Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
266 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I am in the market for a Talas and was wondering if the 2010 with the FIT that much better than the 2009? Anyone done the comparison? Is it minute or big?
Thanks in advance for any advice.
 

·
Code Burr
Joined
·
1,381 Posts
I'm not crazy about the FIT damper. I just read the MBA article about it and how it will save some weight over their older open bath damper. I've seen that idea fail for mazocchi repeatedly(tst, tst2). I hope it works better for Fox. I would buy a 2009 but thats just me. I love open bath dampers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,470 Posts
shutterbug67 said:
I am in the market for a Talas and was wondering if the 2010 with the FIT that much better than the 2009? Anyone done the comparison? Is it minute or big?
Thanks in advance for any advice.
I have the 2010 Talas 150 rlc with the fit damper & 15mm QR. I haven't ridden the previous version of this fork, but I do also own a '09 Talas 36rc2 on my other bike. Anyways I was apprehensive about the Talas 32 since the 36rc2 is my benchmark, but I am very impressed... I've got about 30k' of downhill over 12 or so rides, so it's definitely been put through the paces. There was a 2-3 ride break-in period, at first the fork felt a bit sticky, but now it's pure butter, especially at speeds. Plenty stiff too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
2009 vs. 2010 TALAS on Mission

I have the 2009 TALAS 15mm (150mm max travel model) on a 2007 Mission with the 2008 DHX 5.0 Air in the rear and agree with the response above (thebronze) about proven reliability of the open bath vs. the bladder. The 2009 can be rebuilt by the home mechanic - I like o-rings lots better than bladders. No history on the bladder technology yet, but it will drive down the cost of the 2009 model - good for us. I have been more than pleased with the 2009 and set it at 130mm for everything other than going down firelanes, then I go to 150mm. The 130mm setting changes the head tube angle enough that you have a very fast steering bike - great turn in) and yet it is not twitchy and the bottom bracket is not to low. This technology is so great - now time for me to practice becoming a better rider - I can't blame the bike for my skill level or lack of!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,836 Posts
Considering Fox has been using a bladder in their 36 forks, I'm pretty sure it will be reliable from the beginning. It will, however, be more difficult to service at home.

What's annoying to me, is that Fox still hasn't fixed their seals.
 

·
Code Burr
Joined
·
1,381 Posts
bad mechanic said:
Considering Fox has been using a bladder in their 36 forks, I'm pretty sure it will be reliable from the beginning. It will, however, be more difficult to service at home.

What's annoying to me, is that Fox still hasn't fixed their seals.
I'm sure they will do better at it than zoke did. I just dont understand the need for it. Does the bladder somehow allow the H/L adjustable compression on the 36's?
 

·
mtbr member
Joined
·
230 Posts
I've got a 36 Talas RC2 on a Knolly Endorphin. My only other comparison is a Zoke Bomber Z2 (about 12 yrs old) so I really don't have anything I can compare it with, other than the fact that it's very, very stiff.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,837 Posts
thebronze said:
I'm sure they will do better at it than zoke did. I just dont understand the need for it. Does the bladder somehow allow the H/L adjustable compression on the 36's?
I also wonder what the justification is for sealed fork dampers.
Was there ever a downside to open bath?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,836 Posts
The downside to open bath is oil contamination, a higher required oil volume, and possible oil aeration.

The bladder allows for the expansion of the oil during use.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top