Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,928

    W.F.O / RIP 9 w/ 120mm fork ?

    Picking up a WFO to use as a trail bike. I will mention I initially looked @ the RIP 9 but am a die hard coil shock fan so I went for the WFO. Looking @ the geometry spec's the WFO & RIP are identical depending on the fork travel. I already have a new Reba 120 . Seems from a lot of threads RIP owners would welcome a 140mm fork ? Not sure if this is more for the additional travel or geo. change. I could sell the 120 but would still have to come up w/ a few hundred extra $. So 120 or 140mm ? Thanks.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MightyDingus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    280
    I'm riding a RIP9 with a 120MM Reba Team on it. It's perfectly balanced. The WFO would take the 140 better. I think the 120 on a WFO would be a little lacking in travel to match the back end.

    Ideally you want to match the travel as closely as possible in most cases.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,747
    A 120mm fork will decrease the ground clearance too much and the bike will be a bit unbalanced suspension-wise. It could be made to work, but a 140mm is a better choice.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    111
    I've had a Reba 120 and the Marz 140 on my Rip and hands down I'll keep the Marz.It just takes the bike more to all mountain end of things which works better for me.
    Also I'm waiting for a Romic coil shock I just bought to arrive and I'll give that a whirl. Thought it was worth a shot as I prefer a coil over air any day and the Romic has RC without a piggy-back. Although I must admit the Fox rp23 on the Rip is my best air shock I've felt to date

  5. #5
    rider
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,336
    Quote Originally Posted by Thor29
    A 120mm fork will decrease the ground clearance too much and the bike will be a bit unbalanced suspension-wise. It could be made to work, but a 140mm is a better choice.
    Agreed. My 140mm fork choice would be a Reba.
    Abandoned the 26" wheel in May '03

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,928
    Quote Originally Posted by pete weber
    I've had a Reba 120 and the Marz 140 on my Rip and hands down I'll keep the Marz.It just takes the bike more to all mountain end of things which works better for me.
    Also I'm waiting for a Romic coil shock I just bought to arrive and I'll give that a whirl. Thought it was worth a shot as I prefer a coil over air any day and the Romic has RC without a piggy-back. Although I must admit the Fox rp23 on the Rip is my best air shock I've felt to date
    I considered running a non piggy-back shock but from past experiences there wasn't much to control bottom-out. I ran a Romic on a Turner last season for XC riding and it was super smooth but had loads up pedal bob compared to any Propedal type shocks.

  7. #7
    Underskilled
    Reputation: CaveGiant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    4,111
    Avalanche does a reservoir shock where the reservoir is attached by a tube, so should fit.

    The size is a custom one, but I think they make it.
    Why would I care about 150g of bike weight, I just ate 400g of cookies while reading this?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •