Nothing wrong with it. Fox F--- up in 2013 with the introduction of the CTD. The 2013's were crap. That opened the door for the Pike and why so many people are going for a pike.
The Talas is what's wrong... on any bike.
Wow, that is super helpful. Thanks for contributing to an informed dialogue.
All of the relevant information is in the thread already, but my point is just that travel adjust forks are a gimmick (as I think you probably agree). They are heavier, more prone to failure, and have more stiction. None of these tradeoffs are worth the ability to lower your front end slightly, unless you are on a bike that has horrible geometry and/or you have a fork with more travel than your bike was designed for.
Word
Yeah, and I wouldn't get a travel adjust Pike either. Like Jkon said, he uses the fork in 150 mode 90% of the time. I would bet that over the life of the fork that will trend towards 100% of the time. So at best it's a feature you use a minority of the time you are on the fork. But there are tradeoffs associated with it that you experience 100% of the time, including more stiction and weight relative to the nonadjustable version. This is in addition to the extra failure points and more complicated service.
Ah why listen to any of that when you have such thorough reviews on here as the one below by someone that most likely hasn't ridden either.
It costs more, it's heavier, there's more stuff to break (mechanically complex) and you'll end up never using it because it's unnecessary on modern bikes. That's assuming the performance is identical.
