Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 59 Posts

·
LDC is ded,deth by trollz
Joined
·
2,147 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Has anybody either raised the RS1 up to 120 or put a 120 f34/pike/sid etc on there. Did it slow down the handling a bunch? Even better has anyone ridden the 16 fuel ex 8-9.9 and a top fuel with a 120 fork. Does the Fuel feel like it has a lot more than the top fuel? Or just a bit more. Thank you

Sent from my SM-G360P using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,426 Posts
Has anybody either raised the RS1 up to 120 or put a 120 f34/pike/sid etc on there. Did it slow down the handling a bunch? Even better has anyone ridden the 16 fuel ex 8-9.9 and a top fuel with a 120 fork. Does the Fuel feel like it has a lot more than the top fuel? Or just a bit more. Thank you

Sent from my SM-G360P using Tapatalk
I have not upped my travel on my RS1 to 120 yet.
From the reports it slackin's the HA a little

IMO, you can't compare a Top fuel to a 2016 Fuel. They feel 100% different when riding.
more so with a 2017 Fuel.

after riding my bike more and more ( 2016 Procal 9.9 SL) I won't be upping the travel. At most. The bike will be for sale for a new FS bike.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
147 Posts
I didn't realize the 2016 forks could extend to 120. Thought it was 80 or 100 only. How do you increase the travel?
 

·
LDC is ded,deth by trollz
Joined
·
2,147 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
I didn't realize the 2016 forks could extend to 120. Thought it was 80 or 100 only. How do you increase the travel?
I was talking about the Rock Shox RS1. Thats 80-120. The guy above your post wasnt very clear.

Sent from my SM-G360P using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,426 Posts
Can't up the Fox 32 SC to 120. 100mm is it's limit.
I have one coming but may sell it for a factory 32 at 120 instead for my Niner
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
383 Posts
I increased the SID XX on my '16 9.8 to 120mm this fall. 10/10, would do it again. It does slack the HA out by about a degree.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
Has anybody either raised the RS1 up to 120 or put a 120 f34/pike/sid etc on there. Did it slow down the handling a bunch? Even better has anyone ridden the 16 fuel ex 8-9.9 and a top fuel with a 120 fork. Does the Fuel feel like it has a lot more than the top fuel? Or just a bit more. Thank you

Sent from my SM-G360P using Tapatalk
I have a 2017 fox float 34 120 on mine and the bike turns into a very capable ripper cross country bike. The added stiffness of the fox 34 is night and day over the fox 32 SC ( which is an amazing cross country fork that actually works!) My TF 9.9 weights 22.5lbs with the fox 34 which is still plenty light. I honestly really couldn't notice the weight difference between the two setups because the bike pedals so damn well. I drop my stem size down to a 80 or 90 when I have the bigger fork on. Handling is great. The rear suspension on this bike feels like much more than 100mm. Hope this helps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,402 Posts
I have a 2017 fox float 34 120 on mine and the bike turns into a very capable ripper cross country bike. The added stiffness of the fox 34 is night and day over the fox 32 SC ( which is an amazing cross country fork that actually works!) My TF 9.9 weights 22.5lbs with the fox 34 which is still plenty light. I honestly really couldn't notice the weight difference between the two setups because the bike pedals so damn well. I drop my stem size down to a 80 or 90 when I have the bigger fork on. Handling is great. The rear suspension on this bike feels like much more than 100mm. Hope this helps.
How much do you weigh? Asking in regard to the big diff in stiffness between the 34 and 32SC (which I ride, weigh about 155 in season).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,426 Posts
How much do you weigh? Asking in regard to the big diff in stiffness between the 34 and 32SC (which I ride, weigh about 155 in season).
at 155 you will feel the Fox 32 SC flex under some good riding.

It's a nice fork. very smooth and plush but it does flex a little.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13 Posts
I weigh 180-190 depending on time of year. Fork is just as stiff as any 32mm stanction fork I've tried. I don't notice any flex in it unless really taking it through terrain that it's not designed for. If your gonna race it, it's better than any xc fork I've tried(previous fox and RS world cups). I also run wheels with 32 spoke count for a stiffer ride up front.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,426 Posts
I weigh 180-190 depending on time of year. Fork is just as stiff as any 32mm stanction fork I've tried. I don't notice any flex in it unless really taking it through terrain that it's not designed for. If your gonna race it, it's better than any xc fork I've tried(previous fox and RS world cups). I also run wheels with 32 spoke count for a stiffer ride up front.
My Fox 32 SC and RS1 fork are almost the same feel.
Each has it's pro/con.
The RS1 does feel a little stiffer, and can go to 120 travel.
but the weight is a little more :(
 

·
LDC is ded,deth by trollz
Joined
·
2,147 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
What's the pro/con? My topfuel frame comes in April. Im pretty locked into 120mm on it. I really like the idea of the rs1 because i am making a 3 bike system out of sharing parts. Procaliber 9.9 rigid or rs1 at 100, topfuel 9.9 rs1 at 120, chinese ebay stache rigid or rs1 at 120. I am going to rotate parts i spent all my money getting the procal 9.9 and top fuel 9.9 frames and now ill share parts as i save up and get each bike its parts.

I want a 120xc bike and under warranty for any full suspension so that leaves me only the TF and putting a 120. It obviously makes it a little slacker but i want something more "aggresive xc". The rs1 allows me the most flexibility out of any fork. The Trek dealer told me they had a bunch of growing pains getting the rs1 to lockout properly with the rear shock but they have it solved now. Not sure if that means they solved it with a fox fork or solved the actual issue. The rs1 has a lot of opinions either way. The stepcast i have heard nothing but good things. I only hesitate to use it on the TF because im trying to make a bike that is closer to the fuel 120 and the stepcast is 100 travel and "flexy" and i want to ride without any worries of bottoming out or flex. My weight budget is 24lbs with a dropper and the rs1. So the weight isnt the same factor if chasing 22lbs. Im basically trying to build the 2016 tf 9.9 that had the rs1 but with a dropper and wider wheels.
My Fox 32 SC and RS1 fork are almost the same feel.
Each has it's pro/con.
The RS1 does feel a little stiffer, and can go to 120 travel.
but the weight is a little more :(

Sent from my SM-G360P using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,426 Posts
What's the pro/con? My topfuel frame comes in April. Im pretty locked into 120mm on it. I really like the idea of the rs1 because i am making a 3 bike system out of sharing parts. Procaliber 9.9 rigid or rs1 at 100, topfuel 9.9 rs1 at 120, chinese ebay stache rigid or rs1 at 120. I am going to rotate parts i spent all my money getting the procal 9.9 and top fuel 9.9 frames and now ill share parts as i save up and get each bike its parts.

I want a 120xc bike and under warranty for any full suspension so that leaves me only the TF and putting a 120. It obviously makes it a little slacker but i want something more "aggresive xc". The rs1 allows me the most flexibility out of any fork. The Trek dealer told me they had a bunch of growing pains getting the rs1 to lockout properly with the rear shock but they have it solved now. Not sure if that means they solved it with a fox fork or solved the actual issue. The rs1 has a lot of opinions either way. The stepcast i have heard nothing but good things. I only hesitate to use it on the TF because im trying to make a bike that is closer to the fuel 120 and the stepcast is 100 travel and "flexy" and i want to ride without any worries of bottoming out or flex. My weight budget is 24lbs with a dropper and the rs1. So the weight isnt the same factor if chasing 22lbs. Im basically trying to build the 2016 tf 9.9 that had the rs1 but with a dropper and wider wheels.



Sent from my SM-G360P using Tapatalk

If one bike will have a RS1 and you want to keep them the same. Do the RS1 on the others.
My niner is 24lbs with the RS1 and I could still get it much lighter with cranks and rims and a seat post

The SC flex. It so does the RS1
They just have a different feel/flex to them

The con I see with the RS1 over the SC
Changing the front tire sucks. The legs can be a pita to get aligned to get the hub back on

Pro. It's can go to 120mm and it's very smooth and plush

Fox. If you keep the sc you are stuck at 100mm
But if you do a fox 32 non sc you can do 120mm





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
149 Posts
I have a '16 Fuel EX8 29er with a Fox 32 on it. I am 6' and 220# and it is way too flexy for me. The fork works well otherwise and haven't had any issues with bottoming it out. It just has too much flex for my liking. I plan to upgrade to a Fox 34 whenever finances allow.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
294 Posts
I have a 2017 fox float 34 120 on mine and the bike turns into a very capable ripper cross country bike.
Hi, I am about to do the the same... I have 2017 TF 9.8 carbon in XL and I feel a big need to go to stiffer fork .. but bike is way heavier and I thought it was actually light:
setup is: Traverse sl 29 carbon wheels upgrade, Schwalbe RR 29x2.35 tires: 24.66 lb; I know tires are heavier, wheels could also loose some .. but other than that I do not see where would I shave almost 3 pounds to match your 21.5 lb before upgrade... sounds unrealistic to make the weight... please advise..
Anyway about the upgrade.. I have a choice to put on either a) 2015 Fox 34 performance 100mm OE or B) 2018 Fox 34 Factory 120mm;
The a) option can also extend to 120 mm with swap of Air spring ($30)
Which one would you guys advise to put?
100 or 120?
Factory or upgrade performance with Air spring (and save $$)
I want to hook up the new 34 back to dual remote lockout.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,426 Posts
Hi, I am about to do the the same... I have 2017 TF 9.8 carbon in XL and I feel a big need to go to stiffer fork .. but bike is way heavier and I thought it was actually light:
setup is: Traverse sl 29 carbon wheels upgrade, Schwalbe RR 29x2.35 tires: 24.66 lb; I know tires are heavier, wheels could also loose some .. but other than that I do not see where would I shave almost 3 pounds to match your 21.5 lb before upgrade... sounds unrealistic to make the weight... please advise..
Anyway about the upgrade.. I have a choice to put on either a) 2015 Fox 34 performance 100mm OE or B) 2018 Fox 34 Factory 120mm;
The a) option can also extend to 120 mm with swap of Air spring ($30)
Which one would you guys advise to put?
100 or 120?
Factory or upgrade performance with Air spring (and save $$)
I want to hook up the new 34 back to dual remote lockout.
To loose weight, New drive train. Brakes. Smaller tires.

Fox wise. I'd go with the 2018 Fox 34. The factory valving is very nice. BUT. You should call fox and ask if you can connect your lockout to the forks and if you will have 3 settings or 2.

I personally do not see any cons with going to a 120mm fork.

After I pick my Slash up. a Top Fuel is the next order. I will be upping the fork to 120 on it
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
294 Posts
To loose weight, New drive train. Brakes. Smaller tires.

Fox wise. I'd go with the 2018 Fox 34. The factory valving is very nice. BUT. You should call fox and ask if you can connect your lockout to the forks and if you will have 3 settings or 2.

I personally do not see any cons with going to a 120mm fork.

After I pick my Slash up. a Top Fuel is the next order. I will be upping the fork to 120 on it
Thanks !! My current Fox 32 SC is 3 position lockout and the 2018 Fox 34 Factory is also 3 pos. so just have to get remote kit as the original 32 is grip remote and the new Fox 34 needs Fit4 Remote.. should work ... already have kit # I need...

BTW what wheels you running ? I have my eyes on the new Rovals control SL in boost that Kulhary is riding.. but right now too much $$.. but sweet weight for sure.. or Kovee XXX would be nice too.. same problem.
In your setup going with lighter tires means usually going narrower...I personally prefer a bit more cushion, especially for the harsher stuff on east coast.. (also more protection for the rims)
 
1 - 20 of 59 Posts
Top