Fork help


#1

I’m looking at getting a 160mm fork. Right now my bike is 150/140 so it would be 160/140 I’m ok with the front tire coming up easier and a 1degree slacker head tube angle. Looking for someones opinion on it


#2

150/140 would be the average all rounder here . More slackier good for DH But a bit awkward for climbing steep boulders.


#3

I agree. I think 150 is the sweet spot haha.


#4

Going from 150 to 160 mm suspension in front woukd raise BB by ~5mm. I would think you would be fine.


#5

My bike was 140/140. I upgraded to a Pike and went to 150/140 like the newer Trances. A big part of the difference was the substantially better fork, but I feel like the extra 10mm of travel helped the bike out a lot and feels much better on decents without affecting the climbing abilities. I don’t feel like I would want any more travel as I don’t think I would gain much for decents and it would make the bike climb poorly.


#6

Lots of factors and variables. Best go for Giant, Rocky, specialized demo at Fight for enduro and Victoria park for Xc, keppoch for DH. check out which one feels comfortable or what type of trails you like.


#7

Yea but would 20 more front then back feel good too


#8

Ok thanks


#9

Yea true I’ll think about it but I think the extra 10 mm would help a bit cuz I ride a bit don’t want to say stupid but I push myself and it might help


#10

I’ve always over forked my bikes save for my Giant Reign. I ran my trance with a 160mm pike and wouldn’t have had it any other way. My Hightower was 140/135. I bumped it to 160/135. Sure you loose some climbing, but I’m in it for the extra forgiveness. My buddy runs a 170mm fork on his 2018 trance. It handles a bit awkward at times on flats or climbs but it descends like a monster and he can still out climbing. You’re either a strong climber or not a strong climber. And if you aren’t a strong climber like myself a 140 fork or a 160 fork isn’t going to change anything other than the 160 will be more fun on the way down. Plus the new forks are stupid easy and cheap to adjust. The pike/ revelation/ yari/ lyrik are easily adjustable by swapping out a cartridge. Took me all of 30 minutes to swap the debonair cart and service my fork in my kitchen and went from 140 to 160 for like $40. So if you bought a newer rock shox at 150 or 160 it’s nothing to try a different travel. I’m all rock shox all the time. So I have no idea if fox forks are as easy to change. But the x fusion forks are excellent and you scan adjust travel on most of them by moving a pin. They are also easy to service and there are usually lots on pink bike for cheap for 275 wheels. I was going to run x fusion but they do not have a Canadian dealer, only service centres. So the forks are damn near impossible to buy new, but rebuild parts are easy to get. I mean I wouldn’t buy a 170mm fork. But a 150 or 160 will work great and from my experience over forking giants you won’t have any issues. Giant always did sell the trance sx which was the same frame and rear travel but with a 160mm fork.


#11

Alright thanks. So you think that rockshox is the way to go cuz I found a 2016 Pike 150 mm and I think I also found 1 in 160mm that are in my price range and also a yari 150mm 2017 and a fox performance 34 160mm 2017 what would be the best bet out of those options because the pikes are a lil old but have either not been ridden or serviced last season and the fox has 1 year of use and Yari is also quite new


#12

150mm pike 2016 was last serviced this winter that could be good I think?


#13

I’ve had 2 Pike’s and they are excellent forks. I also used a Yari last season which was surprisingly good. I scraped my Pike on a rock at Fight and ruined the uppers and the Yari was much more affordable in a pinch than a Pike. I now have a revelation and it is also a great fork, although not quite as smooth as they Pike. The Pike and Revelation are the same fork, the only difference being the damper cartridge in the Pike is better. Same with the Lyric and the Yari, same base fork, the Lyric just has the nicer charger guts. I have very little experience with Fox like I said, my last Fox fork was a 36 on my 2013 Reign, I am sure they are great forks, I just prefer Rock Shox personally. But any of those forks should fit the bill and work great. The rock shox all use 35mm stanchions so in theory they would be stiffer than fox 34, but that’s probably not a difference you will be able to feel.


#14

I think youll be happy with the Pike once you get it set up right for your riding. I run a Pike 140 on my Chromag Rootdown and now that Ive set it up, it really eats up everything. Basic lower service (seals, oil, rings) is also really easy to do.


#15

Ok thanks I’ll try and get 1


#16

Alright thanks


#17

Short story: I’ve over forked … and understocked and under tired my StumpJumper. Works good for me. Stock my bike came with a 150/150 travel set up on 2.6 tires. Now running 160/145 travel and rear 2.3 tire. Slacker, lower, for me better, not for everyone however…

Not so short…
Currently I’m running a 160mm fork, offset bushings in my shock and a 2.3 rear tire. The bike is noticeably slacker and lower than stock in this set up. When I still had the 2.6 on the back I had to make a bottom out spacer for the shock to keep the tire from hitting the frame under hard bottom outs. I lost about 5mm of travel by doing this but it’s worth it so I won’t trash the fame.

The longer fork slackens out the front and and give me a bit more to control on DH sections and when hitting drops then the stock 150mm did. Stock the bike had a 150mm Fox 34, I swapped for a 160mm Cane Creek Helm. The CC has more lots of adjustments so it’s easy to dial in for getting rowdy too. bonus. Bar height is higher, but I had some room to move a spacer and get the regular riding position back the same for me as with the 150mm fork. I do swap spacers for steeper trails both up and down from time to time too.

So that longer fork raised my bb, but I’ve dealt with that by the offset bushings I run on the shock. Downside… with the stock 2.6 tires, I’d get some frame rub at bottom out. Not ideal, especially on a carbon frame. So I initially fixed the issue by making a travel limiter for the shock. I lost about 5mm of travel and that gained my the clearance I needed. I’ve since swapped to a 2.3 rear tire as it gives me more sidewall support, it’s lighter, and now I have plenty of clearance too. This lowered the BB even more, also slackened out the bike more too as the tire has a lower profile than the 2.6’s do. I know allot of people with my generation StumpJumper claim the stock BB height is to low. Personally, I don’t think so, and like it in it’s now even lower then low position.

The only downside to all of this for me is that all this slacking out is not just on the head angle but the seat tube angle too, so your weight ends up farther back on seated climbs. Not ideal but I can work with it. Slide the saddle forward a bit and the balance comes back fixing the issue for weight distribution.

But wait… doesn’t that make the fame to small by reducing the reach? Yep, longer forks, lowering bbs, and moving saddle positions do reduce the front end length a bit on the bike. Is it to a level that is an issue? Not really, but I compensated for that from the start moving up one frame size knowing I’d end up doing silly things like this.

takeway… you’ll be fine with the longer fork.