Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    82

    going from 150mm to 160mm or just keeping it at 150mm??

    I currently ride a 2011 spitfire an was thinking of upgrading my 150 Talas 32 to a 34! Unfortunately the new 34's come in 160mm. That being said, will a 160mm fork change the character of my bike, although i do like the 150 upfront now, but the fork kinda scares me a bit when things get a bit knarly or big! Or another option would be to get a 34 at 150mm, seems there's a few out there i can get my hands on? But will i notice more stiffness an more confidence with the 34 at 150mm over the 32! Any input would be great, thanks......

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    513
    Quote Originally Posted by alfonz212 View Post
    I currently ride a 2011 spitfire an was thinking of upgrading my 150 Talas 32 to a 34! Unfortunately the new 34's come in 160mm. That being said, will a 160mm fork change the character of my bike, although i do like the 150 upfront now, but the fork kinda scares me a bit when things get a bit knarly or big! Or another option would be to get a 34 at 150mm, seems there's a few out there i can get my hands on? But will i notice more stiffness an more confidence with the 34 at 150mm over the 32! Any input would be great, thanks......
    if you want a real upgrade, get a 160mm fox 36 (or RS lyrik)... it works very well with the spitfire...

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    82
    Thanks man, I'm sure it would be a killer upgrade, but would complicate things such as getting a 20mm hub an wheel build! So figured stick inbetween an go for a 34.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Haus Boss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,404
    A 34 160mm can be lowered to 150mm with a single internal spacer (and so a 150mm can be raised to 160mm by removing the spacer). From my understanding, that is the most you can lower it due to how the negative spring is set up. If you went with a Float 36, you would not be constrained to either 160 vs 150, as you can add multiple spacers with a greater range of travel/A2C height. Another option is the Xfusion Slant, but the travel options come in 20mm increments (160, 140, 120), but you'll probably end up with a fork that is more reliable and stiffer.

  5. #5
    Hard funkin´ Kraut
    Reputation: NoStyle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    730
    The V1 Spitfires are designed to take up to 160 mm Forks, as long as you go with a ZS-Headset lower Cup - no Problem!
    In my Opinion upgrading to 10 mm more Forktravel is maybe not as noticable as upgrading to 34 mm (or more) Stanchions! If you are unsure towards the Forktravel, then try to get a 150 mm 34er Fork instead. The increased Stiffness is a great Benefit alone, depending on what you ride or your Bodyweight. But you should not bother about going to 160 mm Travel at all. In the Case your current Setup is 150 mm Travel and external lower HS-Cup, the Change to 160 mm Travel and Zerostack lower HS-Cup doesn´t really affect the given Geometry. Plus: 160 mm Travel and 34er is a big win in every aspect when you plan on riding more gnarly Terrain.

    I have a V2 Spitfire, Fork is a BOS Deville with 160 mm Travel, 34er Stanchions and 20 mm Axle. This, with the given Reartravel of the Spitfire, makes for such a stiff, playfull but ground-eating Bike than you would nothing but enjoy it!

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    82
    Thanks for the input. I'm not so concerned with the travel but more for stiffness. An like I mentioned I do like my current setup at 150mm but just wishing for a bit more reassurance my front end is not going to snap when I start getting aggressive. An I def don't want to go 36 cause then it would require a new hub an wheel build. Rather try an keep the cost down an use my current 15mm axle.

  7. #7
    Hard funkin´ Kraut
    Reputation: NoStyle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    730
    In this case I would follow the suggestions Haus Boss made: 34er 160 mm lowered to 150 mm.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jgusta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    2,683
    I think a Fox 34 160 has little lower A2C then 36 160 (like 5mm), so that will help in keeping the feel similar to 150 fork, would be like a typical 155 fork in total length. I would go 34 160 for sure. 32 forks should only be on race and XC specific bikes, IMO.
    Ride On!

Posting Permissions

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