Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    77

    2005 Marzocchi 66 RC fork?

    I have a specialized pitch with a pike 327 fork. I'm wanting a fork that can handle more freeriding, something more beefy. A guy wants to trade his 2005 Marzocchi 66 RC that has 1 month of use and was just serviced for my pike 327. What do you think? The marzocchi 66 rc has been off the bike and in his basement for a long while cuz he bought a lyrik for the bike that had this fork. Is this a fair trade?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,905
    its a big fork.. 30mm more travel, plus the taller AC height. it'll drastically change your bike, way taller front end.

    its not a bad trade i guess, its just a very different fork! if thats what you're looking for, sure.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    77
    Quote Originally Posted by tomsmoto
    its a big fork.. 30mm more travel, plus the taller AC height. it'll drastically change your bike, way taller front end.

    its not a bad trade i guess, its just a very different fork! if thats what you're looking for, sure.
    AC height?

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    121
    AC-height= Axle to Crown height

    You might also want to check if a fork that much taller voids your warranty.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    77
    Quote Originally Posted by Schlitz Domino
    AC-height= Axle to Crown height

    You might also want to check if a fork that much taller voids your warranty.
    Will do, btw do you think this is a good deal? How much harder will it make climbing trails?

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    121
    Quote Originally Posted by ECU_Pirate18
    Will do, btw do you think this is a good deal? How much harder will it make climbing trails?
    Don't know anything about the 66, so I can't say if it is a good deal. You will notice it climbing, especially on the steeps where your front end will like to lift and wander more than before. Do you want a slacker head angle, a burlier fork, or both?

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    77
    I want a fork that can handle the pretty big hits but I will be doing my fair share of climbing.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by ECU_Pirate18
    I want a fork that can handle the pretty big hits but I will be doing my fair share of climbing.
    If you're prepared to deal with the longer fork, then yeah, I'd go for it. I had an 888 RC from 2005 and it was sick...basically the same thing.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    715
    The 2005 66 series had really tall crowns, and as a result the AC height (as mentioned) is really tall. For the pitch, I'd say this is a bit of a sticking point.

    Can the 66 be spaced internally down to 150mm? If so, this may get you a fork that can handle the big hits without ruining the frame geometry and sacrificing the integrity of the frame.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ryan_daugherty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,773
    Quote Originally Posted by NWfreeride
    The 2005 66 series had really tall crowns, and as a result the AC height (as mentioned) is really tall. For the pitch, I'd say this is a bit of a sticking point.

    Can the 66 be spaced internally down to 150mm? If so, this may get you a fork that can handle the big hits without ruining the frame geometry and sacrificing the integrity of the frame.
    I agree with Adam.
    I had this fork on my ASX and it is super tall. If you can drop it down to 150mm with an internal spacer, it'd make it much more suitable for the frame. I also know that your Pike is a very capable fork. The reason I know is because I own one too. I don't ride off of big things by any means but it has excelled on everything I ridden it on.

  11. #11
    Living Ghetto Fabulous!
    Reputation: Uncle Cliffy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,747
    That year 66 has a very tall A to C height. It's taller than most modern triple clamp forks! Not a good idea for the Pitch IMO.

    Edit: Axel to crown measurement on the 2005 170mm 66 was 595mm!!!!!!!!
    Last edited by Uncle Cliffy; 06-27-2009 at 11:04 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by kidwoo
    The internet sounds like a tough place to ride.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,905
    Quote Originally Posted by ECU_Pirate18
    I want a fork that can handle the pretty big hits but I will be doing my fair share of climbing.
    then you definitely dont want a 66!

  13. #13
    Now with More Wood
    Reputation: Iceman2058's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    2,980
    Quote Originally Posted by Uncle Cliffy
    That year 66 has a very tall A to C height. It's taller than most modern triple clamp forks! Not a good idea for the Pitch IMO.

    Edit: Axel to crown measurement on the 2005 170mm 66 was 595mm!!!!!!!!
    Holy hi-rise Batman, that's a tall front end you got there!

    almost 3 cm taller AC than a 2010 Boxxer (568mm).

    OP: better look for a used Lyric or Fox 36, be much better suited for the Pitch.

  14. #14
    No Fear
    Reputation: SABER_MTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    1,017
    If the 66 is a 170 mm travel model just forget about it. It would certainly crack your head tube within a few months . Its ride height is 595 mm shockingly more than 888 RC2Xs Boxxers and even Travis .
    Marz its self found out its too high and lowered it 4 cm on the next generation ( RC2X ).

Posting Permissions

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