- This topic has 10 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 7 years ago by andyl.
-
456 question
-
philjuniorFree MemberPosted 7 years ago
Does anyone on here ride any variety of the 456 with a 4″ set of forks on?
Just had the thought that when it first came out, 4″ would’ve been a possible fork option, but I can’t see anyone putting something that short on a hardcore HT these days.
Am I wrong?
docrobsterFree MemberPosted 7 years agoI used to run a summer season at 110 most of the time. Wound out to 140 for downhills.
It didn’t feel too steep at 110 but climbed like shut at 140aether531Free MemberPosted 7 years agoI had an original 456 that I used with a 100mm & 120mm fork. Handled well at 100mm I thought.
jairajFull MemberPosted 7 years agoI used to have a Carbon 456 with a u-turn Revelation. I prefered it at around 120mm – 130mm for my everyday riding which was tight twisty woodland trails. At 140mm – 150mm I found the front wondered too much on climbs and handling was a bit too slow.
jonbaFree MemberPosted 7 years agoI used to run mine with 100mm forks (back in 2007) switched to 140s which I thought were a bit wandery on the hills.
It is important to consider axle to crown height as well as travel. I’ve had 140mm forks that are shorter when riding on the flat than 130mm forks (think it was fox vs. Rockshox).
These days not many people produce 100mm forks of the type that you’d put on a 456, they would be XC light weight things unless you went for DJ forks.
jointhedotzFree MemberPosted 7 years agoMy evo 2 was ran with 130s first then 120/150 dpc forks. 130 felt perfect, 150 good for the downs but less good on the ups. In 120 it felt too low at the front but that may have been due to me getting used to 150, I rarely bothered to drop it.
TL/DR on the evo 2 130-140 is probably ideal for general riding. I suspect 100mm would be too steep unless you’re used to xc geo
EuroFree MemberPosted 7 years agoNot sure what the difference in HA is between the 456 and the SS version is but…
I used to run a summer season at 110 most of the time.
me too. Older 36 Talas @ 110mm pumped up firm and it’s a frickin’ bullety tank thing. I’ve played about with the full range these forks offer (110-150) but even on rough downhilly stuff 110 feels best overall. Might be a combination of the short travel and chunky stanctions but at longer settings the bike doesn’t feel as balanced.
cpFull MemberPosted 7 years agoNot sure what the difference in HA is between the 456 and the SS version is but.
Summer Season version had very slack angles (for back then), much slacker than normal 456. The intent was you could run short travel forks and still have slack angles.
philjuniorFree MemberPosted 7 years agoThese days not many people produce 100mm forks of the type that you’d put on a 456, they would be XC light weight things unless you went for DJ forks.
Is what I thought,
I’ve played about with the full range these forks offer (110-150) but even on rough downhilly stuff 110 feels best overall. Might be a combination of the short travel and chunky stanctions but at longer settings the bike doesn’t feel as balanced.
is interesting to hear.(even though you’re cheating and running 4.5″ 😛 )
SaccadesFree MemberPosted 7 years agoI’ve a set of RC40xcam (130mm) that I wind down to ~100mm for general cycling duties and set back to 130 for any long downwards bits.
It’s a very original on-one prototype thing.
Used to have a set of RC41F (150mm) on which I also liked, but you did have to get your weight forward on steep climbs.
andylFree MemberPosted 7 years agoused to run my C456 with 100-130 u-turn revs. Was nice and responsive at 100mm and I would wind them out to 130 (bit of a chore with u-turns) for anything pointing down.
I fitted wider bars and and a shorter stem and started leaving them at 130, putting them to 100 felt too twitchy.
I then started riding it harder and the forks were starting to feel a bit out of their depth so fitted some 120-150 DP black box revs. 150 was great descending, no problem climbing but I did drop them to 120 when I remembered. Front did feel a tad high so…
I fitted a 2 deg angleset to get about 1.5 deg net slacker head angle and drop the BB again. Climbing at 150mm noticeably better. I was worried about the steering response but as I have gradually got slacker I have adjusted my riding to cope so no under steering off into the bushes.
100mm will be fine for most general mountain biking. 120 would be better though IMO, much like a Soul has it’s sweet spot around there. I think it is just a typical 26″ hard tail thing from that generation and genre – 100m fine, 120mm that little bit more capable.
The topic ‘456 question’ is closed to new replies.
