Slipped my Float RL130s of my trek yesturday to send them off for a service and found a large bit of stantion wear on the inside of the stanions right wear i couldnt see it! When i took them down to te shop the guys said its really common with fox forks especally on the caliper side and going to cost aorund £270 to repair. Only had the bike from new since last april!! Anyone had the same problem, did mojo warrenty it??
Bike Forum
[closed]
Fox stantions wear.
-
Posted 3 years ago #
-
this is VERY common. The cost you mention is roughtly right - £70 for mojo to service and IIRC 150 ish for a new crown/steerer/stanchions assembly.
Mojo will typically tell you it's your fault and that you didn't service it every 15.3 minutes of riding, meaning that it's not a warrantee job. If you complain enough they do seem to agree to replace it FOC sometimes.
Plenty of people on here will tell you that it's your fault because their Fox Forx have been fine for 15 years with no maintenance except for a wipe with a metal file on the stanchions every ride
Posted 3 years ago # -
You can try sending it to Mojo and seeing if you'll get it done under warranty but I doubt it. They will probably say you didn't service it regularly enough.This is indeed a common problem with Fox forks (I have had it happen to me twice) and you will need an entire crown upper stanchion assembly.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Fox forx don't like the UK slop and grime. :Fact:
Posted 3 years ago # -
my Fox Float 32 RL's have done exactly the same, after approx 10 months of riding, including a wet winter in wales. i used to wipe the stanchions after every ride. it seems the only way in britain you can hope to avoid this is by either lifting up or replacing the seals fairly often.
not sure what to do with mine, may just keep them going as long as possible and then maybe gets something like rock shox revaltions which should be more durable. either way its crap and annoying cos they were nicely performing forks
Posted 3 years ago # -
Or you can just ignore it and carry on until they are properly borked.
Does this affect Vanillas?
Posted 3 years ago # -
"Does this affect Vanillas?"
It did affect my 05 Vanillas. Mine had significant wear after one year and were "beyond economic repair" about 10 months later. That was from TFT. I replaced mine with Pikes.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Yep
Posted 3 years ago # -
"Does this affect Vanillas?"
It was the Vans that it happened to. My Floats have been trouble free so far *looks for some wood to touch*.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Mojo will not warranty it.
Mine packed up after less than 20 hours riding and they wanted me to pay over £200 so I told them not to bother and I bought some rockshox
Posted 3 years ago # -
OK cheers. I'm not that fussed because I got my Vanillas for £147 in Canada, but I s'pose I should start looking after them.....
Posted 3 years ago # -
Why don't Mojo warranty this, Fox forks carry a 2 year warranty
Posted 3 years ago # -
my 06 talas 36's did it too. you could see the stripes where the anodising wore away.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Had this after 4 months with my Fox Forks
Mojo will say as above have said-it'd then whether you can persuade them to show a bit of discretion
Have now bought fork oil and float fluid
Best way(IMO) is to take the lower legs off(every 15 hours or so)
Lets you inspect for any dirt ingress and clean/lubricate the foam rings
It's easier than trying to lift the seals(and to get them to reseat afterwards)
Not sure whether there have been design changes but stripped my lads 3 years old Fox Forks down at the weekend and the foam seals were still lubricated, no dirt and no stanchion wear-maybe some are just better than others
Talk to any LBS and they will all have stories to tell on FoxPosted 3 years ago # -
Thats coz they were my forks mate...
Posted 3 years ago # -
Best way(IMO) is to take the lower legs off(every 15 hours or so)
That's going to work well for the 24 hour/multi-stage racers.....
Posted 3 years ago # -
Why don't Mojo warranty this, Fox forks carry a 2 year warranty
Because its not a manufacturing defect.
The reason this problem occurs with Fox forks is due to lack of maintenance. Mojo cant replace every CSU free of charge because the idiot who owns the forks couldnt be arsed to clean them when they were meant to.
This is the reason Im geting rid of my fox forks, because they are worn and I cant be bothered to maintain them. Not Mojo's fault though
Posted 3 years ago # -
Yours were in very good nick Neil- but it was my other lads forks I was surprised aboutPosted 3 years ago # -
Ahhh. The younger and cheaper one to keep...
Posted 3 years ago # -
Because its not a manufacturing defect.
The reason this problem occurs with Fox forks is due to lack of maintenance. Mojo cant replace every CSU free of charge because the idiot who owns the forks couldnt be arsed to clean them when they were meant to.
Where does manufacturing defect end and 'unfit for purpose' start.
On the basis that Marzocchi, Rockshox, don't suffer anywhere near as much as it seems Fox do, and also given that Fox apparently didn't have these issues in the past, I'd say it's either a significant design flaw / substandard speccing of the coating or coating process. Hence unfit for purpose.
Alternatively, the design and coating spec has been adequately specified but something has gone badly wrong on the manufacture. Hence a manufacturing defect.
Why doesn't someone issue a small claims writ on this for one or the other and see what the SCC would think of it?
[Interesting that some people seem tolerant to this yet when other manufacturers making for sake of argument 'consumables' encountered manufacturing defects and did warranty their returns they still got a hell of a blasting]
Posted 3 years ago # -
I thought Fox forks have always been like this?? i remember similar stories started to appear after fox first brought out their line of forks in 2002 or whenever it was.
Taking the lower legs of every 15 hours is ridiculous. Thats a couple of times a month in the summer. If they're no suitable for UK use, perhaps they should stop selling them here.
Posted 3 years ago # -
They have always been like it, I had a set of Vanillas when they 1st came out, and they were dead in 15 months.
Taking the lower legs of every 15 hours is ridiculous. Thats a couple of times a month in the summer
for some people thats a couple of times a week in the summer.Posted 3 years ago # -
So you automatically void the Fox warranty if you use them in a 24 hour race?!
Posted 3 years ago # -
No, you just need to stop mid race for a service
Posted 3 years ago # -
This is surely going to bite them in the ass soon because they're coming on a lot of popular bikes these days. Mine are running fine after a year of heavy use but I'm prepared to expect some wear under the seals now judging by what others have said.
Although, as they work fine I'm likely going to do what 'Poddy said and just run them till they break and get something else.
Posted 3 years ago # -
For a Dust Wiper Seal Quick Clean and Lube (Quickstart) I'm unsure how tight the crush washers need tightening, does anyone know what 50in-lbs or 565N-cm equates to is Nm ?
Posted 3 years ago # -
it equates to 'buy a torque wrench' as if you over tighten it you will shear the soft Al thread off the damper cartridge and will cost you around £80 to get a new one.
edit: mine has Nm and Inch pounds on it
Posted 3 years ago # -
OK smart a*se........I have a torque wrench which measures in Nm, what does 50-in-lbs or 565N-cm equate to in Nm ???
Posted 3 years ago # -
I read this thread and checked with Fox site (I am about to get a bike with Fox forks on).
You DO NOT have to remove the lower legs or change oil every 15 hours.
You DO have to pop off and clean the seals and foam rings, and put a drop of oil on. Looks like a 5-10min job, bit like the really good drivetrain clean I do every few weeks.
Every 150 hours you change oil and do a strip down.
http://www.foxracingshox.com/fox_tech_center/owners_manuals/09/Eng/2009_OM_eng.htm
Posted 3 years ago # -
Matt, I was about to do what you suggest myself, but apparantly the "quickstart" takes approx the same amount of time, and lifting the seals with a scredriver is more fiddly than taking the lower legs off. This is all "in theory" though...
Posted 3 years ago # -
Having said that, if you have to pop off seals so often, why not make them 'screw on' or with an easy removal/install - rather than stoopid little slots and bodged screwdrivers and electrical tape - surely someone at Fox could come up with something / a tool to pull and knock back on?
Posted 3 years ago # -
50 inch pounds = 5.649241667 Nm off some Internet calculator, however I will check tonight on mine to make sure
Posted 3 years ago # -
trouble is, matt, people who've done exactly that have STILL had problems...
Posted 3 years ago # -
cheers for that richc
Posted 3 years ago # -
no worries, also reading back I misread your 1st post, and didn't think you already had a torque wrench so sorry about that.
Mind you might save someone an expensive mistake.
Posted 3 years ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
