Can someone explain what differences I would “feel” as a rider over the two afore mentioned forks.
will the 160s (talas) mean i can do more.
Really need someone to explain the real world differences
Thanks
Kev
1 degree slacker headangle and potentially more "sticktion" to overcome to get fork moving
they'll make you a better rider !
Would suggest thats a pretty big question.
VERY high level:
160mm will give you
more stable at speed (slacker head angle)
more control through the rough stuff (more travel)
bike will hold its line better (stiffer left to right + weight)
stiffer front to back - only really felt under breaking
disadvantages:
might not suit your frame therefore ruin handling and/ or snap it
Weight will be a disadvantage uphill
slacker head angle could make it wandery uphill (although not if u get Talas as u suggest)
presuming your frame suits both as mine does you know if you live to enjoy the downs (160mm) or you enjoy the climbs and putting the milage in and therefore go 140mm. I have a mojo and have the very lucky option to run both, the 36 sits neglected in the garage until i go to the alps each year. then again if my mates were DH'ers i would run the 36 all year.
hope all that helps!!
I have a pair of 36 talas's (150mm) and a pair of Reba Maxle's (120mm) for my 456.
The 36's are stiffer and when talas'ed down mean easier climbing than the Reba's, but about 800g heavier.
I use the 36's when away and at trail centres, and the Reba's for XC and enduro's.
If I was buying from scratch I'd probably, instead of the 36's, buy a pair of 140/150mm U-Turn Air Revelations - saving weight (and money) and not really losing much in the way of stiffness (if my Reba's are anything to go by). Plus the 36's need a service at least once a year to keep them right...
one day you will underestimate something on the trail, slightly overestimate your skills and that extra 20mm might save you 🙂