I'm trying to get a feel for how my Cockpit is going to change if I go with a Maverick Fork.

My current setup is a Thomson 5X90 flipped(negative rise) and Monkey lite bars 1.5 inch rise.

Running the stem in a conventional manner give me too high a bar height.

If I'm running a 90mm length now, is the 90 mm Maverick stem the place to start? I believe the Maverick stems are 6 degree rise.

Any feedback from those of you that are running this fork would be greatly appreciated.

When you went with this fork how did it effect your cockpit?

After long rides the Maverick fork made my cockpit feel limp and numb. Definitely, negative rise...

I'm 6'1" 200 and I had a 03 Z1FR on my large 5 Spot with a 15x100 Thompson stem and 1.5" rise monkeylites. My Maverick fork came with a 15x90 (my choice) and it works great.

MTNBikerX....Did you happen to put a tape measure to the bar height, before and after?
Are you saying that you ended up with the same ride height?

If I flip my stem from -5 to +5 on the Thomson, then my bars end up being too tall. And, the 3/4" rise monkey lites don't have the width that I need.

I looked at this fork/stem today and I suspect it's gonna be too tall when I get it all bolted up. We eyeballed and measured, however......

.....we couldn't do a mockup measurement because my Spot's head tube is an XL. This requires a new Xtra tall crown(which they didn't have) from Maverick to fit. This is way too costly of an experiment to get it wrong, Ya know.

EBasil, one more wisecrack out of you mister, and your Noble Canyon access pass will be revoked!

Have you considered running a wide, flat bar with the Maverick fork? To be honest, the rise on the stock Maverick stems means that running any sort of riser is going to produce a high-ish front end compared to a reversed stem anyway. Bontrager for one make such a bar and there must be some other options out there. The additional rise from the stem should compensate for the lack of rise in the bar.

MTNBikerX....Did you happen to put a tape measure to the bar height, before and after?
Are you saying that you ended up with the same ride height?

If I flip my stem from -5 to +5 on the Thomson, then my bars end up being too tall. And, the 3/4" rise monkey lites don't have the width that I need.

I looked at this fork/stem today and I suspect it's gonna be too tall when I get it all bolted up. We eyeballed and measured, however......

.....we couldn't do a mockup measurement because my Spot's head tube is an XL. This requires a new Xtra tall crown(which they didn't have) from Maverick to fit. This is way too costly of an experiment to get it wrong, Ya know.

EBasil, one more wisecrack out of you mister, and your Noble Canyon access pass will be revoked!

I think all current Maverick stems are 15 degrees. I like an upright posture so it suited me fine. The axle to crown dimension is not much different (you can check the specs) than the Z1 FR that I was running. I tried a Z150 FR on the Spot, yikes! Don't do that.

Actually, if the LBS was willing, you could do a mockup, as the bottom of the headset would set on the bottom triple clamp of the Mav and you could measure the distance above the top of the headset that the stem would set. A little "virtual" and probably a PITA but when you are spending this much the bike shop should be involved more than just taking your plastic.

I think all current Maverick stems are 15 degrees. I like an upright posture so it suited me fine. The axle to crown dimension is not much different (you can check the specs) than the Z1 FR that I was running. I tried a Z150 FR on the Spot, yikes! Don't do that.

Actually, if the LBS was willing, you could do a mockup, as the bottom of the headset would set on the bottom triple clamp of the Mav and you could measure the distance above the top of the headset that the stem would set. A little "virtual" and probably a PITA but when you are spending this much the bike shop should be involved more than just taking your plastic.

I'm starting to think that if I do pull the trigger on this, that doing a mockup like you described is an awesome idea to see where the bar height will end up. I'm thinking that with the rise on the maverick stem (15 degrees) that I will need to run a flat bar. I wonder who makes a flat bar in the width I need (690+mm). Bontrager is like 580mm. I may have to approach a custom fabricator to get the width and bend I want.

Another thing I was concerned about is the limited external damping adjustability. There is no compression adjustment, and the rebound screw didn't seem to do a thing from full open, to full closed. On my Fox RLC there is a huge difference in rebound speed from wide open to full closed.

So how long how you been running this fork? Do you have to add air often? Anything you don't care for?

I think all current Maverick stems are 15 degrees. I like an upright posture so it suited me fine. The axle to crown dimension is not much different (you can check the specs) than the Z1 FR that I was running. I tried a Z150 FR on the Spot, yikes! Don't do that.

Actually, if the LBS was willing, you could do a mockup, as the bottom of the headset would set on the bottom triple clamp of the Mav and you could measure the distance above the top of the headset that the stem would set. A little "virtual" and probably a PITA but when you are spending this much the bike shop should be involved more than just taking your plastic.

I just picked one up from Cambria for $16. Silver. They have all the sweep and width of a riser bar without the rise. A great bar! I use the bar on my Spot when I'm going to spend the day climbing and my riser when I'm going to be doing a lot of downhilling. For you, I be the Flat Tracer would work great for both.

Jaybo

I've got about 10 hours of rock/root riding and some limited (short duration, highspeed whoops) downhill. The compression is easily adjusted with a shock pump and the pressure, 110 psi in my case, stays from week to week pretty well. The lock down works great with the "knob" under the right hand bar being easy to reach and flip 1/4 turn. I find the rebound control works great. Not much range in the knob rotation but each click makes a difference. I leave it full open except in slow, technical stretches where the front wheel will "sproing" back off the ground at rebound if not controlled. Stiff? I guess it is, look at the knurled axle and clamp and you can imagine the clamping friction available. Of course this is doubly important with the upside down design of the fork. When the front wheel is removed each leg is free to move on it's own.

I've had a Psylo SL, 03 Z1 FR, 03 Firefly and 03 Z-150 and this is the most versatile, most easily fitted (crown to axle) and most user friendly of the bunch. Don't get me wrong, the other forks are great in their own way, I still own all but the Pyslo, it's just that the Maverrick suits my purpose best. Light, 6" travel, stiff, adjustable, mild axle to crown dist and great looks.

I've got about 10 hours of rock/root riding and some limited (short duration, highspeed whoops) downhill. The compression is easily adjusted with a shock pump and the pressure, 110 psi in my case, stays from week to week pretty well. The lock down works great with the "knob" under the right hand bar being easy to reach and flip 1/4 turn. I find the rebound control works great. Not much range in the knob rotation but each click makes a difference. I leave it full open except in slow, technical stretches where the front wheel will "sproing" back off the ground at rebound if not controlled. Stiff? I guess it is, look at the knurled axle and clamp and you can imagine the clamping friction available. Of course this is doubly important with the upside down design of the fork. When the front wheel is removed each leg is free to move on it's own.

I've had a Psylo SL, 03 Z1 FR, 03 Firefly and 03 Z-150 and this is the most versatile, most easily fitted (crown to axle) and most user friendly of the bunch. Don't get me wrong, the other forks are great in their own way, I still own all but the Pyslo, it's just that the Maverrick suits my purpose best. Light, 6" travel, stiff, adjustable, mild axle to crown dist and great looks.

MBX...Thank for the 411. I guess I'm not understanding how the air pressure can effect the compression damping? Air pressure would seem to impact "spring" rate, not a function of damping.

Just bouncing on the fork, I can feel no difference in rebound speed from one extreme to the other(when turning the rebound knob).

Where do you ride/live? I'm in Socal. The rides we do include lots of high speed single track and slow speed, techno chunk. It would be unfeasable to have to stop and fiddle with the rebound for each slow speed rock garden that sneaks up.

I still need to figure something out on the bar height issue. No manufacturer that I've found makes a flat bar that is over 580mm. I'm looking for at least another 100mm in width.

It's too bad Maverick doesn't offer a zero degree rise stem.

The damping adjustment does not affect the free-bleed port, and that's why you can't feel a difference in the parking lot.

However, it does affect preload on the high-speed rebound shim stack. Increase preload on the stack, and you raise the pressure threshold at which the circuit actuates. Unfortunately, it's impossible to tune this in the parking lot!

Try running your fork close to full-fast. I went riding with PT last month, and that's how he set his up. Personally, I run about 75-80 psi, 3 clicks in from full fast.

The damping adjustment does not affect the free-bleed port, and that's why you can't feel a difference in the parking lot.

However, it does affect preload on the high-speed rebound shim stack. Increase preload on the stack, and you raise the pressure threshold at which the circuit actuates. Unfortunately, it's impossible to tune this in the parking lot!

Try running your fork close to full-fast. I went riding with PT last month, and that's how he set his up. Personally, I run about 75-80 psi, 3 clicks in from full fast.

How is the fork under braking. Does it dive through its travel at all? I am also looking at putting the Mav on a Xl spot but I am also looking at the new fox36.

How is the fork under braking. Does it dive through its travel at all? I am also looking at putting the Mav on a Xl spot but I am also looking at the new fox36.

You know, I'm not sure why this is, but the fork doesn't dive much at all.

When you grab the front brake, it immediately settles down to static point about midway through the travel. A little while ago, as an experiment, I rode my bike using the front brake (Hayes 8") only, and was surprised at how stable and predictable it remained.

YMMV.

How is the fork under braking. Does it dive through its travel at all? I am also looking at putting the Mav on a Xl spot but I am also looking at the new fox36.


Ozlo:

I see you have an XL Spot as well. Why don't you hurry up and do this. You can be the guinea pig and let me know where the bar height ends up. BTW, Those top crown pieces(for XL head tubes), are now available from Maverick. However, they are rough cut, and unfinished(not polished).

Ozlo:

I see you have an XL Spot as well. Why don't you hurry up and do this. You can be the guinea pig and let me know where the bar height ends up. BTW, Those top crown pieces(for XL head tubes), are now available from Maverick. However, they are rough cut, and unfinished(not polished).

Sorry fella, you will have to wait about 6 weeks before I get a fork on there. Otherwise no problem. I just posted on the turner board asking spot/mav owners for any feedback. Its a tough call considering the Fox 36 is going to be out soon. The Mav sure is a lot sexier though. :D

I've got some info on wide flat bars.

Salsa Pro-Moto flat bar: Either 5 or 11 degree bend X 660mm width
QBP part # HB8003 for the 5 degree and HB8004 for the 11 degree bend.

Titec Flat Tracker is 640mm wide with a 9 degree sweep: $15 at Cambria Bike.

Bontrager bars come in 600mm widths but that might not be enough for you?

Nate

Oops on the compression damping, I thought you meant spring rate. Brake dive? Not even noticable compared to my Z150 or Z1, go figure.

Re: the fiddle w the rebound damping. It's only an issue when creeping, esp on uphills, higher speeds negate the bounced front end. The location of the knob and the short span of rotation makes it EZ to change on the fly - same w lock down. My Z1FR was a tree hug waiting to happen if I tried to snap an adjustment change while spinning. I read posts about how easy the settings were to access but I had to ride it to understand. BTW, in a previous post by Maverick American there was mention of someone gearing up to grind aftermarket stems in different configuarations for the Mav. Not Thompson though.

I ride in Maine, 97% of the time it's flat singletrack with 6 to 10 inch transitions over rocks and roots, usually slimy. A few one foot drops and some short very steep ledge climbs. I have an 1/8 mile downhill through the trees that I judge suspension on. Babyheads, roots and whoops. The Maverick feels like my Z150 on this only 2 lbs lighter. When I get out on fireroad type trails the Mav is just a smidge less compliant over small stuff than the zokes but not really an issue. Did I mention it's light?

Oops on the compression damping, I thought you meant spring rate. Brake dive? Not even noticable compared to my Z150 or Z1, go figure.

Re: the fiddle w the rebound damping. It's only an issue when creeping, esp on uphills, higher speeds negate the bounced front end. The location of the knob and the short span of rotation makes it EZ to change on the fly - same w lock down. My Z1FR was a tree hug waiting to happen if I tried to snap an adjustment change while spinning. I read posts about how easy the settings were to access but I had to ride it to understand. BTW, in a previous post by Maverick American there was mention of someone gearing up to grind aftermarket stems in different configuarations for the Mav. Not Thompson though.

I ride in Maine, 97% of the time it's flat singletrack with 6 to 10 inch transitions over rocks and roots, usually slimy. A few one foot drops and some short very steep ledge climbs. I have an 1/8 mile downhill through the trees that I judge suspension on. Babyheads, roots and whoops. The Maverick feels like my Z150 on this only 2 lbs lighter. When I get out on fireroad type trails the Mav is just a smidge less compliant over small stuff than the zokes but not really an issue. Did I mention it's light?


Would you buy another one?

I've got some info on wide flat bars.

Salsa Pro-Moto flat bar: Either 5 or 11 degree bend X 660mm width
QBP part # HB8003 for the 5 degree and HB8004 for the 11 degree bend.

Titec Flat Tracker is 640mm wide with a 9 degree sweep: $15 at Cambria Bike.

Bontrager bars come in 600mm widths but that might not be enough for you?

Nate

Thanks Nater! If push comes to shove, I guess I could try the Salsa Pro-Moto bar. It's a tad short on the width and it's not exactly the bend I use. But this would be better than having my front end look like those ape hangar bars that the Harley goons ride with.

Just happened upon this posting.... this is James from TWT. If you're who I think you are (I'm pretty certain), shoot me an email in a few weeks. I have a DUC 32 on the way, but it will likely be a little while before I actually get everything required to install the thing.

Regardless, though, in reference to that stem... the actual angle measurement on the upper surface of that stem may be the same as a conventional 15 degree stem, but it's not really a fair comparison since the Maverick stem starts immediately on top of the upper crown. If you were to extrapolate the bar position relative to where a conventional threadless stem and steerer tube would put it, the Maverick stem is really more like a 6 degree (hence why Maverick refers to it as such). In any event, it's still a 6" travel fork, regardless of the relatively low crown-to-axle, so you MIGHT need to go with a flat bar, but I would wait until you actually have the fork to decide for sure. If you do need a flat bar, Syntace makes a fantastic carbon bar (the Duraflite Carbon) that's easily as wide as your current Monkeylite with similar sweep if not more (available in 9 and 12 degree if memory serves). It's superlight considering its dimensions (roughly the same as your Monkeylite, maybe even lighter unless you have the SL), and the ends and center section are reinforced to protect against clamping (carbon stuff is actually pretty crappy in terms of resistance to clamping forces). Anyway, if you're you, good running into you, but otherwise, hope this was useful.

</FONT><A HREF="http://www.angryasian.com"><FONT FACE="Arial" SIZE=2 COLOR="#800000">www.angryasian.com</FONT></A><FONT FACE="Arial" SIZE=2>
<img src="http://www.angryasian.com/images/sfooter.gif">


I'm trying to get a feel for how my Cockpit is going to change if I go with a Maverick Fork.

My current setup is a Thomson 5X90 flipped(negative rise) and Monkey lite bars 1.5 inch rise.

Running the stem in a conventional manner give me too high a bar height.

If I'm running a 90mm length now, is the 90 mm Maverick stem the place to start? I believe the Maverick stems are 6 degree rise.

Any feedback from those of you that are running this fork would be greatly appreciated.

When you went with this fork how did it effect your cockpit?

Like Angryasain said, Syntace makes a really wide flat bar, also check out Pazzaz (I think its spelled that way) they have some flat's that are in the 700mm range.

Also, I went from a 120 x 6 to the Mav 90 and its great. A little more upright, but it hasn't been anything but a good move for me.

Would you buy another one?
Yep, a lot of $ but so was my 5 Spot frame and a hundred bucks for a handlebar - wassat all about?? Seriously, I debated and stressed about the purchase and then figured WTF, if I don't like it I'll sell it on ebay. I'm pist now though. I can't upgrade any more :P -- well except maybe a set of Juicys

A resounding YES.

James!!!!! I swear you must have ESP. I was going to ring you tomorrow. I'm heading back to see my folks in Ann Arbor next tues. I'll be staying a week. Can you line me up Dennis's bike again? Can you do a Highland run with me this time?

Thanks for chiming in on this. I really appreciate the 411 on those flat bars. We can talk more in person when I see you next week.

Aquaholic

A ha... figured that was you.... don't run into too many "aquaholics"! Anyway, I'll be at the shop tomorrow evening from 4-8EST, as will Dennis. Call me there at 734-528-3030. I'm also back at Michigan for grad school now so I'll actually probably be able to ride with you while you're here! I'll talk to you tomorrow.

</FONT><A HREF="http://www.angryasian.com"><FONT FACE="Arial" SIZE=2 COLOR="#800000">www.angryasian.com</FONT></A><FONT FACE="Arial" SIZE=2>
<img src="http://www.angryasian.com/images/sfooter.gif">


James!!!!! I swear you must have ESP. I was going to ring you tomorrow. I'm heading back to see my folks in Ann Arbor next tues. I'll be staying a week. Can you line me up Dennis's bike again? Can you do a Highland run with me this time?

Thanks for chiming in on this. I really appreciate the 411 on those flat bars. We can talk more in person when I see you next week.

Aquaholic

Thanks Nater! If push comes to shove, I guess I could try the Salsa Pro-Moto bar. It's a tad short on the width and it's not exactly the bend I use. But this would be better than having my front end look like those ape hangar bars that the Harley goons ride with.
Seven titanium bar (http://www.sevencycles.com/accessories/mountainhandlebars.html). You tell them the width and bend, pay 'em a Benjamin, and a couple of weeks later, you get this beauty. I chose 26" wide with a 11 degree bend. Tough as nails also.

Seven titanium bar (http://www.sevencycles.com/accessories/mountainhandlebars.html). You tell them the width and bend, pay 'em a Benjamin, and a couple of weeks later, you get this beauty. I chose 26" wide with a 11 degree bend. Tough as nails also.

Drevil, Angry Asian, et al, Thanks so much for the 411 on flat bars. It looks like the Syntace are the way I'll go. They have the width and bend I'm seeking. The Seven Ti bars looked interesting, however, they won't do a bend of more than 6 degrees. They said that their mandrel causes a crimp if they go more than that.

So, I got into a discussion/debate with a friend on todays ride. I was explaining this whole project to him (he's a professional wrench, I value his judgement), anyway, he was saying that you can take two totally different stem/bar combos that essentially end up with the same grip placement. That is, the bend and the grip height, grip placement, etc., is the same with the two separate setups, but because of where the bar attaches to the stem, and fulcrum points, and leverage, that you will notice a difference in handling traits.

For example, he was saying that you can take a low angle 90mm stem with 2 inch riser and then setup a high angle 90mm stem with a flat bar. The bend angle is the same on both bars. You end up with the same grip placement, but he argues that the two setups will behave noticeably different.

I'm not so sure I agree, but it does get me thinking about it. Agree or disagree?

Drevil, Angry Asian, et al, Thanks so much for the 411 on flat bars. It looks like the Syntace are the way I'll go. They have the width and bend I'm seeking. The Seven Ti bars looked interesting, however, they won't do a bend of more than 6 degrees. They said that their mandrel causes a crimp if they go more than that.

So, I got into a discussion/debate with a friend on todays ride. I was explaining this whole project to him (he's a professional wrench, I value his judgement), anyway, he was saying that you can take two totally different stem/bar combos that essentially end up with the same grip placement. That is, the bend and the grip height, grip placement, etc., is the same with the two separate setups, but because of where the bar attaches to the stem, and fulcrum points, and leverage, that you will notice a difference in handling traits.

For example, he was saying that you can take a low rise 90mm stem with 2 inch riser and then setup a highrise 90mm stem with a flat bar. The bend angle is the same on both bars. You end up with the same grip placement, but he argues that the two setups will behave noticeably different.

I'm not so sure I agree, but it does get me thinking about it. Agree or disagree?

1. Seven must have changed their policy because I had them make me a bar for my trials bike about four years ago. 27" wide with 11 deg bend. A few months after I bought it, I was in Boston, rode out to their shop and had them take it to 14. They had no problem with it at the time.

2. If the grip placement is the same, the handling characteristics are going to be the same. Of course that's not considering variables like flex in the stem or bars. Whether seated or standing, all the input points would be identicle.

I get frustrated sometimes trying to explain this to weight conscious roadies that come into the shop. Many of them spend hundreds of $$ to keep the bike weight down and then insist on using a negative rise stem with a few inches of spacers underneath. How silly. All because they think the look of a riser stem is too "mountain bikey."

So, I got into a discussion/debate with a friend on todays ride. I was explaining this whole project to him (he's a professional wrench, I value his judgement), anyway, he was saying that you can take two totally different stem/bar combos that essentially end up with the same grip placement. That is, the bend and the grip height, grip placement, etc., is the same with the two separate setups, but because of where the bar attaches to the stem, and fulcrum points, and leverage, that you will notice a difference in handling traits.

For example, he was saying that you can take a low angle 90mm stem with 2 inch riser and then setup a high angle 90mm stem with a flat bar. The bend angle is the same on both bars. You end up with the same grip placement, but he argues that the two setups will behave noticeably different.

I'm not so sure I agree, but it does get me thinking about it. Agree or disagree?
Let me first say I've been on a Maverick ML7 with DUC32 fork since October 2003, in Boulder Colorado. I switched from a 120mm x 6 degree Thompson stem on my Rocky Mtn Instinct with SID SL to the Maverick setup with the 90mm stem. I use the same bar, a MonkeyLite DH which is 28" wide, 8 x 4 bend and 1.5" rise. I rotate the bars about 25-30 degrees forward because I like the 8 degree bend to be slightly upward (more than the 4 degree bend) and I like the little extra extension it gives. I measured the ground to grip length and the Maverick was roughly 1.5" higher (when I'm on the bike, with 25mm sag). It should've been slightly higher because of the difference between the 80mm and 125mm (at sag) fork. The delta between nose of my saddle and grips was just slightly smaller, about 1/2". So I think the Maverick setup is about 1/2" higher compared to the same axle to crown distance. But with that much more travel, I like being a little higher on this fork -- realize that the Maverick Fork will up your riding a huge amount, you'll be going up and down technical sections you never thought were possible, so the slight extra bit of height is welcome.

Point is, don't get flat bars just yet. Try your same bars, knowing that many of us have gone from 120 x 6 stems to the Maverick 90mm just fine.

I also agree with the comments above. By rotating your bars, depending on the back- and upsweep, you can get an inch more or less extension.

Finally, no issues with the fork. Like I said above, it'll definately up your riding. Also, I just serviced it, and it was very easy. All you need is a 10mm deep socket, and a 17mm cone wrench. Used Honda 5wt fork oil (don't waste your money on "bicycle" specific fork oil) and it took about an hour total. Next time it'll be 1/2 hour or less.

"Point is, don't get flat bars just yet. Try your same bars, knowing that many of us have gone from 120 x 6 stems to the Maverick 90mm just fine".

MiniMTNBiker:

Again, more good feedback, I'm appreciating this! I hear what your saying about trying the riser first, and I'm game to do that. However, understand, that I have to run my 5X90 Thomson flipped in order to negate the chopper effect. So, I'm running negative 5 degrees with a 1.5 rise monkeylite. This extra tall HT complicates things.

If your saying that the average net height gain is roughly half an inch, that sounds like something I could work with. Maybe. But, the problem is that the Maverick stem can't be flipped. And, the challenge becomes magnified because the new extra tall, top crown for the Maverick is even taller than the conventional piece. So, in my case we're not comparing apples to apples. That's why I'm betting that I'll end up needing a flat bar to pull this off.

I'll know more tomorrow, as the local guy took delivery of the new top crown. I'll be able to throw a ruler on this thing tomorrow.

Aquaholic

"Point is, don't get flat bars just yet. Try your same bars, knowing that many of us have gone from 120 x 6 stems to the Maverick 90mm just fine".

MiniMTNBiker:

Again, more good feedback, I'm appreciating this! I hear what your saying about trying the riser first, and I'm game to do that. However, understand, that I have to run my 5X90 Thomson flipped in order to negate the chopper effect. So, I'm running negative 5 degrees with a 1.5 rise monkeylite.

If your saying that the average net height gain is roughly half an inch, that sounds workable. But, the problem is that Maverick stem can't be flipped. And, the challenge becomes magnified because the new top crown for the Maverick is even taller than the conventional piece. So, in my case we're not comparing apples to apples.That's why I'm betting that I'll end up needing a flat bar to pull this off.

I'll know more tomorrow, as the local guy took delivery of the new top crown. I'll be able to throw a ruler on this thing tomorrow.

Aquaholic

Well, if you are still looking for the Seven, I talked to a guy there today (Madison?). He said that there was no problem making whatever width and sweep you want. I asked if there is any problem with a 27" 11 degree bend, and he said sure. Hopefully he's right because I may want to get another.

Well, if you are still looking for the Seven, I talked to a guy there today (Madison?). He said that there was no problem making whatever width and sweep you want. I asked if there is any problem with a 27" 11 degree bend, and he said sure. Hopefully he's right because I may want to get another.

Sounds like they're telling you one thing, and me another.

This is from Al Brown at Seven:

"Our bars are bent without use of an internal mandrel. Thus any bend over about 6 degrees results in a dimple on the inside of the bend which is aesthetically and structurally problematic. Length changes are not a problem as are bend options less than 6 degrees, but we are unable to bend you a bar greater than 6 degrees of sweep".

Alan

So, in my case we're not comparing apples to apples.

Oh, I forgot one thing. I have an XL Maverick ML7 frame. That uses their medium top crown. If you have to use the large top crown, I'm sure you'll be higher.

Oh, I forgot one thing. I have an XL Maverick ML7 frame. That uses their medium top crown. If you have to use the large top crown, I'm sure you'll be higher.


Mini:

The XL head tube on my 5* is so long that I have to run the new Xtra tall top crown. So, yeah, it's gonna end up higher, hence the whole flat bar theory.
So, I'm going with the new Salsa flat bar, 660mm, with an 11degree sweep. If I've calculated things right, I'm going to end up a bit higher than what I have now. I hope it's not much.

Hey Aqua, what hub are you going to use? The Mav or the King?

For what it is worth, I was trying to run down the correct mav set-up for my salty and a shop in colorado said they had actually seen the King hub for the mav. I called King and was told they are hoping for an early 05 release. :( But now that the mav hub is available in black I suppose it will match, so that is cool too.

Sorry things didn't work out for that Highland ride! Totally my fault... maybe next time.

Too bad you left when you did, too... my new Maverick just showed up yesterday, along with the new Reba!

For what it's worth, I went with the Maverick hub for a few reasons. First off, I didn't get any indication from King that their axle was bulged in the middle like the Maverick was, plus the axle ends aren't knurled, either. Also, in my experience, I have yet to see a King hub that didn't have an appreciable amount of seal drag. Yes, they're made incredibly well, but if it doesn't spin well....

</FONT><A HREF="http://www.angryasian.com"><FONT FACE="Arial" SIZE=2 COLOR="#800000">www.angryasian.com</FONT></A><FONT FACE="Arial" SIZE=2>
<img src="http://www.angryasian.com/images/sfooter.gif">

I'm trying to get a feel for how my Cockpit is going to change if I go with a Maverick Fork.

My current setup is a Thomson 5X90 flipped(negative rise) and Monkey lite bars 1.5 inch rise.

Running the stem in a conventional manner give me too high a bar height.

If I'm running a 90mm length now, is the 90 mm Maverick stem the place to start? I believe the Maverick stems are 6 degree rise.

Any feedback from those of you that are running this fork would be greatly appreciated.

When you went with this fork how did it effect your cockpit?

For what it is worth, I was trying to run down the correct mav set-up for my salty and a shop in colorado said they had actually seen the King hub for the mav. I called King and was told they are hoping for an early 05 release. :( But now that the mav hub is available in black I suppose it will match, so that is cool too.

I think they are available now. I just got mine last week. Give the guys at The Path (http://www.thepathbikeshop.com) a call.

From the looks of that wheel, the spoke flanges on the King hub are not nearly as widely spaced as those of the Maverick hub.

My understanding of wheels suggests that all other things being equal, the Maverick hub would produce a wheel more resistant to lateral deflection.

Riding this fork, you need the strongest wheel that you're still comfortable climbing. See the attached photo for a good reason why.

So, even though the King hubs are just so sweet looking, I would not buy one. If I already had a King through-axle hub, though, I would be pretty excited about converting it.

Tommy

From the looks of that wheel, the spoke flanges on the King hub are not nearly as widely spaced as those of the Maverick hub.

My understanding of wheels suggests that all other things being equal, the Maverick hub would produce a wheel more resistant to lateral deflection.

Riding this fork, you need the strongest wheel that you're still comfortable climbing. See the attached photo for a good reason why.

So, even though the King hubs are just so sweet looking, I would not buy one. If I already had a King through-axle hub, though, I would be pretty excited about converting it.

Tommy


Hmm, all good reasons by you and angry. I guess I will go with a black Mav then but will still run a steel axel King in the rear. (Larry expect an email) From the looks of that pic you must have given the fork some thorough testing. :D

From the looks of that wheel, the spoke flanges on the King hub are not nearly as widely spaced as those of the Maverick hub.

You're right. I checked the specs on the King and Maverick sites, and the spoke flanges on the Maverick hub are 11.6mm wider than the King. I think the King wheel will have less dish, however, as the distance center to flange is 27.8/26.5 (difference of 1.3mm) compared to 36.5/29.4 (difference of 7.1mm) on the Mav. I don't know enough about wheelbuilding to say how that relates to strength.

The whole thing seems insanely stiff to me with the King, but I've never tried the Maverick hub, so I don't know what I may be missing.

Sorry things didn't work out for that Highland ride! Totally my fault... maybe next time.

Too bad you left when you did, too... my new Maverick just showed up yesterday, along with the new Reba!

For what it's worth, I went with the Maverick hub for a few reasons. First off, I didn't get any indication from King that their axle was bulged in the middle like the Maverick was, plus the axle ends aren't knurled, either. Also, in my experience, I have yet to see a King hub that didn't have an appreciable amount of seal drag. Yes, they're made incredibly well, but if it doesn't spin well....

</FONT><A HREF="http://www.angryasian.com"><FONT FACE="Arial" SIZE=2 COLOR="#800000">www.angryasian.com</FONT></A><FONT FACE="Arial" SIZE=2>
<img src="http://www.angryasian.com/images/sfooter.gif">

James:

Actually, I got to ride Highland on saturday with the MMBA on the HIP100 ride. 100 Focking miles!!! It was brutal. We hit Highland first. Pretty cool trail.

Thanks for letting me tag along on that thursday ride. For a guy who is "out of shape", you can still shred!

BTW, after spending a week on that 29er, I started to figure the thing out a bit. It's still a weird bike. I'm back in San Diego now. I went for a ride today, and my bike felt totally foreign.

Are you going to put the DUC on your Klein? Please post your feedback on it.

Ozlongboarder, I too went with the Maverick Hub. I'd like to go with a KIng, but I don't want to wait for it. 'Sides, what Angry says makes sense

Glad to hear your finally got to ride Highland. It is certainly a pretty cool trail, and at the very least, likely very different from the other ones you've ridden around here. Sorry I couldn't join you.

Yup, the DUC32 is going to go on the Palomino. However, I don't have everything I need to get it going (I still don't have a complete front wheel nor a handlebar), and besides, I also just received my test Reba to play with so I will likely ride that thing for a while first.

James:

Actually, I got to ride Highland on saturday with the MMBA on the HIP100 ride. 100 Focking miles!!! It was brutal. We hit Highland first. Pretty cool trail.

Thanks for letting me tag along on that thursday ride. For a guy who is "out of shape", you can still shred!

BTW, after spending a week on that 29er, I started to figure the thing out a bit. It's still a weird bike. I'm back in San Diego now. I went for a ride today, and my bike felt totally foreign.

Are you going to put the DUC on your Klein? Please post your feedback on it.

Ozlongboarder, I too went with the Maverick Hub. I'd like to go with a KIng, but I don't want to wait for it. 'Sides, what Angry says makes sense

So, here's what I ended up with. The bars are 660mm on the width(perfect). They have an 11 degree sweep. The cockpit length with the 90mm stem ended up being the same. The grip height is now a half inch higher than before.

I've only got one ride in so far, 35 miles on saturday. The fork still needs to loosen up. This setup didn't really hurt my climbing much at all. It did take some minor adjustments to body english, weight transfer, etc. But overall, my measurements beforehand were pretty close.

It's too bad, however, that Maverick doesn't offer a different rise stem. A flat stem wouldn't be that hard to do. Hell, I may have a machinist whip one up. It's just odd, looking down and seeing a flat bar after running a riser for so long. And, I must say that the vibration damping quality of the Monkeylite bars is really noticeable as compared to this aluminum bar.

Dig the Huffy stickers!!!

...Oh yeah, nice rig too. :D

You have to love those Huffy 5-spots. Just out of curiosity, do you ever get anyone trying to give you crap because they are to stupid to know better?

Nice looking rig. The Huffy stickers threw me for a couple of seconds. ;)

...but is that your normal seat post setting or just where you set it for BBHJT (Boom Boom Huck Jam Time)?

Sean

You have to love those Huffy 5-spots. Just out of curiosity, do you ever get anyone trying to give you crap because they are to stupid to know better?

Not really "giving me crap". It's more like a lot of head scratching, confused looks, and comments like, "Hmmmm, I didn't realize huffy made a high end bike......what model is that"?

I've quit trying to explain.

Soup: I'm about 8 feet tall, so I have alot of seatpost exposed for climbing, For gravity mode, I actually have to jam it all the way down to the clamp bolts.

Its a good thing you swapped the Fox for the Mav. You needed to lose some weight up front to balance that light rear end a bit.

So, here's what I ended up with. The bars are 660mm on the width(perfect). They have an 11 degree sweep. The cockpit length with the 90mm stem ended up being the same. The grip height is now a half inch higher than before...

So is that the Titec you went with? Happy with it?

I'm thinking of doing the same thing--running a flat bar with my Maverick fork (on a size L Maverick ML7 frame). I just put my bike together and went for the first ride ride. With the long Maverick stem (105mm?) and 1.5" rise Monkeylite XC bars, my position was very different compared to my old hardtail which has a compact 17.5" frame, flat bars, a 130mm stem, and a 60mm SID fork. I'm thinking I might prefer a flat bar with short barends mated to the medium 90mm Maverick stem.

Does anybody sell the Syntace carbon bars in the US? I did a quick Google search and came up with mostly German sites.

I ended up with the Salsa Pro-Moto. Surprisingly, it feels pretty good. It's got the width (660mm), that I like, and the sweep is 11 degrees. The grip height is now 1/2 inch higher than what it was originally. I'm still trying to figure out if I like using the "ETA" feature of this fork for climbing or not. The Fox Vanilla/Monkeylite setup was a better climber in the really steep/techno stuff.

At first it was strange looking down and seeing a flat bar after running a riser for so long. I also felt that the carbon bar provided a little bit better vibration damping in my hands compared to the aluminum bar. Perhaps a Ti bar would be marginally better? But after spending time on the new setup, I think I'll keep it this way for awhile.

The problem with the DUC, is that once you lock it down, the "spring" rate ramps up considerably. So, even though the front end is lowered, the front end tends to bounce and wander a bit more than with a supple front end.

For long fireroad grinds I use it. But, for climbs like this...the jury is still out.

I think it's just going to take some re-adjustment and reeducating myself as to the new characteristics of this fork.

Overall, the DUC rocks!!!

DYG2001, if you want the Syntace bar, contact Angry Asian, or Larry at Mt. High Cyclery. Either of them has a line on them.

Try lightbikes.com for the Syntace bars. It's in Florida. Otherwise you can contact Syntace directly (I found the contact info in the Brake forum but have since lost it).

Curious to hear how the DUC32 works out for you. The Fox Float 100 RLT I put on my ML7 is a little too short overall and is also coming up short in actual travel, although the height is perfect for me with one 10 mm spacer under the 120 mm x 4 degree stem. I'm considering trying a Float 130, but I'm worried it will be too tall. However, there are more stem options to get the right height vs. the very limited choices with the DUC. If I could get the bar & ride height I want with the DUC, I would definitely give it a try. The design is awesome. Something like a 130 mm DUC would probably be just perfect. The SC32 seems too heavy for what it offers. I'm already just over my 24 pound goal.

Curious to hear how the DUC32 works out for you. The Fox Float 100 RLT I put on my ML7 is a little too short overall and is also coming up short in actual travel, although the height is perfect for me with one 10 mm spacer under the 120 mm x 4 degree stem. I'm considering trying a Float 130, but I'm worried it will be too tall. However, there are more stem options to get the right height vs. the very limited choices with the DUC. If I could get the bar & ride height I want with the DUC, I would definitely give it a try. The design is awesome. Something like a 130 mm DUC would probably be just perfect. The SC32 seems too heavy for what it offers. I'm already just over my 24 pound goal.
For climbs like that one above, you want to have it in regular 150mm position. The fork is so supple it just rolls over anything, especially angry babyheads like that. You just have to try the DUC fork. Being 1" more upright really helps on flats and downhills. I rarely use the lockdown. Only for some really long fire roads, but I try to avoid those. On climbs I've adjusted, and as I've said before, I consistently clean technical climbs that I never could with my old "low" setup. So overall, it is a positive.

My bar position would go up at least 2.5 inches and back at least 1 inch -- that's a HUGE difference! I find a 10 mm difference in bar height alone (stem spacers) makes enough difference that I can ride it one way and can't stand it the other. I haven't tried more spacers on my current setup yet, but I did ride an ML7 with DC and 105 stem and it felt like a chopper. I couldn't climb anything in 150 mm mode and ended up using 100 mm mode most of the day. In 150 mm mode it was just impossible to loft the front wheel over obstacles and was way too springy out of the saddle. Maybe it works on seated, loose climbs where smooth pedal strokes are important. I didn't get a chance to try any of those. Any other time it felt like the front was just too "light". It was especially easy to wash out the front end on fast twisty singletrack with a little bit of loose thrown in. That bike had risers and no bar ends either though. I still don't understand how people can climb as effectively without bar ends (actually I don't believe they can).

Also, doesn't the DC make for an even longer wheelbase? The ML7 is longer than most to begin with.

.......That bike had risers and no bar ends either though. I still don't understand how people can climb as effectively without bar ends (actually I don't believe they can).

Also, doesn't the DC make for an even longer wheelbase? The ML7 is longer than most to begin with.
That is a big diff for you. When I switched to the Maverick, I was already using wide riser bars. Still a low position, with the saddle about 6" below the seat. As for bar ends, I never liked them except for fire roads. Never got used to them for technical stuff. The solution for me is the Easton Monkeylite DH bars -- they're 28" wide and still fairly light at 225g. They really give you leverage, and open up your chest for climbing.

Not sure about the wheelbase, since I have only ridden the ML7 with the DUC fork. I still have been able to ride more switchbacks than I did before, which was on a Rocky Mtn Instinct with SID SL.

Yeah I remember your mentioning the huge saddle to bar drop. So am I reading that right that you seriously have a 6" drop from saddle to bar? I just don't see how that's possible with that fork and a riser bar. You'd have to have a 500 mm seatpost and legs like an ostrich! :)

Yeah I remember your mentioning the huge saddle to bar drop. So am I reading that right that you seriously have a 6" drop from saddle to bar? I just don't see how that's possible with that fork and a riser bar. You'd have to have a 500 mm seatpost and legs like an ostrich! :)

I'll have to measure to be exact. I'll post again tomorrow. Could be more like 4" at the grips, especially since I have the risers tilted forward about 30 degrees -- for extra extension and I like the rise at the ends that way. I've got really long legs -- as long as a 6'4" friend of mine, but I'm not quite 5'11". More like monkey legs and monkey arms!

I'll have to measure to be exact. I'll post again tomorrow. Could be more like 4" at the grips, especially since I have the risers tilted forward about 30 degrees -- for extra extension and I like the rise at the ends that way. I've got really long legs -- as long as a 6'4" friend of mine, but I'm not quite 5'11". More like monkey legs and monkey arms!

On my XL ML7/DUC the grips are 1" lower than saddle... about 2" at the stem. My old bike has a 2.5" drop at grips and almost 4" at stem. Wierd, it looked like more and I know my old bikes had more drop -- more of a climbing position. So I measured two of my other bikes: my '97 Bontrager Ti - now singlespeed commuter - with 70mm fork is 5" drop at grips, and just for kicks, my track bike has a whoppin 12" drop from saddle to bottom of bars!

So there you have it, the DUC did raise my position about 1.5". But I am used to it now, and I think I'm as fast in races and definately faster and more control on technical stuff.

Those numbers sound alot more normal (at least on your ML7 they do). Mine is currently set up with almost exactly a 1" drop right now. I believe this is nearly an inch less than my previous bike, but it feels just right -- any lower and there is too much weight on the front. I may try 1 more 10 mm spacer under the stem this weekend. That's all I have room for and would put the bar close to the same height as it would be with the Float 130 and no stem spacers.

Too bad there's nothing I can do about the shorter cockpit with the DC. I know I couldn't adapt to that 2" difference and moving my saddle back isn't an option (certainly not 2" or even 1" for that matter!). I like the Maverick American stems, but they need more choices. The angle on their current stems is around 28 degrees! Maybe they can't make them any lower with the current top crown design. If that's the case, maybe they could make an optional top crown with the center section angled down about 20 degrees. That would still require different stems, but they could cover ALOT of area with an optional 20 degree crown (actually crowns since they would need 3 sizes) and 4 more stems (add a 115 length too). Maybe they'll do a custom one just for me! :) I know I'm not alone on these fit issues with the DC.

I dunno, it looks like it would be fairly easy to machine a flat, or zero degree rise stem for the DUC fork. But, Good luck in getting Maverick to re-evaluate it. I pleaded, begged, & threatened. It's not going to happen any time soon.

I have a machinist friend who said he would be willing to carve one out of some billet. The clamp piece wouldn't need to be redone, just the main stem body. We're not talking about extensive machine work here. I'm going to spend a little more time on the current setup and then see if it's worth pursuing.

I use a 1.5" rise bar rotated forward not quite 45 degrees. With some risers, that means the grips will rotate upwards, and with some they'll be relatively level. With the Monkeylites, the grips will be slightly upwards at the ends.

As for the stem, keep in mind the effective angle. Normal stems are about an inch tall above the headset. The Maverick has a very short stack integrated headset, the upper crown adds some height, but the stem starts right from the upper crown. I read on another forum where someone measured the effective stem angle as ~15 degrees.

I use a 1.5" rise bar rotated forward not quite 45 degrees. With some risers, that means the grips will rotate upwards, and with some they'll be relatively level. With the Monkeylites, the grips will be slightly upwards at the ends.

As for the stem, keep in mind the effective angle. Normal stems are about an inch tall above the headset. The Maverick has a very short stack integrated headset, the upper crown adds some height, but the stem starts right from the upper crown. I read on another forum where someone measured the effective stem angle as ~15 degrees.

Rotating a riser bar forward is fine, but you'll reach a point where it's going to feel weird, and put a strain on your wrists and hands.

The height on the top crown of the DUC is fairly insignificant. That is, from the top of the headset, to the base of the top crown without any stack height adjustment is only 10mm.

So, in my case, with the XL HT length, I'm very limited on what I can do to get the grip height back down to what I had before. People with the normal 3 sizes of top crowns have the luxury of raising the bar heights with different height riser bars, if needed.

I wish I had that flexibilty. But check this out, I was even toying with the idea of running a low riser bar, flipped to get back that 1/2" that I gained with the DUC. That would certainly look very odd. And I'm not so sure a carbon riser could handle that kind of loading, flipped.

Just thinking outside of the box.

I knew going in that this was going to get me a higher grip height. Overall, the fork has been an immense improvement. And, going to flat, aluminum bar is way more comfortable than I would have imagined. It's just that I do notice the added height on the brutally steep, techno climbs.

I'm really curious what their reasoning is. Are they saying that their bikes are only for cyclists of certain dimensions or what?

Flipping a riser bar puts the sweep in the wrong direction. Maybe there is a riser with no sweep though. :) I still don't like the width of risers (I like fairly narrow bars and bar ends).

I'm really curious what their reasoning is. Are they saying that their bikes are only for cyclists of certain dimensions or what?


"Not enough demand".

Yesterday, I put another 15 miles on the fork. I've probably got over 100 miles total on it now. It's fully broken in at this point.

There's a series of short steep climbs on our mid week ride. Typically, people ride this section in the opposite direction. I like to try to do it backwards, as it's a real good test of a bike's setup for climbing. (Not to mention one's fitness level).


Anyway, I cleaned all of them yesterday. And this was with the fork's ETA not employed.
I'm starting to understand the nuances of this fork, and adapted to the taller bar height.

Again, unless it's a long fireroad grind, I probably won't be using the ETA much. It just ramps up the "spring" rate too much.

The ML7 has a pretty long head tube. The overall length is actually 15 mm longer than my Truth with Chris King headset. The Truth has a shorter than normal head tube.

The effective stem angle is indeed ~12.5 to ~17.5 degrees (depends on the stem length), but that is still really steep in my opinion. With more travel, it makes sense to me to want reduced stem angles, not increased. I wouldn't want to ride a bike with 12" of rear travel if that meant my saddle was 8" higher than my 4" bike!

Here is a drawing I made to look at this stuff. The blue stuff shows the MA stem options (all 3 of them) and the green shows a normal 120 mm x 4 degree stem with and without a 10 mm spacer (and stack height of 42 mm which is probably higher than most but just happens to be what mine is). It is important to note that the drawing does not consider bar height changes due to different axle-to-crown dimensions (which only makes matters worse when the DC or any other longer travel fork is fully extended/unweighted).

PS. I don't know for sure if I have the origin of the blue lines in the correct location. Just a total guess. Things would be a little better (not much though) if the angle of those lines was actually a little more slack than I have drawn. I have a feeling they might be.

The blue are Maverick and the green are other fork options with 120 mm x 4 degree stem. The top green is some other fork with the same build height as the Maverick DC. The middle green is the Fox Float 130 with no spacers. The bottom green is a Float 100 with 10 mm spacers (my current setup). These positions are relative to the saddle (relative to the ground, things are actually a bit worse). I also moved the Maverick origins a bit (slightly more slack angle than my previous sketch). Still no idea if these are actually correct, but it doesn't really change the picture that much. Considering ride heights makes the DC look a little better (more sag), but not that much and it doesn't change the fact that the fork will extend fully when unweighted.

It looks pretty obvious to me that the DC is simply out of the question but the Fox 130 will be worth trying (probably with some tuning). I suppose the Maverick SC is also an option but it's sort of an unknown at this point not to mention sort of ugly looking.

It looks pretty obvious to me that the DC is simply out of the question but the Fox 130 will be worth trying (probably with some tuning). I suppose the Maverick SC is also an option but it's sort of an unknown at this point not to mention sort of ugly looking.
Keep in mind that sag is 35-40mm, while Fox's is half that. Have you seen the chart on the Maverick site? http://www.maverickamerican.com/pdfs/fork_comparison.xls According to that, the 125 Fox forks are only 6-7mm lower than the DUC. You say that sag doesn't change the picture that much, but what I see on the chart is that sag makes the forks' ride heights not that much different. Also when measuring grip height, etc, you have to consider sag. I forgot to consider sag in my measurements of saddle --> grip drop above. Finally, you need not worry about ride height when the fork is fully extended, since the only time that happens is when it's unweighted, typically going downhill.

I used info from that spreadsheet to make the sketch. The sag does help some with the height discrepancy, but does nothing for the cockpit length issue. The sag doesn't help the height discrepancy as much as you may be thinking though because of the steep Maverick stem angle (the stem rise is so much higher to begin with).

The fork would be fully extended on alot of the climbs where I ride. Even the Mighty DUC won't roll up 6" rock steps, so the front wheel must be lofted up onto them. In these situations, the fork extends fully, making it even more difficult to get up the obstacle. The steeper the climb, the worse it gets. I also ride out of the saddle more than most so the fully extended height is even more important to me.

That 6-7 mm should be 6-13 mm. If you compare the DC to the Float 130 at the same sag (say 20%), the ride height difference is 12 mm and the fully-extended height difference is 17 mm. Of course the DC does have 25 mm more travel (but I don't want it).

The fork would be fully extended on alot of the climbs where I ride. Even the Mighty DUC won't roll up 6" rock steps, so the front wheel must be lofted up onto them. In these situations, the fork extends fully, making it even more difficult to get up the obstacle. The steeper the climb, the worse it gets. I also ride out of the saddle more than most so the fully extended height is even more important to me.
Dude, you must not have you've ridden the DUC on technical stuff. You roll through 6" rock steps! Plus what you're saying about the fork extending fully making it tougher to get up the obstacle makes sense theoretically, on paper, on smooth climbs maybe. In reality, you can ride up more ugly technical, babyhead, rocky ledge etc. climbs than with any other fork. That's a pretty bold statement but those who have ridden DUC's for a while will probably agree.

At some point you have to put the numbers aside and talk to folks who've spent lots of time on equipment, and ask yourself if it will really make a difference. And if you don't want it, don't get it.

BTW I also ride exclusively out of the saddle on technical ugly stuff.

Cool picture but that's not really the type of stuff I'm trying to describe. I would call that a short steep lumpy climb with 4" lumps (on the rideable line anyway). I didn't get the chance to ride the DUC on anything like that (although we have plenty of stuff like that around here that I manage just fine with the 3" I get from my 4" Fox).

The stuff that was a problem on the DUC was single 6" steps that definitely cannot be rolled up with ANY fork, especially after half a dozen or so in a row on a continuous climb (say 500-1000 feet worth). Stopping to rest doesn't count either. :) It's just not easy to overcome all that travel when lofting a front wheel over and over again. It's light enough, just too tall.

The extra height also made it basically impossible to keep enough weight on the front wheel to corner fast on more mellow downhill sections. It washes out too easily. Reduced height makes a big difference here.

Climbing out of the saddle in 150 mm mode on a fireroad was just a total waste of energy (way too much bob). I can't claim to have made multiple climbs with a stopwatch or anything, but I've done enough of that to know that when something feels that much slower it probably is.

I didn't mean I didn't want a DUC32... I just don't want it's 150 mm of travel -- 120-130 mm with a longer lower stem would be perfect. I'm still considering trying to modify one to fit my needs because I think the design in general is really exceptional.

PS. Do you think some of the folks at Maverick are thinking along the same lines with the 125 mm SC32? Also, I sure hope that spreadsheet error didn't play a role in determining what stem options to offer for the DUC!

Cool picture but that's not really the type of stuff I'm trying to describe. I would call that a short steep lumpy climb with 4" lumps (on the rideable line anyway). I didn't get the chance to ride the DUC on anything like that (although we have plenty of stuff like that around here that I manage just fine with the 3" I get from my 4" Fox).Actually some of the rocks are over a foot tall. If you were to slip off, they're disc rotor-eaters! On my 80mm fork I could do this 50/50. With the DUC I am almost batting 1000. Sorta like cheating!
The extra height also made it basically impossible to keep enough weight on the front wheel to corner fast on more mellow downhill sections. It washes out too easily. Reduced height makes a big difference here.I could see how that might be a problem with not enough weight forward. I have a 90mm stem, a no-setback seatpost and my saddle is almost all the way forward on the rails, and I feel neutral. But I'm a trackie at heart, so my saddle is all the way forward on all my bikes :-)
Climbing out of the saddle in 150 mm mode on a fireroad was just a total waste of energy (way too much bob). I can't claim to have made multiple climbs with a stopwatch or anything, but I've done enough of that to know that when something feels that much slower it probably is.Agreed. But if you do a lot of riding like that, set it up stiffer. I can ride the DUC anwhere between 80-90psi and I weigh 165. Seated isn't bad.

I didn't mean I didn't want a DUC32... I just don't want it's 150 mm of travel -- 120-130 mm with a longer lower stem would be perfect. I'm still considering trying to modify one to fit my needs because I think the design in general is really exceptional.

PS. Do you think some of the folks at Maverick are thinking along the same lines with the 125 mm SC32? Also, I sure hope that spreadsheet error didn't play a role in determining what stem options to offer for the DUC!I think that was more for bikes whose warranties are voided with a double clamp, not just the 125mm limit. I have ridden with a lot of people who were testing the single crown, and they all say if you're bike can handle the DUC, get it. It is way stiffer and same weight. Now they weren't racers, although a few of them could kick XC expert racer behind if they wanted. Supposedly the single crown is as stiff or more than the 125mm FOX forks, even though some people on this forum will say that's impossible.

It did sort of feel like cheating on some of the steeper downhill sections I rode with the DUC. Those people may be able to kick XC expert racer behind with another fork, but not with the DUC unless they were able to end up with the same geometry they were used to I suppose (not likely). All the time is spent on the climbs, so small differences in efficiency here really add up quickly. A shorter cockpit really slows me down. I have my saddle just about centered on my medium ML7 with Float 100 & 120 mm stem, but had it almost all the way back on the large ML7 with DUC & 105 mm stem that I rented. That probably explains the washing out problem. I started with 90 psi in the fork and tried as high as 120 (I brought a pump on the ride), but still didn't like it. I know the shop where I purchased my frame agrees and they hear the same requests all the time -- too few stem options and too tall. Great for Downieville (very similar stuff to your photo) but not epic XC!

I have no problem believing the SC32 could be as stiff or stiffer than the Fox. Funny how all these other companies think bigger stanchions are the answer. I doubt any of those forks are as stiff as the DUC and certainly none are even close in weight!

... Those people may be able to kick XC expert racer behind with another fork, but not with the DUC unless they were able to end up with the same geometry they were used to I suppose (not likely) ...

Paul Turner has his own ideas about how a bike should fit and ride. After doing some research and having a long conversation with Frank Scurlock at Maverick I made a big leap of faith and bought a ML7 with a DUC32 fork. The riding position is way different that what I'm used to, a racy Merlin hardtail with and old 60mm SID, a long low rise stem, and narrow flat bars. Needless to say my grips are way higher with the Maverick. I rode the Maverick once with Easton 1.5" riser bars and found it difficult to weight the front end down enough for steep technical climbs. So I switched to my old flat bar from the Merlin which is too narrow but more comfortable height wise. After a few more rides I was really liking the bike, clearing sections that had me dabbing on my old bike, but became concerned with the standover height. With a 2.5" Weirwolf tire in front the standover on my size large frame is 32.5", which is exactly my inseam wearing bike shorts and socks. Concerned that I might have got too large a frame I emailed Frank Scurlock about a possible exchange. He called me back and we talked a long time about Paul Turner's philosophy on how the Maverick should fit and ride. Frank told me his inseam is 29" but he rides a medium frame. Like me, he has no standover clearance--his ball sack touches the top tube. But the ride of the medium is so much better for him than the small because of front-rear weight distribution. He said Paul tried making versions with more compact front triangles, but performance suffered. Frank offered to exchange my large for a medium, but encouraged me to give it more time, and that's what I am doing. He said he often advises new customers to try to put aside their preconceived notions of bike fit and just ride until they find their sweet spot. So my point is, when you get a Maverick you are getting a bike that is pretty unique. Trying to exactly replicate your old riding position may not be the best approach. Your old position will likely be no more than a rough starting point for further adjustments. Of course my advice to "give it a try, be flexible" applies more to those considering getting the complete package--ML7 with DUC32--than to those thinking of adding the fork to another frame. And it is unfortunate that only 3 stem sizes are offered.

Paul is an innovator, and an iconoclast. He has very specific ideas about how his bikes and forks should be ridden.

As for frame sizing: Paul is about 5' 10" tall, and the large-sized ML-7s fit him perfectly. Frank Scurlock and Frank Vogel are both 5' 8" and change, and the mediums fit them perfectly.

I'm about 5'8.5", with long arms. I can ride a large frame faster, but maneuver a medium frame better.

For any given rider, I think the largest ML-7 frame they can ride will yield the best weight distribution and suspension performance.

As for the fork: If you were to run a long stem on a DUC32, you would screw up its steering geometry and increase your chances of endoing over the fork when it reaches full compression.

It seems obvious to me that balance issues are mostly due to the slack angle of the seat tube and lack of longer stem choices.

I was on the fence between medium and large too and my measured inseam is 33-33.5". I'm 5' 10.5". I ultimately chose the medium for the lower standover height -- that's really the only substantial difference between a medium and large. I had a few close calls test riding a large with DUC. That fork is just too darn tall!

Wasn't the ML7 geometry designed around a 120 mm fork?

... If you do need a flat bar, Syntace makes a fantastic carbon bar (the Duraflite Carbon) that's easily as wide as your current Monkeylite with similar sweep if not more (available in 9 and 12 degree if memory serves). It's superlight considering its dimensions (roughly the same as your Monkeylite, maybe even lighter unless you have the SL), and the ends and center section are reinforced to protect against clamping (carbon stuff is actually pretty crappy in terms of resistance to clamping forces) ...

</FONT><A HREF="http://www.angryasian.com"><FONT FACE="Arial" SIZE=2 COLOR="#800000">www.angryasian.com</FONT></A><FONT FACE="Arial" SIZE=2>
<img src="http://www.angryasian.com/images/sfooter.gif">

I ordered one of these Syntace Duraflite carbon bars from Mountain High but have not received it yet. I was just browsing the Syntace website and noticed the width is only 580mm.

http://syntace.com/02_produkte/detail.cfm?artid=387

Looks like I goofed by not doing my own research before buying. 580mm is no different from the stubby old Easton CT2 carbon flat bar that I am currently running, and way shorter than the 660mm of the EC70 Monkeylite XC riser. Which Syntace bar were you referring to? I see some wide flat bars on the website but they are all for the VRO stem system and would not work with the conventional Maverick clamp.

What about running a riser bar rotated backwards to place the grips level with the stem clamp? Anybody try that? Looks like it would give a large sweep angle. The grips would actually have some drop to them--the outsides of the grips would be lower than the insides.

I ordered one of these Syntace Duraflite carbon bars from Mountain High but have not received it yet. I was just browsing the Syntace website and noticed the width is only 580mm.

http://syntace.com/02_produkte/detail.cfm?artid=387

Looks like I goofed by not doing my own research before buying. 580mm is no different from the stubby old Easton CT2 carbon flat bar that I am currently running, and way shorter than the 660mm of the EC70 Monkeylite XC riser. Which Syntace bar were you referring to? I see some wide flat bars on the website but they are all for the VRO stem system and would not work with the conventional Maverick clamp.

What about running a riser bar rotated backwards to place the grips level with the stem clamp? Anybody try that? Looks like it would give a large sweep angle. The grips would actually have some drop to them--the outsides of the grips would be lower than the insides.

If you want to drop the Syntace from the order just let me know, it's not a problem. Salsa has a carbon flat bar made by Alpha Q that's 660mm wide. Seems nice, I have have one in stock if you want to sub that for the Syntace (http://www.salsacycles.com/comps_handlebars.html).
Larry Mettler
http://www.mtnhighcyclery.com

If you want to drop the Syntace from the order just let me know, it's not a problem. Salsa has a carbon flat bar made by Alpha Q that's 660mm wide. Seems nice, I have have one in stock if you want to sub that for the Syntace (http://www.salsacycles.com/comps_handlebars.html).
Larry Mettler
http://www.mtnhighcyclery.com

Thanks, Larry, for letting me sub the Salsa, even though you special ordered the Syntace. I continue to be impressed by your knowledge, customer service, and prices.

I've posted this as a question in the forum, but figured a number of the subscribers to this forum are maverick owners. how difficult is it to get the 24mm hub to set correctly in a wheel stand as you are building the wheel for the fork/hub. i have a DUC on the way with the hub and am going to have to build up the wheel. I have parks 20mm adaptor -- will this do the trick? thanks for any help

You can jam the 24mm axle into the V-shaped notches in Park stand. Unmodified, they just barely hold the hub in place.

Or, buy adapters from Maverick for $25 bucks.

See http://www.maverickamerican.com/products/tools.aspx

I've posted this as a question in the forum, but figured a number of the subscribers to this forum are maverick owners. how difficult is it to get the 24mm hub to set correctly in a wheel stand as you are building the wheel for the fork/hub. i have a DUC on the way with the hub and am going to have to build up the wheel. I have parks 20mm adaptor -- will this do the trick? thanks for any help

I laced up the wheel in my lap, as I always do, but I was able to tension and true it fine in a cheap old truing stand with just notches for a standard axle. I basically just held my left hand index finger inside the axle to push it down on the notches, while spinning the wheel and turning the nipples with my right hand. It was annoying, but didn't slow me down too much. If I had to do more than one or two of these, I would modify the stand or buy an adapter. You could also do something with zip ties to hold the axle to the stand. Basically, a standard Park stand will work fine if you've got a little patience.

I used the spocalc.xls spreadsheet and the hub dimensions from the Maverick site to determine the spoke lengths. For a Mavic 317 or 717 rim and 3x pattern, 261 left and 263 right works out perfect.

I also recommend using a bike rack that doesn't require removal of the front wheel. The dropout QRs are a slick design, but they're always kind of a pain. I have the 24mm shipping axle attached to my roof rack, and it works fine, but because the stanchions move independantly, it's always a little fiddly.

The performance of the fork is awesome for a light trail bike, worth a little trouble!

-David