Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
49 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
SC website just quotes figures for a 515mm length fork, - anyone know what it is for a 160mm travel/545mm length fork??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
From what I've "heard" running a Fox 32 140 puts the geometry at 69 deg. Running a 32 150 puts it at 68.5ish. The A2C difference between the 140 to 150 is 10 mm, obviously. With an A2C difference of 30 between the 32 and 36 I would guess the geometry would be 67.5. Without AutoCad or the actual fork and bike it makes it tough. Don't forget stack height and tire selection in the equation as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
49 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Yeti
many thanks for the reply. I'm riding a nomad but I'm wondering about the blur lt and at some stage can see me going over to it with longer 160mm forks to slacken the angles. Finding the nomad hard going up hillls but may be due to my recent increase in weight :)
Berkley - only just saw your post - cool, will check out that site :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
128 Posts
Great thread and good replies. Am thinking about the same thing actually so this thread has given me some serious thinking...

Want something Nomad ish but not as heavy. The LTc is right up there, so much that i am soo close to pulling the trigger on one and this info has made me even closer.

Thanks guys!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
49 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Damien
I'm thinking the same thing - have 08 Nomad which I got a deal on in the summer (for the frame) but know its probably overkill at times and I do struggle more on the climbs. Love the look of the LTc but angles are too steep for me but think it would be ideal to run with a 160mm fork. At some stage in a year or two will seriously think about this but look at he price of those frames!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
I would try it with a 32 first. I had Yeti ASX with a 66sl 170mm prior to the LTc and I don't miss it one bit. I have a MUCH stiffer and engaging platform with the 32 150 TALAS 1 1/8-1.5 and the LTc. My normal rides include 3-4 ft to flat drops as well as some pretty nasty climbs. The bike doesn't skip a beat. However if you end up with the 36, I would definitly look into the TALAS. Dropping the front end will definitly help.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
128 Posts
Hitman, Yeah, the frames are expensive (even moreso for me as I live in Australia, I haven't even broached the subject with the wife yet...). But i am thinking that the LTc is the go for me purely for the versatility of it. It could do just about anything in skilled hands and seeing the footage of Goldman and Voreis of late on Blur's has shown me that this is a seriously capable frame.

Having it light would make it so much more of a joy to ride and i really don't think i would be missing much with the riding i would end up doing most of the time. If i was spending a lot of my time headed down then i think the nomad for sure ( coming off a Transition Bottlerocket which i used for everything but it sure as **** wasn't suited for it).

Yeti, If i go down the 36 route i will be definitely getting the TALAS purely for the adjustability for the way up, and even with the extra weight it would still be a killer XC ride at 130mm travel. The other option i have considered it the Lyric 2-step air, the U-Turn facility on the others is great but really a pain in the ass for use on the trail.

If i go a 32mm fork i will probably get a set of XX revalations with the tapered steerer and start there. I can get the Rockshox cheaper online where as i would have to go to my LBS to get the FOX and they are so expensive over here against what i could get a set from Cambria or Speedgoat and the like.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
49 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Damien
what I'm interested in as much as weight is the geometry of the bike. Read an interesting forum debate at Ridemonkey.com re:geometry and so much of it made sense. I think the nomad feels great going downhill because of its slack headtube angle and to a certain extent its long wheel base. The blur lt set up with 160mm forks would slacken the head tube angle but not to quite the same extent as the nomad. This should make it a more effective climber and yet it should still be good downhill. If you go for the carbon version you also get decreased weight. Just some thoughts :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
128 Posts
The Geo was the part of my post i neglected to mention, but yes it's very important for me too as its why i would go for the higher A2C of the 36 as well. I want something that sits between the nomad and the XC geo of the LT with a 140 or 150. That said the Revelation is a bit higher than the 32 TALAS and some of the ride reports on the 2010 models are saying its the trail fork of the year.

At the end of the day you gotta go with what works for you best. I am hoping that the 36 or the revelation is the shot for me. I will probably end up getting the 36 TALAS first up to see and if i don't like it sell it off and get the revelation.

I am no weight weeny so light weight is not my prime concern, however if it ends up that way it will be a pure product of function rather than design. I think if i end up with a build at around 13 kg give or take a few 100gms would be a ride i could retire with.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
394 Posts
Fellas, I've had the LTc since August and have run the Revelation (150, no travel adjust) exclusively until about two months ago. The bike was perfect for 98% of the trail riding I do. I came off a Nomad and did not miss the geo change almost all the time.

The only time I missed my Nomad was on trails with big gaps and drops. I missed the HA when committing to drops. The trails are rocky around here - I particularly felt under-gunned when getting speed up for big gaps because I was getting so rattled on the run-ins that I had a hard time focusing on the feature.

A couple months ago, I got a 36 Van with tapered steerer; I run it when I am doing big-featured trails. The geo feels similar to how I remember my Nomad; it provides the confidence and plushness I was missing. The back end is still a little tight and firm (compared to my Nomad), but it doesn't mess with me. It climbs like my Nomad did, which was fine.

I still run the Revelation on trail rides, particularly long ones. The geo and weight with it makes for easier climbing and more than adequate for average DH runs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
128 Posts
Awesome feedback.

I have heard a lot of good things about the Revelation forks and if i am to be honest with my self that's looking like the front runner for me at this point.

As much as i would like a TALAS or Float 36 i am more likely to get the revelation purely from the perspective that our DH is nothing like the DH you guys would have in the US and that for the most part i will be doing aggressive XC/ AM so until i find the limitations of the fork (read me getting more confidence on trail features) I am thinking that a revelation might just be the fork for me at the moment.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top