Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 64
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    63

    Fox TALAS 36 or 32 TALAS 150

    i'm debating what to do with my bike. I have a specialized enduro sl and im trying to pick out a fork. If i could get these 2 forks at the same price, which one should i go for? I do all sorts of riding from 13 mile super rocky and technical XC loops to straight up climb climb climb followed by quite lengthy downhill runs but dont know if i necessarily need all the travel as last season i was doing it on a stumpjumper. However, I think the 160 TALAS would really be quite fun on the downhills.

    basically, im trying to decide whether i stick with the 160 TALAS and forget that its 3/4 of a pound heavier, or do i say that its ridiculous for me to have such a burly fork when i dont need all that suspension and get a 150 mm to save some weight?

    am i being a weight weeny who wont even notice a difference in the 3/4 pound or is that extra weight going to make my climbs noticeably harder? TIA

  2. #2
    squish is good
    Reputation: Clutchman83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    4,933
    I'd say 36 but I'm boycotting the 15mm axle so take that with a grain of salt. If the 32 had a 20mm axle then I'd say go for that.
    Bike good, work bad.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    7,903
    Quote Originally Posted by Clutchman83
    I'd say 36 but I'm boycotting the 15mm axle so take that with a grain of salt. If the 32 had a 20mm axle then I'd say go for that.
    +1...the 15mm is rediculous(ly noodly). IMO, the data provided by testing it and the feedback I have heard from others first-hand is that it just shouldn't exist.

    Get the 36, enjoy the confidence and planted feeling. Get stronger if the weight upsets you!

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    53
    Noodly? what do you mean by that

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: darkslide18's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,059
    I was in the same boat as you but went with the 36 talas for my enduro SL and I am very pleased with the results. It is very plush, it is stiff as hell, the talas feature is great because I can adjust the travel on the fly. Plus it just looks sexy with those 36mm stanchions.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    664
    ^^^^^^^

    superb!!!


    not a fan of anything without a 20mm TA, so def a 36 TALAS,
    check out great video coverage of anything mtb (well almost).

    http://www.mtbcut.tv

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    7,903
    Quote Originally Posted by DoubleBat
    Noodly? what do you mean by that
    Not stiff enough for me - front end flex in the fork/hub interface causes deflection and poor handling.
    I can make brake rotors "shiiing" on a QR fork on easy trails, I won't ever go back to them - they are a hold-over from when MTBs came from road bikes. The 15mm is much closer to the traditional QR in terms of stiffness than it is to the 20mm... spend some time researching.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jlar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    511
    The 15mm is only marginally stiffer than the 9mm. I also vote for the 36!!

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bikesinmud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,145
    I've got a 15mm talas and it's purely an XC fork in my opinion, yep you can feel it flex. I've dropped it off my 5.5" and replaced it with a 55ata. I was going to put a talas on, but I got such a great deal on the 55. Get the 36 unless you are purely doing XC and no big stuff, or are a lighter rider.

  10. #10
    Shortcutting Hikabiker
    Reputation: Acme54321's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    2,752
    Get the 36, but not a TALAS. Are you really set on travel adjust? I had a 36 TALAS and found myself never really using the travel adjust, and even when I did it make my bike ride weird. I have since ditched it for a 36 Vanilla and am much happier. The Vanilla is so much more plush than the TALAS it isn't funny.
    "Listen here you beautiful *****, I'm about to **** you up with some truth"

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Yody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,905
    Quote Originally Posted by CharacterZero
    Not stiff enough for me - front end flex in the fork/hub interface causes deflection and poor handling.
    I can make brake rotors "shiiing" on a QR fork on easy trails, I won't ever go back to them - they are a hold-over from when MTBs came from road bikes. The 15mm is much closer to the traditional QR in terms of stiffness than it is to the 20mm... spend some time researching.
    I wouldn't argue that the 15mm is as stiff as the 20mm but how do you compare a weenie 9mm axle to a 15mm axle?? I mean how is that physically possible.

  12. #12
    squish is good
    Reputation: Clutchman83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    4,933
    Quote Originally Posted by Yody
    I mean how is that physically possible.
    by running it through a stress test. Companies do it all the time for frames, Rock Shox did it and decided not to buy into Fox's 15mm model because it didn't outperform 9mm, hence the 20mm Reba and Revelation lineup. Run a search if you are skeptical, there's about 8 million threads where nobody agrees but the tests are listed.
    Bike good, work bad.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by Acme54321
    Get the 36, but not a TALAS. Are you really set on travel adjust? I had a 36 TALAS and found myself never really using the travel adjust, and even when I did it make my bike ride weird. I have since ditched it for a 36 Vanilla and am much happier. The Vanilla is so much more plush than the TALAS it isn't funny.

    how is the 36 vanilla going to do on 13 mile technical XC loops?

  14. #14
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,480
    If you're going for this level of travel, you need a 20. Unless you're riding XC, in which case, you're only in it for the status a bike with this much travel would give you on the street.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Yody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,905
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerk_Chicken
    If you're going for this level of travel, you need a 20. Unless you're riding XC, in which case, you're only in it for the status a bike with this much travel would give you on the street.
    Are you serious? Sounds like you're projecting

    Pretty much anyone on a mountain bike looks like a goober to the average person. I highly doubt anyone is impressing anybody with their travel of their fork Maybe with you're talas you're trying to make up for the lack of travel somewhere else

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: anvil_den's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    940
    I came from 9mm QRs since day 1 riding and went straight to a 36 TALAS. Had a lot of doubts about the increase weight and all. But definitely not looking back now.

    Reading all the hype last year and later the test results on 15mm, figured its not worth the while.

    Weight of the 36 TALAS? Hardly noticed it. But I find this always has to do with proper setup of a bike. Nope I dont have anchors for biceps. Just your average 160lb that pedals everything (well almost)

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by anvil_den
    I came from 9mm QRs since day 1 riding and went straight to a 36 TALAS. Had a lot of doubts about the increase weight and all. But definitely not looking back now.

    Reading all the hype last year and later the test results on 15mm, figured its not worth the while.

    Weight of the 36 TALAS? Hardly noticed it. But I find this always has to do with proper setup of a bike. Nope I dont have anchors for biceps. Just your average 160lb that pedals everything (well almost)
    thank you

  18. #18
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,480
    Quote Originally Posted by Yody
    Are you serious? Sounds like you're projecting

    Pretty much anyone on a mountain bike looks like a goober to the average person. I highly doubt anyone is impressing anybody with their travel of their fork Maybe with you're talas you're trying to make up for the lack of travel somewhere else
    How would you know if I'm projecting? If you want an intelligent discussion about it, I'll be happy to oblige. If you want to bring it down to your level in the sandbox because your feelings are hurt, I can oblige that as well.

    There is also a thread running I coincidentally saw a little while ago about people who get longer travel bikes, but don't use them. We've all seen the same thing in real life. The issue is the Fox 150/15mm has not shown itself to be exceptionally stiffer over the 9mm equivalent. The forces it takes to compress these forks and use their full travel potential would outright make it more feasible to go for something with a stiffer platform, whether a stiffer 9mm, or a 20, or whatever. This particular fork simply doesn't do what it promises, in terms of stiffness.

    As far as your last statement, the illiteracy, coupled with grammar, and an inability to clearly communicate your thoughts makes the overall post look silly. If you're looking to answer the question in the thread, go for it. If you get butt-hurt and can't handle your own riding being criticized, or the reality of what these parts may or may not go through (leading to an actual recommendation and a WHY), then shut off the internet and don't read. Everyone that goes on the internet gets criticized for something. You made a post because your emotions were hurt because I didn't word myself nicely and politically correct, despite the reality in what I posted. You didn't respond based on the disagreement with the information I presented.

  19. #19
    M_S
    M_S is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,410
    I think everyone should be required to mention their weight when describing a (fork/wheel/frame) as "flexy."

    That said it's silly to replace a fork that does everything the OP wants with a fork that may or may not do everything he or she wants simply to save 3/4 of a pound, and not even on a race bike.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    768
    That 3/4 lb is 3/4lbs worth of extra performance, the 36 IS stiffer and you really won't notice the extra weight on a climb but will notice the extra stiffness on a rocky twisty descent.

    Take 3/4lb of food in a saddle pack next time you go riding and see if you can really notice it is there.

    If your like most of us, could always lose 3/4lb of yourself to even it up,

    As every one else says, go for the 36!

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dust_Head's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    129
    I'll also side with the 36, If weight is a concern also consider the non Tallas 36 Float. I'm running it on my Intense Tracer and is awesome. I don't feel the need for a Talas. In the 5.5 travel mode on the tracer I don't feel a need to steepen the head angle anymore for climbing or single track and in the 6" travel it's more then slack enough for descending anything short of a WC DH course. So I figured the Talas would become redundant in my case

  22. #22
    Shortcutting Hikabiker
    Reputation: Acme54321's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    2,752
    Quote Originally Posted by altezza2k2
    how is the 36 vanilla going to do on 13 mile technical XC loops?
    Better than that TALAS, I just did 50+ miles on mine the other day. It weighs just about the same, so that's not an issue. Most 6" bikes like the Enduro are designed around a 6" fork, and if you ask me most ride better in the 6" setting. Most people who are in love with their TALAS have either never ridden a Vanilla or are on bikes that are desinged around shorter forks, so they can drop the travel to 4 or 5 inch and still have a beefy fork that doesn't rake out their bike.
    "Listen here you beautiful *****, I'm about to **** you up with some truth"

  23. #23
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,480
    Quote Originally Posted by altezza2k2
    how is the 36 vanilla going to do on 13 mile technical XC loops?
    The more relevant question is "how are you going to do on a 13 mile technical XC loop?"

    There's not that much to it, and it's not like the fork is a handicap. I've done 30 milers, or shorter, ridiculously technical riding with painful climbs. It's not like the fork will hold you back if you're able to do it in the first place.

    13 miles isn't really that much.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    768
    if you were set on a 150mm fork to match the back or if you want the lighter weight, you could look at dt swiss, there 150mm fork is super light and super stiff and comparable in price to the fox (ie expensive)

  25. #25
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,480
    What about the a2c compared to the Fox? Do the tires touch the crown on full compression?

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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