New Manitou Fork and Sun Ringle Carbon Wheelset - Taipei Cycle Show 2011

Mar 16, 2011 at 0:08

Mar 16, 2011

by Mike Levy

Manitou debuts their QR15 HexLock axle equipped Marvel trail fork inside, and you can also check out Sun Ringle's brand new Carbon SRD wheels.

2012 sees Manitou make the leap to a 15mm thru-axle on their Marvel trail/XC fork, although one can only assume that it is just a matter of time until we see it on other models that currently use 9mm QR dropouts.

Manitou have adapted their proven HexLock axle system - the axle has a hex shape in the clamping zones as opposed to being round - to the 15mm standard, incorporating a quick release lever into the design. There are updates to the 2012 Marvel Pro hidden inside as well, with the fork using their new Iso Air design that is said to be more compliant than other air sprung systems, especially at the top of the travel - the achilles heel of many air springs. The fork uses TPC+ internals to control damping. The Marvel is available in two travel options; 100mm and 120mm, and you can choose between black or white lowers.

Manitou Marvel Pro details:

• 100mm/120mm of travel
• Iso Air spring
• TPC+ Damper
• Adjustments: air pressure, compression to lockout, rebound
• QR15 HexLock thru-axle
• Tapered steerer tube
• 3.3lbs (100mm travel w/ QR15 HexLock axle)

Manitou's QR15 HexLock thru-axle uses a 90 degree quick release lever to disengage the axle from the lowers. The gold dial adjusts the tension once the QR lever is tightened down. Adjust it once and it is set from then on in.

In this photo you can clearly see the hex shaped clamping zone of the QR15 HexLock axle. The opposite side features the same shape as well, and is said to better resist twisting motions than a traditional round axle.

The recessed dropouts on the Marvel are shaped so that the tension adjustment - the gold anodized aluminum dial assembly on the axle - sits mostly inside the lowers, with only the dial itself exposed. The opposite side uses threaded insert for the axle to tighten into that is also replaceable if damaged.

Sun Ringle Carbon SRD trail bike wheels

Sun Ringle also showed Pinkbike their new Carbon SRD trail bike wheels are sure to have many riders drooling. The non-tubeless rims are 26mm wide, perfect for the high volume 2.35 inch tires that many trail riders use, and are strung together with straight pull double butted Wheelsmith spokes (24 per wheel) and anodized red aluminum nipples. Total claimed weight is 1555 grams, although the goal is also to be much stiffer than aluminum rimmed options that also approach the weight.

There are plenty of hub options for the new Carbon SRD wheels, including 9mm/15mm/20mm front and 9mm/12x135mm/12x142mm rear options.

Sun Ringle Carbon SRD details:

• Carbon 26mm wide rims
• 24 straight pull spokes per wheel
• Sealed bearings
• Front hub options: 9mm QR/15mm/20mm
• Rear hub options: 9mm QR/12x135mm/12x142mm

Check out the Manitou website to see their entire lineup.

Stay tuned for many more updates from the 2011 Taipei Cycle Show

Must Read This Week

1. Marzocchi Forks Through the Years 34850 reads
2. A $5 Custom Intense M9 - Cancer Fundraiser 33293 reads
3. Movies For Your Monday 29217 reads
4. Video: How To Create A FORCE OF NATURE 27496 reads
5. Video: Aaron Gwin Blazes a Trail 26833 reads
6. Photo: Brett Rheeder Over Vert Flip 26245 reads
7. Hart and Pugin win Saracen British Downhill Series, Round 2 24233 reads
8. 24 Bikes of the Enduro World Series 22869 reads

71 Comments

Score Time

+ 27

iamamodel (Mar 16, 2011 at 0:12)

Ha ha! Manitou adopts the Fox/Shimano axle size but improves on their design.

The rebuttal from Fox/Shimano will be 18.173mm axles! Smile

captaingillooley (Mar 16, 2011 at 9:02)

ahahahaha so true

RideBikes927 (Mar 16, 2011 at 11:43)

^^ agreed

mountguitars (Mar 16, 2011 at 16:30)

haha. don't worry. instead of shimano and fox applying a patent for the 15 QR system, they intended the 15mm to be an open for use by everyone so that everyone adapts/uses the new 15QR system.

ninjatarian (Mar 16, 2011 at 19:23)

Haters gunna hate.

captaingillooley (Mar 16, 2011 at 19:27)

No, no ninjatarian, we don't hate. We are just laughing at the truth and the inevitability of it. Shimano is by far one of my favorite companies

iamamodel (Mar 16, 2011 at 19:42)

^^ Spot on! There's no malice behind what I posted, just amusement.

IllestT (Mar 17, 2011 at 12:09)

Whatever was the problem with 20mm thru axle? Stiffer and pretty much identical weight.
I guess its just so we have to buy something else

WAKIdesigns (Mar 18, 2011 at 13:22)

I could start hating at the point where more and more forks are having this no tool axle lock, instead of a stupid simple 2 or 4 bolt clamp with side retention. I could hate further by bringing up the fact that at the time 15mm axle "standard" was developed, Fox had no through axle on their 32 series and Shimano had no 20mm hubs at all. Maybe Saint was there, still they waited at least two years before the released more 20mm hubs like XTR, XT alnd SLX. So it seems that they both kind of decided it might be a good move to develop semething completely new for growing Trail and AM segment.

Same story with 12x135 and now 12x142. Nobody will ever convince me that a 12mm axle is so much better than a 10mm through axle so that it's worth having other drop out type. 12x150 is fine as DH bikes have different drop out anyways. I see no point for in-between solution when so much components need to be standardized.

At least there are HOPE hubs...

ninjatarian (Mar 18, 2011 at 14:24)

I made this argument one the forums a long time ago, it was a losing battle. People will buy into anything. At least 1 other person in this world agrees with me. I wish Manitou would make this exact design... in 20mm. I find no fault with 20mm QR axles instead of bolt on, it still uses all the standard parts and everything is still interchangeable. I still run bolt on though though.

WAKIdesigns (Mar 18, 2011 at 15:14)

I like losing battles, you have a rare opportunity to pi** into face of someone's big by revolting other people against them. Yea people will buy into anything if just get their brain dissolved by hype well enough. It is the only reason we still have neoliberal capitalism here. Corporate with government blessing treat world in a way that Adolf compared to them is a naughty kid. Then they screw up our planet and our health at the very moment, thousands of scientists are providing evidence and sounding alarm, religious leaders of all beliefs cry for stop putting trust in commodities. Exploited people all over the world stand up for their rights and mutiny. We ourselves get less free time and leisure than ever, there is an epidemic of suicides, cancer and diabetes.

Yet the system is rolling as big bunch of us feel perfectly fine because they get their toys on time...

[Reply]

+ 13

panzer103 (Mar 16, 2011 at 4:49)

We are all carbon based life forms but not as cool as carbon rims

jamismtnbikes (Mar 16, 2011 at 14:30) (Below Threshold) show comment

what if we were born with carbon rims! Big Grin

that would be awesome.

+ 10

johnny-compton (Mar 16, 2011 at 15:11)

Wtf.

panzer103 (Mar 17, 2011 at 11:22)

That would be cool I think.

[Reply]

+ 10

Iloper (Mar 16, 2011 at 11:21)

MANITOU

WE NEED A 35/36 160mm FORK!!!

[Reply]

JKSR (Mar 16, 2011 at 6:01)

How about a 6 inch all mountain fork already.

[Reply]

Railgunner (Mar 16, 2011 at 9:48)

Dude Manitou's rebuild has been epic. They seem to be really working hard, it's starting to pay off. Can't wait for this TPC+ damper long travel single crown everyone seems to be whispering about... props Manitou

[Reply]

thecarpy (Mar 15, 2011 at 22:57)

that manitou is beauty for once.

newbikesoon (Mar 15, 2011 at 23:12)

id ride it.. looks like a nice fork

thecarpy (Mar 15, 2011 at 23:17)

I would to. guess on price anyone?

Rethonal (Mar 16, 2011 at 6:34)

under a grand?

mattsavage (Mar 16, 2011 at 7:46)

500 bucks

zona (Mar 16, 2011 at 11:06)

450 I think

Rethonal (Mar 16, 2011 at 15:21)

not bad at all

[Reply]

Solstice (Mar 16, 2011 at 8:47)

The reverse arch/brace was a concept done in the late 80's, early 90's by Pauls Components. As an engineer by trade, it does stiffen the fork considerably. Only issue is clearance which is addressed with the multitude of hydroformed frames that can bend the down tube to allow the clearance.

yonibois (Mar 18, 2011 at 10:08)

Or not even that. I run a Nixon on a Patriot and have never had a clearance prob.
Pace did a double (front/back) arch which was a nice idea...

[Reply]

timmins (Mar 15, 2011 at 23:26)

Did they ditch the Stan's BST license? Is Easton the only UST compatible Carbon rim? Not that I could afford one, but I'm looking forward to the carbon rims that will be arriving on the secondary market in the coming seasons, I hope some will be tubeless.

mikelevy Mod Plus (Mar 16, 2011 at 1:27)

The SRD Carbon rim does not use the Stans design but their other tubeless rims do (and ship w/ yellow tubeless rim tape as well).

[Reply]

Varaxis (Mar 15, 2011 at 23:45)

What's the benefit of having the arch behind the stanchions? Are they simply trying to be different? Do they have any more elegant ways to route the front brake cable so it doesn't rub the hell out of your paint?

timmins (Mar 16, 2011 at 0:19)

dt swiss does it too, they claim it allows for a better stiffness to weight ratio.

+ 15

bpshred (Mar 16, 2011 at 1:13)

Definitely nice looking, however I question Manitou's foray into the frame building business, that wooden downtube looks flimsy, and made out of ply, which might not be too rigid. It looks especially fast with the large speedholes. I approve

mikelevy Mod Plus (Mar 16, 2011 at 1:30)

The arch is in the rear because it can be closer to the axle, which Manitou says allows the fork to be stiffer. They have been doing the reverse arch for many many years now.

brett236 (Mar 16, 2011 at 6:01)

or they are just hipsters and want to do it different

jervis (Mar 16, 2011 at 6:30)

Manitou have been using the reverse arch design for years. hardly being 'hipsters' when they started using it back in 2003...

brett236 (Mar 16, 2011 at 6:44)

i was kidding man, chill

Rasterman Plus (Mar 16, 2011 at 7:24)

"The arch is in the rear because it can be closer to the axle, which Manitou says allows the fork to be stiffer."

Putting the arch in the rear makes it FARTHER from the axle, not closer. The axle is sticking out from the front of the fork so an arch on the front should be closer. Am I missing something?

smike (Mar 16, 2011 at 7:36)

From the Manitou website: "By placing the arch behind the crown, we can make it shorter and stiffer than if it were in front of the crown.". The problem with the reverse arch is that at full compression, it will come closer to hitting the downtube. As a "solution", their A2C heights tend to be taller than other brands.

kovaldesign (Mar 16, 2011 at 8:01)

Right, so basically what Manitou says about the distance between the arch and the axle is a complete rubbish.
Smike, you have made very good point about the A2C distance - unfortunately another disadvantage to the reverse arch design.
Not for me, thank you.

BTW, talking about the hex axle now, how 'The opposite side features the same shape'? According to that you wouldn't be able to put it throught the hub. [???]

smike (Mar 16, 2011 at 8:24)

Well, it IS true that the arch can be shorter. If you look at your fork, the tire sits higher in front of the stanchions than behind. Therefore, you COULD make it shorter by putting it behind. Whether it makes any significant difference in stiffness I don't know. But I do know that "traditional" arched forks are stiff enough for me, with the advantage of having lower A2C height.

kovaldesign (Mar 16, 2011 at 8:37)

Yes, the arch can be shorter but that does not mean the distance between the arch and the axle will be shorter. I bet the traditional front faced arch from Fox or RockShox will beat the Manitou for stiffness.

Rasterman Plus (Mar 16, 2011 at 8:51)

Yeah smike I thought of that too, my guess is it ends up being almost the same distance. Arch in front is closer to the axle horizontally, but in back its closer vertically. Either way it doesn't matter, knowing that the forks are over designed by probably 100-1000% for safety, a difference of a few millimeters or even centimeters isn't going to make a shit bit of difference in what you feel as a rider. Its a load of marketing baloney.

Socket (Mar 17, 2011 at 0:58)

Wheels are usually somewhat circular, therefore the closest you can get the arch to the axle is dictated by how big the wheel/tyre is. It doesn't get any closer being in front or behind the stanchions. As to whether it's actually stiffer, that'd depend far more on the execution and specific design of the fork than fore/aft of the stanchions IMO.

Kovaldesign - the hex on the LHS is smaller than on the RHS, so yeah it does fit through the hub.

kovaldesign (Mar 17, 2011 at 2:49)

Thanks for clarifying re axle.

smike (Mar 17, 2011 at 7:42)

@Socket: take one quick look at your fork. The stanchions are offset from the axle (i.e. the axle sits in front of the stanchions, right?). Therefore, the wheel is higher in front of the stanchion, than behind it. So it IS closer behind the stanchion. It's not an opinion... you just have to take one quick peek to see it.

smike (Mar 17, 2011 at 7:46)

And nobody is saying that it's stiffer because the arch is closer to the axle (well, MikeLevy is saying that, but not Manitou). By making the arch shorter (period... just the arch structure itself, not in relation to anything else), would in fact make it stiffer. If there is more clearance behind the stanchion than in front of it, then it is possible to make it shorter and therefore stiffer. But as I said: whether in reality it IS stiffer than other brands is questionable, as there are other ways to make an arch stiff (like making it bigger, or hollowed out with support ribs etc).

PHRANQUY (Mar 17, 2011 at 8:17)

I think the issue is more that the top of the arch is closer to the axle, allowing it to be shorter and stiffer. I know the Manitou RSeven I had, the arch was fairly long and flat, but close to the tire.

yonibois (Mar 18, 2011 at 10:15)

I've got no idea, but I always guessed that as the axle sticks out in front of the stanchions, then having the brace behind the stanchions made like a diagonal, or a 'straight' line, rather than the 'c' shape you get when you put the brace in front too... ???

Socket (Mar 20, 2011 at 3:01)

Smike - I am well aware of stanchions being offset from the axle, what you fail to notice is that the TYRE is the limiting factor as to how far from the axle the arch can be. Given that wheels/tyres are, as I said, circular, that means they have a constant radius and no matter where you put the arch, it'll always have to be a certain minimum distance from the axle. "This isn't an opinion"...

smike (Mar 20, 2011 at 6:02)

I see where our differing "opinions" is stemming from now. Yes, you are correct the that the distance from axle to arch is constant. What I'm saying is it's not the distance from axle to arch that determines stiffness, it's the actual height of the arch itself, regardless of where it's placed. The fact that you can make the arch shorter it will be stiffer. It doesn't matter if it's closer to the axle or not.

Socket (Mar 25, 2011 at 17:34)

Height relative to what? The torsional forces acting on the fork come through the axle, arch can only ever be so close to axle, therefore you're never getting any closer to the actual force input, therefore there is no inherent stiffness gain.

Flat out, it just isn't a "better" system. The details of the execution will make 10x more difference than whether your arch is on the front or the rear of the fork.

smike (Mar 25, 2011 at 21:42)

Agreed. I wasn't trying to argue that it was a better system. Just trying to explain what Manitou's marketing was trying to say.

[Reply]

sidekicked (Mar 15, 2011 at 23:06)

they need to make a proper long travel trail fork, 130mm +

devin-m (Mar 15, 2011 at 23:07)

truth! bring back the nixon, or something similar

ship-it-fed-ex (Mar 16, 2011 at 0:37)

Theres one in the works!

rubbman (Mar 16, 2011 at 6:33)

I am a fan of the 150 travis.

lmbngtracer7975 (Mar 16, 2011 at 10:51)

32 talas 150 ftw!

tsimpson1993 (Mar 16, 2011 at 10:53)

^^ we can't all afford fox.

baca262 (Mar 16, 2011 at 13:36)

yup, i was like wtf, another trail fork? they need to fill up long travel single crown category and perhaps a non inverted dc fork model

[Reply]

NoPanicRacing (Mar 17, 2011 at 13:04)

Mike, what is that with 9 * 135mm rear axle standard. It`s 10*135mm, is it not? Caliper it out please... Smile

[Reply]

mountguitars (Mar 16, 2011 at 16:31)

what's the stanchion diameter on that fork? is it 30mm just like the one on their R7?

[Reply]

sagetthegreat (Mar 17, 2011 at 22:13)

I know im echoing others, but how about a damn 160mm fork manitou. Seriously, wtf.

[Reply]

metalmike (Mar 17, 2011 at 10:13)

Still don't see how they'll ever compete with the family of SRAM brands, or FOX SHOX, or Shimano brakes.

[Reply]

fantaman (Mar 15, 2011 at 23:05)

those new wheels are sweet

[Reply]

genericmk (Mar 16, 2011 at 11:31)

Amazing, 20 years and to this day Manitou hasn't come up with any good damper to replace the tried and true TPC+.

[Reply]

g1701gst Plus (Mar 16, 2011 at 11:04)

How about some info and pictures on those sexy Hayes Prime brakes I see?

[Reply]

cammyg18 (Mar 15, 2011 at 23:01)

thats sick

[Reply]

trevormann (Mar 16, 2011 at 6:53)

whats the price for these wheels?

[Reply]

deanw (Mar 15, 2011 at 23:34)

mmm carbon!!!

[Reply]

armadafreerider (Mar 17, 2011 at 19:10)

One nice big rock and these rims will be toast

[Reply]

Below threshold threads are hidden