[kcavtca]

Geeky question here. I could also ask it in this way, "For the 2011 redesigned forks, does the existence of the TALAS 36 mechanism change the airspring curves compared to the Float 36?"

They've got same dampers, I understand that. I'm going under the assumption that Fox isn't purposefully making these have different airspring curves / ride characteristics when at 160mm travel...if that's a wrong assumption let me know that too.

I care about downhill performance much more than uphill, and see travel adjust as a bonus on a few extended steep climbs I deal with regularly. I'm considering a Blur LTc for trail riding, which has pretty steep angles, so I'm thinking maybe I could get away with a Float. So I'm writing this to see if there's a even a reason to want to get away with a Float (aside from saving some $s and .2 lbs, neither of which I'm paying attention to).

Thanks,
K-CAVT

 

[Deerhill]

Get the 180 chassis if you're over 160lbs.

It can be lowered and/or converted to float for @$80. Talas cart is like $200 something and rc2 is better than rlc.

Talas supposedly has a little more stiction than float, so I here. I swapped it out before trying, not sure if that is true

 

[yohyat]

Im pretty sure the talas cartridge takes up more volume in the spring side leg - and that fox tunes the dampening curve to mitigate the difference in volume. I run the 160 talas on all my smaller bikes because the fork feels so good once properly set up that i wouldn't want to not have the talas option just incase the float felt marginally better, which im sure i wouldn't notice.

I also have 09 and 2010's since i can slam them down to 100mm on my bikes since they are all really slack for their intended use - so it helps on long or technical climbs. and they have the adjustable HSC clicker - which is nice to have.

a 180 might raise your bb a little more than it was intended for - and i might not want 40mm more tavel in the front that rear- my reign is about 10mm taller at BBB from a 140 - 160mm fork - which has a 30mm taller a2c. your 180 would be 50mm more - so it would probably raise your BB about 17mm more than with a 140 fork. not the end of the world, but i think you would be good with a 2010 or 2011 talas 160 on that bike.

 

[Deerhill]

Use the travel spacers and everything stays the same.

Also, the 180 versions axle is moved forward on the lowers. More so than the 160, makes it a tad slacker.

 

[kcavtca]

Ah yes, the stiction, indeed that has come up in the past, and I forgot to ask. I'm betting that was part of the reason to go to 2 travel settings because it elimiated one of the seals. Then the kashmir coating should have helped too...in the end there is indeed additional an additional seal(s).

A for the 180, I'm not going there because Its overkill...I'm was even considering the 150 float.

As for the ROLC vs RC2, I initially was bummed to see the RC2 only on the VAN, then thought about it and thought indeed I'm not a hucker, and generally with my current TALAS RC2 I left the high speed compression almost all the way open, so basically I was riding it like an RLC...I'm never going big. It sounds like it may be nice to crank up the compression on pedally sections and then uncrank it otherwise...all on the fly. Maybe once I ride with it I'll wish it was RC2...hopefully I have a chance to find out, though I doubt I'll get a chance to compare the 2011 VAN to the TALAS or Float on a trail, on the same bike. That's what it would take to sort out.

Thanks for the feedback so far!
K-CAVT

 

[myarmisonfire]

Use the travel spacers and everything stays the same.

Also, the 180 versions axle is moved forward on the lowers. More so than the 160, makes it a tad slacker.

The axle being forward does not make it the same as a slacker head tube angle. It has the opposite effect. The axle being forward reduces trail and promotes a 'quicker steering' feel on bikes with slacker head angles. I have seen this posted several times already. Check out the wiki page on bicycle and motorcycle geometry.

 

[Deerhill]

Felt a little different to me. Maybe it was a little taller than 160. I'll check that out.