"The black is truely a black grade"
Its listed on the boards as a double black grade (just the name of the route is the black route)
I think thats probably the best way to look at it. A step up from other blacks. Though probably easier than stainburns warren boulder trail or mabies kona dark side (Also double blacks)

"the new upper red's a total waste of time, though"
I quite liked the drop after drop after drop after ..
I wasn't so keen on the tight slow corners between the faster bits

Pics needed (fork and wheels) i think, just to fully clarify

How much layback does your seatpost have, and how far back on the rails is the saddle? It might be you can get another 30mm out of the two?

Too much faff ..

For anyone to see it, they'd need to have a facebook account, and be your 'friend' on facebook too. You need to put it on a public video posting site like youtube, vimeo, etc ..

I don't think you can put it on here. You'll have to post a link to someehere else that you've uploaded it to (youtube, vimeo etc ..)

I have linked it. Press the first 'this'

Not exactly what you're after, but this[/url] will work stuff out as you change the forks you stick in the front end.
Also, this gives an upto date A-Cs of RS forks
I think Fox 32 QR15 140mm forks are 515mm if you need it

Although the indexing is works under no load, perhaps it isn't indexed centrally? (exaclty below each sprocket, rather than a little to one side of each sprocket?)
Try re-indexing it?

How would a bigger travel bike help?
So long as you don't have particularly hard compound, low volume tyres or at high pressure then theres only really the riding to sort out.
Get the saddle out the way so the bike can move around, try to remember its less herky-jerky the faster you go and don't try to set off in really rough bits

I managed most of it last time apart from the narrow bit near the top (the top being the gate?) where it seems to become insanely slippy, probably because of the water flowing through

"I can't find any Maxxis Minion Dhf 42a's with a folding bead"
That'll be because they don't make them

Folding/kevlar 2.35" Minions are only available in 60a Maxxpro

You'll need to buy a single ply wire or dual ply wire to get a 42a Supertacky Minion

Theres not a lot of weight difference between a kevlar/folding 2.35" minion and a wire/single ply 2.35" minion anyway

Yes, but for best performance, make sure you shorten the chain correctly and wind in the B-tension screw on the mech properly for the reduced biggest sprocket on the casette

Isn't there a bit of a price jump between them?

I thought an EX8 was about equal to an FSR comp, and an EX9 about equal to an FSR Elite?

"Blackspire DH, so no shifting ramps etc."
It depends on the riding and how well the unramped chainring holds the chain as to whether you need any sort of chain device.
I ran a thorn unramped chainring (from SJS, twas cheapish – I know at least one of the S/S on-one ones work too), without anythign for quite a while without a problem. General XC and anything upto the 'lumpiness' of sherwood pines caused no problems whatsoever.

When I started to try it on steps/stairs and more rooty/rocky stuff it did start to fall off a few times a ride

I've now got a plastic FSA bashguard (I think they're £14 from CRC (inc. longer chainring bolts – the 32T one is big enough to guide a 34T ring too) and one of those mounts for a 'classic' zefal style pumps (just pointing toward the chainring where the chain is, it phyically stops the chain from coming off. An N-gear jump stop as mentioned above would do a better job, but it costs and weighs more, I can't seem to find them that readily available and I had the pump bracket lying around already
I'll get some pics up if you want

"How do you measure the chain for a 1 x 9 setup? "
Easy, same as you would for a 3×9. Wrap the chain round your 2 biggest rings/sprockets (the 32 or 34 on the back and your front ring), but not through the mech + one pair of links overlap [with a 32 or 34T front ring you'll be taking 3 pairs of links out from a typical triple setup]

"will shorten the life of your chain"
But you won't be shelling out for granny rings or expensive outer rings. Plus your unramped 'middle' ring will have wider, fatter teeth that don't wear out as quickly, and because its unramped, is undirectional, so you can flip it round and use the other side of the teeth

"What are your reasons for using it for xc?"
2-1 uphill stops you form being too lazy andf droppping to 1-1 when it gets steep/long. 2-9 on the road forces you to spin. Both things I don't do on my main bike. It gives me a reason to take the 1×9 HT as an attempt to force me to try uphill and in an attempt to get better at spinning
Either that or some riding simply doesn't need any more gears than a 1×9 setup, so why carry around the extra 1lb in weight. Front mechs bung up in slop

Remove all the air from your air shock and see how close the rear wheel is then? I'd guess its going to be close. Unless you can get hold of a detailed axle path diagram for an '06 reign you'll never really know without fitting the bigger shock

Does the longer stroke shock have the same eye-to-eye length or not? If longer thenm it may be that it won't actually fit in the frame unloaded

"i'd buy a commencal max max. for £300 its a flipping great bike"
For £215.96, it'd be even better

The winstanleys page says that tora '09 is post mount too

Either try to find something IS mount, or go into a giant bike dealer and ask if they have (or can order) a (giant) post mount fork to IS caliper adaptor. I think thats the only one for that way around. An IS fork – post mount caliper adator won't work.

I asked in my LBS 2 years ago when I was considering buying a post mount fork when I had some IS mount giant calipers. I'd seen the adaptor in the brakes instructions and they had one in the workshop (JeJames Rotherham)

I didn't read that bit. It does appear they are all post mount

What are your brake calipers? Do they bolt straight to an IS fork (running with a 160mm rotor) with no adaptor bolted to them? If so, then theres only one adaptor (going off threads asking about this) that might fit, but theres a good chance won't, or might not be available any more (made by giant)

I prefer Kenda Nevegals for 'general XC' in 2.1" DTC(Dual Tread Compound) folding as they're pretty much the same volume as 2.35" HRs, are about 85g lighter and I prefer them to HRs on harder ground
Advantages don't roll as well as nevegals (I don't reckon)
2.1" HRs are tiny

Nevegals don't go as well as HRs in slop though, so I run HRs (swap between them and 2" Bontrager mudXs) through winter

Same forks, black or white, £10 less from merlin (inc. P&P*)

Marzocchi XC500 ETA** = £157.46

If you stretch another £25, recons are a lot lighter (same internals as the toras) here for £175

*At least it was last time I got some forks from them
** A lockout which when you push on them also drop the height of the fork for going uphill

keep refreshing the page until it appears?

XTR r.mech and SLX cranks ..

I'm not a fan of the yellow. If it was just a touch redder then I think I might really like it. As it is, its not a vibrant enough yellow for me. Perhaps in the blue they do the silver back end wouldn't stand out so much too

"tell you what, I could do a swap….
… somewhere in the spares box I have a pair of 1996 "

I was thinking more along the lines of buying a new DT fork (as this is apparantly sufficient? and selling the DTs

"He told me that DT had made their stanchions less smooth to make the fork plusher "
"It is, I think – by DT as mentioned above. "

Are you sure DT just don't make them a touch less smooth? Rather than make them too smooth and then have to make them rough enough? (apologies if I've not read it fully)

I thought they changed every time your chagned pages (eg front page, forum page, each thread etc..
Or have I not stuck around on the same page for long enough for it to change to another?

If your stantions are too smooth to live with, why not sell the forks on for £££ now, and get something rough enough for what you're after, instead of trashing these and having to buy something else afterward?

"but if my feet are sore because I've ridden lots then DX's are much comfier"

I see, I do find my (back) foot/calf hurts quite a lot if I don't put quite a few pedalstrokes in on longer/rougher descents

I seem to remember DXs being harder to clip into when I used them (over M520s)

Surely if you feel the 'need' to stay unclipped to ascend/descend something you still haven't leanrt to use SPDs yet? My brother has said he has only just stopped doing this, and now finds it much easier staying clipped in for everything. I think I did it a bit on a few vaguely tricky bits where I thought I might want to put a foot down on the first few rides with SPDs, but made myself stay clipped in once I was semiconfident I could unclip when I wanted. Clipped in seems way more secure than not

"Plenty of downhillers use platform spd's on occassion, do you think they just ride them unclipped?"
No, I think they'll stay clipped in, but if pro DHers use platform/cage type SPD pedals, there must be some good reason to use them, its not like pro DHers aren't weight weenies

"A tiny bit heavier"
Not really
XTR ~ 320g
XT/M540 ~ 350g
M520 ~ 380g
(crank brothers/ritchey are lighter)
M424 ~ 440g
M545 ~ 550g
DX ~ 650g

DXs seem to be quite common, thats another 1/2 pound that is arguably not needed(and costs more to buy – though I can see some benefit)

"lighter tyres to replace my current wired high rollers, without losing the grip"
If you've got 60a wire ones, then get 60a folding ones which are 100-150g less per tyre. Theres no 42a supertacky folding one though

"Is the only difference between High Roller XC and High Roller DH the width"
No. The tread is different. The FR/DH (2.35" +) have much taller side tread and taller/closer main tread
Not all the FR/DH tread (2.35" +) have downhill labelling on them. The downhill labelled ones are dual thickness I think.
Have a closer look at the specs. If its over a kilo it'll be dual ply, if a bit under (7-800g) then it'll be single ply (wire) or kevlar (folding = 695g)

" The side walls are much thinner than normal rollers"
But still far better than a kevlar kenda nevegal for eg

"with the ramped side of the central knob facing to the back. It gives more braking power (if you look at the tyre it's obvious why)"

No, not to me

So, which way is the correct way round and which way is the wrong way around? Pics? (I'm not able to get to my high rollers to check)

Or do you get more braking traction from the ramp because its got more contct with the ground than the paddle-like-surface?
If this is so then surely this only works in certain conditions, ie harder, smoother terrain, and when it gets muddy/rooty then the paddlesshould hook up better under braking?

"reverses does give more stopping power on steep stuff but lots more rolling resistance on flats and ups"
How does it give more stopping power? You're using ramps instead of 'paddles' to brake with surely?

Bontrager do them (in 27.2 or 31.6, with 5 or 25mm offsets). I think mmine is called a Race X-lite. Its an ACC (alu. core construction) one

"with back reversed in Alps a few years ago – extra braking yes"

"I do it because I like to have the maxxis logo on both sides of the bike….."

Eh? I thought high rollers were supposed to normally both face so the ramps are on the forward edge? Paddle-like-surface gives braking surface, but roll on and climbing traction provided onky by the ramps? Vice versa other way around

You want a coke can 0.1mm thick?

"It's a bad idea. "
I know I wouldn't, especially being carbon

Bear in mind a 2.25" Advantage is much bigger volume than a 2.35" High Roller. A 2.5" High Roller is very similar in volume to a 2.25" Advantage

Something to do with an advantage being a 'new' tread design (along with crossmarks, ardents) on bigger carcasses, and high rollers are an 'old' read design (along with minions, larsen TTs, ignitors) and much smaller

I reckon my 60a 2.35" HR is grippier than my 60a 2.25" advantage up front in slop and probably better in turns etc, but I think mostly because my rims are too narrow (mavic XM719s) to get proper/decent performance out of the advantages. They need some nice wide rims I think, like 28mm DT EX5.1Ds, Bontrager Rythms etc ..
Although a much better fit to my rims, the high rollers have much taller cornering tread so probably contribute to better cornering as well as fitting with a much squarer profile to XM719s

I've not tried them, but from what I've read on here and magazine reviews (when I was trying to work out what to buy) is that they're very good in slop, but the tall narrow knobbles can squirm horribly on tarmac/other hard surfaces and not overly brilliant on wet rock or roots.

Panaracer Trailrakers are supposed to be silly grippy everywhere (slop, wet rock/roots, but unfortuanatly on tarmac and hard surfaces too, so quite slow rolling

Bontrager Mud X's are more of a race mud tyre, not having the ultimate grip of a trailraker, but still grip very well in slop, wet rock/roots and roll well for a mud tyre. I bought these in a 2.0", which still come up small. The 1.8" is supposed to be very small, though I've not seen one. I sometimes use them in summer too, when I can't really be bothered to take them off. They corner quite nicely too I think

Assuming the same axle-crown height when bottomed out, then the bike can't dive any further so it can't get that bad. Even if you have some tall 130mm forks (eg Fox 36 Talas, 515mm) and some low 100mm ones to put on (eg 470mm), then the 100mm fork can only bottom out 15mm lower

Try it and see what happens. I suspect it'll be okay. You'll still have a silly slack head angle on it

"If the 130mm fork was 500mm axle to crown, and the 180mm fork is 550mm"
Not all 130mm forks are that low
A Revelation at 130mm (or Pike) is 508mm
A Fox Talas 36 at 130mm for eg is 515mm

Nor 180mm forks as low as 550mm either
A 180mm Totem/Domain is 565mm for eg

You seem to be trying to make it all far too simple
If you genuinely want to replace a 130mm fork with a 180mm one I suspect you have completely the wrong frame already, or would do with a 180mm fork, not just in terms of whether or not you'd rip off the headtube or not riding the same terrain but with a bigger fork. Massively raised BB height, shortened effective top tube, shortened effective seatstay length, increased head angle unloaded (but similar bottomed out head angle), increased seat angle forcing the rider way over the rear wheel, etc etc ..

160mm rotor for £9, posted

Caliper mount? Is the caliper IS mount? If so, is it not a 160mm direct mount to the fork? Though which of these carbon forks are IS mount (and not post mount?)

White brothers, superstar, nukeproof, exotica, element are all the same, just with different stickers

Bontrager are different
On-one is different
Pace/DT Swiss is different

I'm 15st and run a 160mm rotor in a '03 Hope mini on my XC hardtail. Okay so the power is lacking, but given that you'll have a rigid fork up front, will you really need a 203mm rotor + M4?

465mm ones? I presume for 29"er? I would work on a 26"er as unlike the on-one 29"er fork I don't think they have the 'proper' rake for a 26"er, just that they'll be a touch slack. 440/445mm is generally used to suspension correct at sag position a 100mm 26"er fork

SLX is something like 889g (triple) and £90 from merlin, XT is 853g (triple) and £130 from merlin.

Decide if you need to drop 36g for £40? I suspect its more than likely they'll be cheaper weight savings £ for gram elsewhere on your bike when you come to swap something (for eg tyres)