Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

1 - 6 of 6 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
194 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
HI all,
I will like to know if the given travel of a fork is the real travel. I`ve read that nixon´s travel is not 145mm, its only 137mm. Is this true?. In other brands is also that difference.What about marzocchi, Rockshox, etc
Experiences?
 

·
customized
Joined
·
3,123 Posts
It is different with all forks. Some get a little more, some exact and some less. You would have to research each fork independently. Btw, some forks feel like they have more travel than they actually do.

Generally, a fork has the amount of travel that it advertises. My guess is that no one notices that 1/4 of an inch. It is more principle than anything else.
 

·
Chillin the Most
Joined
·
4,025 Posts
Keep in mind that the mfg. stated measurement has the negative travel as part of the total sum. For instance the RS Pyslo has 125mm of travel, however the fork only shows 115mm, then other 10mm is negative travel. So when you measure it on the stantchion you only see 115.

RS does this, as does Marz I believe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,230 Posts
evo5 said:
HI all,
I will like to know if the given travel of a fork is the real travel. I`ve read that nixon´s travel is not 145mm, its only 137mm. Is this true?. In other brands is also that difference.What about marzocchi, Rockshox, etc
Experiences?
I suspect that 137mm applies to the original Nixons which were fitted with the "tyre clearance upgrade". I have one of these at home, but I have only had it a week and have yet to ride it.

All the manitous I've worked on were capable of their claimed travel, but to get it you have to hit something hard enough to fully compress the bottomout bumpers. Something that many riders never actually do.
 

·
Elitest thrill junkie
Joined
·
34,839 Posts
Well, one problem with the nixon we had was the very hard bottom-out bumpers, and while they'll compress to give full travel in some situations, it takes a LOT of force and it may not jive with the overal rate of the fork, so it basically feels like bottoming when you hit this, and for most riding, you don't get full travel. It's a difference in design philosophy, other fork manufacturers give you "full travel" unabaided, and it's up to the customer to set up the proper spring rate and bottom-out feature to keep it from bottoming. As with my marzocchis, you may occasionally bottom them (clank!) when you don't have enough oil in there to help prevent bottom out (air assist feature). Easily fixable, but sometimes you don't know if you have enough or not untill that big bump/drop comes up and you find out that you bottomed it. On the plus side, once you've experienced this and "fine tuned" the fork, you can get max travel without harshly bottoming it, and the best part is that the "progressive rate" just jives with the feel of the fork, so it doesn't feel like you hit bottom 10mm from what is the claimed "full travel".

On the nixon that we got on the Giant Reign bikes (they were the "fixed" ones with less travel), we couldn't get more than about 132mm out of it, fairly dissapointing. For the "effective" amount of travel, it wasn't really any lower than my all-mountain1 set to 130mm of travel.

So you're "total travel" vrs what you'll see day in and day out may be a little different.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,234 Posts
Note Pace

red5 said:
Keep in mind that the mfg. stated measurement has the negative travel as part of the total sum. For instance the RS Pyslo has 125mm of travel, however the fork only shows 115mm, then other 10mm is negative travel. So when you measure it on the stantchion you only see 115.

RS does this, as does Marz I believe.
My Pace RC40 Figher gets exactly the advertised 150mm travel. But I can also pull the fork up at least another 20mm negative travel.

I believe Fox measures positive travel as well, but there's not much negative travel.

Ole.
 
1 - 6 of 6 Posts
Top