Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
has any one put a rockshox lyric on a motolite. I know its a 35mmx160 fork
wondered if a spacer can be put in it to make it 140mm. i know it's a big fork but
rockshox calls it an all-mountain trailbike fork in the same class as the pike.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,475 Posts
Do you know what the axle-to-crown measurement is?

If it's 530mm or less, you should be OK. Up to 540 might even be tolerable if you don't mind slack steering- the front-end may wander on climbs. You can move your saddle forward and make other adjustments to partially compensate for this.

Keep in mind that if the fork offers more than 145mm of travel, you are voiding your warranty. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,207 Posts
I run a fork with 540mm height and 150 travel. I like this on the motolite and the more I ride with 150 travel the more I like it. I would consider the Lyrik myself if I was looking into a new fork. The 2-step would be great for climb and descend rides.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,207 Posts
lamboman said:
thanks for the info i questioned if it might be to much of a fork for that frame.
Depends on how you like to set it up.

For me it would not be too much fork and I would like it. I already ride with a fork about the same height. Throw me the cash and all put it on mine.

The general consensus however, would be that it's too much fork for the motolite.

It voids warranty.
 

·
"El Whatever"
Joined
·
18,874 Posts
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong... but the Fox 36 is a no-go for the ML, not much for travel (the TALAS 36 can be stepped down to under 145mm which is the limit a ML/SB), but the combination of long travel (if used) and big diameter stanchions. I seem to recall there was a discussion a while ago about that.

Besides... that thing of "I'll just use the 140mm setting" is lying to yourself... when you have a "big wrench" for a "tiny bolt" (if you catch my drift ;) ), you'll end up using it ALL. Same with the bike/fork.

Do yourself and your bike a favor and get the right tool for the job.

Pikes and AM's are pleanty of fork for the frame. If you think you'll be doing stuff that requires a fork as big as the Lyrik, you'd rather think about an El Guapo.

I think RS aimed the Lyrik at the more aggressive side of the AM spectrum... remember AM starts from 4" front and up to 7" for the more aggro side.
 

·
thats right living legend
Joined
·
6,360 Posts
Warp said:
Somebody correct me if I'm wrong... but the Fox 36 is a no-go for the ML, not much for travel (the TALAS 36 can be stepped down to under 145mm which is the limit a ML/SB), but the combination of long travel (if used) and big diameter stanchions. I seem to recall there was a discussion a while ago about that.

Besides... that thing of "I'll just use the 140mm setting" is lying to yourself... when you have a "big wrench" for a "tiny bolt" (if you catch my drift ;) ), you'll end up using it ALL. Same with the bike/fork.

Do yourself and your bike a favor and get the right tool for the job.

Pikes and AM's are pleanty of fork for the frame. If you think you'll be doing stuff that requires a fork as big as the Lyrik, you'd rather think about an El Guapo.

I think RS aimed the Lyrik at the more aggressive side of the AM spectrum... remember AM starts from 4" front and up to 7" for the more aggro side.
I disagree with this.... Respectfuly. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,207 Posts
I don't agree with this Warp.

Warp said:
....

Besides... that thing of "I'll just use the 140mm setting" is lying to yourself... when you have a "big wrench" for a "tiny bolt" (if you catch my drift ;) ), you'll end up using it ALL. Same with the bike/fork.

Do yourself and your bike a favor and get the right tool for the job.

Pikes and AM's are pleanty of fork for the frame. If you think you'll be doing stuff that requires a fork as big as the Lyrik, you'd rather think about an El Guapo.

I think RS aimed the Lyrik at the more aggressive side of the AM spectrum... remember AM starts from 4" front and up to 7" for the more aggro side.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,475 Posts
For me it was a matter of getting the head angle where I wanted it. I was totally happy with my 130mm Z1 on my previous bike, but with the motolites geometry it just felt a bit front-heavy to me on steeper downhills. I ended up trying a few different forks and the AM series at 140mm gives me exactly the geometry I was looking for.

I like the '06 all mountain 1 since it gives me both styles of travel adjust; ETA to drop the front end quickly & temporarily for climbs, and TAS to fine tune the head angle. All that with coil spring feel! I tweak my TAS pretty frequently depending on the ride- the other night we were riding flat twisty trails so I wound the travel down to 135mm. I'll probably set it back to 145 the next time we are at the top of a steep descent. You really can't go wrong with the '06 all mountain 1!
 

·
"El Whatever"
Joined
·
18,874 Posts
blackagness said:
I disagree with this.... Respectfuly. :)
In healthy discussion... You guy how much I appreciate you guys...

What part of it?
The stanchions being too much?

The travel over 145mm being too much?

Maybe I misworded it and indeed, I should have stated the AM1 and Pike are the right choices for it, but not "plenty of fork" like I wrote.

Discussion, please... :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,207 Posts
MBA Ask RC

Since we are all in a MBA lovefest, I just found this on MBA Website Ask RC:

Q. Q:Is there a significant difference in stanchion size in accordance to performance? What are the plus and minus? And what are the things to consider to choose a fork? Thank you very much.
wilson/mbaction.com - 12/29/2006 6:05:01 AM

A. RC: There are three opposing forces related to the diameter of a fork's stanchion tubes (the upper legs, fixed to the crown). The advantage of larger-diameter stanchions is that the stiffness of the tube increases with the square of its diameter--so a slightly larger stanchion is dramatically more rigid than its smaller cousin--even if the fork maker doubles the wall thickness of the smaller tube. In fact, a larger-diameter stanchion tube can be made with a thinner wall and still be stronger and lighter than a smaller-diameter one. We know that a more rigid fork steers more precisely, and, theoretically, a more rigid stanchion will distort less under stress and will not bind on the lowers as they slide over its surface. The downside of te big-tube fork is that the cast magnesium sliders (the lower part of the fork) must be grossly oversized in order to house the bearings for the larger stanchions--and inside the sliders, there is room for a whopping amount of fork fluid. All this stuff adds weight. Another downside to large-diameter stanchions is that the "swept area" of the bearings and seals is significantly greater, so there is an inescapable amount of "stiction" (starting friction) that comes with a big-format fork design. Stiction erodes the fork's ability to respond to small impacts and small-bump suppleness is the measure of a champion's suspension fork. Soooo, if you want a lightweight, smooth-acting fork, choose one with 32-millimeter stanchions, like the Manitou Minute, or Marzocchi's All Mountain SL-1. If you want ultra-precise steerings and big-hit strength, then choose a big-format fork like the Fox 36 or the RockShox Lyric.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,207 Posts
But, stiffness formula for a hollow tube is:

I = 3.14 (d ^4 - d1 ^4) / 64

d = outside diametre
d1 = inside diametre


for 32 mm tube with 2mm wall: I = 21,300

for 36 mm tube with 1mm wall: I = 16,850

The 32 is stiffer in this hypothetical example.

I have no idea where RC gets his technical info..... "-so a slightly larger stanchion is dramatically more rigid than its smaller cousin--even if the fork maker doubles the wall thickness of the smaller tube"
 

·
thats right living legend
Joined
·
6,360 Posts
Warp said:
In healthy discussion... You guy how much I appreciate you guys...

What part of it?
The stanchions being too much?

The travel over 145mm being too much?

Maybe I misworded it and indeed, I should have stated the AM1 and Pike are the right choices for it, but not "plenty of fork" like I wrote.

Discussion, please... :)
Well for one I disagree that having the ability to raise the travel will cause one "ie me" to do so. I have anywhere from 10 to 15mm of travel I could use, but Titus Say's X is the appropriate travel, so I really have no desire to buck that.

Secondly I can't for the life of me justify why a larger diameter fork set at the appropriate travel would make any difference on the ML, as any other bike that may have more travel which the larger fork might encompass.

And AM doesnt count, cause I think we all know he had every intention of running his AM 1 at the full 150mm all along. :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
 

·
Trophy Husband
Joined
·
3,007 Posts
All Mountain said:
But, stiffness formula for a hollow tube is:

I = 3.14 (d ^4 - d1 ^4) / 64

d = outside diametre
d1 = inside diametre

for 32 mm tube with 2mm wall: I = 21,300

for 36 mm tube with 1mm wall: I = 16,850

The 32 is stiffer in this hypothetical example.

I have no idea where RC gets his technical info..... "-so a slightly larger stanchion is dramatically more rigid than its smaller cousin--even if the fork maker doubles the wall thickness of the smaller tube"
We all know chicks dig larger diameter tubes. :D
 

·
Ti is addictive
Joined
·
2,892 Posts
Uhmmm isn't the stearing precision also dependent upon the stiffness of the wheel and hub/axle thus 20/24 thry axle?????? So would you really notice a 145mm pike with a thru axle vs the lyric set up identitcally in travel??????

Or is it to satisfy BA's assessment of mine is thicker then yours to justify the need on a 5 inch travel bike?????
 

·
thats right living legend
Joined
·
6,360 Posts
TiEndo said:
Uhmmm isn't the stearing precision also dependent upon the stiffness of the wheel and hub/axle thus 20/24 thry axle?????? So would you really notice a 145mm pike with a thru axle vs the lyric set up identitcally in travel??????

Or is it to satisfy BA's assessment of mine is thicker then yours to justify the need on a 5 inch travel bike?????
I don't know who your talking to but I never said I had a need for a larger diamater fork.

But yeah, I'd still say mine is thicker than yours.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,000 Posts
Forget the Lyric . . go with a Rock Shox BoXXer - 203 mm of travel 7 lbs. Now that is a fork. Weighs more than the frame. Would it void the warranty? Kidding of course. The Lyric is pushing the envelope for the ML but it would be a fun fork for serious downhill stuff.
 

·
Ti is addictive
Joined
·
2,892 Posts
blackagness said:
I don't know who your talking to but I never said I had a need for a larger diamater fork.

But yeah, I'd still say mine is thicker than yours.
Sorry, I mixed up your statements and geo's.........

remember its not how thick its is that matters, but how long it is and how one uses it that counts:D :D :D :D :D :D As long as its stiff, one will get all the pleasure of the ride possible:thumbsup: :thumbsup: (now I'm sounding like I'm writing a penthous pet letter:eekster: )
 
1 - 20 of 25 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