MY11 - Aluminum legged Dorado

May 12, 2009
by Jordan Holmes  
You asked for it, you got it… Arguably the only downside the upside down fork was the price tag. At $2775 MSRP the Carbon Dorado was a little outside of most people's price range, however, Manitou has come up with an "Answer" for all of you. MY11, or better known as the Aluminum Legged Dorado, is the next step for Manitou Racing Development (MRD), and it's a big one.

Read more here...I recently got off the phone with Rich Travis, the new Product Manager for Manitou. He informed me of some pretty interesting information you guys will probably enjoy. Manitou is working on the MY11 Project, better known as the Aluminum Legged Dorado, and it's graphically designed after a Firebird!

Snowman and Fred Approved!

Snowman and Fred Approved!


You asked for it, you got it... The MY11 Aluminum legged Dorado is coming... It will be ridden and tested all summer by HTP (Hayes Test Pilot) test riders and you'll see it and probably have a chance to ride it at Interbike's Dirt Demo and Crankworx. "It's still a DH race fork and MRD level product for us" said Travis." Just the aluminum legs have been added and yes it will feel a little different and weigh a little more than the carbon but the reduced cost makes it a viable OEM fork and more affordable aftermarket fork than the carbon."

MY11 Aluminum Legged Dorado

MY11 Aluminum Legged Dorado


"We'll continue the same 2 year free service program plus free service/support at our race truck and a hard case to protect your investment. Again, we are in full support of DH racing and want teams, individuals to understand they'll have the support they need through out the race season when choosing the Dorado fork.”

What? MY11 Aluminum Legged Dorado

How much? Very Affordable!

Weight? Sub 6.5 lbs

When? Fall of '09

Where? Interbike Dirt Demo and Crankworx

Related Links:
Manitou Dorado Preview
Interbike - 2009 Manitou Dorado In Depth And On Film


171 Comments

  • 25 6
 uh, that was one of the worst-written posts on pb in some time. it was designed after a firebird? so, uh, where is your support for that statement? what the hell does smokey and the bandit have to do with a DH fork? does MY11 = model year 2011? so we'll see this thing next summer? i don't get it. what "needs to be worked on"? if it is an MRD product, shouldn't the internals be pretty similar to the carbon version? except, you know, plastic?
manitou keeps reinforcing my low expectations.
long live long-lasting, gimmick-free fox racing shox!
  • 18 8
 The whole Dorado thing is such a terrible move on Hayes part. Sure, it generated a lot of hype but I think that they need to start working on improving the forks that people are going to be riding. Manitou has such a bad rep when it comes to reliability and customer service... I think they need to tackle that issue first with their lower lines.
Another thing, what is Manitou's "work horse"? marz has the 888 and 66, RS has the Boxxer and Argyle or Domain? and Fox has the 40 and 36... what does Manitou have? the Travis.. I don't think. Maybe the Gold Label but I don't think there's that many around...
Anyway, the point I'm trying to get across is that Hayes needs to take a couple years ad fix whats broken before bringing another (probably) flawed product to the market. IMO of course
But maybe they get hype with a new product then turn their other products around and maybe they'll make a comeback; but if the Dorado fails I think Manitou is sunk.
Flame me all you want, this is what I think.
  • 1 1
 R7 XC?
  • 3 0
 Yes maybe, but it's not like the 32 for fox and the sid and reba for rockshox.
  • 0 1
 I donno I have just heard very good things about them. They get great reviews everywhere for a performance at there price point.
  • 1 2
 i have a travis 180 single and its better than the boxxer and 888 ive owned before... such a nice fork!
  • 3 1
 Lucky your way off unless you've been living in a cave for the last 4 years. Since the Hayes acquisition Manitou has had exceptional customer service and reliability hasn't been a huge issue. Systems like Intrinsic damping on the long travel forks were flawed when they first came out but have since been rectified. Besides, they've been making a switch towards more reliable systems like TPC+ on all their high end gravity equipment because it works just as well with less complexity anyways. The new Dorado is cool but eye candy as far as I'm concerned at that price. I fear the new "cheaper" version is still gonna be pushing $2k. Watch for it next year at $1999 labeled as an every-mans fork. Sorry, still can't afford it. Get it down to $1300 and I'll start considering it again.
  • 1 1
 if its aluminum it better be like 800 bucks... aluminum dents... normal forks use mag lowers which dont dent unless you use brute force. I can see aluminum being a huge problem for dh racing...
  • 1 0
 I'm pretty sure magnesium just cracks. My shivers were Al and I never had much of a problem.. The Dorado will probably be much thinner though.
  • 0 0
 well if they are trying to achieve sub 6.5 it will probably be paper
  • 1 1
 lucky im with clutchman all the way, the manitou dorado is the best dh fork IMO. Ive owned both the 888's and boxxer's and came back to the dorado, the amount of adjustment and customization hasn't been beat (again IMO). Ive never ridden the fox 40 so i dont know about it. The dorado's carbon legs make it super light (6.6lbs if im not mistaken) and the amount of flex in them is ideal for cornering. You could say that the carbon legs are not the greatest for freeriding/massive hucks and i would have to agree because of the flex but the carbon dorado is made specifically as a dh race fork, this is why they are coming out with this new fork, it will be way stiffer and able to take the big drops that goes along with FRing.
  • 0 0
 Austin, once again, you have proven my point, that newer riders have absolutely 0 clue about anything to do with histroy of the sport. Aluminum inverted forks have proven time and time again to be stronger than any magnesium lower fork. Bar none. Shivers from 00 are still riding strong, over some of the gnarliest terrain around. Lets see a 2000 boxer ridden non stop get close to that, or an 888, or fox 40.

Do you youngsters not remember when freeriding started? People hucking 20-40 foot drops on inverted forks. The dorado and shiver were both a part of the beginning.

Avalanche forks are bomb proof also. Aluminum inverteds have proven to be the most reliable long term fork out there. Look in the pics section in broken parts. Look at the ratio.
  • 0 0
 and btw, just to eliminate any noobish replies, I did not mean a 2000 888 or 40, I meant the beg of those forks, and a 2000 issue boxxer.
  • 9 1
 i dunno... maybe i'm the odd ball but i have had nothing but good things with manitou, and bad with fox.... yes the fox feels primo... and maybe even a bit better than manitou... however, i think its like a comparison between a high-end european sports car and a japanese... they go around the track equally well... but the jap car will do it forever with minimal maintainence... conversely, the euro car will do it all and have nice plush seats. but you pay the price in maintainence.... dunno if that makes sense to anyone, just my two cents.... and i will agree that it is not out of neccessity that they offer two years factory support for the fork... its because they know that joe shmoe racer will need it, and its nice to have.... just another bargining chip they are offering over the compitition... and i won't be surprised if the rest of the top guys start offering it on the race forks.
  • 3 1
 Bargaining!!! at that price, come off it. It can not be justified at that cost, and you cant tell me you are not paying for the 2 years support.
what makes these over a £1000 better than 40's??????
  • 3 1
 you could buy the 40's and have 8-9 services (full) at that cost.
  • 4 2
 SOFME has the point that i was itching to push. there are different companies out there and they have different qualities. if manitou developed a fox 40 look alike and similar internals it probably wouldn't be as cheep and people would still buy the fox. manitou has there own nitch in the suspension world. the Dorado is a pretty sweet fork. i personally have ridden a manitou Dorado carbon many times and i owned a Boxxer world cup. yes they are different but in good ways and bad ways. the Manitou has some of the most amazing suspension adjust ability i have ever experienced.and thats where you get some of the cost. not to mention the carbon fiber. if you dont like it fine dont buy it. if you can ride one try it and if you still dont like it no one is forcing you to buy it. i dont like american made cars i like German and Japanese made cars but that doesnt mean that all american cars are crap i just dont like how they feel. so stay with you 40's if you will but dont diss the Dorado's performance until you have ridden one!
  • 2 2
 No matter whether you like the doarados or not the price difference has to be a factor? how can it not be?
And i do not see these forks being as advanced as a Bos? which may i add i havent tried, but im talking economics. its a £1000 more than the Bos, its twice the cost of the rest.(In the UK)
Is it going to save 5 seconds on the hill?
I dont think it will. Its a lot of money.
Ultimately i do not think it can be justified on a price basis.
If the ally version is more expensive than the BOS they are going to find it difficult this year.
  • 2 2
 And i have boxxers...just making comparrisons which i think its all about....isnt it
  • 0 0
 it's an expensive fork to make - it has been 4 years since their last production (which means they need to retool), not to mention the materials needed (carbon fiber isn't cheap), and extra work that goes into an inverted fork. yes, Fox 40s are way cheaper, but they have also remained essentially the same since they came out. give the Dorado a little while for the shock to wear off (in the consumers, and in the factory) and the price will go down.
  • 1 1
 I ran a company that incorporated carbon fibre, long reach poles.
Its not that expensive at whatever grade.
65 foot of carbon fibre pole was only £1400 (bit like fishing type) and its not that hard to work with!
  • 0 0
 not that expensive, not that cheap either. regardless, the new Dorado is an expensive (at the moment at least) fork to make. the price will inevitably go down as production costs are covered.
  • 1 0
 well the BOS suspension fork is a nice fork but its estimated weight is about 7.1 lb at least from what i could find out about them. the Dorado has every bit as much adjust ability as the BOS but the BOS has a pressurized system which makes it a touch nicer than the Dorado but heavier.cost difference? i dont work for either company so i cant tell you where it comes from but i am sure that manitou isnt just pulling an extra ₤1000 markup for no reason. it just costs them alot to make. carbon fiber, tooling and technology may be the blame. i think that the price was the main reason they discontinued the line the first time. my point is it isnt a piece of crap. it is a very nice fork performance and weight wise.
  • 1 1
 This is the thing bikefreaks, no one can. everyone getting on there high horse over it, but if people knew where the extra cost lies, other than their service program (which is where i bet most is), i for one am intersted in the fork and build, but when people are defending cost, with little knowledge to back it up i find it laughable, its a £1000 UK pounds.......
  • 1 1
 And a side by side 2009 fork test would be ideal, why dont pb run one?
That would be a great idea.
I for one would love to see these next to the BOS Idyll. Lets cut the Sh8t and see what thy can all do on similar setups with the same rider/s.
  • 1 1
 welll... yes it does come down to economics... it the cost worth it for the gains... i think yes.... and though i haven't ridden the 40 or the dorado.. however going on my last experiance i'm will to bet that the dorado will out proform... on a second note... carbon fiber its self may not be expensive... its acctually very cheap to buy... but to make the body the company needs a die.. if they are using one die for there production, than production will be slow... which mean supply will most likey not meet the demand dispite the price, which will intern raise the price... so it comes do again to my metaphore used earlier... the jap car vs. the euro... i will tell you right now that i have made a 91 honda crx faster than a stock 911 carrera s around a track, at a fraction of the cost... but no matter what that crx will never have the "feel" of the 911... even down to closing the door... not many of you will get that analagy i assume.... its just something you get from experiance.... i think that manitou is getting flammed by alot of people for the same reason why i flame on 60 geriatric f*cks who own carrera gt3's.... i want one, and i can't afford it. again, just my 2 cents... its pluasable that i am wrong and i should pull my head out of my ass. who knows...
  • 1 1
 just a side note the BOS isnt really available to the us market so id rather not compare it to the Dorado. maybe a fox 40 or boxxer WC.
  • 1 1
 Touche, i would not be able to buy a set of either of them to easy either. But they cant be dismissed on that basis, but if i was going into BOS territory, like Manitou clearly are with the pricing range, and they were confident in their product, "re-tooling" and r&d would be subsidised to compensate moving units.
Did any other manufacurer launch dual crown forks at double their competitors RRP on launch?. Then gradualy lower the price over time??
No, they didnt.
So all the mention of re-tooling etc is rubbish, they can stand that cost as a company.
If they can not be competetive in the market place, then its game over in this economic climate.
  • 1 1
 Although other manufacturer's did lower costs by maybe 10% after there 1st year of each model.
  • 7 0
 no idea this was coming, should've seen it tho. release the pro model, get tons of interest, release joe modle, everyone wants it! but it all hangs on the price...
  • 6 1
 You guys are unreal, none of you have ridden this fork, and yet you all pass judgement. AND..........we dont know the price yet. They sound dedicated to the service end and I dont see why thats counted against them. And another thing...........dated?? What is dated about it, its a freaking bicycle fork, its got dual crowns and two legs, just like any other ....inverted? Is THAT why its dated, look at any motocross bike and find a dated fork hanging off the front.
  • 4 1
 +1.

Yeah manitou sucked for a while, it's a fact. No one seems to remember that rock shox sucked before the sram buy out, and that marzocchi had tons of problems over the last year or 2 with all their stuff blowing up. You're all being idiots really...
  • 2 0
 i think manitou singles were great, had a few pairs. Super blacks etc.
but things should be progressing. I am neither for or against manitou, as a consumer i will try a product and purchase is on its own merit. I dont even take notice of what people spout on here, unless they have tried the product.
I myself only comment on my own experiences, as should others.
People are getting misted by manitou,rockshox,Fox comparissons as companies, and not the individual product.
I do not, and never have liked dorados in any format they have been released.
just my two penneth.Smile
  • 4 0
 There are a couple big reasons that moto bikes use inverted forks. The first is un-sprung weight. This isnt really easy to describe quickly but basicly the majority of the wieght in the inverted design is in the uppers and therefore is "sprung" meaning the fork "carry's" the weight. This improves handling. Running an inverted fork reduces "unsprung weight". Secondly, an inverted design is stiffer in therory. (I know your like "Waht about Shivers? They are flimsy") But seriously, if done correctly an inverted fork has the larger diameter bulkier portion of the fork on top where the triple trees are and this increases rigidity. I assure you motocross bikes are clad with inverted forks for good reason, as are all decent street bikes. If your still curious look up motorcycle suspension design and you can read about this for weeks.
  • 3 0
 Exactly, thankyou Smile
  • 1 0
 yeah riding upside down forks is such a nice feeling , hard to describe how it makes the front end of the bike feel , it's just that mountain bike forks have to be soo much lighter then moto X forks so they tend to be flimsy springy bits of straw , i expect if you scaled up some shivers to motoX size/weight there would no flex what so ever
  • 0 0
 I still don't understand why the "unsprung weight" is lower. On a regular fork you have the fork body attached to the wheel, which has some weight that needs to me moved around, but on an inverted you have the stanchions attached to the wheel. If you ever held a magnesium fork body it's very light compared to the stanchions with all the internals.
I've been puzzled with this for a while so hope someone can shed some light on it.
  • 0 1
 i think because then the forks hold the whole eight of the bike , so that exra wieght of the forks beneath them , can pull them down of something?
  • 0 1
 weight and extra . sorry
  • 0 0
 Hmm, yeah I can see that. I always thought there was some advantage to have less inertia at the wheel end of the fork, but I can see how having less weight on the "bike" gives it an advantage.
So to retrace my understanding, since the stanchions weight more than a fork body, on a regular fork having the stanchions supported by the spring, (the stanchions are part of the "bike") puts more weight on the springs.
On an inverted fork, the lighter fork body is attached to the bike, and the heavier stanchions are to the wheel, so there is less weight on the springs.
I can see how less weight on the springs...or "sprung weight" is an advantage as all the dampening components can work better, etc. In some sense it's like having a lighter bike as far as the springs are concerned.
  • 0 0
 Doesn't moving the internals(fork body) up off the front axle mean more weight to account for? Doesn't this mean that the fork now has to not only accommodate the frame and rider, but now its own weight. In a conventional design, the fork's body weight would seem more "out of the way".(for lack of a better term)
  • 0 0
 thats the idea cam , so that that "extra wieght" isn't pulling springs back out . if you understand me , not many people do lol
  • 0 0
 Okay, now I get it. Missed your post by 4mins. Thanks for the explanation!
  • 0 0
 As you point out, on a normal fork the magnesium body is light, the weight is in the stanchions, an inverted fork, the stanchions (and their weight) is much lower giving a more stable fork, since more of the proportional weight is lower.
  • 0 0
 bige1: I see the additional advantage that you point out that on the inverted fork, the weight is moved from the top to the bottom, giving you a lower center of gravity.
  • 2 0
 Lets say your bike weighs 40lbs and you have a 'normal' fork and wheel where the unsprung weight is 5lbs. Lets assume the rear unsprung weight is also 5lbs. Total sprung weight is 30lbs.

Let's say you switch to an upside down fork of the same weight but there is a reduction in unsprung weight of 1lb. Now your front wheel and stanchions only weigh 4lbs.

RESULTS: Bike still weighs 40lbs. Increase in sprung weight not much at 1lb or 3%. DECREASE in unsprung weight on the front of the bike is huge at 1lb - 20%!

Now if you weigh 180lbs in all your gear and we consider your carcass unsprung, then, like DARKSTAR63 says below, adding a pound higher up the bike is only very slightly negative.

When you hit a bump, your unsprung weight (you and most of your bike) stay still and the wheels move up to absorb the bump, but they are fighting inertia to do so. The lighter your wheel, the less inertia it has and it will move away from the bump easier. Ride a bike with a Rohloff hub to feel a HUGE difference in sprung and unsprung weight on the rear wheel. If your wheel had NO unsprung weight, you would never get a pinch flat.
  • 0 0
 Ok, we're still talking about different things.

A fork body (the lowers) is lighter than a set of stanchions with all the internals.

On an non-inverted fork you have fork body (lowers) and the wheel and it adds up to say 5 lbs of unsprung weight. If you switch to an inverted fork, you now have a wheel and the heavier stanchions accounting for the unsprung weight. This is heavier so you have say 6 lbs of unsprung weight.

iamamodel: This is actually completely different than what you are saying.

It seems that the confusion is coming from the fact that just because we move the lowers to the top of the fork on an inverted fork, we now subtract this from the unsprung weight. But in fact, on an inverted fork, move the stanchions to the unsprung area, and stanchions are heavier than a light magnesium lower.

I'm just trying to understand it all and don't have any preference either way.
  • 0 0
 Radek, anything that moves up and down with the bike frame is sprung, that includes lots of internals, no matter if the fork is right-side up or upside down... ... but if you say that lowers are lighter than stanchions, I'll believe you. I've never weighed the fork parts. Next time I'm in my garage I'll give some parts a shake and see. Personally, I doubt I'd pass the blindfold test on upside down versus right side up, assuming I could ride blindfolded. I've had both types and at the moment, right-side up is for me for various reasons.
  • 0 0
 i get the therory ... i don't know how anyone couldn't after the original post... thankyou for the elaboration...
  • 0 0
 The original post suggest the opposite of what seems to be determined in the posts following it. The idea of an inverted fork having less unsprung weight is a myth, because lowers typically weight a lot less than stanchions.
  • 0 0
 Okay, I've always ASSUMED that upside down forks have less unsprung weight because that's what I've always been told (and Darkstar63 says it is true for motorbike forks, but is it true for MTB forks?). Let me do some serious research and if I can get the answers I'll get back to you.

This'll take a few weeks.
  • 0 0
 Yeah, it would be interesting to find out for sure. One additional thing that we have not talked about, and it would be a factor in the calculations, is that in a regular fork the oil sits in the unsprung parts, but in the inverted it is moved to the sprung part of the fork. This additionally would reduce the unsprung weight of the inverted fork, but would it be by enough to account for the heavier stanchions in the unsprung area? Looking forward to some data on this.
  • 0 0
 The oil does not sit that much higher, and the rebound cartridge and its oil still sits at the bottom of the fork.
  • 0 0
 Personally I would be interested to know where the distance to the balance point of a fork relative to the axel on a dorado compared to say a fox 40.
  • 0 0
 "distance to the balance point"
What is the theory on the pros and cons of this?
  • 0 0
 Actually the oil sits a good amount above the seal, and in regular forks its not about the seal. (obviously).

Were not talking about grenades here, 1/2-1 inch is a HUGE change with how internals work. It completely changes the design, and how things interact with each other. There is a reason most inverted forks have leak issues, the weight of the oil sits on the seal. So in turn, lubricates the stanctions much better when functioning properly, and much worse when the seals leak and just glob out oil. No matter what radek, regular forks will be over all lighter in every way than inverteds.

Only way I can explain in how they ride differently is like I mentioned in a comment above, the new type forks seem to skip and be nimble (when I'm on my 888's my bike has no issue moving around the trail, as nimble as I want, but with the shivers, its much more of a direct path, and just keeps more of a line. The lightness of the lowers on the regular forks is what makes them seem so nimble and bounces from object to object rather then the shiver with the much heavier lower end of the fork just soaks up and keeps straight.

I'll try to make a vid to explain it.
  • 0 0
 btw the majority of the first paragraph is directed to bige, and was more or less meant to explain how a small change can have big things. Same with weight. Move weight up, it will make it feel way diff and so on.
  • 0 0
 radek, This distance would give you a better idea of where the weight of the fork sits,Its really just the centre of mass.
  • 0 0
 So I would imaging a lower center of mass is the advantage? That is moving the mass lower in the fork is a good thing. I say that just from the general thought that top heavy things don't corner as well.
Is that the consensus on that?
  • 0 0
 I guess that if the weight is lower it would make the front wheel stick to the ground better, where a higher mass would make the fork easier to 'flick'.
  • 0 0
 Manufacturers are killing themselves to get weight lower, but you still want the unsprung weight to be as small as possible (e.g. Rohloff is very 'bangy').

I haven't read all the latest comments, but I think no-one has mentioned the braking forces put on an inverted fork leg. Often you can fix a leaky brake-side leg just by swapping it over to the non-brake side. And who wants suspension fluid gettin' on their rotors?

Radek, I think there should be a technical article purely on inverted versus conventional forks. I'm happy to contribute or consolidate other's findings.
  • 1 0
 I didnt read the entire string of comments here, but from what i've seen nobody has mentioned the fact that an inverted fork can achieve a much greater bushing overlap, because the larger diameter slider legs extend through the triple trees. This makes the fork stiffer in deflection fore and aft(creating a supple fork due to less binding on the bushings). The downside, no brake arch to combat torsion(with proper engineering this can be taken care of). I dont think we'll ever see a 6 pound inverted fork that matches the stiffness of a 6 pound upright fork(DH use), but i think for the 8-9 pound range they're possibly superior for heavy dh and freeride(never heard anyone bitch about avalanche forks).
  • 9 2
 This post is worthless without a price.
  • 2 1
 bingo. if the price was going to be shockingly cheaper (like maybe close to affordable to the average rider) then give us a ballpark figure to build hype.
  • 0 5
flag cyberoptixs (May 12, 2009 at 11:27) (Below Threshold)
 its 2800 bucks
  • 0 1
 yeah thats for the carbon version, in USD is it not? we're asking how much cheaper for aluminum legs
  • 0 0
 and those prices are the MSRP, not the actual price. Take 500-1000$ off the msrp in almost every case.
  • 1 0
 Its $1799 msrp
  • 1 0
 Invented forks on Motocross bikes is a must, Otherwise there is no stopping point. But im not sure if this is neccesary for DH bikes. I think its a bad idea for regular bikes because, it becomes weaker on the impact point which isnt good.

But still... upside down is haaaawtt!!! Big Grin DD
  • 4 3
 I think people need to understand the forks they ride and be able to service them when they need to so they can see when and what needs to be done. Take the time to make your bike feel the way you want it too smooth of course with regular tuneups, grease, seals, bearings, cleaning and inspections. Guys ride through shit all day long for weeks at a time and expect that everything should function the same as day one. I dont understand the guy "tommytomac" whos bitching about servicing a fork every 6 months thats almost unreal. I notice grime, seals, creaks and oil breakdown on every fork I have ever owned (Marz, Fox, Rock Shox) and I dont race. Im sure racers service their bikes pretty often say after every race sometimes 2 or 3 times on a rough weekend and atleast have everything checked over. 2 years of fork maintenance for racers can = alot of service. All in all forks, shocks, brakes, rotors, bolts, tires, chains, bearings/pivots need servicing! It should say in your manual as to when for your fork and I know that you cant go by that because everybody rides a different amount and put their bike through different shit(mud,water, different types of dirt, fine silt powder which is a bitch on bearings, seals and oil. All I know is I take the time to care for my bikes and they take care of me!
  • 2 0
 Props to that!
  • 1 0
 some guy on here said the reason the carbon one was so expensive was because manitou didnt want anyone to ride it beside industry insiders. I tried to tell him carbon fiber makes prices skyrocket but he assured me he knew the manitou staff and this is what they told him. Now we have an alloy version that is much cheaper obviously so normall people can afford to own one. I hope he read this article.
  • 1 0
 My rule is to wait one year after any product is released to let everyone else test it for me, especially an expensive and complex one, like a fork. Waiting a year would have helped many who bought Zzyzx, Hanebrink, and the first generations of Psylos, Fox, Trixxys and Specialized forks. Some died, some were improved. Of course, those original Z1s can still be found going strong, but just to be safe, wait a season, then see how your trendy friends' forks are going.
  • 1 0
 saying that fork is graphically designed after a '77 chicken is like saying a red intense is graphically designed after a ferrari. yeah i guess it has black and gold on it, but honestly... brutal marketing hype tell me more about the product
  • 1 0
 had a set of 06 dorados didn't last long they came apart and scored the insides there not made for drops. Won't see me lining up for a new set that's for sure. Changed them out for a set of marrz rc2x 66 and have not had a problem. No more manitou for me.
  • 2 1
 I dont think there is going to be much of a price drop from the carbon version, unless there is a difference in the internal build.
I predict a UK cost of £1800 ish, Manitou are convinced they have a winning formula.
  • 1 0
 no, they're gonna want to hit the slightly more budget minded market. So I really think they'll be the same or slightly less than than the leading dh forks.. it will probably be like a boxxer race.. nice and plasticy inside Smile
  • 0 0
 From what i have heard the way they build the carbon uppers is a VERY expensive process ( I heard that the machine it from a 'chunk' of carbon, not sure how much truth there is behind that)
  • 0 0
 I really doubt that is true, carbon is not like metal. Its very particular to how it is laid up and what direction the fibres are oriented in. This being said its still not cheap doing a layup like a fork upper.
  • 0 0
 I have rode with manitous since the "3's". love them. I have always wanted invert forks since i saw the single crown Shivers but the price was always the issue. I think they look cleaner. Not sure how good they are but thats my 2 cents. Ride more bitch less....peace out
  • 1 1
 Oiling is another advantage to consider with an inverted fork.
In an inverted fork the oil sits in the body of the fork on top of the stanchions, constantly lubricating the seals. On a non-inverted fork, the oil sits in the bottom of the lowers, splash lubricating the seal which is on top of the lowers.
The advantage with better/constant lubrication is less leaks, but also a much smoother action. The better performance is both the lubrication, but also the change in the design of the bushings that the extra lubrication allows for.
With less lubrication in a non-inverted fork, the bushings need to be thicker in order to provide the same sealing as a thinner bushing that is constantly lubricated. The thicker bushings and less lubrication add to friction in a non-inverted fork.

The dorados have thinner, but more snug bushings because of the lubrication that the inverted design allows. This decreases the play and the friction of the stanchions, translating to better feel and action.
  • 1 1
 absolutely, i keep my bike upside down for this reason.8P
  • 1 1
 To be fair, if you do blow a seal in an inverted fork the oil will leak out faster than if you blow one on a non-inverted one. Though the extra lubrication is supposed to decrease the seal leaking, this still something to consider when looking at the two designs.
  • 3 1
 what ACTUALLY is the point in upside down forks? i can see no inherent benefit, and they're heavier than most regular forks.
  • 1 2
 they can't be all bad if they use them on moto cross bikes...
  • 1 0
 the internals are shims and oil. the same as moto forks
  • 2 1
 completely different weight actuation, bike forks act nothing like moto forks, not even a comparison point is all im saying
  • 1 1
 I know what your saying, but there are some comparisons that can and should be made, moto x bikes and downhill bikes have many things in common. Many.
  • 4 0
 Yes! i had the shivers! im just saying this Manitou design with carbon lowers cannot be compared in the same instance due to the amount of flex caused (even though these are the ally version) which if they do feel like the shivers will be a surprise victory for Manitou, Which in turn relates back to my statement.

"I CANT WAIT FOR THE REVIEW'S!"
  • 2 3
 Inverted forks have less unsprung weight. Face-plant, please stop posting hating comments all over this article. Maybe you should wait for the review before you start bashing the product.
  • 4 2
 Look if i want to make comparisons on forks past and present (because unlike you i am old enough to remember,and been in around at the time of release.So ill comment, its relavent other than where andyp1981 is concerned, but thats a different story.
So i suggest grab hold of a set of all the upside downers, including The mighty all mountain Avalanches,Curnutt XTD's etc then you might grasp an ounce of what i mean, and the reason why i have views like i do on carbon lowers.
To me they are justified on my experiences.
  • 1 3
 quit the bitching if you dont like the dorados then walk away from the subject.
  • 3 0
 its a debate on the performance, pro's and con's...why walk away from it?
And whats it to you?
  • 2 0
 i dont belive the man is bitching about anything
  • 0 2
 i like a debate as much as the next person,but you have noteboards for such stuff. and why the attitude fella.
  • 2 0
 prolly cause he was told to stop bitching when he was stating an opinion
  • 2 0
 When im getting replies on here to my statements, ill answer them. So who are you to tell me where to post is what im asking.
  • 1 2
 ok there was a complaint about the attitude by yourself by other users,i have to look into such complaints as a moderator. the point is no one has actually tested the new dorado as of yet yet you continue to argue the point that fox are so much better,that is your opinion and i have to agree with that but all i am saying is you have noteboards for such stuff.
  • 0 0
 The point sam264 is it changes not only how the bike rides, but functions, and ride quality.

Several factors are stiffness is changed, you will keep a more direct path with them with the additional weight on the stanctions. You will find inverted forks keep on path and go over stuff, while 888's or likewise bounces off stuff and has you more on a nimble line.

Inverted forks also have the smoothest stanction travel due to them always being lubricated with the oil above, not below (but this can cause seal leakage, like seen on the original dorados... but not as much as the marzocchi's and avys.

Lower ride height. You can durastically lower the equivalent travel height by inverteds because you remove the brake arch, which takes up a good amount of height on normal forks. ( my shivers ride a few inches below my 888's and they close in travel).

Reliability in over all strength and integrity. Aluminum upper legs with such a big diameter and bushing over lap will generally be stronger than smaller diameter thicker tubes on the stanctions of normal forks. Basically you change the forks traits by flipping them.

Other than that they weight more, generally cost more because they are generally had turned on a lathe rather than cast like magnesium lowers.



now the controversy is huge in all of the mx, mc racing, and mtb world on this subject, and really, all of what people say is babble about it. Its all opinion based from riders that haven't put extensive time on both designs. To me both have their weaknesses and strengths, but day in and day out I myself just choose to ride my shivers over my 888's just for the feel and experience they allow me to have compared to the 888s.
  • 1 2
 a friend of mine is using carbon dorado and says they are amazing, they never dive and although they need a service every 6 months its free for 2 years. i guess the alloy legs ones have the same internals so they should be good.


whats the price. i guess £1500
  • 2 1
 i would be pretty upset if i spent even 1500 on a fork i had to send away to get serviced EVERY 6 MONTHS! great its free for 2 years and it wants to be if its needs doing that often but how much will it cost then?
sounds like a false economy to me but thats just me.
  • 1 0
 its a race fork, made for performance, not durability. most good racing forks need to be serviced often
  • 3 0
 Foes Curnutt XTD Fork... I believe the recommended service interval is 1yr for intense use and 2yrs for infrequent use..... race forks should be designed to last a long time as they need to be reliable!
  • 1 1
 "most"
  • 1 2
 why would you be upset.... people don't realize that the more things cost, they inheriently cost more to maintain... prefection has a price... the day that fox makes a fork that is untterly flawless and never ever needs service i will buy it even if it costs a million dollars... but it won't happen.... look at rolls royce.. they welded the hoods shut on their early car... then they started braking and they were fucked.... expensive things break... and cost more to fix. people need to get over that fact and stop hating.
  • 2 0
 hang on, why is that true?? if you going to tsalk about cars if i spent 100,000 on a car i would NOT want to take it to a garage every few monthe and spend a fortune doing it. It should be able to manage 1 service every year like any other car. Yeah if its race stuff i can understand that but that stuff is amied at people who get it given to them when they need it replacing. Of ocarse everything breaks but expensive things should break/need fixing less often if its aimed at normal people. I also said that was just my opinion, i wasnt hating!! If your happy spending that sort of money on something you will end up spending more time looking after then riding by the sound of it then good for you get a pair otherwise let people have their say.
  • 0 0
 Tommy, you said it yourself. "If its race stuff I can understand". This fork is being advertised as a slightly cheaper version of the top of the line race fork. The intended use is still racing. Equipment for intense uses like racing will always require more maintenance. I would be surprised to find out a dedicated DH racer only services their fork every six months. i'd bet they do it at least every other month, if not more often. If I was going to be servicing my fork that much, 2 years of free servicing would make a HUGE difference IMO.
  • 0 0
 dood your car needs to be serviced more than once per year, if you want it to last more than 3 years. An expensive car should be serviced more often than a normal car as parts and labor for expensive cars are well, expensive. If you do regular maint less major things need fixing.
  • 1 1
 There really aren't bad suspension systems, only bad users. LOL just kidding. Seriously though, I see no problem with this Dorado fork, doesn't look ugly, looks like it would be anything better than a SR SUN fork.
  • 2 3
 Could someone explain to me why Manitou is still in business? And why the hell would they bring back the Dorado? I wish they would just stop... Stop making forks, stop making shocks. Save every mechanic the headache of trying to explain to someone why Manitou sucks.
  • 2 0
 Could someone explain me why seattletrials is such an a**?
You have no logical and explainable reason in this world to say what you just said, and yet you did... do you fell better after that statement? Do you really think you made a valuable comment to the biking community?
Some people just never learn...
  • 1 0
 Am I an ass? I actually do have a very logical and good reason to say what I did about Manitou products. Did it make a valuable contribution to the biking community? Maybe it did. Maybe someone will read my comment, and think to themselves 'hey, maybe I should not get a Manitou fork' and they will never have the chance to realize what a shitty product they make.

My reasoning behind my comment? Manitou products are unreliable, they don't hold up to abuse, they are made of plastic parts that hold the whole fork together, they do not ride well, and all around a very bad product. I have ridden several Manitou products, but I am glad to say I never owned one.

I have been a professional mechanic for 7 years and know a thing or two about working on bikes. I have overhauled hundreds of forks, and know my way around working on suspension very well. I have also ridden a new Dorado. They do not feel good. Not the worst fork I've felt, but not at all worth what they are asking. For how much work it will take to keep it working well, it should not cost more than a few hundred... Not a few thousand!
  • 0 1
 wait, thing is . ive never rode any dh fork , boxxers or watever , but who cares , its personal opinion on parts , not others, most of the time . forks only have problems when there used for the wrong thing , e.g and xc fork used for dj. e.c.t, so ya know . yeah some forks have problems , zocchi's(cant spell) have had problems over the last 2 years , and there hopefully sorting them for '2010. so everything can have a problem
  • 0 1
 stop shutting manitou down! you have no idea how these will handle, so STFU until you ride one! let the riders use them and they will make their own opinions. and frankly their 09 stuff like the minute is amazing. so don't go blowing them off only because of their pastproducts. that was the same deal with trek, and look at where they are now!
  • 2 0
 Most opinions on this page have been based around the carbon version (the flagship) and comparissons made based on:
1) The new carbon model
2) the 1st version dorado
3) other manufacturers, both past and present models.
The other factor which is in question is the cost.
Not the business profile of manitou.
Now im probably going to get told off by a moderator for even commenting on this thread, but if you cant put valid points accross do me a favour and delete my account.
Trek are in a simlar position due to the down tube dinks they are suffering from.
All companies need to look at certain lines, put that extra time and money into the research and development to ensure we get the product you deserve, wether yo pay £2500 or £900, or be it 44 lbs build or 36lbs builds. They should stand the rigour of what they are designed for!
We put a lot of money into our bikes, we are not all sponsored riders with 2 or more rigs.
I expect a £1000 fork to do it all.
So i expect these manitous to do a lot more again.
"Fit for purpose" is a standard that is dropping to the side lines these days.

Marketing hype is starting to take over from quality control, and thats just not on.
But like so many have said, you need to grab a set and test them out if they float your boat.
  • 2 0
 sick,but its better to either save and buy the carbon one,or just buy a boxxer!!

just my opinion
  • 1 1
 To me these forks look cheap and from what ive heard they are not worth it. I mean you could just go and get some Boxxers and have lots more money left over to put into the rest of a bike. But thats only my opinion
  • 0 1
 Sweet looking forks...can't wait to see how "affordable" they are. Will they be as inexpensive as a 888rc3...or a boxxer team? That seems to be what they will compete with. Maybe not.
  • 2 0
 good, lets hope that "affordable" is less than 2000 bucks
  • 1 0
 im hoping more like $1200
  • 1 0
 yea but i doubt it
  • 1 0
 Hey, why not start making forks for actual people? I don't think the Average Joe will find this fork useful for dh or fr.
  • 1 0
 I think the pinch bolt system is a great idea, that insert will save some repairs.
  • 2 0
 or you could just buy a boxxer those r reliable and sram kicks ass
  • 3 5
 im thinking of buying some dorado carbon forks but they cost twice the price of 40's are they twice as good.

would like a price / date on the my11.

also if they are 6.5lbs thats only .1 lbs more than carbon legs
  • 5 1
 sam264, the "main forks" you see at world cup races are provided by the biggest sponsors. I.E. you see mostly Boxxers cause Rock Shox sponsors more people than anyone else, not because all those racers thinks they are the best. You can't base who makes the best product off of what you see the most pros riding!
  • 2 1
 true, but from the amount of people i've seen/heard talking about fox 40's in a positive manner and people talking about dorados, i doubt the dorados really warrant such a price tag, expensive materials or not.
  • 3 2
 gpmoto: to an extent, but obviously no legitimate race team (ie syndicate) would ride a poorly performing fork season after season for any amount of sponsorship.
  • 1 1
 oh really Razz
  • 2 1
 cdbnr, the top pros always have new stuff. Period. Most issues normal people see will never be seen by the top tier riders. Their forks are always custom tuned, and brand spankin new. All the companies out there in the w/c have great dh forks, fox, rockshox, zocchi, manutou (yea, the old dorodo's still rocked the freeride scene back in the day), and the gap btw performance becomes much smaller at the pros spec w/ all the different things I mentioned. Truth is the original tpc+ dorado was great, but suffered from seal issues (not an issue for pros. People around here that are younger all talk down on these forks, mostly because they weren't even around during the time of the great inverteds. Rember avy? They still thriving.
  • 1 0
 i'm going to assume t3h1337r's comment was directed to me. i totally understand that a lot of racers and any pro riders have mechanics and lots of brand new equipment and what not that us mere mortals don't. i also realize that they are running brand new equipment each season (if not each weekend). the point i was trying to make is if the fork doesn't consistently perform on race day, the team would look at other manufacturer's products for next season. race teams should strive for results, not promoting mediocre products year after year for a paycheck. if they never considered other options they wouldn't be competitive in this sport very long.
  • 0 0
 but they do perform at the same consistency because they have the product support for it.

I know one thing, my non rebuilt (since new in 02) shivers run better each race day then my freshly rebuilt custom tuned 888's do. I don't have to maintain anything on my shivers. I know several people that have the same experience with dorados. The only bad part of dorados like mentioned is the seal issues. Other than that, not one thing was bad on their old tpc+ forks. It was the last few MRD 8 inch forks using their spv crap that did the reputation in for them. Other than that they had a great rep througout the riding scene.
  • 0 0
 yeah i see what you're saying and thats an amazing fact about that shiver. you gotta wonder why marzo stopped building em if they were all that good. for the record i've never owned an inverted fork, so i can't comment on the performance relative to a traditional fork design. i'm certainly not taking a jab at the new dorado either, other than maybe the marketing and absurd price. all i was trying to get at is serious race teams (any sport, not just dh) use and endorse the products they do because they perform when it counts, not just because of reliability or how big the company is, as "gpmoto" was saying above. i'd love for manitou to seriously get back into the game and build quality products. it would give the other big names some fresh competition, which is great for the consumer. i'll tell you though, it will be a couple years at least before i consider running their stuff myself. they've got to prove their reliability
  • 1 1
 Maybe everyone should just ride one and see how they feel before they start making assumptions
  • 1 0
 big price tag but you get a sick ass fork
  • 1 0
 Does any body own a set of the carbons?
  • 1 1
 Doesn't higher centre of mass mean worse handling?
  • 5 0
 To adress that quickly, the benifit of reducing unsprung weight outweighs...lol- the very slight negative effect of moving some weight up in the fork assembly.
  • 0 1
 instead of those plastic protectors, they should use rubber sleeves like Lefty's do. It would keep em cleaner
  • 0 0
 Uhh, no. Lefty's don't function anything like a standard telescoping fork. Have you ever actually seen the stanchions on those things? Rubber boots tend to trap more dirt than keep out. The plastic shields are a much better solution to protecting the stanchions.
  • 2 2
 Damn well beautifull!!!!
  • 0 1
 These forks give me an erection carved from sandstone
  • 0 3
 i love how its graphically designed to be like a fire bird, like right the fuck on, what a great car and what a great fork!
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2020. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.017617
Mobile Version of Website