Uchwmdr

A Dorado would destroy this boxxer.

i like to play fork roulette. Whenever i get a new fork or a new bike i never touch any setting and just ride along with the clicks and spring rates straight out of the box. If something feels off, i just adjust my riding to it lol

Looks absolutely stunnig.

@Lagr1980: iykyk. Proper stiffnes of the fork and letting it do its thing really completes the riding experience. Motorbikes figured it out decades ago and as usual, the mtb world catches up slowly in tiny increments. :) Cant wait to ride the intend flash 38. Stay safe!

Torsional flex has never been a real issue since the fox 36. I dunno why most sub 85kg average riders (which the majority of the mtb audience is) complain about it. The majority of stress on the fork actually is fore-aft flex, which occurs mostly under braking and that is when the performance is impaired the most because of binding and excess friction that affects even the most perfect damping and air spring systems. Eery fork effectively is a lever between the front axle and the head tube and all the braking and each bump on the trail during a forks lifecycle applies the greatest stress on the csu, which is unfortunately the weakest point in every single crown fork especially the 'conventional' ones. Every time you apply the front brake or go through a bump, or both, the fork 'fights' two forces; one is the compression of the fork, which is the desired scenario, when the fork absorbs the bump, the other one is the urge to flex backwards due to the forces of deccelaration acting on the whole chassis. Naturally, the more the fore-aft flex, the less bump absorbtion occurs. From engineering point of view, the conventional single crown fork is a faulty design because the inherent incline of the chassis to flex backwards during every impact and braking event, negatively affects the performance of the fork. No matter how thick the stanchions, arch or the csu are it is inevitable, because the pressfit interface between the stanchions, crown and steerer will ALWAYS be far les robust than the whole chassis. That issue is best adressed in the USD design where the proximal part (csu) is much stiffer and resistant to fore-aft flex, thus enabling the fork to perform best the way it is intended to perform-absorb impacts instead of flexing backwards. I think that the best configuration for a fork is dual crown usd > single crown usd > dual crown conventional and lastly the single crown conventional. As a 90 kgs aggressive rider with more than 17 years of riding, ive tested A LOT of forks and the one thing that always bugged me was not the so called torsional flex, but the annoying fore-aft wobbling and shivering of the single crown conventional fork every time i apply the front brake at speed. Doing the front wheel between the legs test for torsional flex in the parking lot is completely meaningless, because it doesn't recreate any real world event. Instead, try applying the front brake while being inclined backwards thus making the front wheel skid and you might notice the real cause for poor performance.

Inverted forks will always be superior in terms of engineering and performance. Period. I will get a usd fork any day instead of a conventional fork. The conventional setup makes no sense.

Finally. Been waiting for my dream fork to come out for years. Buying immediately and cant wait to ride it.

this is by far the worst and most meaningless poll ever

6’3, 470 reach, 50 mil stem, 1255 wb, bike fees fantastic.

If this followed logic, why would canyon produce such an oversized strive and sell it to customers, but still pay for their main advertiser Moir to ride it in a size small essentially opposing the whole idea if the long bike?