Forum menu
The bike was designed to work with those forks rather than as an afterthought. The forks are excellent as far as rigid forks go, and far better than any carbon fork I have had on other 26" bikes. I have a permanently bust thumb and often get numb hands, but no pain with this fork. Really is very, very good for a rigid.
I have experienced no wandering at all, if anything I have trouble getting the front wheel up compared to my 456 or Heckler. Which given that it is my SS rigid XC bike is probably as it should be! I still have spacers under the stem with a flat bar so there is room to play with. I wouldn't say it is too high at all.
They're some of the best rigid forks I've ridden - noticeably flexy back/forward so that they're noticeably smoother than most rigids but perfectly stiff side to side. Can't say I noticed any front end lift either since as stated, the frame was designed around that length of fork.
Fork looks long but is excellent in use, perfectly designed for the frame
Mike_D - Memberusually reducing the travel doesn't reduce the axel-crown length
Are you on crack?
static length man, not under compression 🙄
Rocket Dog - When I drop travel on my old vanillas (add a spacer) from 130 to 100 the a-c gets 30mm shorter and when I raised the Wife's Rebas (remove a spacer) from 100 to 120 the a-c got 20mm bigger. I assume manitou work the same?EDIT: A quick trawl of the interweb indicates that it isn't a trivial task. Not entirely sure why, but something to do with them not having the length of stroke determined solely by spacers.
I dropped the travel on my minutes, dead easy, just bung a spacer underneath the top-out bumper. The reason everyone says its difficult is manitou designed the 3 travel models (120, 100, 80) with different length internals, unlike rockshox, so you can get an 'official' kit to do it. I just used a bit of old fork i had in my spares box to drop the travel 30mm to 90mm. Meant i actually got some standover height on my 21".
Dont have my Swift now though, sizing was weird on the 21", felt short but with crazy high bars and no standover room. If you look at all the pics posted the lowest bars are only about an inch lower than the saddle, i run my bars much lower than the saddle, even my DH bike had bars lower than the Swift! and that has 8" travel. Hoping to try a 19" at some point to see if, with lower bars, it feels long enough. Should hopefully make it feel a bit more nimble too.
clubber - Member
They're some of the best rigid forks I've ridden - noticeably flexy back/forward so that they're noticeably smoother than most rigids but perfectly stiff side to side...
I'd agree. It's as good as a good carbon fork so the only reason to consider replacing it is weight, and the fork isn't particularly heavy.
rOcKeTdOg - Memberstatic length man, not under compression 🙄
Static length [b]is[/b] reduced. Just look at RS u-turn - wind down the travel and the fork gets shorter. Same for Fox, same for Pace. Haven't done it on Manitous myself but I'd be amazed if they weren't the same.
Don't forget the Hummingbird for those of us who are vertically challenged:
[img] 
[/img]
Now with slightly less idiotic handlebars - replaced with a much lower rise.
Haven't done it on Manitous myself
they key phrase i think
Remind me the model then - I'll have a look at the manual - bet I'm right though 🙂
RD, if you open them up and put the reducer spacer in the right place it will lower the fork and drop the travel. Remember, this is a different conversion than is required on the SC32's where you to reduce travel WITHOUT reducing height in order to run the 29er wheel.
epicyclo - Memberjfeb - Member
A Gryphon rather than a Swift, but as no one ever says "lets see photos of a Singular Gryphon"...Well I like it
🙂 Thanks
will this craving never abate?
[img] http://www.flickr.com/photos/48107563@N00/4852974505/in/pool-1010382@N22/ [/img]
Disaster... I didn't think the £350 Niner fork would suit the swift... NO holidays this year kids... You have rootes1 to thank...