Fox's Featherweight 32 Step-Cast Fork - First Look

Apr 5, 2016 at 0:17
by Mike Levy  





Fox's new 32 Step-Cast fork sees them take their proven FIT4 damper, as well as the new FIT GRIP damper, and drop them into an entirely new fork chassis that has allowed them to bring the 32 down to an impressive claimed weight of just 1,355g (2.98lb) for the Factory 27.5'' model. The 29er version weighs just five grams more, and both models employ Fox's FLOAT air spring that can be tuned with clip-on volume spacers.

How does the 32 Step-Cast compare to the competition when it comes to the scales? RockShox's lightest SID offering, the XX World Cup with its one-piece carbon crown and steerer, comes in at a claimed 1,398g (3.08lb) for the 27.5'' fork and 1,485g (3.27lb) for the 29er version, while DT Swiss' OPM O.D.L 100 RACE, also with a carbon crown and steerer, weighs a claimed 1,455g (3.20lb) in its lightest configuration. All those numbers mean that the 32 Step-Cast is lighter despite Fox not employing any carbon. What they did have to do, however, was make a drastic redesign of the 32's chassis.

32 Step-Cast Details

• Intended use: cross-country
• Travel: 100mm only
• Stanchions: 32mm
• New Step-Cast chassis
• 10mm narrower chassis width
• FIT4, FIT iRD, FIT GRIP damper options
• FLOAT air spring
• Boost or standard 15mm thru-axle
• Weight: 27.5'' - 1,355g / 2.98lb, 29'' - 1,360g / 2.99lb (165mm steerer, star nut, Kabolt axle)
• Availability: May, 2016
• MSRP: $619 - $1,569 USD
Fox 32 Step-Cast


Fox 32 Step-Cast


New Chassis, Extreme Measures

Any cross-country fork that weighs in somewhere around the low three-pound range should be considered as extremely light, but the more weight that engineers shave off, the more difficult it becomes to keep doing exactly that. You go from counting hundreds of grams to adding up double digits if you're lucky and really clever about it, and you'll eventually end up needing to make a drastic departure in design if you want to drop any meaningful weight. So that's what Fox did, with the result being a 225g (0.49lb) weight loss for the 27.5'' 32 Step-Cast fork compared to the 27.5'' 32 from 2016, and an even larger 255g (0.56lb) drop in weight for the 29er model.

The drastic departure in design that Fox went ahead with to lose that weight consists of a whole new fork chassis that sports a narrower stance than the previous 32, so much so that the Step-Cast's lowers needed to be re-engineered to clear the front wheel's spokes and brake rotor. And this is where the fork's name comes from, with two large steps on the inside of each leg to provide the necessary clearance. A 15mm thru-axle ties the legs together, and riders can choose from either Boost or standard 100mm spacing, as well as going with Fox's 15QR or the lighter Kabolt axle that requires a 6mm hex key.

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.

Also, we're talking about a half-pound weight loss from an already light fork that's made for pure cross-country racing, a sport where guys are excited to swap out their stock water bottle boss bolts for some aluminum hardware. In other words, a lot of racers will be more than happy with the trade-off.



Same Air Spring

While the rest of the Step-Cast fork has seen updates and complete redesigns, Fox didn't change anything when it came to the FLOAT air spring. Rider's will find the same spring curve as on previous 32 forks, with the ability to fit up to four clip-on volume spacers should they feel the need for more progression. And being offered in a single 100mm travel option means that there is obviously no need for a TALAS version of the 32 Step-Cast.



Updated FIT4 and New FIT GRIP Dampers

The 32 Step-Cast is available with a few different internal options, including the FIT4 damper with its extruded rubber bladder, RC2 10mm shaft setup, and the usual three-position lever that allows riders to fine tune low-speed compression when the fork is in its open mode. This damper can also be controlled via a handlebar mounted remote for those looking to keep all hands on deck. There is also a FIT iRD damper that provides electronic control of the lock-out for riders with a battery fetish.

Fox 32 Step-Cast

The fork's FIT4 damper (pictured above) has been tweaked a bit for use in the Step-Cast, with basically the same low-speed compression, but with a lighter mid and high-speed control, as well as extra machining performed on certain parts in order to shed some extra grams compared to the FIT4 unit used inside of Fox's other forks.

The big news is an all-new damper from Fox, the FIT GRIP, that's meant to bridge the gap between their high-end and more expensive FIT 4 damper and a less pricey open system. FIT GRIP is a closed damper, just like FIT4, but it employs a spring-backed internal floating piston - rather than the expanding bladder in the FIT4 design - that acts as a compensator.

FIT GRIP (shown right) is a less complicated damper with different oil flow paths that is less expensive to manufacture than the more complicated FIT4 design, and it likely introduces a bit more internal friction into the system than if Fox had used a bladder, but the spring-backed IFP allows them to produce a less expensive closed cartridge that should offer much more consistent control compared to an open damper.

Performance Series forks with the FIT GRIP damper still provide Open, Medium, and Firm modes for riders to choose between by toggling a crown-mounted lever, as well as additional micro-adjust between those modes.

Fox 32 Step-Cast

Fox 32 Step-Cast



175 Comments

  • + 857
 Is it gluten free ?
  • + 126
 hahahahah I just had to login to give you props
  • + 223
 If it was gluten free, it would have told us right away.
  • + 22
 @moefosho: and then refused to do anything else. the article would just be blank with picture, because its taking a stand.
  • + 88
 @majik0mike: you log out?
  • + 111
 @adrennan: pornhub... Delete history and that
  • + 7
 Its not gluten free, but it is free range gmo
  • + 6
 @majik0mike: Exactly. Pisses me off when my I phone does that.
  • + 7
 It looks like Fox sent the 32 to Weight Watchers Smile Quality, Weight, & Cost......pick two Smile
  • + 12
 @majik0mike: A hint for next time is Incognito mode ( CTRL+SHIFT+N) on Chrome, or a little something called filterbypass.me on Firefox Wink
  • + 2
 I think the orange one is gluten free but I'm not seeing any vegan options?
  • + 22
 @skeen95: if there were vegan options you wouldn't have to ask, they'd tell you!
  • - 6
flag starpak (Apr 5, 2016 at 11:05) (Below Threshold)
 Best comment of the year.
  • + 47
 A vegan and a crossfitter walk into a bar, how do you know?

They both immediately tell you.
  • + 10
 I ride RS because I am on Warrior's diet. Paleo dude! Natives in Amazonian jungle eat plenty of meat and work only 4h a day, so do Inuits. What an amazing life they are living. What have missed in this civilization that indigineous people always knew... Like high child mortality, dying of common flu, or we no longer need to run from a fkng Polar Bear. Oh how I wish I was back in the food chain! Fkng green peace terrorists and PETA basterds trying to take my God given right to tripple bacon sandwich or butter with steak and cold Bud. You do hear people saying "I'd love some bacon!", "give me some chocolate" but nobody says: "I'd kill for anti-oxidants, I am starving for fibeeer!"
  • + 6
 @WAKIdesigns:

will it start creaking in the crown/upper stanchions like all of the past 6 Fox forks i've owned (32 and 36 models)?

Light weight is the name with Fox, and the lighter the forks get, the more susceptible to problems in the 'real world'

once that 1 year warranty runs out, its crazy expensive to replace the CSU and pay for the service charges for the rebuild

last time, it was just cheaper to ditch my 32 and buy a Manitou Tower Pro heavily discounted off WiggleChain Wink
  • + 5
 @blkmrktrider156: don't forget about the person that vapes.
  • - 2
 @hampsteadbandit: Isn't RS lighter than Fox in most cases? I'd rather live with creaking crown than anything with any kind of CTD or non Charger, RCT3 dampers. Manitou is legit. Rode one on Trek Stache lately.
  • + 8
 Shave another few grams by going back to 9mm QR for next year
  • + 2
 just wheelie all the courses, then you don't need that front wheel, fork or brake.
  • + 0
 @skeen95: What's vegan is it a Star Trek alien species ?
  • + 4
 @adrennan: You might as well just ride a Unicycle then.
  • + 4
 @blkmrktrider156: hey, im a vegan and I do crossfit, i object to that! ....... oh wait....
  • + 4
 @blkmrktrider156: but if they're a vegan cross fitter, which do they tell you about first?
  • + 2
 dup derp delete
  • + 2
 @davixxx: First, they tell you they're 'special'.....
  • + 122
 FOX..Please offer the ORANGE in 34/36 options!!!!!!!
Beautiful
  • + 9
 this dude. here, take my upvote
  • + 45
 That orange fork is ugly as sin... which means I want it on my bike.
  • - 39
flag Extremmist (Apr 5, 2016 at 8:52) (Below Threshold)
 If you can afford a brand new Fox 34/36 I'm sure you can afford to pay someone to custom paint it for you.
  • + 23
 @Extremmist: ...?..Uh..Um..Ya..OK...Thanks?..and when I can afford Two of them I'll offer you one for free..
hope that cheers ya up
  • + 3
 I got the RCT when it was Orange and I love it
  • + 7
 Now I understand why this beauties disappeared from the Marzocchi website
p.vitalmtb.com/photos/users/94/photos/96105/s780_Marzocchi_380_Evo_V2.jpg?1440629564
  • + 6
 @OLTI27: Marzocchi could make some sexy looking forks...
  • + 2
 Hell, I'd be happy with a white option on the 34.
  • + 3
 Nothing says I'm POACHING like a bright orange fork! I'm digging the new Fox colorways.
  • + 2
 Fluro orange is bad enough on enduro kit, and you want it on your bike?
  • + 50
 Cool to see something different. Just please don't make promo with Emily Batty saying how wonderful the fork is because I'm going to buy it and I really don't have any use for it. Like a sailor drawn to the rocky shore by a syren... Especially since the pricing is really messed up. I can buy both SID and Revelation for this money. Or Öhlins STX and have some money left...
  • + 30
 but this one goes to 11...
  • + 51
 I love that when adding something like torsional rigidity we know exactly how much "12.35 percent stiffer" "four times as strong - 1/3 less weight"......but when we lost rigidity ........ "we don't know" ......... are you completely serious? You don't know? How you not know, you must have tested the fork - point being - I think they know.
  • + 40
 @DARKSTAR63: My buddy who works at fox says their torsional analysis machine puts it at about 1.5x stronger than a wet noodle.
  • + 6
 @lyophilization: but why not make 10 better?
  • + 15
 @lyophilization: No sale, nowadays we go up to twelve.
  • - 4
flag WAKIdesigns (Apr 5, 2016 at 11:25) (Below Threshold)
 If stiffness on modern MTBforks was an issue, forks like Argyle would look rather like a 100mm Totem, since no other discipline than Dirt and SS could require and utilize it. Fox 40 has been flexed up in 2012. When I read a review where tester from a major website says that a negatives RS-1 involve high weight and flex I am getting depressed.
  • + 3
 @WAKIdesigns: I have an Argyle, it's the old PIKE chassis and it is stiff. Totem, well that fork was just over-kill. Hence it went the way of the dodo. It's all about the application, so I am sure this fork we see here with chunks missing from it performs well for XC. To that point, Ill bet if you pointed a dj bike down a proper DH trail you would quickly encounter some shortcomings in the equipment.
  • + 3
 Ummm...only the electronic remote lockout carries an obscene price tag. And it offers something very few others do. As for the other versions? They seem to be priced quite competitively. In line with the Sid.
  • - 3
 I had an Argyle, great fork! I actually crossed it later with Rebas upper assembly, because I never understood why would they make it with steel uppers. I'd still love to get my hands on a barely used Marzocchi DJ from 2003, the one with dark sliders and silver crown. It was amazing!
  • + 2
 @WAKIdesigns: For cost, the air model is all aluminum upper. I owned one of those Marzochhi's actually, it failed at one of the axle clamps, it was an odd "quick release" 20mm axle. The Marzocci's of the era sure were pretty.
  • + 1
 @DARKSTAR63: I had a Totem Soloair on an Ironhorse 7.7 in the late 2000's. That bike was perfect for park laps and the local FR/DH trails. Stiff enough to give confidence on gnarly terrain but nimble to move around like a modern trail bike. Sucked on the way up, but that's not what it was for.
  • + 1
 @DARKSTAR63: Of course they know! They just don't want to advertise anything that would come across as a detriment to performance.
  • - 1
 @kjjohnson: design decisions are compromises. Each characteristic/parameter has in-built duality and when taken out of context, one part of the story can be exploited to make business case. 29" wheels roll over better, 26" wheels accelerate better, 650B makes best of both worlds, flexy fork tracks better, rigid fork feels more stable in corners. It's all true, but the issue is that it's always a set of parameters than work together. Just saying that Plus tyres roll better is like me drawing a plan of apartment building and saying that long , narrow rooms are better, because they worked in 5 different apartments, so now I have to become an idiot to apply same principle to the remaining 20. Nothing ever works like that. From that duality, one can synthesize an informed singularity where you chose design A.K.A. a set of compromises that seems to fit a particular need/set of needs. In XC Flex is a non-issue so it doesn't matter if it's flexier or stiffer than 32 F100 or SID or.
  • + 2
 Just call it Eagle, people will throw their money at it!
  • + 2
 @Waki I'd love to have you as a customer. You apparently love paying MSRP for stuff.
  • + 1
 @lyophilization: Surely it's 12 now...
  • - 1
 just googled Emily Batty...my 36 isn't the only overly stiff stanchion now
  • + 0
 @NormanPerez: not sure why you felt that we need to know about your psycho- physiological functions but if yoy wanted to show off then tell me that in 50 years and maybe you'll impress somebody Wink
  • + 1
 @WAKIdesigns: If i keep this mountain biking business I can't promise even ten years. Seriously. She's a beast. Respect. She can ride a bike better than most of us mortals on here.
  • + 41
 Perhaps its cheaper for me to loose weight by eating less than buying expensive lighter kit.
  • + 7
 Do both
  • + 10
 You're new here, aren't you?
  • + 38
 I'll stick with a Pike and have a dump before I go out to save weight
  • + 6
 Same with me. Able to drop up to 0,5kg without much effort.
  • + 7
 Buying new forks makes you constipated?
  • + 5
 Why not take a shit AND buy the fork and save a whole pound!
  • + 1
 Yea because a pike and a "lightweight XC Race fork" are the same thing right... Loads of 90/100/110mm Pikes out there (although probably possible not a great idea)
  • + 1
 @mj46: Sarcasm dude!!
  • + 33
 Since FOX took over Marzocchi, they probably went through their shelves and copied their 20 years old forks...

www.flatoutcycles.co.uk/media/catalog/product/i/m/img_8966.jpg
  • + 2
 Yep, reminds me of my (very old) Marzocchi XC51.
  • + 2
 LOLZ. Good eyes...
  • + 1
 True.
  • + 0
 @kovaldesign no, already were in production before marzocchi purchase. Decals design might have been helped out.

Rides like boss though...damper is money.
  • + 5
 ...with 1996 Bomber orange color.
  • + 2
 @nozes: I resemble that remark.... LOL! Still riding mine... all 6.5 pounds worth...
  • + 1
 The OG Marzocci's were my first thought too... didn't clue-in about the Bomber orange at first, so now I feel so sad... lol

When are we going to see lowers made out of something cheap and awesome instead of plain old cast Magnesium? Throw that on a fire already...

Can't wait to see the 2017 RockShox Mag21! Manitou EFC?... ProFlex... anyone?... crickets>
  • + 1
 I was thinking Marzocchi Atom Bomb Z2, with the hollow lowers. Needed a 4" extension to take that fork apart.
  • + 19
 why not just put a 20mm kabolt non quick release thru-axle .. would probably be a small weight penalty and help with the flex .... or why not do a 22mm new standard then make all of us buy new hubs, but dont allow the hubs to be made individually, only as complete wheels, and only in carbon, ti spokes with all propriety lacing and only in 29er for the first year, with no 26 inch option until the 22mm becomes obsolete with the maverick 24mm hubs in 2019 ? yes / no Wink
  • + 32
 Mr Train we think you have what it takes and would like to offer you a position as chief product manager for our major bike company.
  • + 1
 Word!
  • - 5
flag nicolai12 (Apr 5, 2016 at 12:47) (Below Threshold)
 no crying on pinkbike, go ride your bike if you're sad
  • + 18
 It should be called the Fox 32 Flex. Because that is exactly what it is going to do.
  • + 3
 Fox 32 compared to RockShoxes Sid and Revelation feels very noddly, Did they think taking away more material was going to help it become stiffer.
  • + 1
 @jonokonko: "Polar moment of inertia" Look it up. Size has absolutely nothing( or very little) to do with rigidity.
  • + 3
 @jonokonko:

No, they knew it would sell to XC weight weenies!
  • + 2
 They need this weight loss to make up for the extra weight added by a 12speed drivetrain Wink
  • + 2
 @KUNTHER: I know that, but fox 32 was a noodle and still could be a noodle
  • + 1
 @KUNTHER: polar moment of inertia for a cross-section is determined from the geometry of the cross-section. What are you talking about when you size has nothing to do with rigidity? Tubing size directly impacts polar moment of inertia and rigidity...

What do you mean when you say "size"
  • + 1
 @captaintyingknots: Correct you are sir. I meant amount of material doesn't always determine certain strengths. and yes tubing size does impact the moments but Im sure you would agree that the shape of this actually could be a good thing for these little forks. Like you referred to, the geometry could be stronger in this than a larger sized tube. Oh and who actually give a shit about the 32? Ride a real fork or rock it rigid.
  • + 2
 @KUNTHER: your comment completely excludes female riders. A 127lb female does not need the cross section strength that a 180+lb male will need.

I know this fork was not specifically designed for small people, but my understanding is that it will work for smaller people who do not ride aggressively. Which happens to be lots of riders!
  • + 12
 Here's our super-light fork, buy it.

What's that? Flex compared to current models you say?

Erm, we don't know. Sorry . . . .


So you develop an entirely new product, designed around lightness that we all know will flex . . . But ignore the actual testing to tell us just how stiff it is (or obviously isn't). Makes sense.
  • + 2
 If money were no object I'd personally rather ride and take care of an XC bike equipped with Flexy RS-1 than any other fork in that class. Stiffness argument is often used by companies to cover up the drawback of STD design where sliders must be of a large diameter to prevent excessive bending at G-outs which prevents them from freely sliding into bushings. According to sources like DVO or Andreani group, stiffness in MTB is overrated and often cotributes to decrease in grip in whole bike being deflected off obstacles, throwing the rider out of balance. I experienced the difference myself when riding Shiver SC on offcamber rock garden and then riding same frame with Fox36 on two days after.
  • + 1
 Have to say I've got an rs1 and I've certainly got no complaints about it being "flexy", it's the best fork I have ridden
  • + 1
 just because they dont tell you the data, doesnt mean it wasnt done. every single design company out there has purchased their competitors parts and done comparisons against their own. this is a HUGE part of design engineering. and its always done. always. knowing that, this product either very closely meets the current bench mark of stiffness or is better.
  • + 2
 Or it's nowhere near since they don't say. Let's face it, marketing teams love to push figures that make them better than the competitors. All this has is lower weight and a sweet stand out colour
  • + 9
 Kinda glad there is no 26" option for once. You know if there was, there would be a slew of "street" riders putting them on their rigs and subsequently breaking their collective faces on the concrete when the forks would inevitably fail.
  • + 10
 So, Fox doesn't know the torsional rigidity of this fork?
Sometimes companies come up with the worst excuses for their shortcomings.
  • + 2
 It knows. It didn't want to tell him. And they readily admitted that it's very close to previous models but slightly less in torsional rigidity. Most people aren't going to know wtf a few foot pounds translates to. So slightly less should be enough for right now. I'm sure someone will test it eventually.
  • + 6
 At this travel and weight category the lefty rules. An XC race Lefty is below 3pounds and probably twice as stiff. Oh and more supple. Just sayin'
  • + 2
 Alas, there is merit and truth to such yet to actually own a lefty is different story. Serviceable man, serviceable.
  • + 6
 Why don't they market it as the women's model Fox 32 forks ? Lighter riders...lighter construction. It sure isn't built for my 6 foot - 7 inch / 195 pound body size.
  • + 5
 Should come with the disclaimer: Fork will only function properly if the rider is wearing spandex
  • + 2
 I'll probably never buy one, but it is a bit of an engineering marvel. Wish I knew enough about materials science to know if this is a better option than the carbon route RS & DT Swiss went. Seems like I've heard of a few people snapping those carbon uppers at the crown race, but for something this light, that could easily be misuse.
  • + 6
 FIT 'Grip' = 2003 Rock Shox Pure damper? Wink
  • + 4
 Holy shit yes, it really feels like Fox ripped off RS' their Pure Damper, which in turn was "ripped" off from Manitou.
  • + 6
 I bet this fork will out flex the previous one if you know what I mean
  • + 2
 Suspension in all directions! Allows lateral movement for obstacle avoidance and forward and aft flex for on the fly offset adjustment.
  • + 5
 I thought it was Fox that bought the rights to Marzocchi's designs, not Rockshox...
  • + 5
 Awesome. Good to see focus on what XC riders need and not on what the industry is trending towards.
  • + 6
 Sanctions.... 32mm. Like... North Korea Sanctions by the UN?
  • + 1
 Not sure what you're on about. They spelled "stanchion" right in the article.
  • + 5
 @getrad24-7: to be fair to the dude when I read it (before people had started commenting) it read sanctions, rather than stanchions.
  • + 4
 Indeed. It was sanctions before they fixed it. Just a silly mistake that I pointed out, nobody's perfect, was worth a grin.
  • + 1
 I always thought the 32's where extremely flexy. What is a further reduction in the chassis size going to do for the durability of the damper? That flex is going to pass through some sensitive parts, and its going to reduce their life span unless this chassis is equally as stiff as previous versions, but that is unlikely in my mind, and they have not claimed it to be either, so not expecting much there. What are the chances anyone has been running these tests fork for more then 2 years?
  • + 2
 Dude, 1569$ for that. I've never felt so cheap in my life. Additionally, if you decide not to eat, and you use the money to buy this fork, the weight savings will be stratospheric!
  • + 5
 What do I got for spending $1600. It better service itself.
  • + 8
 These forks cost about double their weight in silver. Crazy.
  • + 1
 @aoneal: I have just checked and for the 27.5 option they would cost $663.95 if made out of silver Therefore making the entry level option cost slighly less than 1:1 by weight, and the top end cost approx 1:2.404 (To 2 D.P) by weight. Madness.
  • + 1
 You basically get Di2 suspension. Really only a pro race-dork thing where half/seconds mean the difference between looking good and looking great when getting a job with a team.
  • + 1
 A smoother/ more gradual transition on the stepped feature would make for a pretty nice looking taper if they wanted to make a quick refinement to the design... I could see this fork picking up some elements from rigid forks, now that there is no large insert diameter to compete with near the dropouts.
  • + 5
 What kind of wheels is she running because I can't tell
  • + 1
 A lot of forks back in the day had a similar design on the lowers. Even before disc brakes. The rock shox Judy, Manitou Mag with carbon arch, etc. With a very narrow clearance and spacing. This just sounds like FOX is starting to learn from the past. Those forks were wicked light! At least they didn't incorporate elastomers.
  • + 3
 Looks like an Marzo XC600. Sorry, had to throw that in there. I'll show myself out. To the old people's home.
  • + 3
 Marzocchi did those fork legs in 1992. Good buy Fox!

ep1.pinkbike.org/p5pb9350488/p5pb9350488.jpg
  • + 3
 Kinda reminds me of the pre bomber Marzocchi forks that had the narrowed lowers with the holes cast in.
  • + 2
 I'll keep with my old forks but make sure I take a shit before I go for a ride.
  • + 3
 Reminds me of the indy or old rock shox like the quadra 21
  • + 2
 Errr! What a nasty horrible thing that is. These are for the roadie version out mountain bikers
  • + 2
 Looking at the cut-out pic, I foresee pictures popping up (after their released) with the botton 4" of the lower broken off
  • + 2
 One thing I truly despise about colored forks is when the crown is of a different color!
  • + 2
 I have a feeling there will be some future fork snaps, especially if you are a hard descender.
  • + 1
 Now that axles are getting wider can we please just go back to 20mm hubs!!!!!
  • + 1
 Nah this is rubbish. You call that innovation. Gimmie a 50t cassette any day.

(Sarcasm warning).
  • + 2
 Oh nice! A Marzocchi Design froh the 90's......
  • + 2
 Hope I'm wrong, but it looks flexy....
  • + 1
 Did I miss the 26 option?.....oh wait...I didn't.....that's ok. Rather rockshox and avalanche.
  • + 1
 You can feel the stiffness just by looking at "claimed weight of just 1,355g" I wonder what's weight limit on that one Wink
  • + 2
 Love the color choices. Lets see these on other models!
  • + 2
 That nice orange would match my Evil.......
  • + 2
 i don't know about the 32, but i want to marry Emily.
  • + 1
 Any idea what the lefty 2.0 weighs in comparison? I can't find it on google
  • + 1
 1600 grams in 29" with 100mm travel for the Lefty Hybrid 2.0 Carbon
www.cyclinic.com.au/cannondale-lefty-2015
  • + 1
 @HardtailsAreGnarly: Man, the old lefty was 1200 grams!

www.the900shop.com/lefty
  • + 1
 '06 DLR 80 headshok is 1316g. It's been great so far.
  • + 1
 material on lower legs look like a beer can aluminium
  • + 1
 seems like marz dna is appearing, from xc-700, z1, z2 era!
  • + 2
 No 26in, no 20mm?!
  • + 2
 Yeah Fox, some people still run the wheel size of legends. 29ers are sluggish as hell.
  • + 13
 No DJ specific option either? Ridiculous.
  • + 1
 @molloser: yep, got a 16 trek 9.9 fuel ex with Nox am carbons and omg sluggish as all hell..Don't no how people ride these things...lol
  • + 5
 Dual crown and room for 2.5" or no deal.
  • + 1
 Nice to see some out of the box ish thing, but it is hideous!
  • + 1
 Probably has 2.5ml of oil in it.
  • + 1
 look how short the steerer is of course its gonna be light.....
  • + 1
 Does the Stepcast chassis limit the rider in terms of rotor diameter?
  • + 1
 Info elsewhere says 180 max for the 27.5" and 203 for the 29".
  • + 1
 wish i could XC... but i can´t!!
  • + 1
 Love Fox but not a fan of orange. To each their own but forkoff orange.
  • + 2
 What's old is new again
  • + 2
 Look at the price !!!
  • - 1
 It's a fair price for the normal models. The expensive one includes the electronic lockout (and I'm assuming all the batteries etc to make it work)
  • + 0
 That's 200 grams lighter than the SID XX. I wish I had that Orange to go with the rest of my ride.
  • + 1
 A narrower 32... cause plain 32 just isn't flexy enough.
  • + 1
 Pretty cool; nothing special.
  • + 1
 That time I spent $1500 on a Fox 32.....said no one.....ever.
  • + 0
 What brand of wheels is Emily Batty riding in that photo?
  • + 1
 that orange is bad ass
  • + 0
 I just came for Emily... more photos pls
  • + 1
 Oh Emily...
  • + 1
 Dat Orange Tho!
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



You must login to Pinkbike.
Don't have an account? Sign up

Join Pinkbike  Login
Copyright © 2000 - 2019. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv14 0.070880
Mobile Version of Website