Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hello,

I need some help with the following.
I have a yeti 575 (07) with a talas rlc 32 (08).
I am looking for something stiffer. I lean towards the talas rc2.
Is it n overkill?
I do climbs, therfore I don't want to loose the climbing ability.
Anyone has tried both and can help me decide?
What about the weight penalty? Is it worth it?
Any comments /thoughts would be appreciated.

Thanks.
 

·
Pin it to win it
Joined
·
486 Posts
I have a 2008... which I'm almost positive has the same geometry. I just recently went from a 32 Talas to a Lyrik 2-step (160mm travel, same AC as the 36, travel adjust between 115 and 160). I absolutely LOVE it. My bike went from 27 lbs to about 28.5 with the new fork. I climb for almost all my downhills and I come from an xc race background so I definitely care about weight and being able to climb well.

I honestly didn't notice the weight difference much... with the travel adjust it climbs just fine too. This will be especially true on the Talas because you can adjust it all the way down to 100mm travel. I absolutely love it on the downhills. I never really noticed any flex in my 32... but I don't weigh much. I got the new fork purely for the additional travel. I really really like the geometry of the bike with the 160mm fork... super fast and stable, rails corners even better then it did before.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
243 Posts
if you don't need travel adjust, just get a float 36 RC2 and reduce travel to 130mm or whatever you desire.

I moved from 08 Talas 32 RLC to 08 Talas 36 RC2 on my '06 575. And it feels like a very nice upgrade, the weight difference is not noticeable for me since I am a rather heavy rider but stiffness and the way the fork works feel much better. By the way I ride on 100mm setting 80% of the time and the other 20% at 130mm
 

·
Pin it to win it
Joined
·
486 Posts
I dunno, it seems to me like it's a tad pointless to spend money on and carry around the extra weight of a 160mm travel fork to run it in 130mm the whole time... :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Jerk_Chicken said:
You mean a 32 TALAS vs. a 36 TALAS?

Sorry, a pet-peeve of mine is how Fox pretty clearly lines their forks up and then people pose questions, get all sorts of wrong answers, simply because they are identifying the fork by the spring option.
yup, talas 32 vs talas 36.

I need the travel adjust cos I have to climb and then go down...:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
104 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Another option is to go for a DT 9mm RWS.
Will it make the front end stiffer, or is it just another marketing firework?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
259 Posts
I can vouch for the 36 Talas rc2 being very useful. I use the heck out of the travel adjust. Mainly between 160 and 130. I think it's a great match for the bike, but I have an 09 frame. The geometry was changed on the 08/09 frames to better handle longer travel forks. Previous years had different geo when slightly shorter forks were en vogue. I know that some on here run 07 and previous year frames with 36 forks, so maybe a few of them will chime in.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
243 Posts
I've once saw a picture of a pre 08 yeti 575 with white marz 66 on it. The bike looked sweet. It looked like it was at a lower travel setting though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
338 Posts
I had a 2006 with a Pike 140 and later moved to a Lyrik 160. Both times I opted for the U-Turn model so I could adjust the travel, and both times I ended up leaving the setting at max travel the whole time. This time I used a Fox VAN36 mostly because it's what I had laying around, but I don't think I will miss the ability to adjust the travel.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top