Results 1 to 17 of 17
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    24

    Headshok Interest

    How likely is it, that there will be a (Fox coil-spring-based Internals) version of the Headshok?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sp3000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    558
    I would basically bet my house that the 80mm Headshok DL & DLR will always stay an air shock. Apart from not using FOX internals the newer variants of the Headshok use the aluminium Steerer as the air chamber to save weight, the only other internals I have ever seen for them are an after market Magura Cartridge for the Headshok. Hope this helps.

  3. #3
    mad aussie
    Reputation: Flying Wombat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    1,124
    Given that we have seen the Fatty now on only a few lower to mid range bikes I doubt they will do anything to upgrade it.

    Kevin

  4. #4
    More than somewhat.
    Reputation: Cypress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    660
    80mm of travel is a joke to most of the cycling world these days. I'm surprised the headshok is still around.

    I think the headshok was/is a great idea. I hope it never goes away... But I'm an XC geek, so,what do I know.

  5. #5
    Ridin' dirty!
    Reputation: cdalemaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,902
    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress
    80mm of travel is a joke to most of the cycling world these days. I'm surprised the headshok is still around.

    I think the headshok was/is a great idea. I hope it never goes away... But I'm an XC geek, so,what do I know.
    I think 80mm isn't bad if you can utilize the "whole" 80mm range of travel and not just 60mm which is the case on most Fatty forks...
    That's the reason why I still like the "old" scalpel...it was really well balanced as far as "suspension" goes.
    Felt like a very cushy hard tail....
    So for commuting and Hard tail freaks, it's perfect!
    Other than that I tend to agree that 80mm (or 60mm ) seem to be outdated....
    "Common sense isn't always that common!"
    Custom Prophet and Custom Delta V

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,338
    They could go after the "lightest in the category" angle with it...do it in carbon-fiber with improved guts....I think it would be sweet for the "light" bikes (Taurine/Scalpel).

    Unfortunately, it seems like they're just letting it die tho, putting it on the low-end bikes.

  7. #7
    mad aussie
    Reputation: Flying Wombat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    1,124
    Given that the Fatty DLR was the same weight or a little lighter (steerer included) as the Lefty SL I would imagine that a carbon version could be made at close to the kilo mark or less. But with the way that travel has gone overall there just wouldnt be the market to justify the R&D costs.

    Kevin

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sp3000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    558
    I have heard about a new lefty SL for '09 that should be around 300g lighter than the current model. So with that happening, it seems very unlikely they will upgrade the Fatty for weight.

  9. #9
    More than somewhat.
    Reputation: Cypress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    660
    Quote Originally Posted by sp3000
    I have heard about a new lefty SL for '09 that should be around [SIZE="4"]300g lighter[/SIZE] than the current model. So with that happening, it seems very unlikely they will upgrade the Fatty for weight.

    Jebus!

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: greenhill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    98

    more Travel for Fatty?

    what about a 4" travel Fatty? would that work?

  11. #11
    LA CHÈVRE
    Reputation: Dan Gerous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    9,402
    Quote Originally Posted by greenhill
    what about a 4" travel Fatty? would that work?
    It 'could' work but it would make for a very tall front end so it's not a good idea. That's why they made the Lefty in the first place, to keep the stiffness and steering precision of the headshok but have more travel with a decent front end height...

    DAN.GEROUS.NET : MOUNTAIN BIKING : CYCLOCROSS : ROAD :

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sp3000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    558
    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress
    Jebus!
    Apparently it uses a totally different construction to the current style, hence the dramatic weight difference! But 300g was exactly what I was told!

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by cdalemaniac
    I think 80mm isn't bad if you can utilize the "whole" 80mm range of travel and not just 60mm which is the case on most Fatty forks...
    That's the reason why I still like the "old" scalpel...it was really well balanced as far as "suspension" goes.
    Felt like a very cushy hard tail....
    So for commuting and Hard tail freaks, it's perfect!
    Other than that I tend to agree that 80mm (or 60mm ) seem to be outdated....

    Thank you for your feedback.

    Based on your experience, do the latest Headshok models use only 75% of their travel?

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: greenhill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    98
    Quote Originally Posted by cowbell
    Thank you for your feedback.

    Based on your experience, do the latest Headshok models use only 75% of their travel?
    Well based on Cannondales claim, it is a "True 80mm of Travel" fork. I guess I assumed that is, 100% of 80mm.
    is this not the case?

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sp3000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    558
    well mine "feels" like 80mm, I guess i have to deflate and measure.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4

    fatty dlr travel

    i just bought a new fatty dlr on ebay and stuck it on my bike and the most travel it gets is 2" i played with the air pressure and everything. i don't see how it could possibly get a true 80mm of travel when the top of the slider to the bottom is only 2". i want to make this thing work cause i don't have $1000 for the lefty sl. i'm considering sending it to mendon. 80mm is enough for the trails i ride on, but it gets maybe 50. i'm thinking maybe it has too much oil or the oil is too thick. does the amount of oil determine how much travel it will have? how do i make the most out of this fork? thanks

  17. #17
    Music & Bikes
    Reputation: fokof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    925
    Quote Originally Posted by Cypress
    80mm of travel is a joke to most of the cycling world these days. I'm surprised the headshok is still around.

    I think the headshok was/is a great idea. I hope it never goes away... But I'm an XC geek, so,what do I know.
    I'm also XC guy and 80mm and a hardtail is plenty for me.
    130mm front and rear is not for everybody.

    The day I'll buy a dualy with 4+ inches of travel because 80mm is beating me up , I'll stay home in my "lazy boy" with the remote instead.

    But eh, that's me ..... retro geek !
    "There is a big difference between kneeling down and bending over" -FZ

Posting Permissions

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