Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
  • 150 or 160
  • kendo954
    Free Member

    building a new bike up, last years marin attack trail 6.9 with 150 rear travel.

    torn between 150 or 160 forks, like the talas idea to quickly reduce the travel for climbs etc, i know if i go u-turn ill never use it.

    this is going to be a do it all bike, from rough xc to uplifts days over at inners etc.

    fox 36 a bit of an overkill???? anyone use them on a do it all bike?

    ps iv a carbon 456 for calmer xc/longer days on the bike.

    GW
    Free Member

    There is no question to answer here that can’t be answered better by YOU!

    honourablegeorge
    Full Member

    If you have a 456 already, then you might as well have the 36s.

    Or wait for the 34s to come out. Or get Devilles, which are cheaper and better.

    thisisnotaspoon
    Free Member

    I built my Pitch with Lyrics on the basis I’ll have a hardtail with sektors for more mundane stuff.

    As for 150/160mm, take a 5p coin, stand it on it’s edge, wonder if that much movement is really going to make any real difference.

    philconsequence
    Free Member

    160, that 10mm will mean the difference between getting the ladies and having people point and laugh at your pathetic attempt at a bike.

    FACT.

    batfink
    Free Member

    Dual position Revelations….. then spend the difference on cocktails

    Sancho
    Free Member

    160 float and forget the TALAS.
    I have a covert and its a do it all ride everything bike and climbs perfectly fine, the bigger fork is noticeably stiffer on big descents.
    the 150 32’s are a bit stretched in my view and are flexing too much.

    messiah
    Free Member

    Be aware that 160mm forks like Lyriks and 36’s (and Deville’s I think) add 20mm to the fork length over a 150mm fork; 10mm for the additional travel and 10mm more for the bigger/beefier crown. This can effect the geometry so it’s worth being sure you really want the bigger fork.

    I tried some Revelation forks on my hardtail after hearing good things about them. For the first few months I got on fine with them and was even thinking of trying them on my AM bike… they were pretty good even in the gnar although the flex was a bit disconcerting… but then it rained loads and I found that when push-came-to-shove-came-to-deep-muddy-ruts I was struggling to make the bike go where I wanted it to. I don’t scare easy but that day scared me… the Rev’s were fine on good trails but as soon as I took it to my more usual mud wrestling I wanted/needed a beefier fork… so I sold them on and I’m now running 36’s and 55’s which give me the beefy goodness I desire… which meant changing my hardtail frame to get one to suit the longer fork :mrgreen:

    I don’t do Talas or travel adjust forks… wind out your forks for the doonhall bit and you’ve just raised your bottom bracket and fubared the handling (IMHO etc)… poor crutch for a bad design… run the correct length fork even if that means running a Fox 36 at 140mm of travel 8)

    kudos100
    Free Member

    You will struggle to notice 10mm. You will notice the beefier forks being stiffer and tracking better.

    Weight vs stiffness and strength.

    messiah
    Free Member

    You will struggle to notice 10mm.

    But you possibly will notice 20mm 🙄

    rocketman
    Free Member

    ime 150mm travel on a 32mm chassis with a std steerer is pushing it even in moderate gnar-tech

    I’d go for 36s with a tapered steerer any day

    soobalias
    Free Member

    wham bam 36 Vans.

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)

The topic ‘150 or 160’ is closed to new replies.