed their compression damping systems.

Still seems silly to me........and this goes for the 888s too. All you've got to do is add a two stage spring or a an air cap (like the 66s) to give some ramp/bottoming resistance. Why all the fancy oil tunnels to makes something simple more complex?

 

[Transcend]

Air caps wouldn't work on a fox. They would have to completely redesign the seal system, and would lose the super plush feeling they now have due to increased stiction.

The bottom out system worked great on the 06s, people were just too lazy to get it adjusted (granted having to send it to fox was a deal killer for many).

 

[basikbiker]

basikbiker/bicyclist -
They suit the demo9 quite well actually. Not sure if we're talking about the 40 or the boxxer here, but they're about the same height anyway.

The demo9 is fairly slack, so dropping on a lower fork just means you get the BB lower (always welcome), because while the HA gets steeper it still stays healthily slack.

I'm a pretty small guy (sub 65kg) and did a few runs on a friend's demo9 with TF Tuned boxxer teams.... was expecting the bike to be a real slug, but was pleasantly surprised. Launched everything quite well and was a fair bit of fun.

thanks for the input, my friend, wants a 888, and i want a fork thatsa lower AC hieght. half the fork is an 07 the only thing that is 06 is the lowers.

 

[kidwoo]

Air caps wouldn't work on a fox. They would have to completely redesign the seal system, and would lose the super plush feeling they now have due to increased stiction.

They won't work on an 888 either.

But it wouldn't be hard to make it so that you could do it on either fork.

The bottom out system worked great on the 06s, people were just too lazy to get it adjusted (granted having to send it to fox was a deal killer for many).

Sending back a brand new $1500+ fork to make it work right rules.

 

[Transcend]

They won't work on an 888 either.

But it wouldn't be hard to make it so that you could do it on either fork.




Sending back a brand new $1500+ fork to make it work right rules.

Fox has local service centers to do that sort of thing. For 07 i BELIEVE it is user adjustable, but not sure. I have 07 internals, but have not taken it apart since it was updated. Mine was perfect out of the box compression wise for 06 as well.

It'd be difficult to make the 40 work with air caps, and they would lose much of what makes the 40 popular. The float feels MUCH more stictioney than a vanilla, for example.

As for an 888, I've no idea as I have never touched one.

 

[Bicyclist]

To go back to the Flex vs. Noflex issue in forks;
Then for what reason do some WC mechanics build soft wheels? Doesn't that have the same effect as if your fork has some give? Some frames come, whole or partly, in steel. Isn't one of their purposely built in qualities that they have some give?

Totally different. When the stancions flex stiction and bushing wear is increased. Soft wheels do not equal a flexy fork.

 

[kidwoo]

I'm not saying stick an air cap on them as much as stick some sort of an air chamber IN them. Still a coil but with 5-10 psi so top end stiction isn't a big deal but you get a good air chamber ramp up close to bottom out. I'm not saying make it an air fork.

And if you don't feel like doing that, just stick a decent 2 stage spring in it like white brothers has done for years. They even had an adjustable air chamber on the oil that helped ramp. But just some air in it would be very simple and allow people (me) to run the spring that kept the smoove without slamming the thing down into itself so easily.

But I've still never ridden ANY fox (including the 36 I've been riding for over a year) that feels as smooth as a broken in, maintained zoke. When I don't ride my dh bike with a 888 for a while, and am on the 36 a lot, I forget. (yes I know one has more travel than the other)

 

[Transcend]

I'm not saying stick an air cap on them as much as stick some sort of an air chamber IN them. Still a coil but with 5-10 psi so top end stiction isn't a big deal but you get a good air chamber ramp up close to bottom out. I'm not saying make it an air fork.

And if you don't feel like doing that, just stick a decent 2 stage spring in it like white brothers has done for years. They even had an adjustable air chamber on the oil that helped ramp. But just some air in it would be very simple and allow people (me) to run the spring that kept the smoove without slamming the thing down into itself so easily.

But I've still never ridden ANY fox (including the 36 I've been riding for over a year) that feels as smooth as a broken in, maintained zoke. When I don't ride my dh bike with a 888 for a while, and am on the 36 a lot, I forget. (yes I know one has more travel than the other)

AHH completely misunderstood you, sorry. Thought you means air cap type deal as plenty of goobers tried on the boxxer (almost instantly blowing out seals as they rode).

I actually love my 40 the way it feels and wouldn't change a thing. Sure, I bottom it out once and awhile on race runs, but it's supposed to do that. People are too paranoid about never bottoming out their suspension.

My fox stuff, (this newest 40 in particular,) feels better than any fork I have ever ridden.

 

[kidwoo]

Yeah I'm kind of curious about the 07 stuff. With my 36, I ended up sticking a spring that's a little too heavy to keep from clacking the thing down on everything resembling a g-out. End result is that it's not as plush as I would like but I don't feel like I'm damaging it on every ride.

I thought about getting the new guts but just got a 66 instead. Because I KNOW how that's going to ride at least. I don't have a hatred for the things or anything.....especially with manitou around.......it's just that one little issue.

 

[driftsrfun]

there are a lot to do with the stiffness of the fork, because of some many variables to deal with such as wheel tention, tire pressure etc

say what you want the Fox 40 is the best fork on the market, light, super smooth, great damping, adjustable everything, best rider support at races

theres no need for air, obviously Fox has been testing air and for the 40 and they find the spring to be overall better.. and air wouldnt even be any lighter..

the price is what it is because it is the most technologically advanced fork on the market, all the engineering to make you guys like it and fit your needs, and its impossible to make everyone happy...

 

[Transcend]

How much do you weigh? I know the big deal for heavier trail riders was bottoming out.

You have to keep in mind it's a race bred fork, and most of the worlds top guys who helped develop it want a system that is ridiculously supple, to the point of being way way undersprung on the protos and other brands. With this system they can spring properly, and still get the system they want.

For free riders, weekend warriors etc, especially heavier ones than the "design rider" weight (180lbs) this is a problem. For lighter guys, it's a fork made in heaven.

 

[Transcend]

one more time smacky and you get to take a vacation.

edit: dh_dirt_diva - you can be next. consider yourself warned. Read the forum rules. If you don't like them, you can go to pinkbike.

 

[Rye_Bread]

moderated...

 

[skinny mike]

ooh I just found this thread!

1. Never get them as smoove as an 888. I know it feels like it when you've been on it for a while......go back and forth, you'll see what I mean

2. They bottom out like martha fockers with the spring that feels right. Cranking up the HS Compression damper makes them ride spikey so that's not the answer

3. Getting the right spring to avoid bottoming makes them ride less plusherer than an 888

4. They don't come in black

interesting. maybe it was me, but my 04 888 always felt like poo. i had the correct springs for my weight and 7.5 wt oil, yet it always felt way too stiff and not plush enough.

 

[blue]

Awww, I missed the pre-moderation

Is Fox going to revamp Float so it's not so stictiony ever? I'm sure you remember when I bitched to you about my TALAS feeling crappy Transcend...I rode a Vanilla 32 a couple days ago and was blown away at how much smoother it was than my TALAS. Perhaps an air 40? Mmm...air 40...

 

[Transcend]

Awww, I missed the pre-moderation

Is Fox going to revamp Float so it's not so stictiony ever? I'm sure you remember when I bitched to you about my TALAS feeling crappy Transcend...I rode a Vanilla 32 a couple days ago and was blown away at how much smoother it was than my TALAS. Perhaps an air 40? Mmm...air 40...

Ya my float is pretty damn stictioney but it's an XC race fork...so those guys aren't really going to complain too much. They normally set 'em up so stiff they barely move anyways.

 

[Jm_]

AHH completely misunderstood you, sorry. Thought you means air cap type deal as plenty of goobers tried on the boxxer (almost instantly blowing out seals as they rode).

I actually love my 40 the way it feels and wouldn't change a thing. Sure, I bottom it out once and awhile on race runs, but it's supposed to do that. People are too paranoid about never bottoming out their suspension.

My fox stuff, (this newest 40 in particular,) feels better than any fork I have ever ridden.

There's a difference between bottoming out, and bottoming out and feeling metal-on-metal contact. Bottoming out is not bad if the fork bottoms and you don't actually feel the metal-on-metal contact, but if that's what you're feeling, it's usually bad.

Adjustable progression is a critical feature of any decent suspension product IMO. The fox system only lets you adjust the very end of the travel though.

 

[Udi]

But I've still never ridden ANY fox (including the 36 I've been riding for over a year) that feels as smooth as a broken in, maintained zoke.

Is your 888 a pre-06? If so that smoothness that you seem to be mentioning a lot lately is just an inherent lack of compression damping. When it comes to performance, a 40 or boxxer is a noticeable improvement (especially when it comes to corner entry/exit speed).

 

[ATOMICFIREBALL]

All years Monster-T =
Heavy fork,tracks stiff as heck,seals last forever although & won't break.Could have picked up a nice one for $200, but passed on the deal..It's a love-hate relationship with a Monster-T .

SHIVER DC=
Flexy. Got to bleed those air screws. Although it's plush & has good overall performance !Discontinued !!

Boxxer 7" 2002 -
Great all around performance.Seals always leak on Boxxers & it pisses me off !.............

*2005-Marzocchi 66RC singlecrown>
Best fork i ever had. If a 888RC rides like this then that's the fork to have man IMO...

FOX40--never tried & it's too darn expensive.
Foes inverted race fork--Too darn expensive.Bet it rides great though.

 

[Transcend]

There's a difference between bottoming out, and bottoming out and feeling metal-on-metal contact. Bottoming out is not bad if the fork bottoms and you don't actually feel the metal-on-metal contact, but if that's what you're feeling, it's usually bad.

Adjustable progression is a critical feature of any decent suspension product IMO. The fox system only lets you adjust the very end of the travel though.

No idea what you are going on about, but i have never felt a fox bottom out with metal on metal contact. If it is however, the spring rate is too low.

 

[dhkid]

Awww, I missed the pre-moderation

Is Fox going to revamp Float so it's not so stictiony ever? I'm sure you remember when I bitched to you about my TALAS feeling crappy Transcend...I rode a Vanilla 32 a couple days ago and was blown away at how much smoother it was than my TALAS. Perhaps an air 40? Mmm...air 40...

i remember seeing the numbers for the increase in stiction for a float and talas compared to a coil(0% stiction), it was like 12% for the float and around 18% to 20 something for the talas.
i have got to say that the float is the smoothest air forks you can get. but i just hate the stiction in the talas ones. who knew a whole 6%-10% could make such a big difference.

 

[blue]

i remember seeing the numbers for the increase in stiction for a float and talas compared to a coil(0% stiction), it was like 12% for the float and around 18% to 20 something for the talas.
i have got to say that the float is the smoothest air forks you can get. but i just hate the stiction in the talas ones. who knew a whole 6%-10% could make such a big difference.

I sold mine for a Pike on my hardtail. For DJ and street it was fine, but for trailriding I could never get it to feel very plush. I briefly contemplated springing for a 36 TALAS but came to the conclusion that it would probably behave in the same manner. I've ridden the air Pike and haven't really noticed much difference between it and the coil...is the Boxxer WC the same way?

 

[Jm_]

No idea what you are going on about, but i have never felt a fox bottom out with metal on metal contact. If it is however, the spring rate is too low.

No, if it bottoms out it could be from aggressive riding and the fork simply not being progressive enough. If your sag is correct, then the proper fix is NOT a stiffer spring, although that is the band aid that some manufacturers choose.

 

[Transcend]

No, if it bottoms out it could be from aggressive riding and the fork simply not being progressive enough. If your sag is correct, then the proper fix is NOT a stiffer spring, although that is the band aid that some manufacturers choose.

If you are routinely slamming your fork to the bottom, you need a heavier spring weight. Period. You can also adjust the bottom out setting in the fork. So again, user setup error (like 99% of mtb suspension problems) and no fault of the fork.

 

[Jm_]

If you are routinely slamming your fork to the bottom, you need a heavier spring weight. Period. You can also adjust the bottom out setting in the fork. So again, user setup error (like 99% of mtb suspension problems) and no fault of the fork.

No, if you are routinely slamming it you need a more progressive fork IF the sag is correct, otherwise you'll end up with a much harsher ride. If you like your suspension to not work as well, then get a stiffer spring, if you want it to work correctly for your weight (again, IF the sag is correct) then make it more progressive.

I can see that this concept blows your mind.

 

[Transcend]

Yup, another useless JM rant. If you are slamming the fork to the bottom time after time, the spring rate is incorrect, and chances are you are running 40 or 50% sag. If your sag is indeed correct, you will not be getting metal on metal bottoming out routinely unless you have nothing but a spring even there, and even then, it is unlikley.

The bottom out adjuster is also probably wide open (which will adjust the progressivity of the fork at the bottom end, the only place it is needed). But of course, people choose to just not have that setup properly, and then whine and complain. Much like you did about boxxers for years while everyone rolled their eyes at you.

The 40 must be the new boxxer for you huh?

 

[nvd]

This is kind of a funny thread. I have some thoughts, all of which are probably wrong, but here's my two cents.

Flex: true, good companies with solid engineering incorporate "frame" flex into the equation (Honda, Cannondale, Foes, Ironhorse, and the list goes on. Actually, just about everybody). Therefore, to think that flex for fork manufactures isn't factored in is kinda dumb. That's why the fox 40 came out with 40mm stanctions, to make a stiffer fork (fox was obviously factoring flex into their engineering, they wanted to make it stiffer). Too stiff is just as bad as too flexy, maybe even worse, but I don't think anyones reached that point yet. (I've ridden both fox and rs and had great rides on both, I tend to like the performace and feel of the Fox a bit more) The ideal middle ground for flex varies rider to rider, and that's what companies are trying to dial in. You can't put a "flex adjuster knob" on a fork like you can for compression, rebound and preload, so you're kind of stuck with what the company chooses. Luckily there are options, but I've never heard "too stiff" as a complaint for the Fox, nor "too flexy" for the RS. RS also pioneered "stiff DH forks" even though they don't have the stiffest right now. Remember when the Judy DH (one of the first ever dh specific forks) had just one crown, then Herbold used a prototype with a double crown and they introduced the Boxxer soon after for top pros only. I'm willing to bet a stiffer RS dh fork is in the not so distant future because it seems that stiffer is better right now, but eventually there's got to be a point where that reverses.

WC racing: Sam, Rennie, Graves, etc will be able to pin it whatever they ride. Using them as an example is kind of a mute point. I think you see more mid pack WC guys on RS simply because of the 1/2 lbs. difference and the price gap issue. Small weight differences can make a huge difference on a race bike, why do you think people run ti bolts if it's safe and can be afforded, because every gram adds up, and 1/2 a pound is a lot to be able to shed on a dh race bike. I know for a fact that top tier Fox riders have experimented with non-production, "Race use only Fox 40's." They are much lighter and ride great (similar to Intense launching it's FRO bikes this year) however, they are like Formula One cars and need to be rebuilt after each race. For racing that's really quite practical. Racing is about winning on the course, not in the shop, especially when it comes to World Cups. But for your average rider that kind of maintenence is not practical at all, so the FRO 40 will most likely never be seen by the masses, or mid pack WC riders.

Air vs. Spring: Just about everyone I know that was running a DHX Air on a DH rig has switched back to a DHX coil, even the weight weenies. Reason being the springs just work better for DH style riding. I really think springs are here to stay. Moto's still use springs. Air assist is a possibility, but only if more bike shops start stocking nitrogen tanks. The changes in atmosphereic pressure from the top of a 2,000ft + dh run to the bottom really affect the pressure inside your suspension. That's why some shocks use nitrogen, it is less affected by altitude changes (again, just look at motocross, everyone runs nitrogen assisted dampening, not just regular "air")

Durability/Service: Both RS and Fox are pretty easy to do standard service too. Oil and seals are a breeze on both. You can't rebuild some of the cartridges in the Fox without sending it in, but how often do you really disassemble the RS cartridges during routine rebuilds unless something is broken anyway. If that's the case, you'll still be ordering and waiting for replacement parts, and good luck getting RS small parts race weekend. Fox has a trailer and factory mechanic at every major American event exclusively for rider/racer support and maintenence and parts (my hat's off). I have seen some first year Fox's with some stiction in the bushings, but warrenty was really easy and painfree, Fox know's their customers are dropping dime, and do everything they can to take care of them. However, I have never, ever, ever seen a 40 just strait up snap in half (not that it couldn't happen), and have seen a few snapped Boxxers, ****, I've snapped a boxxer myself, and at the time I think I weighed about 135lbs. no joke.

Marzocchi: I've heard a few notes about the 888's, but won't really get into that right now. I will say Marzocchi's feel the best out of the box, pushing on the fork in the parking lot, but I've never ridden a Marzocchi that didn't dive drastically in corners or under heavy braking. On the trail the Fox rides better and is more tunable.

My final verdict: If you want perfomace, tunability, stiffness and strength go for the Fox. If your a weight weenie, go for the RS. If you never want to change your oil or seals, go for the Marzocchi.
They are all great forks, but for me its Fox all the way.

 

[Jm_]

and chances are you are running 40 or 50% sag.

Now you're trying to put words in my mouth. I never said 40-50% sag, you're saying that.

So by your logic, if a 150lb guy goes off a 5 foot drop and doesn't bottom his fork, it's good. If a 150lb guy goes off a 10 foot drop and bottoms his fork, he needs a stiffer spring.

I say that's BS because you should be able to adjust the progression of the fork to allow both riders to use the same amount of sag, just the heavier rider needs more "ramp up" towards the end of travel, not some insanely stiff spring that makes his fork ride like crap. You seem to be in favor of the latter though.

 

[Transcend]

Now you're trying to put words in my mouth. I never said 40-50% sag, you're saying that.

So by your logic, if a 150lb guy goes off a 5 foot drop and doesn't bottom his fork, it's good. If a 150lb guy goes off a 10 foot drop and bottoms his fork, he needs a stiffer spring.

I say that's BS because you should be able to adjust the progression of the fork to allow both riders to use the same amount of sag, just the heavier rider needs more "ramp up" towards the end of travel, not some insanely stiff spring that makes his fork ride like crap. You seem to be in favor of the latter though.

I never said you said it. Under normal riding conditions, if the fork is sagging correctly (30% or so for racing or trail riding), he will not be getting huge metal on metal bottom outs. That is all there is to it. The number selected isn't arbitraty, that recommended percentage is there for a reason (traction and spring performance that will be balanced by the forks damper design when properly adjusted).

If a 150lb rider goes off a 10ft drop and bottoms his fork that is setup for racing or trail riding, the fork is probably setup just fine. If he routinely launches himself off of cliffs, he should definitely up his spring weight and probably adjust the bottom out adjuster as well.

You can't have a fork setup to work well in every single condition, no matter what you'd like to think. Racing VS trailriding VS hucking 10ft cliffs all require different setups.

 

[Kntr]

Usually sag, bottoming, and correct spring go hand in hand.