[Gunnar Westholm]

The famous ETA funktion is not an option on the 66 forks this year.
Do anyone know why, and if it will be back on the 66 in 2009?

 

[Jerk_Chicken]

Should never have been removed.

 

[bjj4202000]

ETA is good! Lets get rid of TST if anything. Hope to see it return next year.

 

[Gunnar Westholm]

I really like the ETA on my AM1, I use it all allot.
I only wish I could fit a remote. And a 3rd, mid travel setting like on Fox TALAS, but coil spring would be sweet...

 

[Gunnar Westholm]

Weard! I just found a link to a 2008 66 RC2 ETA fork! But i cant find it in the lists on the site...

 

[Marzocchi Tech Department]

Weard! I just found a link to a 2008 66 RC2 ETA fork! But i cant find it in the lists on the site...

Hello,
ETA will not be offered for 2009. Based on Product managers, aftermarket sales, and the powers that be they removed it from the line. Believe me we are already regreting the chioce and if I have anything to do with it it will make a resurgance. It again is going to take some time. It has to be my favorite feature too. I posted the other thread to see what kind of response it got and to show my bosses and the decision makers that people want it.
We are still listening though!

 

[Jayem]

Hello,
ETA will not be offered for 2009. Based on Product managers, aftermarket sales, and the powers that be they removed it from the line. Believe me we are already regreting the chioce and if I have anything to do with it it will make a resurgance. It again is going to take some time. It has to be my favorite feature too. I posted the other thread to see what kind of response it got and to show my bosses and the decision makers that people want it.
We are still listening though!

Even though they suck, fox has sold a ton of the talas 36 forks. Why? Because a 160mm fork that is not adjustable is way too limiting in terms of your riding, it sucks for going up hills, flat out, a 55 RC3 ETA is what would do the trick. The ETA on the bigger 66 models is also nice for those huge bikes and allowing them to do some of the big climbs.

 

[wormvine]

Even though they suck, fox has sold a ton of the talas 36 forks. Why? Because a 160mm fork that is not adjustable is way too limiting in terms of your riding, it sucks for going up hills, flat out, a 55 RC3 ETA is what would do the trick. The ETA on the bigger 66 models is also nice for those huge bikes and allowing them to do some of the big climbs.

I have a 180mm 66RC2X on my 6point. I had the 07' 66SL ATA. I never felt the need to change the travel so I went to the coil version. I have no problem climbing with it whatsoever and we have some heinous climbs here in CO. Granted the front end will want to lift on the steepest climbs here in CO but I can move forward for those or raise the seat a little.

The ETA cartridge is heavy and that is why I opted to choose the 66RC2X over the 66RC2 ETA. The ETA fork is heavier.

 

[Jayem]

I have a 180mm 66RC2X on my 6point. I had the 07' 66SL ATA. I never felt the need to change the travel so I went to the coil version. I have no problem climbing with it whatsoever and we have some heinous climbs here in CO. Granted the front end will want to lift on the steepest climbs here in CO but I can move forward for those or raise the seat a little.

The ETA cartridge is heavy and that is why I opted to choose the 66RC2X over the 66RC2 ETA. The ETA fork is heavier.

Um, yeah, well for 99.9999% of people (every other rider), riding up a real steep climb with a 180mm fork is pretty darn impossible. You say you can just move forward or raise the seat, but I've found it pretty damn impossible to make it, and I have a lot of climbing power and ride all climbs in the middle ring mind you.

I would want a coil version too, but way too many people discount the ETA versions and even buy the ATA/SL versions because they are "lighter" and people think that it will be better for their riding (which includes some uphill) because it is "lighter". I say (and more than a few others) that the weight is only one factor and the biggest thing that we usually can't change on our types of bikes is the geometry, and ETA is what allows that, and it makes climbs so much more do-able when it gets steep. Typical rides here will be 2000 to 5000+ vertical in 10-25 miles, we do longer rides, but the idea is that we get a lot of vertical without a lot of horizontal. Fun for the downhills, but the climbs kill ya. climbs of 1300 in 3 miles, 1500 in 3 miles, 2200 in 3 miles even, and those don't count any small intermediate climbs on the way. Some are insanely fun to come down. I had a WAY lighter AM1 later converted to a ZAM1, and I gotta tell you that the 1.5lbs increase in weight with the 66 didn't really phaze me at all, because I still had ETA. During the year that I got the 66 the ETA cart was about .3lbs heavier than the 66RC2 version. I think it was slightly lighter than claimed while the RC3 was slightly heavier than claimed. In any case the slight weight penalty is well worth it, and I'd rather have ETA than the SL/ATA version just for the climbing prowress of ETA.

I appreciate how forward Marz Tech is with this latest info, even if it means that I will have to look elswhere for the "perfect" fork.

 

[rzozaya1969]

What I think it would be nice on a fork is having 3 different travel settings (like, well, Fox), but that you could set the high and end settings. This might help with different geometries.

Say that the fork could go from, let's say, 110 to 170mm. Depending on the bike, one could set the fork minimum at 130, and highest at 160, so it would have 130, 145 and 160 settings on the fly, while maybe for a larger bike, the highest could be set at 170 or so.

Just something I'd like to see. I think that Fox has made it right in making travel adjustment pretty easy with only 3 options.

 

[wormvine]

Um, yeah, well for 99.9999% of people (every other rider), riding up a real steep climb with a 180mm fork is pretty darn impossible. You say you can just move forward or raise the seat, but I've found it pretty damn impossible to make it, and I have a lot of climbing power and ride all climbs in the middle ring mind you.

I am just saying it's not as impossible as some would indicate. Here in Vail, CO there is no choice but to climb. We are stuck in a tight valley. Rides of 2000' to 5000' vertical are very easy to plan but I stick in the 5-20 mile range. So I understand what steep is. I am about to do a ride on Sunday that is 2000' in 5 miles. But I digress...

Don't think that I wouldn't want ETA if it fit my needs. But I probably wouldn't use it. My bike weighed 40lbs with the addition of the 66RC2X and ROCO TST-R Ti coil. So the little bit of extra weight was a negative. So now I got it down to about 37lbs with new wheelset, lighter tires, and air shock.

My buddy rides his 42lb fly with his 66rc2x and can climb some stuff that most would deem impossible. So I know I am not the only one.
I read so many posters complain that their bike is approaching 30lbs. I am super happy that I am about to get my bike to 36lbs with a new crankset.

I still have no issue keeping my front end down when doing steeper sustained climbs. The ones I do have trouble on cannot be sustained for very long by anyone except the greats. I try to keep my posture at about a 45deg angle to the ground. Lowering my fork just makes my back bend more and it starts to hurt.

It just goes to show that everyone's perspective is different.

I

 

[Gunnar Westholm]

>>>>>>>
Lowering my fork just makes my back bend more and it starts to hurt.

It just goes to show that everyone's perspective is different.

I

Thats sounds really weard to me! :skep:
The reason to lower the front end, is to get the same body geometry / comfort on the climbs as on the flats.
Or seen from the other view: To be able to bring as much downhill geometry up the mountain, suffering as little as possible.
Thats why so many allmountain riders use Talas, 2-step Air, Launch Control and ETA equiped forks. And i think ETA are the only one on coil forks? (Did I forget any "easy adjust" system?)

Do you get back pain when pedaling hard on the flats to? When the geometry is the same as if you lower the fork on a steep climb..
Maybe you have the sadle to low, and/ or a to long and/ or low stem?

 

[wormvine]

Thats sounds really weard to me! :skep:
The reason to lower the front end, is to get the same body geometry / comfort on the climbs as on the flats.
Or seen from the other view: To be able to bring as much downhill geometry up the mountain, suffering as little as possible.
Thats why so many allmountain riders use Talas, 2-step Air, Launch Control and ETA equiped forks. And i think ETA are the only one on coil forks? (Did I forget any "easy adjust" system?)

Do you get back pain when pedaling hard on the flats to? When the geometry is the same as if you lower the fork on a steep climb..
Maybe you have the sadle to low, and/ or a to long and/ or low stem?

Well I am 36 and have beat up my body. So it could be other factors as well as body geometry.
Bike fit is pretty setup as far as I can tell. I understand your point about lowering the fork to keep the body geo in line with how you set it up on flat ground. Maybe I am mistaken about my perception. I did have the ATA and could lower my fork 40mm for the climbs. It didn't seem to help much so I just left the fork fully extended. I haven't had any issues. Other than being 36.

 

[Gunnar Westholm]

Humm... well, OK I'm only 35 so... :thumbsup:

Anyway my body geo, specially in the lower back, seemes to get more important as the years pas by... I cant remember if I ever have been able to touch the ground with my hands, standing on straight legs..
Thank God (Zocchi and others) for adjustable geometry!!