Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

Maverick SC32 w/80mm+ rims?

4587 Views 10 Replies 6 Participants Last post by  bighit
i did a search, came up empty :madman:

can anyone confirm clearance (or not) running an Endo in an SC32 fork... with an 80mm (or larger) rim? looking into doing a drilled 80mm G.F. Sheba on the Maverick hub..


anyone already running (or has seen) a similar setup?


-Moose
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
I have run this successfully for years:



I built it up with a Hope Pro II hub and a 65mm Large Marge rim. The Endomorph is 92mm wide at the widest point mounted on this rim and the fork has 101mm of clearance at the narrowest point (up under the crown). I have yet to have the tire rub in any way on this setup. The Endo mounted on a Fat Sheba is around 95-96mm wide. That is getting pretty close if you have any wheel/fork flex, of which there is some in the Maverick.
See less See more
FYI, I tried the Endos on 80 mm Remolinos with a Dorado SC fork and they just barely fit between the fork legs but the tire bottomed on the arch pretty quickly. Running Gazzi 3.0's works great.

Attachments

See less See more
Running that exact set up. It works, and it's clooooose. You might get some sidewall scrub under heavy handling but I get none, even screwing around in the parking lot "trying" to make it rub.

I tried the 100mm's last year with it, they didn't work well, at all:D
tscheezy said:
I built it up with a Hope Pro II hub and a 65mm Large Marge rim.
Do I remember right that you had some sort of problem with the P2 and the Mav?

EDIT: Found it.
If you consider the hub causing your fork to spontaneously explode a "problem", then yes.

The issue with the Pro II is that the axle is smooth and according to Mav, slightly undersized. The fork apparently likes a grippy, knurled, and slightly fat axle interface. Mav will knurl the out-of-spec axle for you if you send it to them.

The dropout parts on the Mav forks seem shockingly anemic to me given what an important role they play. That said, it seems that if the parts are within spec, you should be good to go. Hopefully.
tscheezy said:
The issue with the Pro II is that the axle is smooth and according to Mav, slightly undersized. The fork apparently likes a grippy, knurled, and slightly fat axle interface. Mav will knurl the out-of-spec axle for you if you send it to them..
good to know..
I wanted to interchangeability of the Hope so i can swap back to a rigid fork when the Mav fails, without having to build another wheel:thumbsup:
MendonCycleSmith said:
Running that exact set up. It works, and it's clooooose. You might get some sidewall scrub under heavy handling but I get none, even screwing around in the parking lot "trying" to make it rub.

I tried the 100mm's last year with it, they didn't work well, at all:D
Sidewall rub musings: ;)

In the winter, snow makes a wonderful lubricant

Wheel truing becomes an every ride consideration

Riding on crunchy snow seems to mask any annoying "rubbing" noise
mtnbikerx said:
Sidewall rub musings: ;) Wheel truing becomes an every ride consideration


You must have very aggressive snow conditions! :D

Either that, or you ride much harder than I do, as I have yet to find need to true mine.....
MendonCycleSmith said:
You must have very aggressive snow conditions! :D

Either that, or you ride much harder than I do, as I have yet to find need to true mine.....
LOL, no - when I first built the bike the wheels were not "perfect" but after riding with minimum tolerances (both front and rear) I became obsessive about eliminating runout.
i would stick to the Mav hubs and build a second wheel. thats what i do. after seeing the king hub next to the Mav it's a no brainer. i am sure the Hope will also come up short. i am not saying that the mav hub is better overall, but the fork is made around the hub.
1 - 11 of 11 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