RockShox RS-1 - Review

Sep 15, 2014
by Mike Levy  

Inverted, Carbon Fiber XC Fork

The RS-1 name may be one that some riders recognize from many years ago, but the fork itself isn't like anything else currently on the market. Yes, there have been plenty of upside down forks over the years, and even a few single crown versions, but none have benefited from the all-encompassing approach to fork design that RockShox has put towards the RS-1. This includes not only the lightweight, one-piece carbon fiber upper legs and steerer tube assembly that only recently became possible to manufacture, but also the proprietary Predictive Steering design that includes the fork's dropouts, the clever hub, and how the two mate together to add rigidity to the fork. All of that doesn't come without a hefty price tag, though: the $1,865 USD RS-1 has been designed with cross-country racing and trail riding in mind, and can be run in 80, 100, or 120mm travel settings depending on how you're looking to use RockShox's new 1,666 gram fork.


RockShox RS-1 Details

• Purpose: cross-country / trail
• Chassis: inverted, one-piece carbon upper, 32mm stanchions
• Steerer: tapered carbon
• Spring: Solo Air w/ Bottomless Tokens
• Travel: 80 / 100 / 120mm
• Damper: Accelerator cartridge
• Lockout: XLoc hydraulic remote
• External adjustments: low-speed rebound, spring pressure
• Offset options: 46 / 51mm
• Wheel options: 29” only, with proprietary hub
• Axle: Predictive Steering w/ 15mm Maxle Ultimate
• Weight: 1,666 grams
• Predictive Steering hub MSRP: $238 USD
• MSRP: $1,865 USD




RockShox RS-1
Proprietary Hub - The stout looking carbon upper structure of the RS-1 certainly adds rigidity to the package, but RockShox says that the real key to them being able to manufacture an inverted, single crown fork with adequate torsional stiffness is its Predictive Steering design. That name refers to the fork's larger than usual closed dropouts and the Torque Tube hub that houses a pair of massive sealed bearings. There's one bearing on each side, with them sitting on a 27mm diameter axle that spans the hub, and a 15mm Maxle Ultimate runs through the center of all of this to compress the left and right dropouts together onto the matching hub-ends that fit into the dropouts. The fork and the $238 USD hub must be used in unison for the fork to function - there is no subbing in a different hub - which ties RS-1 owners to the SRAM and DT Swiss branded hubs, as the company has no plans to license the design out to anyone else.


RockShox RS-1 Photo by Amy McDermid
RockShox RS-1 Photo by Amy McDermid
  This is the key to the RS-1 coming to life: its Predictive Steering hub and axle design. Note how the hub's end caps mate to the fork's dropouts, while a standard 15mm Maxle Ultimate ties everything together.


Damper Tech - RockShox has long used different variations of their Motion Control cartridge in their SID cross-country forks, but with the advent of the Charger damper that's employed in the Pike and BoXXer forks, it's clear that they are taking a different approach to damper design. This change consists of going from the emulsion dampers (a design where the damper oil is free to mix with air in the system) to a closed design that utilizes a compensator to, you guessed it, compensate for the volume displacement of the damper shaft entering the cartridge under compression. This layout means that there is essentially no air inside of the damper, and also back-pressure from the compensator, thereby greatly limiting the chance of the oil foaming and the fork acting unpredictably. That's all well and good, but due to weight concerns with the RS-1, RockShox decided to go a different route than to drop in their much lauded Charger damper.

RockShox RS-1 fork 2014
  The sealed Accelerator cartridge is a big step forward from the Motion Control dampers used in RockShox's previous cross-country forks. Photo: Adrian Marcoux


Enter the Accelerator damper cartridge. Rather than an extruded bladder that expands under compression as used in the Pike, RockShox has gone with a more conventional spring-backed internal floating piston, otherwise known as an IFP. As the fork compresses and the Accelerator's damper rod goes into the cartridge, the IFP and the spring behind it are compressed and the added displacement is possible - without it, there would need to be air in the system, and the fork wouldn't compress at all if the cartridge was simply full of oil and had no compensator. After that, as the fork extends, the spring behind the IFP provides back pressure to keep the oil from foaming. It's not a new theory by any stretch of the imagination - it's essentially what's inside of a shock's piggyback, but with a spring rather than air pressure - but it is very effective. RockShox's dual-stage DIG valve has been employed to keep the fork up in its travel under braking, and they've also put in their two-stage Rapid Recovery valve system. Rapid Recovery is a high-speed rebound circuit that returns the wheel quickly after full impact events, while managing slower shaft speeds and mid-travel events with more damping control.

There are fewer external damper adjustments to be found on the RS-1 than with most of the competition: it sports a single knob at the bottom of the left leg to adjust rebound speed, and a handlebar mounted XLoc remote that can be used to firm up the fork on the fly. This likely won't make much difference to a cross-country racer who's going to want their fork to be either pretty stiff or really, really stiff, but trail riders who are used to twiddling dials on every other ride might find more spare time on their hands than they're used to.

RockShox RS-1 Photo by Amy McDermid
  There is no low-speed compression adjustment found on the RS-1, with only a handlebar mounted XLoc remote lockout letting you firm up the fork on the move.


Inverted Air Spring - It was pretty much a given that RockShox was going to use an air spring inside of the RS-1, but it's worth pointing out that the fork's Solo Air spring has, just like the fork's chassis, been turned upside down so that the Schrader air valve sits at the bottom of the leg. This was done for simplicity's sake, as it made a lot more sense to do that than to engineer a more complicated solution to keep the air cartridge sitting right side up. It still uses a self-balancing negative air chamber and, just like with the Pike and BoXXer, progression through the later stages of the fork's stroke can be tuned by adding or subtracting RockShox's threaded Bottomless Tokens.








RockShox RS-1 Photo by Amy McDermid
Riding the

RS-1

  Race weapon or all-day adventure bike? The RS-1 saw it all aboard the Rocky Mountain Element.


I mounted the 100mm travel RS-1 to the front of my Rocky Mountain Element in early June, just in time for me to put some serious miles on it before heading off to the BC Bike Race, an event that served up more than 30,000 feet of descending on some relatively rowdy trails. The bike has also spent a considerable amount of time pointed down all sorts of singletrack on not just my home mountains, but also Whistler's infamous terrain, including an ill-advised trip down the notorious Gargamel trail. This often led to it probably seeing more than RockShox ever intended it to in regards to abuse levelled out, but there's certainly nothing wrong with that, is there? Nah.



Sensitivity - The spring rate that you settle on will obviously depend on where and how you ride, as well as how much you weigh, but the cross-country riding in my neck of the woods tends to be on the aggressive end of the scale in regards to what you should (or maybe shouldn't) be doing on a short-travel bike, which often has me leaning towards a stiffer setup than what I would roll with elsewhere. Most short-travel forks suffer in regards to small bump compliance when under me simply due to the relatively stiff setup that doesn't allow for much in the way of suppleness, but the RS-1 is different. Very different. As far as short-travel cross-country forks go, it takes suppleness to unheard of levels, with a sensitive early stroke feel that is more akin to a fork with another inch or two of travel. This was so pronounced that the fork almost felt a touch under-sprung at first, even with the stiff setup. This is likely down to two reasons: a) the inverted design means that the fork's seals and bushings are more likely to be coated with lubrication oil. And b) the inverted design also means that near perfect alignment of the stanchions and upper assembly can be achieved, thereby ensuring that the fork is never fighting itself when being compressed.

When you're working with less, you really have to know how to use it, right? The RS-1 is the most sensitive and active cross-country fork on the market, of that I'm positive, which, in theory, should lead better ground tracking by the front tire and more traction. I'm not going to tell you that I took note of said increased traction, but I will say that anyone who rides the RS-1 will note how active and forgiving it is, even when run quite stiff.


Air Spring - The RS-1's Solo Air spring is very much geared more towards cross-country riding than any sort of hard charging trail bike shenanigans, and taking the latter approach quickly shows that its spring curve doesn't ramp-up fast enough or hard enough to keep the fork from gobbling up its travel faster than me eating a mid-ride Pop-Tart. That said, this is not an all-mountain fork, is it? No, it is a cross-country weapon whose air spring isn't designed for you to be chucking yourself off of anything that might require knee pads, and its stroke is meant to be more forgiving for its intentions than having it ramp up hard enough so as to keep flyweight racer boys from ever reaching bottom. I, on the other hand, could touch bottom pretty easily when I removed the two Bottomless Tokens that came installed inside the fork from RockShox, even when running on the extreme end of the recommended pressure range. With that in mind I'd tell that anyone who seeks out a spot of rowdiness on their cross-country bike to leave a few of those volume spacers inside of the RS-1.

The RS-1's air spring is too linear for my liking but, truth be told, I'm also probably riding it in places that are a bit above what RockShox really intends it for. The Solo Air spring does feel more appropriate on tamer terrain, though, and the option to easily add the Bottomless Tokens goes a long way to having it ramp up enough to keep nearly every rider happy.

RockShox RS-1 Photo by Amy McDermid
  The RS-1 irons out small chatter like it has an extra inch or two of travel, but also requires that aggressive riders add a few Bottomless Tokens to its air spring to keep it from hitting bottom on larger impacts.


Fork Rigidity - Just how stiff is the RS-1, both torsionally and front to back? First, a primer: inverted forks, and especially single crown inverted forks, have always been more akin to over-cooked noodles than pillars of accuracy, and trying to have them be as rigid as a traditional right side up fork usually results in them not only failing at that task, but also upping the fork's weight to a point where you just have to ask why bother. That said, out and out rigidity isn't the be all and end all decider of a fork's worth, is it? I've been on downhill forks that I've thought were too torsionally rigid, and I can say the same thing about some cross-country and downhill frames - some of my favourite bikes have been as flexy as a nubile yoga instructor. There's a point where a certain amount of flex is too much, but that point is further along than most riders think it is, at least in my mind.

Anyways, back to the RS-1... It is staggeringly flex-free front to back, enough so that I'd say it feels to be approaching what a downhill fork offers in that regard - there is simply none of the tucking feeling that can occur when the wheel is forced back under you during heavy front braking. This was pretty clear right off the bat, but I didn't fully understand how much so until I got off of my Rocky Mountain Element test platform that the RS-1 is bolted to and onto a 160mm travel bike with what should be a much stouter fork - yes, I know it's longer and has more travel, but it should also be stiff all around - and came away surprised at the difference, especially when I jumped back on the Rocky. Advantage RS-1, at least when talking about fore-aft rigidity.

It's not quite so cut and dry when talking about torsional rigidity, a much more obvious performance characteristic to most riders. Yes, the RS-1 feels as flex-free as it needs to be, and it certainly has a leg up on other pure cross-country forks on the market, but it might not be so much that one will have their minds blown by its torsional stiffness. It is more rigid than other short-travel forks, but I've honestly never felt that a RockShox SID or Fox 32 were so flexy as to be holding me back when I'm riding a 100mm travel cross-country bike in the manner it's meant to be ridden. On the other hand, it's all about incremental improvements these days, and the RS-1 is definitely more flex-free all around than the other 100 or 120mm travel contenders out there. The question is, does having to run the proprietary Predictive Steering hub make that gain worthwhile, and I guess the answer will come down to whether you mind being locked into that hub / front wheel or not. The Predictive Steering design is the biggest single factor in the fork's performance, after all, and the RS-1 likely wouldn't have come to fruition without it.


Damping - How much performance should one expect from a 100mm travel fork? Well, if it costs as much as the RS-1, I think we should all expect a lot of it. The fork's sealed Accelerator damper comes through on that front, giving the RS-1 great control on rough ground. It's still a 100mm travel fork, so don't go expecting the roots and rocks to part so you can ''Sam Hill'' your cross-country bike, but there's a noticeable step up in composure compared to the SID's Motion Control DNA damper. I say this after having spent multiple seasons on a SID, and at the time never feeling like it left me wanting for more relative to its intentions. However, it's clear that there's a gap in damping between the two forks when pushing hard.

RockShox RS-1 Photo by Amy McDermid
  You and I can talk smack about the proprietary hub all day long, but it won't change the fact that the RS-1 is the most torsionally rigid cross-country fork on the market.


I'd describe it as just simply having more control in a lot of situations, especially repeat impacts that put the fork deeper into its travel, and that translates to you feeling like you have just a bit more in hand if you need it. Combine that performance with the stiff fork chassis and the RS-1 as a whole feels like much more fork than you might expect given its travel and weight figures. I did still find myself wishing for a separate, crown mounted low-speed compression knob as is available with the Motion Control damper, mostly so I could dial-in some added low-speed control over what the stock cartridge supplies. I didn't find that the fork dived too excessively, actually, but it was so supple that I sometimes found it a bit too active. I guess that's what the XLoc remote on my handlebar is for, though. On the other hand, I don't see a lot of high-performance trail riders being willing to swap out low-speed compression adjustment for a handlebar mounted remote.


Other Details - With moulded-in guides that use snap-in plastic housing retainers, the fork's front brake routing is more dialled than we've ever seen from the competition, but at the same time it's a given that you don't want said housing to be rubbing on the carbon uppers for months and months on end. There looks to be a rather thick application of clear coat applied to the carbon that would likely require you to be a real dumbass about it in order to cause any real damage over the long haul, but you'll still want to make sure that your front brake line is just the right length, and that you've applied the included protective stick-on decals in any areas where it might make excessive contact.

I don't like remotes. Not one bit. Which is why I'm bummed to see that the RS-1 only comes with RockShox's hydraulic XLoc remote system - there is no crown-mounted compression option. I know it's a cross-country fork and that those Lycra weasels lock out their suspension even when just talking about a climb, but the SID is made with the same intentions in mind and it has a crown mounted low-speed compression dial and lock out option should one choose to go that route. XLoc works quite well, there's no doubting that, but I'd rather not have it as I don't often firm up my fork. Racing cross-country? You might think differently, then.

With no guards to protect the lower legs, my RS-1 test fork must have some banged up stanchions after the months and months of riding I've put it through, right? Wrong. There isn't a single scratch, ding, or any mark whatsoever on them, and that's even after the bike spent a full week being transported
inside of a semi-trailer with a few hundred other machines during the BC Bike Race. I've ridden and crashed horribly on rocky, pointy terrain; I've lent the bike out for others to abuse like it was their own; I've had it in the back of pick-up trucks on rowdy 4x4 access roads. I stopped worrying about marring the stanchions long ago, and now treat it as any other fork. I know many out there will be assuming that its lower tubes won't last more than a few weeks under them, but I'm personally more concerned about an oncoming alien invasion than scratching up the RS-1. You fret about the fork's stanchions while I wear my tinfoil hat, okay?




Pinkbike's take:
bigquotesThe RS-1 is expensive, requires a proprietary hub, and obviously has a pretty small target audience. Those facts alone will make it more of a ''pig in the window'' for RockShox than a fork most would consider purchasing. However, if you put those points to the side and only look at the RS-1's performance, you'll find that it's stiffer and offers a better (but less adjustable) damper than its predecessor, the SID. It's a safe bet that the proprietary hub is going to put off some potential buyers, although racers will often look past such things for even the smallest of gains in performance, and that's the exact group of riders who I see not minding the whole "no hub, no RS-1" thing. As for the more casual riders, the ones who might not plan on regularly toeing the starting line but still like to have the latest gear, taking the same approach will put them aboard the best cross-country fork on the market, as long as they can afford the eye-watering cost of entry.- Mike Levy



www.sram.com/rockshox


233 Comments

  • + 151
 just another fork i don't and never will ether want to own or need to own Smile
  • - 113
flag chyu (Sep 15, 2014 at 0:39) (Below Threshold)
 Pretty sure it rides worse than a RST.
  • - 19
flag fla3h (Sep 15, 2014 at 0:53) (Below Threshold)
 @chyu not really , just another fork with nonsense top notch technologies that 1-2 % of XC riders may need ...... maybe not even that much , who cares , 2000 $ for a f*cking xc fork ....carbon fiber blah blah
  • + 50
 Come on I don't like the RS-1 either but its definitely not a bad fork to ride. RST forks are nonredeemable in every way, Bad prices, bad dampeners, bad stancions, just bad forks in general. The RS-1 is expensive but its not a bad fork, a bit gimmicky yes but not a bad fork
  • - 42
flag chyu (Sep 15, 2014 at 1:48) (Below Threshold)
 c'mon, you guys gotta learn to take some pun. I know the mountain bike industry has cause some havoc to your country.
  • + 22
 for once I actualy read the whole article
  • + 86
 "it won't change the fact that the RS-1 is the most torsionally rigid cross-country fork on the market"

Ummm..... www.youtube.com/watch?v=PAO_RVeOBX4&feature=youtu.be

"taking the same approach will put them aboard the best cross-country fork on the market"

So it requires a propitiatory 170g hub, has a real weight of 1700g with axle, has a damper not suited to hard riding and small bump sensitivity coexisting, is as torsionally stiff as a old school SID (despite this reviews claims) and costs an absolute fortune. Yep, sounds like the best XC fork on the market!

Buy a Lefty Wink

P.S. Sorry for the repost of the same comment as below, seems better here
  • + 10
 Thanks for the video link tup
  • + 11
 I'd still rather ride my '02 shiver sc
  • + 1
 Not ridden one but apparently with the needle bearings leftys are stiffer than a normal fork let alone this upside down thing. Not sure it would stand up to the kind of abuse i give stuff (probably not alone there). Proprietary hub as well... All I'm seeing is pound signs wringing out my bank account when it goes wrong. Will stick with fox ta :-)
  • + 7
 Either or I think we can all agree that it looks mighty damn fine on that Element... ugh gotta go clean up now.
  • + 4
 Reminds me of my inverted RST on my old M1. That shit was crazy
  • + 0
 crazy good or crazy bad?
  • + 2
 Crazy good at the tine, crazy bad by today's standards.
  • + 8
 to be fair, there's hub options for lefty forks though, including Chris King. Not so with this fork, though I thought one of things at eurobike was a hub for this that wasn't SRAM or DT Swiss.
  • + 9
 Hell with Chris King, there are dozens of aftermarket china/taiwan brand hubs for lefties. I'm sure given a demand a chinese maker will just rip the RS1 hub design and offer a cheaper version which will end up sold on ebay. That being said, using a hub with an axle that keys into the fork dropouts but using a 15mm maxle as the skewer to hold it together seems like a backwards step, technology wise. If they were going to go proprietary hub design why not just go full hog with a hub with a 25mm QR Thru-axle or something.
  • + 12
 Jeez, I'm starting to feel bad... everyone's saying they cant/ won't pay this much for this fork and I'm thinking of buying one. ......
  • - 6
flag madmon (Sep 15, 2014 at 8:44) (Below Threshold)
 $2,000.00
suckers, fools and losers only.

shame on you RS
  • + 13
 Smart move by RS. Introduce the technology to riders more likely to accept the technology. Once the "Hold the wheel solid and twist the bars to evaluate torisional rigidity" dingbats are silenced, introduce a scaled up 140-170mm version.

Its absolutely amazing how people believe that the inverted design is inferior, yet EVERY other two wjeeled sport has embraced the improved tracking and steeing precision of the inverted design.

Don't bother with the lame "its about weight" argument. Weight went down in other sports compared to the conventional design. This is the best example of people buying into marketing that I have ever seen. Most of the steering precision comes from clamping area at the crown. Using a proper sized axle solves the flex issue. All successful inverted forks use a larger axle.
  • + 2
 BeardlessMarinRider tahnks for video ! Now I know it isn't a competitor for BOS Dizzy wich is lighter, stiffer , cheaper and works lgreat like other BOS products !
  • + 14
 pinkbike we are stil waiting on a review for the 380!
  • + 8
 @ Willie:
Its absolutely amazing that you still bang on about inverted designs being stiffer when every usd fork on the mtb market is either flimsier, heavier or uses some sort of proprietary hub/axle arrangement. The "hold the wheel solid and twist the bars to asses torsional rigidity dingbats" are clearly onto something, as there is no usd mtb fork using only standard parts that is as torsionally stiff as a conventional fork of a similar weight. A simple way to test this is to ""hold the wheel solid and twist the bars to asses torsional rigidity, dingbat". Yes this exerts far more of a torsional stress than you ever will under normal riding conditions, (although no more than you could quite easily see in a crash situation) but that does not take away from the fact that it is a simple way to assess which design is stiffer.

Sadly the "I'll believe what I want despite the evidence right in front of my face dingbats" still have a way to go...

And yes it is a weight issue. EVERY other two wheeled sport that has embraced the USD design uses a motor. Something which you quite clearly failed to mention, I wonder why? When you make a fork that can deal with the loads a motorbike chassis can put through it, the torsional stress a persons arms can exert pale into insignificance. That is the difference. Its pretty simple really.
  • + 2
 So where's the "hold the wheel and twist" video for the SID? OPM? Axon? TS8? Anything? It's only meaningful if there's a comparison, and I'm positive my old sid woulda looked like a noodle too in this "test".
  • + 3
 It probably would yes. Does it have a qr axle, lightweight ali crown and straight steerer? It probably does. Tbh, according to Mr. Levy this fork is stiff enough, and in fact stiffer than the competition, and I think that is cool. However it does use a full carbon upper, tapered steerer and proprietary hub to achieve this. It also costs two grand. Bet your SID didn't.

As a side note...
" thekayo (49 mins ago)
pinkbike we are stil waiting on a review for the 380!"

YES PLEASE PINKBIKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • + 2
 Weights pretty much the same as my manitou marvel fork I got from CRC for 200 euro lol (It doesn't work half bad either). But hey it looks cool If you have the money why not...
  • + 4
 @gabriel: Torsional testing is predefined load to make it twist. In this scenario an usd will flex more than a regular design. Threshold is above what you experience on trail. So both designs are stiff enough. Now superior lubrication, bigger bearing surface, bigger cartridge and oilvolume all favor usd. Really a nobrainer. The RS is cool. @170mm travel I would consider this fork. 100mm is just 1st design iteration, they want to see if the design holds up.
  • + 6
 "So where's the "hold the wheel and twist" video for the SID? OPM? Axon? TS8?"

Well that is for you to do yourself. But it does demonstrate how flexy it is compared to (almost) anything else in the same category. Doing this with my Lefty XLR carbon/ Stans Podium MMX rim of SI Lefty hub with KCNC stem and New Ultimate bars results in barely any torsional flex regardless of how hard I grip the wheel and crank the bars. Certainly nothing like the RS-1.

German magazine bike also did more robust tests and found it 15% stiffer than the next stiffest (Lefty) under braking but it performed very poorly under torsional loading. Pretty relevant to cornering accuracy/ riding off camber sections/ tracking lines though ruts/ etc. It is easy to knock the video but I can't see who Mike can review this fork like this... "the RS-1 is definitely more flex-free all around than the other 100 or 120mm travel contenders out there"... without a cynic looking to the pennies SRAM undoubtedly pay for advertising here.

It may feel ok to ride by itself but back to back with some other forks out there I'm certain it would get shown up.

If you love the idea of the fork no doubt you'll defend it to the end of the world but you have to admit that a lot about the fork just doesn't make sense on a lot of levels and if the reviewer here is honestly believing the RS-1 is "the best cross-country fork on the market" then that suggests a massive lack of time testing and investigating other XC forks on the market. Leftys have all the same advantages with none of the disadvantages but a single sided fork somehow has an uncool reputation with some while SRAM is one of the cool kids. It is a "lifestyle" product pure and simple (read: targets the weekend enthusiast with more money than sense) rather than an out and out XC fork to rule all XC forks as the review suggests. Even the promotional videos were all about cool guys that just like to hang out bro
  • + 2
 @gabriel And a Tracer 275 costs 10k+. At least on this piece of hardware RS is doing some truly new shit to justify the price. Innovation costs money.

I had a qr, carbon crown, but 26", and not only was it flexy but it was sticky and harsh as shit. Like pretty much every XC racing fork, weight was pretty much all it had going for it. Point is, the video tells you nothing about the fork except that under an unknown amount of force applied in an irrelevant manner it does what every other fork will do. Post a similar video with a SID, hopefully in a more meaningful orientation, and then possibly we have something to talk about.

Yeah, it's "stiff enough" and apparently has the best damping and ride quality of any XC race fork, at a competitive weight. I think it's pretty easy to argue it's best in class. Considering that, and that it's barely out of the prototype stage, yeah I expect it to be pretty damn expensive. And considering how different the design is from anything currently available, I expect it to use some new parts. What's the big deal? They coulda gone with something like Manitou's hexlock, but that would be a pain in the ass day to day.

You act like they threw all this crazy tech into a brand new product and it came out the same as every other fork on the market.... it didn't. In every way except cost it's better than the current crop of XC race forks. RS invested some serious time and energy into the RS1 and they came out with a successful experiment. An XC fork that actually rides smooth is big news.

@beardless Never ridden a lefty though. In fairness, it's silly that it gets shit on so much; as an XC fork it makes plenty of sense IMO, and the RS1 will likely suffer the same derision as the Lefty does currently. At least for a while.
  • + 1
 Congrats RS....only took 10 years to mimick Marzocchi with a less worthy product.
  • + 2
 EastCoastDHer, go home, you're drunk.
  • - 4
flag Willie1 (Sep 15, 2014 at 12:56) (Below Threshold)
 @ gabriel-mission, how do you explain that in motorsports, the reason the standard design was abandoned was because they had to overbuild it so much that standard forks had too much friction and weight to compete? It has been simple marketing that sold a "good enough" product to people for years, because standard designs are cheaper to produce. They can use looser tolerances and get away with it.

It is obvious that the designs feel different. This is probably what people refer to as "flexy" but its a difference in reaction to terrain, that once adapted to allows much better tracking. As far as I know, Fox is the only company actively rejecting inverted designs. Maybe that's because their behind the 8 ball in development?
  • + 0
 The video could have been some haters who loosened the axle.
  • + 3
 Like others have said here before, where is the LONG TERM REVIEW for the MARZOCCHI 380. Your first impressions came out months ago! We know you haven't forgotten about it did you, right?
  • + 0
 EastCoastDHer is right the RAC even had up to date colors! ep1.pinkbike.org/p5pb9350497/p5pb9350497.jpg
  • + 3
 Willie1 - I am still sceptical about your argument on weight. THis fork uses a pretty advanced composite structure while it is compared to forks made of aluminium and magnesium. My silent bet is that if you'd like to make a "trickle down", cheaper version of it in metals, that baby would weigh more, and well no one would pay money for a "heavy" XC fork. Then Manitou made Dorado which is freaking flexy and not necessary light. I rode that thing and it is nowhere near my likes to develop a reflex of keep turning the bars left at the same time I am pressing the front brake lever harder, what causes the bike to turn right a bit. I guess we can say that after 3 designs, and so many years, Manitou could have learned how to make a dream USD fork. But I am open minded, if in 10 years most of the forks are USD then I shall admit my defeat easily.
  • + 1
 Now I have an excuse to buy a brandnew less expensive fox or rs enduro fork
  • + 1
 What about the old the old Headshok for torsional rigidity? Yes I know it does not have the travel, but it would be interesting to see an update of it's concept bringing it up to today's requirements with modern materials. Imagine a all carbon Fatty with 120-150mm travel, with internals based on a rear shock, could even have a piggyback reservoir off of the crown, in front of the head tube. Now somebody needs to get to work.
  • + 4
 You know what, I'm going to give them props for at least trying to make this work, that being said I can't imagine this is ever going to see a longer travel version. I see a lot of people preaching about how the USD fork is used in every form of two wheeled motorsport and it's only natural to see it making it's way into the mountain bike world. Unfortunately I don't think it's going to work. Up until recently I spent more time on my motocross bike than my mountain bike and the one difference that is blatantly obvious is the weight between the two and that's where I see the problem, my mountain bike weighs roughly 10% as much as my motocross bike, however both of them are designed to support my weight and their own. In order for an USD fork design to work for mountain biking I think that the weight penalty would be too great. The RS-1 relies on carbon fiber and a proprietary hub design to attempt to keep things on the straight and narrow all while keeping weight within reasonable expectations. My motocross bike has no such weight concerns, huge fork tubes slide into a triple tree with the hub and wheel supported by a generously large axle held in place by pinch bolts in beefy fork lowers. I don't see any mountain bike suspension companies being able to build an USD fork without adding a bunch of weight for strength and stiffness, and even then it's going to be so expensive that it would be cost prohibitive ( see RS-1 above ). On paper the USD design is superior ( everything sitting in a nice bath of oil makes for super smooth action ), but in order to get those performance gains you will have to sacrifice and incur the weight penalty associated with it. Kudos to RockShox for giving it a go, but I don't foresee any longer travel versions in the near future.
  • + 2
 you're the one who's drunk he's correct
  • + 1
 Inverted designs were lighter than the conventional designs they replaced in moto. It was a marketing ploy to say otherwise. The dorado tracked better than the 40 at pretty close to equal weight.
  • - 3
 @Waki, the moto world settled in on 46-48 mm sliders. Conventional designs went up to 50mm in production, and 55mm in prototype form. Even with 6 bolt gull wing clamps, the conventional fork could barely equal the much smaller and lighter inverted design. The major flex area was at the crown, and with the larger diameter of the tubes of the inverted design providing better clamping area, and torsional rigidity. One difference between moto and mtb forks, is that in moto they used cromoly stanchions. These had more flex than aluminum stanchions. WP tried an aluminum stanchion fork, but it was too stiff, and few people used it.

In Moto, conventional forks had better small bump compliance, because longitudinal forces flexed the cromoly slightly. In an inverted fork, this caused binding in the bushings. In the conventional design, the chromoly flexed at the clamp, leaving the bushings free to slide. Aluminum flexes a lot less than chromoly steel, so the effects are minimized. When you think about these principles, they make sense from an engineering standpoint.

The dorado is weight competitive with the other designs. I'm not sure why everyone goes on about this. The old dorado was flexier, but the boxer was even worse with 32mm stanchions.
  • + 0
 I rescind my earlier opinion, after thinking about it I would wager that a longer travel, downhill version would be much easier than a cross country fork to make. You get what the RS-1 is missing in that package, a third bracing point that would come with running a dual crown setup, and a 20mm axle wouldn't hurt the stiffness equation. So get on with it RockShox, prove to people it can be done.
  • + 1
 willie:
the 40 is pretty much the stiffest dh fork on the market. The dorado is the flexiest. The dorado weighs more. I don't see how this can possibly be argued. saying the dorado tracks better in this conversation is (perhaps purposefully) misunderstanding the term "tracking" and is quite possibly unfounded. I assume you mean the wheel tracks the undulations of the floor better. Wheres the data? I am ready to believe the fully oiled up lowers of a set of dorados arent much lighter than the lowers on the latest fit 40s. Anyway, my point is that no amount of bump tracking is any use when the bike doesnt go where you point it. For this point I refer you to my comment much further down the page. As for the moto/friction/weight question you asked me earier, you have already answered it yourself. It is a side effect of the 50mm legs required to deal with the braking forces a motorbike inflicts. To have legs this large on a conventional fork means insanely heavy lowers and huge bearing surfaces. You just dont see braking forces anywhere near this large on an mtb. I'm out. Again, see below. Byee
  • - 2
 Gabriel Mission9, you are very misinformed. It wasn't about braking in moto, it was about steering where you want to. That is tracking. The inverted design tracks better, in the standard definition that tracking means to everyone except you who is involved in two wheeled sports. I have not read a single review of the Dorado that complains about flex or tracking. In fact, almost every review I have ridden notes that the Dorado is the best tracking fork, and that they never felt it was flexy. Check your weights. I posted them last time you spewed this misinformed bullshit.
  • + 1
 oh for f*cks sake man, you have to come out with the bs to drag me back into it. Learn to read.

"saying the dorado tracks better in this conversation is (perhaps purposefully) misunderstanding the term "tracking" and is quite possibly unfounded. I assume you mean the wheel tracks the undulations of the floor better."
I know what tracking means. I was suggesting you don't as, although the dorado probably does a good job of tracking the undulations of the floor better, Its lateral tracking is inferior to EVERY OTHER DH FORK ON THE MARKET. This is unarguable.

You HAVE read a review saying the dorado doesn't track very well. Its at the top of this very page. Everyone knows USD forks in the mountain bike world suffer increased twisting. That is why they are all so bloody heavy. Why do you think they are heavy? Just for fun? Did DVO think "lets make a USD fork, and lets make it really heavy, and at the same time quite twisty, as a sort of drawn out and expensive marketing campaign for Non-USD forks"? For gods sake man this argument is over.
  • + 2
 Please! I agree! It has been long time waiting.
.... When you are all done geeking out on the All Mountain... Sorry enduro testing, please remember all us DH'rs Wink
Cheers!
  • + 2
 I have never ever been riding a motorcycle and forgive me if i am wrong but, isn't steering precision required to ride mx track or Enduro trail analogical to riding a-line trail in mtb or open fields of Mt Saint Anne, while riding a rocky track like Windham or Hafjell is a different thing? You know, ability to put the front wheel exactly "there" not slightly next to it?
  • + 2
 @Waki
Steering precision on a motocross bike has more to do with suspension setup than it does on a mountain bike. But to answer your question, yes when you want the front end to drop into a rut entering a turn, or even for just general tracking and line choice at speed, it's very important that the wheel be exactly where you need it, just like bombing a downhill course or riding singletrack on a mountain bike.. There's just no real noticeable flex or deflection in the front end of a modern motocross bike because of the massive fork tubes, triple tree, and wide front axle. The whole switch to USD forks in motorsports, on road and off, was because it's a structurally stiffer design, which allowed for better steering and suspension performance under the extreme loads of braking. The first thing I noticed abut the RS-1 was how long the fork tubes and stanchions look with only two points of connection at the crown and hub, it's gonna flex torsionally like that no matter what materials they make it out of.
  • + 1
 Haha! No.I've only seen too many boxxers fail.
  • + 3
 I rode a shiver for years and when i went back to a traditional design the increased torsional stiffness was immediately noticesble and better imo. If there is an advantage to a usd fork in moto, great, but it doesnt seem to translate directly to mtb.
  • + 2
 ive owned and ridden a dorado on two flatlines old and new model for about 5 years now (BIG NOTE I AM FEATHERWEIGHT)
no flex ever.
weight aprox the same, the difference is unnoticeable due to the LESS WEIGHT AT THE AXLE which you do notice making it feel a LOT LIGHTER in actual use, the front end is far more responsive easier to move aka TRACK where i want and lift as needed making for an overall much better experience in all conditions.
Its like you guys are ignoring why they made USD forks in the first place for most of your arguments... in actual use the way it works feels and operates is far superior and isnt heavier in practical use.
OH AND LETS NOT FORGET THEY MAKE A CARBON VERSION THAT DOES WEIGH LESS.

for reference - ive ridden totems, marzo 66, fox 40 ... never a boxer ever i am too rough on stuff...
  • + 1
 Its simply marketing that allowed the manufacturers to sell the cheaper design. Now that they convinced people, they need to come up with "solutions" for the lies. What has been sold to MTBers is the opposite of how the fork actually works. Its extremely puzzling how someone can believe the brake arch can make up for the other deficits in design, like the overlap issue and smaller clamping area at the tree where most flex happens. Its like you guys believe your tire has so much cornering traction that it can overcome the laws of physics. Something a lot of people overlook with an inverted design is how critical the torque of the clamps is. Overtighten, and the tubes can distort, too loose, and the fork loses precision. You need a torque wrench to set it right. If wrong, serious performance hit.
  • + 1
 @ Waki: Does this look super smooth to you? Precision is very important at 40-50mph.

www.vitalmx.com/forums/Moto-Related,20/Ruts-at-dilla-with-pictures,1274294
  • + 3
 Ok, I must say that both sides presented good arguments and my verdict for my own use is similar to wheel size debate - there is no data to back any of those arguments up, there probably never will be. Gravity related disciplines of MTB are too small market to spawn quality research (other than few engineering boys doing master thesis in mtb topic) therefore the only measure is race results. Average buyer, I repeat Buyer, not user which may involve sponsoring, thus skill, is unable to translate eventual advantage of any design to a systematic improvement in his own results. Therefore advantage relays on users psyche, it is his subjective experience that may easily be influenced in his belief in a particular product, regardless of products definite properties. A man took 4th place in world championchips without a chain on a track with uphill section... A track I rode myself. So I am out - fight till death!
  • + 1
 the first comment by waki i have 0 issues with lol . well spoken and i cant disagree. its pretty much all subjective as we all know and hear a lot, ride what works for you and you like. The fanboyism doesnt help anyone, just state your opinion and why and we can all decide for ourselves!
  • + 33
 Must get my credit card out, this will no doubt save me 6.23s per hours riding, add that to the 2s per week I have not yet saved by changing wheel size.....
I faced up to the fact that it is me that is the issue a long time ago Smile
  • + 3
 Didn't need that money anyways..
  • + 3
 ^^^Betsie, someone on Pinkbike with a sense of humor.
  • + 3
 ^ I'll second this!!! Most of us are at least a little guilty of wanting/owning posh stuff, but someone somewhere is riding a relative pile and can show me up on their worst day riding. Flipped around, I'm sure many of us can slaughter some riders on $6k+ bikes. Yeah, bikes are cool, but they're just bikes.
  • + 29
 Looks cool, not aimed at me or pretty much anyone else for that matter. I think people need to take this as it is, a flagship technology test-bed that they figured they would sell to those that want it.

Manufacturers make things like this almost as much to make people talk about them as to actually sell them. It also lets them learn how to tweak new manufacturing processes and designs while having their test riders (consumers) help pay for the development costs. They haven't discontinued the SID, and the likely won't.

Take it as it is, a pretty cool piece of tech that might be fun for people to play with if the have the cash.
  • + 4
 Well said. I own a 20mm axle RS Reba w/ 120mm of travel. It weighs under 4 pounds… and takes 26" wheels. Quite happy with the blackbox damping and the torsional rigidity as it is.
  • + 2
 That's what everyone says until they try something stiffer. Then they can't live without it.
  • + 1
 That is the point. I won't be trying it until the technology trickles down or the price drops substantially. I could buy 10 Rebas for that price plus I don't have to go through the 29er transformation. In reality, I would guess the only ones riding this as an upgrade got a sponsor or media deal. Consumers will buy a complete $10k bike with it already specced rather than upgrading. Whoever those people are...
  • + 1
 cueTIP gets it
  • + 1
 Right on cueTIP. Wish I could give more props.
  • + 1
 Well said. My SID flexes a ton under braking when I ride it to the trails. It chatters pretty bad if I'm heavy on the brakes 30mph to stop. Don't really notice it's flex on the trail. I want this fork. Hopefully the street price is a lot lower. I wanted a set of carbon wheels next year, this will give me an excuse to do the wheels and fork at the same time.
  • + 24
 Such haters of innovation. I don’t like it and would never buy it. But if it gives a racer a slight advantage or a weekend warrior something to smile about by dropping a lot of cash for something different after working his fill in the blank off all week long, good for them. Good for the innovators that turn convention ‘upside-down’. And why is it always this ‘keep the cost down, it’s too expensive’ complaint? You can’t have great products without profit. (Not that this is a great product…not my point.) I can’t afford the top end stuff but that technology eventually works its way down to something I can. Profit drives industry and we wouldn’t have these high end, carbon, stop on a dime, sub-30lb mountain machines without it. We’re not entitled to state of the art products being cheap.
  • + 2
 I have been waiting for years for the MTB industry to catch up to other wheeled sports and develop the inverted designs. After living through racing MX on both designs, I never understood the acceptance of the myths out there in regards to inverted forks. The handling was so much improved in MX that it was revolutionary.
  • + 6
 Thank you. I am so tired of the usual complaints. People seem to forget that all the products they know and love are the descendants of some cutting edge early adopter product that no one could afford at the time.
  • - 5
flag DirtCrab (Sep 15, 2014 at 9:00) (Below Threshold)
 Pretty sure the issue isn't cost, it's paying 2x as much as a SID WC for a much heavier, flexier fork with a proprietary front hub. Innovation for innovation's sake is worthless when it doesn't bring an actual benefit to the table.
  • + 7
 Well, it is actually a stiffer fork than the SID as well as almost exactly the same weight. The weight listed includes the hub.
  • + 2
 It's all about the trickle down. I can't (or won't...) pay for XTR, but XT is 90%+ as good and significantly less. Maybe the technology "pioneered" in this fork will end up in my next DH fork.
  • + 0
 interested how this fork pans out for RockShox
  • + 11
 I think that this sport is getting too expensive......I find that bikes are becoming more expensive and components as well. We want to be able to share this sport with everyone and not just scare them away with a fork that costs almost $2000.
  • + 20
 And that's why other companies make lower priced options. Sr Suntour specifically
  • + 45
 But its not getting more expensive. Better bikes area cheaper than ever with better technology. There are just more top end bikes now than before. You dont have to buy the top end stuff.
  • + 1
 Suntour epicon the best budget fork
  • + 2
 I agree. low price but riding are alot fun....SR Suntour definitely choice...
  • + 1
 That fork is 20% of the price of an entry-level Harley Davidson
  • + 24
 My 1994 GT RTS1 cost $4500 when new. My 2014 GT Sensor cost $4000 both with XT but a massive difference in technology.
$4500 was a LOT of money in 94 I say it's more affordable than ever.
Cars are expensive too if you buy a Ferrari but a Carolla will still get you where your going.
Can't afford an RS1 ? well there's a massive selection of budget forks to choose from
  • + 3
 Exactly, do not forget about inflation! 1$ in 94" =/= 1$ in 2014 !
  • + 3
 my old dirt jump RST forks snapped on me when i went over a speed bump going about 40 k, i don't think you could compare the two
  • + 1
 Yes but what did you do to that RST before the speed bump.. if you abuse a fork and then it fails later, its not the final impact that killed it, just that finished it off. It could have failed on the next jump also.
  • + 4
 People seem to forget that all the products they know and love are the descendants of some cutting edge early adopter product that no one could afford at the time.
  • + 2
 Hell 1992 the retail price of a full XTR groupset in canada was about $2000. You could buy a complete new bike WITH the group for about $2500 though. and that was still just a rigid fork equipped bike with cantilever brakes and a steel frame. Compared to that first XTR group, a deore group today costs about 1/4 what that XTR did, weighs the same, has more gears, has hydraulic disc brakes, and has stiffer crank arms as well.
  • + 1
 @deeeight hell yeah. Modern deore is sick... better than anything I could have imagined riding less than 10 years ago.

@razorback Epicon is the shit. Hell even the Raidon and XCR-Air are solid, especially when compared to equivalent forks from other mfrs. Great bargains.
  • + 1
 Since when is a pos motorcycle the measuring stick for the value of anything?
  • + 1
 potateo was it a Launch RA Fork?
  • + 1
 it was a launch fork but i used it to what it said it could be used for, at the time i was quite young and didn't know much about it all anyway
  • + 0
 I don’t know about sharing the sport with everyone. Here in SoCal, we’ve got plenty of mountain bikers. The sport has been quite well shared. Many of them in my immediate are trail-trashing shuttle-junkies that are either going to get us completely banned from the trails or will destroy what’s left of them, whichever comes first. My proselytization of the sport has waned significantly since moving back here.
  • + 10
 "it won't change the fact that the RS-1 is the most torsionally rigid cross-country fork on the market"

Ummm..... www.youtube.com/watch?v=PAO_RVeOBX4&feature=youtu.be

"taking the same approach will put them aboard the best cross-country fork on the market"

So it requires a propitiatory 170g hub, has a real weight of 1700g with axle, has a damper not suited to hard riding and small bump sensitivity coexisting, is as torsionally stiff as a old school SID (despite this reviews claims) and costs an absolute fortune. Yep, sounds like the best XC fork on the market!
  • + 4
 So where's the video for the SID/TS8/Axon/OPM? Without a comparison this is meaningless.
  • + 3
 Is the axle not clamped down in that video or something? I do not believe that Rockshox would release a fork that wobbly.
  • + 1
 hamncheez , that Cannondale video is awesome at showing the effect of torsional stiffness on suspension performance. Thrasher, the movement is not the hub relative to the fork but actually the fork upper relative to fork lowers...
  • + 1
 I'd like to hear Mike Levy's take on the RS-1 video linked above. It doesn't look right to me. How much pressure are they putting on the bars?
  • + 2
 I just tried the same thing with my 100mm SID WC and it flexes almost exactly the same as the RS1 in the link.
  • + 13
 The best part of this article is all the spellings of stanchions in the comments section.
  • + 2
 You mean, "stanshuns"?
  • + 3
 At least "stanchions" is a complex enough word that some people may not notice a misspelling. Go look at the comments in any thread about brakes.

Seriously people, break is broken, brake is stopping.
  • + 7
 In this comment section: a bunch of world cup DH wannabees slag on a super high-end XC fork that they are in no way the target market for.

Personally, I think this is actually a great idea for marathon XC racing, like the BC Bike Race, the registration fees for which will pay for this fork and a day or two in a hotel.
  • + 7
 The secret is that Rockshox didn't release this fork for racers. No, they released it because they feed on the tears of unfathomable sadness, and they knew there's no better source than the comments section of a Pinkbike product review.
  • + 2
 how to we generate as much angst as possible... hmm 29er only? check, proprietary something? check (heck, lets call it a new standard to really piss them off), brutally high price?! double check, shouldn't be dirt jumped, #enduroed or DH-ed? perfect. we have a winner in the pinkbike comments section! only thing missing is a jibe that only the top 3% can get it. The only way there would be a more negative response would be if the reviewer was running avid brakes too....
  • + 4
 I've accepted there are houses I will never live in, cars I will never drive and women I will never marry- I have now accepted there are bikes and components I will never be able to afford either. Didn't think that would ever be the case but in reality it doesn't matter. Most of the super expensive components aren't suitable for me anyway. If there's people out there with the cash and legitimate usage of these forks and similar high end products then let them enjoy it.
  • + 3
 Yeh this "predictive steering" is a stupid term for a fairly standard hub design.
Licence the "technology" to others..? What's stopping people like Hadley or king from making thicker end caps for their 15mm hubs to fit this fork as their hubs already use this design!?
  • + 3
 Yet another useless review that claims "stiffer" but does not actually offer any exact, repeatedly measurable numbers as to how stiff it actually is. And, say, compare its torsional stiffness against other forks, like say, Magura.

It is not rocket science. Not a single review of RS-q actually quoted the exact numbers. In N-m and what not.
  • + 3
 Well even if the numbers apply in real riding I doubt you'll be able to tell the difference. As far as I know the stiffest trail fork I ever ridden was the Lefty and that has been my benchmark for Trail fork stiffness. Haven't ridden Magura or the RS-1 but if I have the opportunity I'll compare the stiffness to the Lefty
  • + 10
 they ride bikes... they aren't engineers (unlike everybody on the comments section apparently...) i know i ride more on feel than numbers, if something feels stiffer is way more important than it's lateral deflection under precise unidirectional loads (or some similar lab measure that i haven't just invented)
  • + 2
 Its not so simple as torsional deflection. Right-side-up forks don't twist as much under rotational load, but they tend to bind up when the pressure is applied. Should they make a graph plotting deflection as varying loads are applied?

Its not just how much a fork flexes. It matters how it feels on the trail.
  • - 3
 ^^^^ Exactly.
  • + 1
 Twisting causes binding. An especially prevalent problem when you bolt a powerful disc brake to one leg only.....
  • + 0
 The amount of traction your tire can generate in a corner is much less than it can generate under braking. Its physics. The hold the wheel and twist the bars is a force that you will never encounter unless you ride in really deep ruts, and inverted forks perform better in ruts anyway. There is no way to get enough traction to seriously deflect a well designed fork under normal riding conditions. How many vectors of force do you think your fork experiences in the sequence of entering a corner, the apex, then exit?

The industry has to get over the placebo effect it created with the marketing campaigns in the early 2000's.
  • + 1
 @Willie1 I mostly agree with you, but forks are not straight up and down, and they have rake. Think about a DH bike. When you turn the bars, it actually moves the bike left and right a bit because the angle is so slack. Also on rough, rocky terrain, there are torsional pressures on the tire from wheel rake.
  • + 0
 Never felt your front tyre tuck under you when making a quick line change, or deflect off of a root, rather than track over it? I have. Call it placebo if you want. I sometimes call it painful.

Anyway man, we've had this conversation before and it went on for a loooong time. I agree USD is better on paper, but think with current materials available, it hasn't yet been made a viable option in the mtb world. A point Levy hits on in his review, saying something along the lines of Current USD forks are nowhere near stiff enough, and trying to remedy that has led to them being uncompetetively heavy at the same time. I guess you don't agree, but on that we'll just have to agree to differ.

I expect modern carbon manufacturing techniques will make huge advances in this area, and have even heard rumors of 'zocchi playing with ways to coat carbon with a smooth/hard enough surface to run a bushing over. This could have been some sort of April fools trickery but then, it could be a bloody good idea. Either way I have seen no convincing evidence of it happening any time soon. This Rockshox fork looks like a promising step, but its still only has a small amount of travel and uses a huge axle (and therefore big heavy hub bearings, diminishing one of the USD designs major advantages) and a very expensive looking one piece crown and oversized steerer to achieve stiffness similar to far cheaper conventional forks with smaller axles and lighter hubs. DVO had to do a similar thing, adding weight to the unsprung end of their emerald fork in a less than successful attempt to bring the stiffness into line with its lighter competition. Some say 40's are too stiff, and I can believe that is true for some riders, but they are also bloody light. Imagine how light you could make a conventional xc fork if using some of the tricks used by the RS-1.

Bring on the USD revolution I say. I just don't see it happening for good a few years. It certainly hasn't happened yet.
  • - 1
 @gabriel-mission9 THe lefty is an USD shock, and it is stiffer than any other shock I have ridden. It also doesn't bind under a torsional load.
  • + 2
 it also has a square stanchion that runs on needle roller bearings.
  • - 1
 "feels" stiffer is not an answer. A lot of setup, and damping and else goes into "feel". If you want to make a statement that something IS (not "feels") stiffer, you have to measure it. And it is not hard to do. And it gives you a lot of objective information.

Want to take it in context of overall performance, thats fine. But there is no magic.

Anything else is har har so rad noise. Saying that actual measurable numbers do not matter is grade A bullcrap.
  • + 0
 someone negged my square stanchion comment? How, of all the comments I have made, has that particular comment upset someone? It is a pure statement of fact. My intended point was that this arrangement is very unusual and, alongside all the unusual stuff in this fork, makes it extremely expensive compared to the competition. I believe if you were to spend the same money on a conventional fork you could make it a similar weight and far stronger. feel free to neg that one, its pure speculation. And probably true...
  • + 1
 I'm surprised no one has brought up the x-fusion fork. Its essentially a lefty with an empty right side. By all accounts its torsonally stiff, buttery smooth, and has realyl good damping.
  • + 3
 Im glad Rock Shocks is doing something bold and different. This fork would be sweet on a xc race bike targeted in the 20 pound range. I cant afford one but there are a few people with deep pockets that want the best stuff. Just like a Lambo. Im not purchasing but its fun to look at.
  • + 6
 "Predictive Steering"....HAHAhaha...that was good for a chuckle
  • + 5
 I'll admit it looks completely badass on the bike. Aesthetics aside, though, I neither want nor need it.
  • + 9
 That's because it wasn't aimed at you.
  • + 3
 carfreak2000 O.M.G... Really?
  • + 9
 Yes rly.....lol
  • + 3
 All the quality hubs have this "torque tube" to support the bearings, sram didn't invent anything. I guess you can fit other hubs with this fork.
chrisking.com/files/images/hubs/Green_20mm.jpg
  • + 6
 no thanks i am happy with my lefty carbon
  • + 2
 Proprietary hub with 27mm axle. Sounds good!
Standard 15mm Thru-Axle. HUH?!?

If you really MUST use a standard axle size, there is such a thing as 20mm
However if your gonna use a proprietary hub anyway, why not use a proprietary 27mm axle too? It'd be lighter, stronger and stiffer. Don't need it to be any stiffer you say? Well then just make it even lighter and "only" the same strength...

Also, it costs how much and doesn't even give you adjustable compression damping?? Then blows through its travel too easily unless you lock it out. Errr, sounds great Rockshox,. sign me up....

Was really hoping this fork would be awesome. Not that I'll ever be buying one either way, I just like awesomeness. Oh well, better luck next time.
  • + 1
 Tested outside its range of intended use, without the bottom out spacers. Did you read the article? Or just try to find a way to pick it apart?
  • + 1
 A damper is a damper mate. If it can't take the hits it can't take the hits, regardless of intended use. I wouldn't forgive my boxxers not being supple enough on small bumps, so why should I forgive a small fork not having enough high speed control? I would have been ready to forgive it had it had some sort of compression adjustment, but it doesn't. Last time I saw a fork with no compression adjustment other than lockout it came on a £400 complete. If they are gonna spec a fixed damper on a $2000 fork, it better be bloody good in my opinion. If someone not wildly heavy can blow through the travel with it fitted to an XC 29er then personally I don't really think that's good enough. If the rest of the bike can cope, why can't the forks? And using air assist to make up for lack of damping control is in no way a good solution to a poor damper. So yes, I did find a way to pick it apart, cos for 2 grand it ought to be pretty much perfect.
  • + 2
 You missed the part where it's an xc race fork.
  • + 3
 If you read the article you'd know.... IF YOU PUT THE TOKENS IN IT, IT DOESN'T BLOW THROUGH THE TRAVEL. And they give you the tokens for exactly that reason. God forbid they give a wide range of ramp-up adjustment. It doesn't have compression adjust cuz XC racers don't give a shit about that, they use lockouts compulsively. If you don't get it then you don't understand the target market.
  • + 5
 Knowing the trails most XC racers ride these days they could at least design some sort of protection for the stancions.
  • + 1
 Fox should make a 100mm carbon lower 34 float for 29er racing. That would be stiff as hell, and run better than this I imagine. (says the guy who knows dick all about engineering). 29ers forks are super flexy as I realized going from a 26-29er hardtail, and it would be worth the weight gain if they'd offer lower travel 34s for 29er guys who don't need 140mm of travel.
  • + 1
 Why the hell would anyone want a 34 for XC racing? Even with carbon lowers it would be a pig compared to any top level XC fork. Suntour uses carbon lowers on the Axon WERX and it's about the same weight (slightly heavier) than the top SID with Mg lowers.

With tapered steer tubes and thru axles 29er forks are plenty stiff for XC racing, or even most trail riding.
  • - 1
 Why would anyone want a 2000 fork that is designed to offer more rigidity at the expense of proprietary components? 29er wheels demand stiffer stanchions to make up for the extra length. X-Fusion offers all their 29er forks with larger stanchions standard, and I think it's a great idea. If this fork was only for pro level athletes I'd say don't bother, but it's gonna be used by anyone with the cash to burn and the need for bling, and it doesn't sound like it will perform as well as my proposed fork. Fork strength inspires confidence on technical courses which will probably be of greater benefit than a quarter pound of unsprung weight.
  • + 0
 I Concur on the 34 - 100mm float
Put the RC2 damper in it, with 20mm axle option..no talas, weight is not that big of a deal for the people who would buy it
In my opinion, a lot of the 29er folks who have and might not convert back to 26 or to 27.5 are bigger, large , xl frame , with an xl frame themselves.
220 pound casual xc rider who puts in a lot of kms a week, no racing etc would benefit drastically from a stiffer, less travel 29er fork. IMO

personally, I have run into this problem numerous times, the float 34 140 was stiffish but too much travel and the CTD sucked
the 32 mm reba was good at 80mm , ok at 100 sucked at 120mm
now carbon sid 80mm on my ss and 100mm carbon sid on my 27.5...not the best and actually heavier than the RCT3 sid, but options are very limited.

34/100/20mm option, dont even need the carbon, i will build one myself
  • + 5
 Are you guys effing serious? "Weight is not that big of a concern"? IT'S A GODDAMN XC RACING FORK. WEIGHT IS PARAMOUNT.

@JesseE Where on earth are you getting that shit? The reviewer not only says the fork is stiffer than (or at least as stiff as) anything currently available, but that it has best-in-class damping and sensitivity. How is that not an improvement? And where are you getting the xfusion 29er stanchion thing? The Velvet and Slide are both 32mm and the adjustment to 27.5" is internal, meaning it's exactly the same fork for the two wheel sizes. The Trace (29") and Slant (26") both have the same 34mm stanchions too. They're doing exactly what everyone else does with their stanchions ---> 32 for XC, 34 for trail/am.

It depends what you mean by "perform as well" I guess, but for an XC race you're simply not going to get a 34mm fork to be weight competitive, and those courses are 100% rideable on 32mm stanchions, even for a 29er. Shit, even a 100mm Revelation WC would sprobably be lighter than a 34mm XC fork, and there's no way a skinny ass racer dude wouldn't be able to stick every single one of those lines on a Rev.

I think you guys are completely missing the point of this fork. It's in the same category as the SID and DT Swiss OPM. Nobody looking at any of those forks would consider a 34. If you're riding really aggressively or you weigh 200+ lbs then yeah, a short travel 34 might be nice.... but then why the hell would you be looking at an XC race fork like this one?
  • + 0
 It's ridiculous to say that all 29er forks are flexy. I guess you're not including the Pike or the new Fox 36 in your myopic generalization.
  • + 1
 alexsin, I think 29er forks typically flex more than their smaller wheel counter parts, but I'll make sure to spend an hour refining my posts regarding hobby toys so that I don't upset others on the forum.

mkm303, All caps, seriously? We're talking about bike parts, dude.

You guys are brutal.
  • + 1
 It makes sense that 29er forks can be more flexible than their 26" versions. They're an inch longer so that makes sense. But it's not an inherent problem with 29er forks, it's a problem with your choice of forks. Your broad generalization implies that a 29er Pike or 36 is less stiff than say, a 26" Revelation, which is simply untrue. There are plenty of adequately stiff 29er forks to choose from.
  • + 2
 Another typical Mike Levy review:

blah blah rowdy blah blah shenanigans blah blah awkward simile blah blah blah really really blah blah, which, in theory, blah blah blah rowdy blah blah.
  • + 3
 I'm so tired of this whining on price that I wrote an article hahaha Big Grin
waki-leaks.blogspot.se/2014/09/expensive-bikes-and-gear-is-mountain.html
  • + 1
 I really wonder, why manitou has never made a special hub for the dorado. Seems Like the only way To geht enough stiffness into a usd fork. If they would, i Would consider trying one. I read, that The carbon thing in the emerald doesnt increase stiffness at all...
  • + 2
 The people I know who have the fork are perfectly satisfied with how they perform as is.
  • + 0
 The Dorado has the patented hex'loc hub, which provides the same benefit. I have owned 4 dorados and they were all exceptional performers. I never felt they needed to be stiffer.
  • + 3
 Hex lock AXLE. Best axle design on the market. If only all forks could use it.
  • + 4
 www.pinkbike.com/news/fox-dh-fork-inverted-prototype-2012.html : "After much testing it was decided to discontinue development of the inverted fork, simply because Fox couldn't attain the torsional stiffness that they were looking for without it becoming much too heavy for their liking. Word is that both Gee and Aaron were big fans of how the prototype fork handled fast, rough sections of trail head on - thanks to the increased fore/aft stiffness of the inverted design - but felt that the standard right side up arrangement of the current Fox 40 had the inverted fork soundly beaten in the corners. Fox admitted that they could likely remedy this by added more material, but the fact of the matter is that the majority of competitive downhillers would likely balk at purchasing a new fork that weighs substantially more than what they are currently using, even if it did offer advancements in damper technology or other areas. "
  • + 1
 This came just before the release of the redesigned Fox 40. Which is the same old design. Obviously Manitou and DVO have put out exceptional products that work very well. Great propaganda on Fox's part to sell their outdated redesign.

Here's a take on the Dorado:


The truth is that no matter how good the Dorado is, and it really is that good, there will be those that will find fault with it. Let's be honest here, it could be easy to find something to pick out: it's carbon and no matter how much proof is out there or how well it is made you are sure that you will snap it in two simply by loading it onto your bike rack! And of course it's inverted and you simply will not be able to ride down your local hill without the front wheel pointing off in the wrong direction! Oh yeah, it's holy-shit expensive and you... Ok, I'll give you that one as I'll never be able to afford it either! But wait, the new aluminum legged version sporting the same amazing internals could be just the ticket for us bike bums. I'll be truthful, when bits of info and pictures of the new Dorado were first made available I immediately balked at the prospect of the new fork.
  • - 1
 Even though I'd had plenty of great experiences with TPC+ damping in both the original Dorado, and later a much loved 7" Travis, I still was not sold on the new fork as a whole. At a much greater price than some of the competition, as well as a much flashier appearance, I almost wanted it to not live up to the expectations. That is obviously not the case. As much as I would like to find fault with the Dorado, speaking strictly about the fork's performance, I simply can't. Pretty much every suspension company out there manages to produce a full fledged DH fork that will never hold most of us back, none of the other top forks are exactly dogs, but with the Dorado on the front of my bike I had more confidence than ever before and that says a lot. At the end of it you can find all the faults you like, the reality is that this is the highest performing no-compromise DH fork available to consumers out of the box.
  • + 3
 The Dude: Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.
  • + 3
 i love the fox 40 and im pretty sure i wouldnt like something much less stiff, and that's just, like, my opinion, man.
  • + 0
 What about the xfusion inverted fork? From all accounts it is torsonally stiff with a normal hub/throughaxle
  • + 1
 Copy pasted from a similar thread above ...
ive owned and ridden a dorado on two flatlines old and new model for about 5 years now (BIG NOTE I AM FEATHERWEIGHT)
no flex ever.
weight aprox the same, the difference is unnoticeable due to the LESS WEIGHT AT THE AXLE which you do notice making it feel a LOT LIGHTER in actual use, the front end is far more responsive easier to move aka TRACK where i want and lift as needed making for an overall much better experience in all conditions.
Its like you guys are ignoring why they made USD forks in the first place for most of your arguments... in actual use the way it works feels and operates is far superior and isnt heavier in practical use.
OH AND LETS NOT FORGET THEY MAKE A CARBON VERSION THAT DOES WEIGH LESS.

for reference - ive ridden totems, marzo 66, fox 40 ... never a boxer ever i am too rough on stuff...
  • + 1
 weight is not approx the same. dorados are getting on for a pound heavier than boxxers. thats nearly a 20% difference. and they still arent as stiff. fore and aft yes. laterally no.
you are a featherweight but too rough for boxxers? i find that very hard to believe. what forks does sam hill run?
  • + 2
 Dorado: Weight Lb / grams 6.55 / 2973.7

Boxxer RC: Weight 26” - 2882g, 27.5” - 2934g

Boxxer WC: Weight 26” – 2585g , 27.5" - 2637g

Fox 40: Weight 20mm thru axle 5.98 lb / 2.71 kg

The Fox and Manitou are weighed with axle, not sure about the Boxxer. This does not take into account the unsprung weight.
  • + 1
 yes i am hard on stuff and boxxers are weak trash that need to much maint (too much maint on a 40 also) you dont have to weigh a lot to be hard on your gear you just need to ride hard and often. and the weight is clearly approx the same and you neglected my actual point of the weight and where its located and how it feels because of that ... oh and also carbon version. just try harder to respond to my actual post and we might have a good back and forth on the matter. what does sam ride ... rolls eyes seriously? FREE SPONSORED gear he gets and doesnt have ALL the same worries as the common rider ... as long as it works for that race run.

ps before you mention my dorado maint look at the vid on pinkbike at how easy it is to do yourself OR better yet its built just like a moto fork and can be brought to any moto shop and they can handle it if you give them the seals and such .... my dorado needs maint about 1 time a season from my experiances ...
  • - 1
 Total weight:
Dorado: Weight 2973.7
Boxxer WC: Weight 2585g

thats .85 lbs. Or as I said previously, "getting on for a pound". This is not an insignificant amount of weight. If someone were to say "hey man, can I strap this pound of sugar to your headtube, before your race run?" I doubt you would reply "yeah sure man, I won't even notice the difference"

Location of weight:
Yes the dorado has less unsprung weight, and yes this is a bloody good thing. What the difference is i do not know. However you have to add the weight of a dh front wheel, tyre and brake to both forks. A LIGHT dh front wheel weighs well over 2 kg. Now measure the difference in unsprung weight. As I say, I do not know for sure, but am willing to speculate that it is a tiny % difference. So the unsprung weight will be almost the same, your fork will be less laterally stiff, AND still weigh nearly a pound more.
The point you make about the position of the weight of the fork doesn't really make much sense. The weight being higher up the fork will not make the fork "easier to lift". At all. What it will do is make your bike very slightly harder to make quick changes of direction with, but this will be a pretty insignificant difference.

Maintenance: Have you ever owned a boxxer? They actually require very little maintenance, and when they do, just like the dorado, Its piss easy. Have no idea what has led you to believe that they need a lot of care. Its just not true. Talking of seals. If you blow a seal on a USD fork, thats it. riding over. If you blow a seal on a normal fork, you can finish your run. Hell, you can probably finish your days riding if you have to.

If you think pro riders get a new fork every run you are sorely misinformed. Every season yes, with replacement parts on tap when something breaks. Which really isn't that often.

Do Manitou still make the Carbon Dorado? cant find it on their website....
  • + 1
 If I remember correctly, they dropped the carbon Dorado after the first year, because of production issues. Switching to a different facility would have driven the price up even more, and the Carbon version was already unobtanium. The Dorado is the oldest of the modern designs, and when it came out it was the lightest fork (Maybe the boxxer might have been a few grams lighter than the Aluminum Dorado, but the Carbon version was the lightest fork on the market.) . Its getting a little long in the tooth weight wise, but I suspect there is a revised version in the works. They have produced a lower end fork at a better price point, with the same internals, with a slightly heavier chassis that is less expensive to produce.

The Dorado is the closest thing to the Moto forks I have used for decades, in terms of setup, feel, and tracking.
  • + 1
 Dorado feels better then any other fork ive used thats all that matters to me , its easier to lift and move where needed is endless butter and much easier to maint much less.
This convo is going in silly circles. no ones strapping sugar to their bike here.... its a fork.... for the SMALL amount of weight LESS then a pound if i was asked would you want all of what i said above for that would you take it , i already answered that by buying the fork. I said yes. Also as stated above the carbon version is about the lightest you can get ... so everything you said is null and void on that matter....
Also carbon dorados are regularly for sale on the used market ive seen about 5 since i got my pro and started looking not often and just on ebay and pinkbike and im sure there were/are many more other places for one to be had.
PS. its cool for you to split hairs with the weight when its less unsprung its hardly anything when its less then a pound up on weight its a big ol bag of sugar.... your attempts to skew the discussion arent guna work here , were only talking about a fork not the other nonsense that does not prove your point.
  • + 0
 Willie: I would love to see a revised version of the Dorado at a more competetive weight. As I have maintained all along, the USD design is indeed better on paper. I'm glad we agree on some points at least. I look forward to seeing what manitou come out with in future. So far I'm not sold on them. It has however been an interesting (if sometimes heated) discourse with you. Thank you.

HisShadow: I am not attempting to skew the discussion. I do not care which fork is better, I am just trying to be objective rather than a fanboy. A pound is a lot of weight. .85of a pound, is a significant amount of weight, and despite what people who don't get it may tell you, weight does matter. I spoke to an F1 engineer the other day who had recently been part of a team given a £200k budget, to shave something like 150g off of the paint on the car he works on. And they have nearly 1000bhp to play with! A human, on average has about 1hp.

The unsprung weight advantage of a dorado IS important, I was just trying to make it clear that when you strap 2.5kg of wheel and brake to the thing, the difference in the forks ability to track the undulations of the floor diminishes. A lot.

As for maintenance...Don't know what else I can say. The boxxer is the most used (sponsored and privateer rider alike) fork on the circuit. Thats a lot of forks. Even with Srams god awfull quality control and cheap ass manufacturing processes, that is a lot of forks, winning a lot of races, and rarely failing...

Anyway, I don't think any relevant new points are being made any more, so can we stop? If it makes you feel any better, I do believe that as material tech improves, USD designs will indeed take over. I'm guessing at maybe 5 years time?ish?
  • + 0
 ugh where to begin ... your first line and last of the first sentence to me : I am not attempting to skew the discussion.... now let me skew it again with some erroneous point about something off topic . like i said that just wont work. Make a point on the subject at hand, were not talking bags of sugar or F1 racing.
A pound ... 850 grams to be more accurate for all the benefits of USD which as i stated i notice and prefer having tried both sides of the coin and can feel a preference. Thank god neither of us are fanboying on this at least it makes this a lot easier to stay on facts and preferences...
Next up the unsprung weight doesn't disappear because you put a wheel on it ...thats how it works it has less there is nothing to debate here same wheel same bike diff fork one has less at that wheel and therefore responds differently if that is to your preference or not is the real matter. And for me i prefer that and can feel a difference.
  • + 0
 And last seems like youve gone of the deep end of skewing yet again as did you earlier about the whole "what does sam ride" pro are pros they maint their gear EVERY race rebuild there bike often ( also nearly every race just due to travel) and HAVE SOMEONE TO DO IT FOR THEM FOR FREE. A luxury none of us non racers non sponsored regular joes or weekend warrior have access to. It costs us money and time and if you do it yourself more time to learn how to do it yourself, if you go to a shop then it costs you more money and time off the bike if its riding time, pick which you like but the maint is what we were talking about NOT FAILURE RATE. yea it only has to last them that ONE race run cause they can get new seals,oil,rebuild whatever, internal tuning etc the next race if they need and have them at no cost and can do it themselves or with a mechanic do i really need to explain all this because you choose to skew the point into the irrelevant. just as i said try harder it would help facilitate a back and forth easier and on point. i hate to go on about things we weren't even discussing.

and yes USD should become standard like in moto when we can get over the incorrect info and spin from manufacturers and posters buying into the lies, and sure manufacturing costs and capabilities would help facilitate that but we know it costs more now and companies dont want to spend more your already willing to buy the inferior designs and listen to them.. watch how better it is when they can make them cheap... sales hype is real!
  • + 1
 face palm
  • + 3
 I'd Rock this Shox on a XC bike in a heartbeat... It appears that it works just as sexy as it looks!
  • + 3
 Good review. The fork is interesting, even if I would never ride it even if you gave it to me for free.
  • + 4
 TLDR - Looks pretty good on that Element though
  • + 1
 since this is an XC race fork, will it be slower for a wheel change than QR15?
I saw some WCs this year where someone's race was spoiled by a flat with a slow wheel change...
  • - 1
 Not once have I looked at all the dents/scratches on the lowers of my fork and said "Wow, wouldn't it be great if my fork was inverted so my stanchions could take the beating instead?!" On the other hand, my dentist who races XC has the money to buy the fork and replacement stanchions. He may be interested.
  • + 2
 I guess you missed the part where there weren't any dents on the stanchions, huh? Read the damn review.
  • + 3
 Waiting for RS-1 DH edition
  • + 2
 The enduro model is gonna be called the EKIP
  • + 1
 "torque Tube" AKA "Axle"
"Maxle" AKA "overgrown QR skewer"


Kinda makes the whole death to 20mm TA scars start itching once again
  • + 1
 I commented too soon.
American classic have gone and made a hub for this RS1:
ep1.pinkbike.org/p4pb11410726/p4pb11410726.jpg

Nothing to it really!1
  • + 4
 I love USD forks.
  • + 1
 "Those facts alone will make it more of a ''pig in the window'' for RockShox than a fork most would consider purchasing. "

Who knew the RockShox was in the Pork business?
  • + 3
 sounds great! first generation of future technology I reckon
  • + 1
 I totally agree. There was a time when dh forks had just 100mm of travel and cost the earth, now they are twice the travel and commonplace.
Inverted fork design makes a lot more sense to me. I miss my Shivers (although they were ridiculously heavy). This new design appears to solve the weight problem.
  • + 2
 Will be interesting to see if this design principle is adopted for a new Revelation, then the Pike etc. Then I will have something to fit to the front of my carbon gearbox enduro bike!
  • + 1
 "Carbon gearbox enduro". Ok say it again only this time ...sexier
  • + 1
 Wouldn't mud and dust get caught on the stansions with them being at the bottom of the fork
  • + 0
 Probably less than on a regular fork unless you're sloshing through 6" puddles constantly. Tires spin crap right up to where the stanchions are ob normal forks.
  • + 1
 Yes. Hopefully in a few years I'll be able to pick one up second hand once the next latest and greatest is released...
  • + 0
 So many nitch-market products out there, but I can't get a 9 speed derailleur with a clutch for my bikes?
They would sell thousands of them
  • + 2
 Stopped reading almost immediately when I saw "proprietary hub".
  • + 0
 Plenty of great shocks out there for literally half the price. Honestly you'd have to be a fool to spend so much on these goofy looking inverted shocks.
  • + 1
 Shame they can't put the same amount of effort into the Maxle, flimsy peices of shite.
  • + 1
 In case there were people still on the fence regarding this thing- www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0xAgGAejq8
  • + 1
 Maybe BOS will give You Dizzy for compare ? For sure stiffer, lighter, cheaper and maybe even better working fork.
  • + 1
 their new predictive steering technology makes me worry about how "unpredictive" my 36 might be. lol
  • + 1
 Not much for the matchy matchy bike/component thing, but that Rocky Mountain Element looks sooooooo sweet!!!
  • + 1
 Can't wait to see someone rocking one of these on his commuter doing 15 kph in the bike lane.
  • + 1
 So why don't they put coils behind IFPs in shocks too? Is it a weight thing?
  • + 1
 ill bet they give more of them to their sponsored pro riders than they sell to the public haha!
  • + 1
 The most important question: does it work with a normal fork mount bike rack (with a 15mm adapter)?
  • + 2
 where are the stanchion guards?
  • + 1
 It's gonna be a sad moment when you brush past a rock with your $1,900 forks.
  • + 1
 i saw "proprietary hub" and instantly said hell no. i hate proprietary stuff. mega hate it.
  • + 1
 this ranks up there with the 2015 S-works demo...only about 1/2 of 1% of people will buy it IF they can afford it
  • - 1
 "Is there a place in this world for an inverted, carbon fiber cross-country fork that costs $1,865 USD?" - There may be a place in the world for this, but there isn't a place in MY world for this.
  • + 1
 I still have a 2002 shiver that still spanks. No thanks.
  • + 1
 I like the idear, but I thinks it's gon' need to evolve.
  • + 1
 What a total useless pike of shit.. that is all.. ( imo of course )
  • + 1
 Market them right and the over paid weekend warriors will come!
  • + 0
 That's nearly $1 per gram! You'll have to be a loaded, tech savy trail enthusiast to get this piece of art..
  • + 1
 The Pike is all you need in life... unless its the Boxxer on my DH bike
  • + 1
 half life 3 confirmed. weight is 1,"666" grams.
  • + 1
 Lotta $$$ for only 4" of travel. Not feelin it.
  • + 1
 Good review, I'd have the 120mm version.
  • + 1
 Ok great... So where's the Marzocchi 380/Moto review?
  • + 1
 test it out before you talk... it feels like a boxer world cup
  • + 1
 dream forks
  • + 1
 rider friendly SRAM :-)
  • + 0
 DH bars on a CC bike. LOL!
  • + 0
 Interesting to see XT brakes on that expensive full Sram setup
  • + 2
 Ahem....XTR...
  • + 3
 Bless you
  • + 3
 XT brakes is better than anything SRAM makes.
  • + 1
 Maverick Sc 32
  • + 1
 I'll stick to my totem.
  • + 1
 Short Answer: No.
  • + 0
 tl;dr
  • - 1
 Just another fork I can't afford.
  • + 11
 Don't whine too much. At least you have a Fox 40 on your bike while here I am still using a Marz Drop-off on my DH bike
  • - 1
 Then just put Boxxer insides in it Smile
  • + 1
 Thanks for the minus! Still, a friend of mine wanted some adjustment on his drop off, so he put one boxxer side and it works like a charm and is a bit lighter Smile
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2019. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.137178
Mobile Version of Website