Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

· Action Sports Trader
Joined
·
388 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Does anyone have a travis on a 6.6. I just want to know how it rides. I'm considering one right now for my ride. My choices are a Travis 180, Fox 36 Vanilla R, or a 66sl. Anyone have any opinions on my fork choices.

Sam
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,231 Posts
Well ......

The Travis 180 is a little tall for the 6.6 but it is VERY plush; to the extent that is has little resistance to "bob". Great for DH and hucking but not a geat trail fork. The SL really works well on my 6.6 and it's extremely adjustable and light.
 

Attachments

· Action Sports Trader
Joined
·
388 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Fork choices

Oh,

So the Travis 180 is a little tall. Have you heard anything about the travis 150's. I was also considering a Fox 36 Vanilla R. Have you heard anything about those?

Sam
 

· Registered
Joined
·
412 Posts
samanderson4 said:
Oh,

So the Travis 180 is a little tall. Have you heard anything about the travis 150's. I was also considering a Fox 36 Vanilla R. Have you heard anything about those?

Sam
The Travis 150 is a great fork... but it uses TPC+ instead of Intrinsic (found on the 180). Also, it is about 6.8 lbs. The '07 Fox VAN looks nice, 160mm travel with bottom-out dampening... but weighing a pound less.

-sus13
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,375 Posts
I rode a 6.6 with a 36 talus and it felt a little too steep at 150mm or less. I have a 66SL on my Nomad and I run it at 160-170 for a good blend of climbing and decending ability. I like being able to tune the length to adjust handling but be aware that there is some break-in time before the 66SL is totally plush.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
13,269 Posts
These are the three forks I was looking at when I ordered my 6.6. Ultimately I narrowed it down to the 66sl and the VAn 36RC2. The Travis 180 was a bit much and the Travis 150 was still heavy like someone else said.

Between the Vanilla 36 and the Marz 66 SL..... I basically flipped a coin. The 66 is more adjustable (but not on the fly so what's the point), it was a bit cheaper but .25lbs heavier, and getting rave reviews from guys on this board on the Turner board.

I've had two other fox forks and have been happy with them, wasn't worried too much about dropping the travel (I rode a 6.6 demo with the TALAS 36 and it did feel shorter, a bit less plush and only a little lighter compared to the VAN), and lots of people rave about the buttery smooth coil feel....so I went with the VANILLA 36 RC2.

So far I really like it. It absolutely gobbles baby heads, ledges, and drops. I haven't noticed any real penalty while climbing over the TALAS 36 either.

Still would be interested in trying a well broken in 66 SL at some point.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,174 Posts
I'm running a 66RC from 05, it's 170mm, with a tall A/C height. The fork feels great, I trail ride it every morning with about 2 miles or so of climbing, it's a little cumbersome on the tight climbs, but VERY rewarding on the downs, feels like a perfect match, but ideally I would want something a touch shorter in height, the 36 VAN.RC2, definitely spring for the RC2, rather than the R, much more fine tuning. Just my 2 cents. E2
 

Attachments

· Now with flavor!!
Joined
·
5,611 Posts
I wouldn't go any taller than the fox........with a zero stack headset.

I like steering though.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top