AC height?tomsmoto said:its a big fork.. 30mm more travel, plus the taller AC height. it'll drastically change your bike, way taller front end.
its not a bad trade i guess, its just a very different fork! if thats what you're looking for, sure.
Will do, btw do you think this is a good deal? How much harder will it make climbing trails?Schlitz Domino said:AC-height= Axle to Crown height
You might also want to check if a fork that much taller voids your warranty.
Don't know anything about the 66, so I can't say if it is a good deal. You will notice it climbing, especially on the steeps where your front end will like to lift and wander more than before. Do you want a slacker head angle, a burlier fork, or both?ECU_Pirate18 said:Will do, btw do you think this is a good deal? How much harder will it make climbing trails?
If you're prepared to deal with the longer fork, then yeah, I'd go for it. I had an 888 RC from 2005 and it was sick...basically the same thing.ECU_Pirate18 said:I want a fork that can handle the pretty big hits but I will be doing my fair share of climbing.
I agree with Adam.NWfreeride said:The 2005 66 series had really tall crowns, and as a result the AC height (as mentioned) is really tall. For the pitch, I'd say this is a bit of a sticking point.
Can the 66 be spaced internally down to 150mm? If so, this may get you a fork that can handle the big hits without ruining the frame geometry and sacrificing the integrity of the frame.
then you definitely dont want a 66!ECU_Pirate18 said:I want a fork that can handle the pretty big hits but I will be doing my fair share of climbing.
Holy hi-rise Batman, that's a tall front end you got there!Uncle Cliffy said:That year 66 has a very tall A to C height. It's taller than most modern triple clamp forks! Not a good idea for the Pitch IMO.
Edit: Axel to crown measurement on the 2005 170mm 66 was 595mm!!!!!!!!
