2017 RockShox SID - First Ride

Apr 29, 2016
by Mike Kazimer  
The Summer Olympics are only a few short months away, which means it won't be long before cross-country mountain bike racing will garner more mainstream media attention than it has received in all of the years since the 2012 Olympics in London. RockShox is hoping to continue their gold medal winning streak that began back in 2000, and to help keep the victories coming they've completely revamped the SID, updating everything from the damper to the dropouts in an effort to create an extremely light and capable fork designed for XC racing at the highest level.


SID World Cup Details
• Intended use: XC racing
• Travel: 100mm
• Wheelsize: 27.5" or 29"
• Air-sprung, Charger damper
• Adjustments: rebound, LSC, lockout
• Stanchions: 32mm
• Axle size: 15x100 or 15x110
• Weight: 1,366 grams (3.01 lb)
• Available: July 2016
• MSRP: $1,150 - $1,225 USD
www.rockshox.com, @SramMedia

The new SID still uses 32mm stanchions, and the World Cup edition retains the carbon steerer and crown, but that's about where the similarities to the prior version end. The new fork has 100mm of travel - the previous 120mm option is nowhere to be found. That's due to the evolution of bike design and riding styles – rather than being long-limbed XC machines, many of today's 120mm bikes fall solidly into the trail category and are better suited to a fork like the Pike with its 35mm stanchions.
RockShox SID
The new SID may look similar to its predecessor, but a closer look reveals numerous clever weight savings techniques, and a Charger damper now resides in the right leg.


RockShox SID
Portions of the SID's magnesium dropouts have been knocked out to shed a few more precious grams.
RockShox SID
The carbon crown and steerer found on the World Cup model are carried over from the previous version of the SID.

Trimming Off the Excess

By deciding to optimize the SID around 100mm of travel, RockShox was able to take weight savings measures that wouldn't have been possible in a longer-travel version, including the use of shorter upper tubes. Extra material was added to the fork's arch to add stiffness, but other than that, every unnecessary bit of material has been shaved off of the lowers – the disc brake caliper mounting posts have been shortened, and even the lower portion of the magnesium dropouts have a portion knocked out to save weight. The top caps went on a diet too, with lower profile knobs and a design that uses a cassette tool to remove them rather than having wrench flats. The end result is a fork that weighs a scant 1,366 grams (3.01 lb) in the 27.5" configuration. For reference, Fox's recently announced 32 Step-Cast weighs a claimed 1,355 grams.


RockShox SID
The low profile adjustment knobs allow riders to select between a locked out or an open position, with the upper dial used to fine tune the amount of low-speed compression damping.
RockShox SID
First found in the Pike, the Charger damper has been scaled down to fit inside the SID's 32mm stanchions and to work even better with a remote lockout.


What's Inside?

A lightweight fork is all well and good, but its bump absorption capabilities can't be neglected, especially since World Cup XC courses have been getting increasingly technical over the last few years. To that end, an XC-optimized version of the same damper that's found in RockShox's venerable Pike is housed in the SID's right leg. The damper still uses the same expanding bladder design of the original Charger, but with a slightly different shape and dimensions that allow it to fit in the SID's 32mm stanchions. The damper's internals were also altered in order to make it easier to turn the low-speed compression dial, due to the fact that many riders will be running a remote lockout on the fork for smoother sections of trail.


RockShox SID
A cassette tool is used to remove and install the SID's top caps.
RockShox SID
The tool-free brake housing guide doesn't require fiddling with any tiny screws - hopefully we'll see this implemented across the rest of RockShox's lineup.

Adjustments

Rather than having the three main compression settings found on a Pike RCT3, the SID has Open and Lock, and the amount of compression in the Open position can be changed by turning the smaller dial on the top of the fork. When the fork is fully locked out it feels very, very firm – you'll know the instant you hit a bump when the fork is in that setting. There is a blowoff to help prevent any issues if a rider does forget to open up their fork before a descent, but when the blowoff occurs there's still a high level of damping, rather than having the fork go to a fully open state.

The SID's air spring is more linear than the previous version, which makes it easier to tune the fork for different rider weights with the use of RockShox's Bottomless Tokens. After all, it's a lot simpler to make a fork more progressive as opposed to trying to make it less progressive.


Options

There are a total of four forks in the new SID lineup, beginning with the highest-end carbon steerer and crown-equipped World Cup, followed by the RLC, the XX, and then the RL. The World Cup and the RLC both use the Charger damper, and the rest of the line use the simpler Motion Control damper, which helps reduce the final cost.

RS 2017





First Impressions

These days, the bulk of my riding takes place on trail or all-mountain rigs, and my Lycra-clad XC racing days are now a distant memory, but there's still something infinitely enjoyable about hopping on a bike that's built purely for covering ground as fast as possible. The Scott Spark 900 fits that bill, and I was able to spend a day on one equipped with a new SID up front in order to get an initial feel for the fork's capabilities. The trails on hand were filled with numerous short climbs and descents, enough technical sections to keep me alert, and plenty of tight corners to carve in and out of while trying to figure out just how far the bike's 2.2” tires could be pushed through the gravelly turns.

Even though the SID only has 100mm of travel, and stanchions that look a touch anorexic compared to the 35mm and 36mm options many of us are riding one, on the trail it provided a very smooth, controlled ride, and I didn't have any issues with the amount of stiffness on tap. Granted, the trails weren't extremely technical, but all the same, there were enough hard corners and sudden dips and dives to get a general idea of the chassis stiffness, and I never felt that there was any undue front end movement occurring.

100mm isn't a whole lot of travel, but the SID does an excellent job of managing those millimeters – there's enough give at the beginning of the stroke to smooth out the smaller trail chatter, and enough support at the middle and end of the stroke to suck up larger impacts without blowing through the travel. It feels almost invisible, which is the ideal behavior for a fork in this category, silently taking the edge off of obstacles while you focus on making it to the finish line ahead of everyone else.


SRAM Eagle
Scott's Spark 900 equipped with the new SID along with the welcome addition of a dropper post and a wider handebar.

Compared to RockShox's RS1, a fork that I spent a fair amount of time on last summer, with the SID it was easier to find that ideal balance of support and bump absorption. The fact that it's more adjustable and doesn't require a proprietary hub also sets it apart from its upside-down relative, and even though it may not have the radical looks, its weight and performance trump that of the RS1.


bigquotesIt's easy to see the newest version of the SID becoming a hit with the dyed-in-the-wool XC crowd, and its performance might even sway some all-mountain riders to give an ultralight race whippet a try. - Mike Kazimer




Visit the high-res gallery for more images.







154 Comments

  • + 260
 That cassette tool top cap is GENIUS!
  • + 66
 My 2013 Marzocchi 55's have the same thing, it's so, so much better than the usual methods. I had my old fork top cap rounded from a poorly fitting socket, was an absolute pain to ever service that fork again. The cassette tool method is a perfect fit, not much chance of slipping and most people have one, I hope more companies use this!
  • + 35
 Best new feature EVER! Can't stand those crappy aluminum caps you need to grind down a socket head to get at (and inevitably and up STILL scratching things up in the process)

Get on it, Fox!
  • + 6
 Yup, it's been done off & on by a few brands. My DT swiss has it as well. were it up to me, everybody would go this route over wrench flats, a top cap is a perfect application for a female interface, rather than a male one. on bigger stanchions, they could use the old internal BB tool, if they needed more space than a cassette tool provides.
  • + 13
 @Revanchist: dont say marzocchi had it, fox will sue RS in no time.
  • - 1
 @rory:

I've serviced and worked on literally thousands of forks. There's no issue with how the topcaps are today. The added cost of the more intricate and not so common machining would result in a higher costing fork. Use the right tools.
  • + 20
 @Revanchist: Even the 2008 Marzocchi forks had this feature.
  • + 5
 what a hero! ^^^
  • + 16
 Nevermind the 2013 and 2008 Marzocchi forks I have some 2006 66 Bombers that have the same thing so it really is nowt new
  • - 1
 @NorthernMatt: It's new for the Sid(& maybe for Rock Shox in general?) though.
  • + 19
 The tool-less Cable router is even better. The little screw on my Fox is really stressful.
  • + 1
 @sevensixtwo: The RS one is worse, having just done one for the first time. Fox one is pretty easy, compared, especially since you can buy a trick NSB replacement. Edit: Didn't realize they made rockshox ones too. One more thing I need...
  • + 9
 @z-man: sram will be making these top caps in the 10,000+ batch quantity. im guessing you're not familiar with Chinese and Taiwanese manufacturing costs, but you're literally making an argument for MAYBE an additional 10-20 cents. i think sram is ok with that cost. and this is a brilliant move.
  • + 2
 Copy of Marzocchi, my fork 2010 has it.
  • + 2
 @z-man: Oh come on Aziz, how much do you think these things cost?! This interface has been around since before you were born!
  • - 20
flag gnralized (Apr 29, 2016 at 9:03) (Below Threshold)
 @ccolagio: www.lunarbikes.com/tools.htm

Fork cap wrench. 8 Bucks. 20 gramms. Laser cutted for lowest tolerances.
Tested on fox 34 & 36 raw caps and pike black anodized one with no marks or scratch.
It will be funny for an XC racer to drag 200 gramms of cassette tool + wrench in order to field dial its air spring, don't you think ?
  • + 14
 @gnralized: wait. wait. XC racers carry top cap tools with them for their forks? wow. i dont know anyone who carries a top cap socket. let alone someone at a race.
  • - 8
flag wallheater (Apr 29, 2016 at 9:13) (Below Threshold)
 @gnralized: If they are that much of a pro (or their mech is), they'll be carrying those tools anyway!
  • - 13
flag gnralized (Apr 29, 2016 at 9:25) (Below Threshold)
 @ccolagio: Be realistic, if you're not a supported racer and go on a 40 km loop to test and dial your new fork, what do you prefer, carry 200 gramms of bulky cassette tool cap in your back pocket or 10-20 gramms of those 3 mm thick fork cap wrench ?
www.lunarbikes.com/tools.htm
Please check the link before you answer.
  • - 10
flag gnralized (Apr 29, 2016 at 9:37) (Below Threshold)
 Now I'm not saying that those cassette caps are not a good idea, they probably allow to shave some more gramms which is quite desirable given the intended application domain of the fork. But for practicality I'm not convinced they are a good solution, given that smaller and reliable tools are available for usual top caps.
  • + 11
 @gnralized: When talking about tool/fastener reliability, surface contact trumps all other factors. a Torx is more reliable than an hex, is more reliable than a Philips, because they increase surface contact & positive engagement.

There is no way in hell a hexagonal interface, with only a few mm of height, & no overlap, is going to trump a 12 splined interface, with as much overlap as the depth of the cap can provide.
  • + 31
 @gnralized: why would you ever remove the top cap while out on a 40km loop ride?
  • - 12
flag gnralized (Apr 29, 2016 at 10:09) (Below Threshold)
 @bkm303: to add/suppress some tokens maybe, i.e. fine tune your air spring ?
  • + 14
 @gnralized: I do that when I get a new fork or are trying new things. I shuttle, note differences then change accordingly. I then do another lap and see if ive made things better or worse. I am pretty sure professional xc racers vying for an olympic spot may have a better system and support than me.


It's either you are trolling or are trying to defend some displaced logic. Either way, we all make mistakes. Have a nice day dude
  • - 9
flag gnralized (Apr 29, 2016 at 10:28) (Below Threshold)
 @groghunter: I agree, but if you look at the picture, the profile seems pretty shallow, not the usual cassette interface depth.
www.pinkbike.com/photo/13432018
So I'm not sure that somebody with two left hands and some bad tools will not butcher the cap anyway.

Now we are talking about max 28 N.m torque on a 28 mm hex cap of 3 mm height for the Pike for instance, so don't you really think the classique interface is enough if you got the right tools (i.e. 28 mm chamferless hex socket at your workshop or the lunartool flat eyed wrench which work really, really well on the field)?
  • - 12
flag gnralized (Apr 29, 2016 at 10:37) (Below Threshold)
 @makripper: I am pretty sure professional xc racers vying for an olympic spot may have a better system and support than me.

Do you really believe that the few professional xc racers are the main market for this fork ????
Check your own logic, dude.
  • + 10
 @gnralized: A hex always torques at the corner of the fastener. even the tightest fitting tools are merely improving angle of attack, so that they use more of the corner's material. A 12 spline female is torquing at the sides of the pockets, which are backed up by the entire rest of the structure of the cap. While you might strip or otherwise damage the interface, you're never going to bend the cap itself. Contrast this with a hex type topcap, where only a thin amount of metal backs the interface, & if you look at ones people have damaged, you'll see that almost always, they didn't strip the fastener at all, but distorted the entire interface. From an engineering perspective, if people are distorting the entire interface, you're applying force to the wrong part of the fastener.

Plus, most people don't have a de-champfered socket or one of the luna tools. But, especially with the advent of air spring tokens, almost everybody is going to want to take that cap off at some point. Because they have a tool that looks like it will work(a normal socket) they will try, they will mess up their topcap, & they will be pissed.

Contrast that with using the one tool that everybody has, because it's the one tool that hasn't changed for at least 20 years, even across MTB & road.
  • - 10
flag gnralized (Apr 29, 2016 at 11:17) (Below Threshold)
 @groghunter: I totally agree from a mechanical POV.

Now I've seen countless people harming themselves or destroying cheap cassette tool trying to get their cassette from free wheel for the same exact reason you cite : they don't have the right tool (like 9 mm cassette tool used for thru-axle + long socket + ratchet = failure) or bad quality tool etc...
The trick is effictively to have the right, good quality tool for the job and I don't believe that most of people have already what they need for the cassette-fork cap, so they have to buy it anyway.
And future will tell but I don't think from an engineering point that you can design a cassette tool as simple, cheap, light and efficient as XX mm ex interface like the lunar tool.

So from this point of view, I don't think that the new interface will be better, but it's only my opinion, no need to go farther in this discussion...
  • + 4
 @gnralized: yeah I know it's to add tokens, I mean why would you do something like that on a long loop ride? I would want to stay close to the parking lot so I could have all my tools nearby. Plus I'd want to be repeating the same bit of trail each time to get a good comparison, not covering lots of miles with different tokens on different terrain.

And are you really worried about 200 grams in your pack on your suspension tweaking ride? Bring 200mL less water.
  • - 8
flag gnralized (Apr 29, 2016 at 11:29) (Below Threshold)
 @bkm303: "And are you really worried about 200 grams in your pack on your suspension tweaking ride? Bring 200mL less water."

If it's useless and can bring less weight, yes I am, like 200mL of water more.
I like when my suspension tweaking ride is not only a suspension tweaking ride ;-)

And depending where you ride it's difficult to find 5km test loops with all the conditions you need to dial your fork, either with a parking lot close behind. Particularly given the fact that this is an XC fork and XC crowd are not the most involved in the shuttle thing.
  • + 17
 What is even happening here? Why is my fork coming apart mid-race ? This descended into madness fairly quickly didn't it?
  • + 8
 @DARKSTAR63: It's amazing, isn't it? I'm thoroughly entertained.
  • + 6
 TIL 200 grams will ruin suspension setup. Must be rough starting from scratch every time you take a piss next to the trail Razz
  • + 4
 I mean they'll have the toolz in the pits / car not in their enduro bum bag or whatever.... i can only imagine how neurotic the person must be who changes tokens half way through a ride.
  • + 2
 @ccolagio: as someone who's scratched and rounded a traditional top cap I'd pay, say an extra dollar on a bike costing thousands. That should cover the extra cost and then some. SRAM can keep the change
  • + 4
 @gnralized: not in the middle of a loop. Maybe before a race, where you'd kind of hope they have tools like a splined socket. It's not *that* exotic
  • + 5
 @wallheater: No kidding! Are people really servicing the fork mid-ride? I don't even think it's a good idea to play with the pressure away from the car, let alone removing the top cap to add a token. Plus, if you're stopping to do something like this mid ride, Dude, I'm getting cold waiting around for you! I don't wanna ride with you anymore...
  • + 2
 @groghunter: spread the wisdom; I'm always a fan of your posts. Keep it up
  • + 1
 Oh my gosh standards need to be reengineered in our market.
  • + 93
 First a review on a Niner RKT, then first looks at Cannondale's Scapel-SI and a RockShox SID.. thanks for the more XC oriented coverage PinkBike! Don't get me wrong I love the DH and enduro coverage but as a guy who only rides DH on vacation in Whistler every few years and rides 80% XC mtb and 20% CX in a flat part of Ontario, this is great!
  • + 13
 Same here! Love it!
  • + 37
 Agreed. cutting edge bike stuff is interesting, no matter what the discipline.
  • + 2
 I also agree, I'm so glad to see more coverage that fits the riding that I get to do here in Florida! Thanks a bunch PB, it's really nice!
  • + 3
 @jeffreyelias8 I love the XC even though I don't ride "XC" near as much anymore. XC can be just as gnarly and fun, you just have to be in better shape comparatively. And by god does this coverage make me think more and more about how I could justify adding something like that hei hei dl to the stable....
  • + 43
 Can anybody from Rock Shox explain why to buy an RS-1 over this?
  • + 23
 They make more money on an rs1?
  • + 15
 Cool looks. If I was to be given one of two, I'd go RS-1
  • + 7
 To look moto.... Maybe the 120mm option
  • - 1
 no need for rockshox predictive steering hub which the RS-1 needs.
  • - 5
flag endurocat (Apr 29, 2016 at 7:25) (Below Threshold)
 The RS-1 is more active.
  • - 7
flag mtnbykr05 (Apr 29, 2016 at 7:27) (Below Threshold)
 @thomas4th: This. And the fact that the RS1 is stiffer than the Sid and Revelation at the respective amount of travel. Really, the RS1 was made to give near-Pike stiffness, with better seal lubrication, at a lower weight and lower travel.
  • + 15
 Because
  • + 9
 The RS-1 also had better performance all around than the OLD Sid, so that was part of the allure. I agree, even though I love inverted forks, that this one may stick the RS-1 in a bit of a no-man's land, if other's agree that the new Sid's performance trumps the RS-1(this is only one person's perspective, remember.)
  • + 6
 Because bike parts are cool. Too much objectivity around here ... sometimes I just see bike parts and geek out for no reason.
  • + 26
 I'm not RockShox, but as I understand it...

SID: Better damper, lighter, torsionally stiffer

RS-1: Constantly lubricated seals, laterally stiffer, sex
  • + 2
 @ashyjay: Actually if you look close at the pictures of the SID lowers, it has also the special hub slots.
You can also run the RS-1 with regular hubs.
  • + 0
 SID is reported to be stiffer than RS-1. The real problem behind all of this is why would one think it's a bad thing? You can accuse it of higher weight and I will buy that, but stiffness argument on short travel bikes is a joke. I ride pumptrack with Shiver SC. Loads the fork has to take there are way worse than anything a XC course and XC geometry can throw at it, yet I see no probs with handling the bike on pumptrack. And I am able to take the tyre off the rim at 27 PSI when loading a berm. Then I hit a rockgarden and that flex that everyone seems to hate, gives me better balance since the bike gets less deflected by rocks and feels as if I was on a much longer travel fork. I suggest everyone to try riding a USD fork on rocky and rooty offcamber and then jump on a stiff mother effer like Lyrik or 36 and do the same. You'll become a believer Big Grin
  • - 1
 @enrico650: i didn't know you could use normal hubs and the SID would have the torque caps for added stiffness.
  • + 7
 @enrico650, the extra room around the SID's dropouts is designed to be used with RockShox's Torque Caps. They have a 20mm diameter, compared to the 27mm diameter axle that's necessary for the RS-1.
  • + 1
 @mikekazimer: Thank you for the clarification, I didn't quite realize the difference until right now.
  • + 1
 @enrico650: So that means your regular hubs wont just line up quick and easy in the drop-outs, it will require giggling the wheel and axle to get it to line up... unless you run the torque caps on your hubs???

NOT GOOD!
  • + 0
 Don't know. The RS-1, unlike the Marzocchi USD forks of yesteryear, looks incredibly ugly. I'm not sure I'd run one for free even...
  • + 0
 Yeah the in my mind the RS-1 the new hot stuff, plus more durable/rigid. Also it comes in 120mm, makes it more of a fork for trail applications.

I've thought about it for my next build, the RS-1 looks epic and rides stiff (oh yeah I'm into that), but I'm not into investing in a new hub standard quite yet. Going for a just as light carbon-free Fox SC, thank you very much.

@enrico650 I don't believe you can currently convert a normal hub for RS-1, unless you have a carbon ti x-hub.
  • + 1
 @groghunter: I agree. For a committed racer or someone with more expendable income, the RS-1 is the choice. For my current (and near future needs), a Sid would be more than adequate, especially considering the hub requirements of the RS1
  • + 1
 @trialsracer: I have an rs1 and will swapping back to this in the World Cup version for the race season since it's a) lighter b) stiffer c) better performance d) more options for spare wheels
  • + 36
 What?!?!?!?! 6 whole grams heavier than the new 32? That's outrageous, downright unrideable! How the hell does SRAM expect me to KOM all my fire road climbs dragging that boat anchor of a fork up them?

Looks good. Completion is always fun.
  • - 9
flag Andrewwebb (Apr 29, 2016 at 8:13) (Below Threshold)
 Fox is lighter
  • - 9
flag Aaronhuang (Apr 29, 2016 at 8:19) (Below Threshold)
 32 Looks better
  • - 5
flag will-burr (Apr 29, 2016 at 9:27) (Below Threshold)
 @Aaronhuang: Yes, Fox 32 SC looks better and is lighter...
  • + 5
 Funny I was thinking of how RockShox and been killing it with their industrial design while Fox is looking uglier. Different strokes for different folks. Eye of the beholder.
  • + 4
 The fox is actually a quarter pound lighter in 29er format. 3.01 v 3.25. The 27.5 versions are insignificantly different. MTBR or bikerumor has a weighted version up.
  • + 32
 WHAT NO 26?!
  • + 15
 lulz
  • + 16
 That's brilliant how it's a cassette tool to remove the top caps. Those tiny wrench flats are so stupid and difficult to get a purchase on
  • + 13
 "...stanchions that look a touch anorexic ..."
I'm reading this and thinking about my 150mm 32 Talas
  • + 14
 so is it metric or imperial?
  • + 36
 The travel is measured in light years but the rest of the fork is measured in gallons. Except the steertube, it's measured in Indian Rupees.
  • + 0
 @warmerdamj: I prefer Hylian Rupees
  • + 13
 @groghunter: My ex gave me ruppees
  • + 7
 " 120mm bikes fall solidly into the trail category and are better suited to a fork like the Pike with its 35mm stanchions"

Wut...? Then what is the Revelation for?
  • + 2
 Sounds like there will be a revelation on the rocks soon... Washed out with the tide.
  • + 8
 I never thought I'd say this about adjustment knobs, but those black knobs with "Charger" stenciled on them are kinda sexy.
  • + 5
 So the real question: Over the course of a 3 hour race in hot dusty conditions, will this fork stiffen up to near rigid like the old SIDs?
  • + 2
 Excellent question, I'd love to know if they fixed that from the older SID forks
  • + 5
 Does this mean i will be able to buy a Charger Damper for my 2015 130 mm Revelation?
  • + 37
 absolutely not, your 2015 fork is completely irrelevant now and should be thrown in the trash. Actually the fact that you ride a fork without a charger damper makes me sick to my stomach.
  • + 3
 i've been hoping for a charger damper upgrade for the revelation for awhile now.
  • + 8
 @warmerdamj: Calm down dude. My RS1 is on order, I didn't want the trash men to see an RCT3 Damper in my Rev when I threw it out.
  • + 1
 @warmerdamj: LOL that was great haha
  • + 1
 Why isn't DH in the olympics? Even just as an exhibition sport. Most countries that have an XC team have a DH team too. And the DH course doesn't need to be crazy if the host city can't find a good mountain, just look at Sea Otters DH track
  • + 3
 Lets not ruin DH... Look at what the Olympics did to snowboarding...
  • + 6
 Can it run 180mm?
  • + 22
 A 180mm rotor? Yes - the max is 200mm.
  • + 36
 Yeah it's a freeride XC fork
  • + 1
 The 2016 season just started. I dont think we need to see this...has mountain biking hit the more suply then demand camtegory??? ya.most indefinetly. Were all one with nature and love it, but hell, lets just hit our resources hard to make new parts for the peoplewho cant be happy with what theyve got....
  • + 2
 I have the 2015 SID XX on my steel single speed hardtail. Why you ask? It's f***g awesome! www.pinkbike.com/photo/13078609
  • + 5
 Dude that is downright sexy. The frame color is amazing. I used to have a SID and I hated it, but it was a straight steerer, old damper, and QR. I'd love to try one of the new ones.
  • + 1
 What a happy single speed you have ! Nice.
  • + 2
 Cheeky PB - this photo ep1.pinkbike.org/p5pb13296622/p5pb13296622.jpg shown back on the 24th March for the Eagle release. And no-one noticed the new SID ;-)
  • + 1
 If pinkbike does a full review on this fork, and on the fox 32 sc for that matter, I want to see that thing on a scale before it's installed so we can all see how much BULLSHIT those advertised weights are
  • - 1
 I pulled this from bikerumor.com "The 29er carbon crown model with 15mm thru axle weighed in at 1,468g on our scale. Lightest claimed weight is 1,336g World Cup 27.5″ World Cup."
  • + 3
 Also comes with a picture of the fork on a scale showing the 1,468g for the 29er
  • + 0
 My point exactly.. thanks
  • + 1
 The top cap would be better with a Phillips screw interface, or even better, a slotted flat head interface for simplicity's sake. Then I could use a coin to change tokens mid ride, or even mid race.
  • + 3
 Olympic year hence the new XC product.
  • + 1
 I wonder about rider weight limits....while I'm okay on a RS-1, I wonder if this would be noodle-y for heavier gents on a steep head-tubed bike?
  • + 3
 But is it E-Bike compatible or just A-Bike(analog) compatible
  • + 2
 A: Can I get it with a straight steerer for my Steel SS?
2: Can it handle a 200+ fatty Cat 1 XC racer?
  • + 3
 Carbon steerer and crown is hot.
  • + 1
 Am I the only person who doesn't understand the purpose of the RS1?
It's more expensive, heavier, and looks wak.
  • + 2
 Hot legs
  • + 1
 ...and it's on all the pros bikes...
  • + 1
 Is the claimed weight 1,366 grams (3.01 lb) 27.5" or 29", 15x100 or 15x110?
  • + 1
 probably the lightest version, so 275 and 15x100. Still, the fact that it isn't a narrowed chassis and is probably just as stiff as previous years (unlike the 32 SC which Fox admitted was less stiff) I think this is a better deal over the 32 SC.
  • + 1
 @PHeller: I thought fox said the 32 sc was 7% stiffer torsionally?
  • + 1
 @R-trailking-S: "The new Step-Cast chassis, including fork lowers, can fit up to a 2.3" wide tire, with the redesigned crown residing at 10mm narrower in width than its predecessor, going from 130mm to 120mm in overall stance. That smaller package is where the large majority of the half-pound weight savings come from, but it's also obvious that some torsional rigidity is going to be lost compared to the previous year's 32. How much? Fox doesn't want to share the exact numbers with me, but they did say that the 32 Step-Cast is comparable to a 2015 32 when talking about equal fore and aft forces, but with slightly less torsional rigidity. "
  • + 1
 @PHeller: Ah, thank you. must be the number for the sids improvement.
  • + 2
 Sweet! Will the Charge Damper work in a 2014 chassis?
  • + 3
 That is one pretty arch.
  • + 3
 my dogs called sid
  • + 1
 The top caps went on a diet too" maybe set it and just take the top cap off completely for maximum weight savings
  • + 1
 Never thought I would see the day rockshox would offer a sid with a through axle. Lol
  • + 1
 @DARKSTAR63 I was thinking the same thing!
  • + 1
 The sid I have kinda sucks. My rct3 just doesn't fit bill
  • + 2
 I just swapped from the XX to the RCT3 damper, I have to say that the SID XX makes the RCT3 feel amazing in comparison.
  • + 0
 i also had a sid rct3 2015 on my scalpel the fork was very unreliable and felt like riding a rigid no matter what configuration i tried, sold it in favor of fox 32 2016
  • + 1
 Can you use these on the FEST series...that's been on recently?
  • + 12
 If you get invited to the FEST series I'm pretty sure you can do whatever you want.
  • + 1
 Hardly 2017 not even half way through 2016 ????
  • + 0
 £1000 for a 100mm travel fork with motion control damper? Crime of the century.
  • + 0
 explain me these € - $ prices please
  • + 4
 Import duties
  • + 5
 @mnorris122: And VAT. 20% VAT is included in the € and £ pricing but sales tax is not included in the $ price.
  • + 2
 Sucker fee
  • + 1
 So cool... need one ASAP
  • - 1
 2017 is turning out to be the year of the XC bike, so far..
  • + 9
 Why? Because they had two xc related posts in a row?
  • + 31
 you probably dont know this but the olympics are kind of a big deal
  • + 7
 @fercho25: it's like, the whole World is watching.
  • + 5
 Isn't it still 2016?
  • - 1
 Wow, no comments on the spark running eagle drive train?!?!
  • + 3
 Why? That was the XC Eagle test bike they rode for the first ride article.
  • - 2
 Is there a cap for the air side? I don't see one in any of the photos.
  • + 1
 Maybe just a schrader cap like on rear shocks? Save a gram or two.
  • + 3
 @gooded: Yep, there is, but it's recessed so it almost looks like there isn't one from a distance. Here's a photo: www.pinkbike.com/photo/13434810
  • + 2
 @mikekazimer: Thank you. Looks mint.
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2019. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.058813
Mobile Version of Website