Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678910 LastLast
Results 701 to 800 of 956
  1. #701
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,703
    Quote Originally Posted by kntr View Post
    Thanks for all the help. I took out the rubber O-ring on the IVA air side and it made a huge difference in the progression of the fork. I like my fork plush and this really helped. I use more travel, now.

    Does the distance from the bottom out rubber O-ring to the crown look about right? That's where I was concerned.
    That distance looks correct for a STD fork at full compression....it's 7mm to the inside point of the crown.

    The only other thing you'd want to do is measure from the tire to crown with it compressed.

  2. #702
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,703
    Quote Originally Posted by fugsworth View Post
    Between the mayor the nurse and Dougal I am a little confused.

    If I wanted to reduce bottom end travel on a 120 pro by 10mm (Make it a 110) is that done on the top air side? Or both sides of the lowers? Or what?

    I thought I had it clear in my mind but I seem to be reading conflicting information.
    What do you mean by
    bottom end travel?
    Are you trying to shorten the ride height?
    Are you trying to shorten the overall travel?
    Are you trying to get more space to be able to run a taller tire?
    And what fork ( STD or EXT?) do you have?

  3. #703
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    142
    Wyatt is specing them as an option for their upcoming Fat Bike as well.

    Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

  4. #704
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,703
    Quote Originally Posted by Tavic View Post
    Wyatt is specing them as an option for their upcoming Fat Bike as well.

    Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
    Thanks for shilling Wyatt...which is the new Bikes Direct

  5. #705
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    142
    Quote Originally Posted by the mayor View Post
    Thanks for shilling Wyatt...which is the new Bikes Direct
    Not their newest bike. The frame is actually going to be built in house (LaCrosse, WI).



    Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

  6. #706
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    142
    Current Prototype

    Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

  7. #707
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,703
    Quote Originally Posted by Tavic View Post
    Not their newest bike. The frame is actually going to be built in house (LaCrosse, WI).



    Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
    Who cares? This is a thread about a fork.
    Take out an ad if you want to shill the bike

  8. #708
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    142
    Quote Originally Posted by the mayor View Post
    Who cares? This is a thread about a fork.
    Take out an ad if you want to shill the bike
    Reading through the thread, folks are posting about what bikes are being speced with them as well. Figured I'd share, but didn't figured I'd be trolled about it.

    Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

  9. #709
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    142
    Btw, I'm not shilling anything. Just another rider sharing info.

    Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

  10. #710
    mtbr member
    Reputation: fugsworth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    77
    Quote Originally Posted by the mayor View Post
    What do you mean by
    bottom end travel?
    Are you trying to shorten the ride height?
    Are you trying to shorten the overall travel?
    Are you trying to get more space to be able to run a taller tire?
    And what fork ( STD or EXT?) do you have?
    I think dougal answered my question with this:
    Quote Originally Posted by Dougal View Post
    If you want to increase tyre clearance then add spacers to the bottom of the rods inside the lower legs.
    .
    By bottom end of the travel I mean when the fork is completely compressed... "Tire clearance".
    My fork is a 120 pro std.
    I'd like the option to make it a 110

    Edit:
    Thanks Dougal, I did what you said and it was quite simple.

    I now have a 110 travel standard that will fit Minion 29x3 and Surly Bud with 531 A-C
    Last edited by fugsworth; 08-30-2017 at 07:00 PM.

  11. #711
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,727
    I just spoke with Luke at Dirt Lab, he has ordered STD conversion parts for my EXT, but Manitou is saying September before they'll be available. I'll post follow ups once I get the conversion complete. Parts cost are estimated at $50.

  12. #712
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    78
    September??? That's tomorrow! Outrageous!!!

  13. #713
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,703
    Quote Originally Posted by Maxeymum View Post
    September??? That's tomorrow! Outrageous!!!
    It's already tomorrow, dude

  14. #714
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,727
    Quote Originally Posted by Maxeymum View Post
    September??? That's tomorrow! Outrageous!!!
    In bike speak, September is really late October.

  15. #715
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,703
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    In bike speak, September is really late October.
    Manitou Mastodon?-maynz.jpg
    This is the calendar the bike industry uses.
    I'm going to bet the parts will be here by the winged 3 legged dog

  16. #716
    mtbr member
    Reputation: iliketexmex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    294
    Quote Originally Posted by the mayor View Post
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	maynZ.jpg 
Views:	99 
Size:	301.1 KB 
ID:	1155358
    This is the calendar the bike industry uses.
    I'm going to bet the parts will be here by the winged 3 legged dog
    Post of the year! Or should I say post of the yellow toothy one eyed parrot...
    Last edited by iliketexmex; 09-08-2017 at 05:52 PM.

  17. #717
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    9
    Awesome ride with the Mastodon


  18. #718
    Flying Sasquatch
    Reputation: KTMNealio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    240
    Quote Originally Posted by Fatpeak View Post
    Awesome ride with the Mastodon

    Now that's how a fatbike is supposed to be ridden!

  19. #719
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    174
    Quote Originally Posted by ktmnealio View Post
    now that's how a fatbike is supposed to be ridden!
    wow!!

  20. #720
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,727
    That video pretty much catches the Mastodon in action. Though my riding is no where near that level, I do work my Mastodons pretty hard, plenty of big hits, routine 4-5' airs, lots of bad lines with consequences..

    What I notice is that the fork goes where I point it, it keeps the tire in contact with the ground, it's not skittery or bouncy, there is no stiction, and flex is not an issue. It's certainly on par with a Pike, though I prefer the action of the Manitou over a Pike.

    Now I need to work on my nose wheelies

  21. #721
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    124
    I'm contemplating buying one of these, and have gone through this forum. Have a few questions I am hoping can be answered by someone more knowledgeable.

    I see the "the travel change manual (page 9)" referenced and linked. However the link is dead and I couldn't find it via a search. Any idea if/how it can be accessed?

    I've read on the std model that you can gain tire clearance by adding spacers which sacrifices travel. makes sense in theory, but has anyone that has one actually done this yet? If so, any feedback on the change?

    This is going on a Surly ICT. I expect to run it mostly with 27.5+ and 3" tires. Concerned about throwing off geometry much, so leaning towards the STD, but then I may just like having suspension enough to want it with some 5" tires also. I can definitely see wanting to at least try it in the snow with some Dillinger 5s, which although they are labelled as 5" they aren't very big. Thinking one extra spacer would be plenty to run those, perhaps 2 spacers for my big Knards.

    Just looking for a little more confirmation or feedback that extending the std model works. real examples would be best, but guessing that manual referenced would help to clarify.

    Also, if any on has run one on an ICT specifically and has feedback, would like to hear it. Thanks.

  22. #722
    mtbr member
    Reputation: fugsworth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    77
    Quote Originally Posted by Pkovo View Post
    I'm contemplating buying one of these, and have gone through this forum. Have a few questions I am hoping can be answered by someone more knowledgeable.

    I see the "the travel change manual (page 9)" referenced and linked. However the link is dead and I couldn't find it via a search. Any idea if/how it can be accessed?

    I've read on the std model that you can gain tire clearance by adding spacers which sacrifices travel. makes sense in theory, but has anyone that has one actually done this yet? If so, any feedback on the change?

    This is going on a Surly ICT. I expect to run it mostly with 27.5+ and 3" tires. Concerned about throwing off geometry much, so leaning towards the STD, but then I may just like having suspension enough to want it with some 5" tires also. I can definitely see wanting to at least try it in the snow with some Dillinger 5s, which although they are labelled as 5" they aren't very big. Thinking one extra spacer would be plenty to run those, perhaps 2 spacers for my big Knards.

    Just looking for a little more confirmation or feedback that extending the std model works. real examples would be best, but guessing that manual referenced would help to clarify.

    Also, if any on has run one on an ICT specifically and has feedback, would like to hear it. Thanks.
    27.5 + should fit a STD 120 no problem (531a-c). There is a picture of a fat minion also fitting. I shortened my 120 to 110 so I could have mud clearance with my 29+ minion. It worked.

  23. #723
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    219
    Quote Originally Posted by Pkovo View Post
    I'm contemplating buying one of these, and have gone through this forum. Have a few questions I am hoping can be answered by someone more knowledgeable.

    I see the "the travel change manual (page 9)" referenced and linked. However the link is dead and I couldn't find it via a search. Any idea if/how it can be accessed?

    I've read on the std model that you can gain tire clearance by adding spacers which sacrifices travel. makes sense in theory, but has anyone that has one actually done this yet? If so, any feedback on the change?

    This is going on a Surly ICT. I expect to run it mostly with 27.5+ and 3" tires. Concerned about throwing off geometry much, so leaning towards the STD, but then I may just like having suspension enough to want it with some 5" tires also. I can definitely see wanting to at least try it in the snow with some Dillinger 5s, which although they are labelled as 5" they aren't very big. Thinking one extra spacer would be plenty to run those, perhaps 2 spacers for my big Knards.

    Just looking for a little more confirmation or feedback that extending the std model works. real examples would be best, but guessing that manual referenced would help to clarify.

    Also, if any on has run one on an ICT specifically and has feedback, would like to hear it. Thanks.
    I tried the EXT 120mm version on my Salsa Beargrease in 21" frame. Set up with low handlebars and flip over the stem, it was no problem. I would probably be better off with a 110 or a 100mm travel, on the Salsa, but I like to ride a bit aggressive and want a bit more travel. I wanted the EXT version to be able to use all kind of wheel sizes including 29+ and 5" tires.

  24. #724
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DirtyHun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    485
    Quote Originally Posted by KTMNealio View Post
    Now that's how a fatbike is supposed to be ridden!
    Then I had better send mine back.

  25. #725
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Blue66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    36
    Material is overestimated, it's always the rider not the bike or fork - reduced to the essentials (starts from 2:00) …

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2_nDekAyZY

  26. #726
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,727
    If you are only going to run shorter travel, ie <130mm, there is no reason to get an EXT for a 29+/5" tire clearance because you can add 10-20mm (1 or 2) of spacers to limit travel, thus preventing the tire from hitting the crown.

    Unlike the EXT, the STD will not increase A-C, so functionally the bike will remain at the same geo as it would with a rigid fork/Lauf/Bluto.

    I made this same mistake on my Wozo, prior to knowing enough about the Mastodon fork to make an informed decision; early adoptor syndrome.

    I am in the process of changing my EXT to an STD on my Wozo, I will run 130mm travel which leaves the the option of adding spacers to reduce travel if I decide to run 29+ again.

    To reiterate: STD with 20mm of spacers can be run up to 130mm and clear 29+/5" tires without increasing A-C.

    The question I have is why even create an EXT?

    Personally, I'd rather have a Mastodon "minus" with a narrower crown for 3-4" tires, 160mm travel; call me a dreamer.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    I tried the EXT 120mm version on my Salsa Beargrease in 21" frame. Set up with low handlebars and flip over the stem, it was no problem. I would probably be better off with a 110 or a 100mm travel, on the Salsa, but I like to ride a bit aggressive and want a bit more travel. I wanted the EXT version to be able to use all kind of wheel sizes including 29+ and 5" tires.

  27. #727
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,669
    Has there been an engineering drawing of the fork posted? Not exploded parts view but 3-view dimensional that a frame builder would use.

  28. #728
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    124
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    If you are only going to run shorter travel, ie <130mm, there is no reason to get an EXT for a 29+/5" tire clearance because you can add 10-20mm (1 or 2) of spacers to limit travel, thus preventing the tire from hitting the crown.

    Unlike the EXT, the STD will not increase A-C, so functionally the bike will remain at the same geo as it would with a rigid fork/Lauf/Bluto.

    I made this same mistake on my Wozo, prior to knowing enough about the Mastodon fork to make an informed decision; early adoptor syndrome.

    I am in the process of changing my EXT to an STD on my Wozo, I will run 130mm travel which leaves the the option of adding spacers to reduce travel if I decide to run 29+ again.

    To reiterate: STD with 20mm of spacers can be run up to 130mm and clear 29+/5" tires without increasing A-C.

    The question I have is why even create an EXT?

    Personally, I'd rather have a Mastodon "minus" with a narrower crown for 3-4" tires, 160 mm travel; call me a dreamer.
    Thanks to everyone that replied, very helpful. This reply is pretty much spot on my situation. I never plan on using more than 130 mm of travel, and actually probably will use less. I'm thinking 120 max, maybe 110 as is for the std. If I run it with bigger tires, ad spacers below, 90-100. A-C distance is very much my concern because I feel the geo now with my rigid fork is great and don't want to increase any further than I need to. So, this makes perfect sense to me. STD it is.

    Hopefully my last question...Does it come with all the spacers I'll need, or do I need to order some extras to have enough to add and reduce travel?

  29. #729
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,727
    I'm not sure if the fork includes the combination of spacers needed to meet all the possible combinations. From memory I remember getting some extra spacers with my forks, but now I have them all in one bag

    You do need to dissaemble the fork and move around spacers, for that you'll need the special socket and cassette tool OR pay a shop to do the work.

    [QUOTE=Pkovo;13337205]Thanks to everyone that replied, very helpful. This reply is pretty much spot on my situation. I never plan on using more than 130 mm of travel, and actually probably will use less. I'm thinking 120 max, maybe 110 as is for the std. If I run it with bigger tires, ad spacers below, 90

  30. #730
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    219
    Wonder what parts there is in the conversion kit for ext to std? Just a shorter airshaft? Someone who have measured and seen the difference of ext and std airshaft? If we know we could shorten the ext shaft accordingly.

  31. #731
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,727
    I was told that the kit includes three parts: spacers, air shaft, and something else (he didn't specify, maybe a washer or a seal/wipe). I'm waiting on the parts from Dirt Labs.

    As far as I know, the air shaft is replaced and the damper shaft is retained.

    Hey Dougal, you out there?? Anything to add?

    I kinda wonder why Manitou didn't simply set the STD for travel limitations from the outset, skipping the EXT air shaft and using spacers as we're looking to do. Wierd.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    Wonder what parts there is in the conversion kit for ext to std? Just a shorter airshaft? Someone who have measured and seen the difference of ext and std airshaft? If we know we could shorten the ext shaft accordingly.

  32. #732
    fat guy on a little bike
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    324
    In. i have a mastodon on my Fattilac.

    is there a fender for these things? my muckynuts won't work...

  33. #733
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,727
    https://muckynutz.com/mudguards/fat_...face_fender_xl

    Quote Originally Posted by Rodney Jekyl View Post
    In. i have a mastodon on my Fattilac.

    is there a fender for these things? my muckynuts won't work...

  34. #734
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,703
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    If you are only going to run shorter travel, ie <130mm,

    To reiterate: STD with 20mm of spacers can be run up to 130mm and clear 29+/5" tires without increasing A-C.
    You got this wrong.
    If you add 20mm of spacers to the bottom.....you will now have a 100mm travel fork with the same a/c as the STD 120.
    If you remove 20mm of spacers from the top to compensate....you will have the same a-c as the 120 EXT because you are extending the fork.
    All pretty simple math.

  35. #735
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,727
    That is not what I understand.

    I think we need Douglal to chime in as I am not gonna spend my time taking apart forks to prove/disprove something I do not plan to use.

    Tapping out until Dougal chimes in.

    Quote Originally Posted by the mayor View Post
    You got this wrong.
    If you add 20mm of spacers to the bottom.....you will now have a 100mm travel fork with the same a/c as the STD 120.
    If you remove 20mm of spacers from the top to compensate....you will have the same a-c as the 120 EXT because you are extending the fork.
    All pretty simple math.

  36. #736
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,703
    Quote Originally Posted by Pkovo View Post
    Thanks to everyone that replied, very helpful. This reply is pretty much spot on my situation. I never plan on using more than 130 mm of travel, and actually probably will use less. I'm thinking 120 max, maybe 110 as is for the std. If I run it with bigger tires, ad spacers below, 90-100. A-C distance is very much my concern because I feel the geo now with my rigid fork is great and don't want to increase any further than I need to. So, this makes perfect sense to me. STD it is.

    Hopefully my last question...Does it come with all the spacers I'll need, or do I need to order some extras to have enough to add and reduce travel?
    You get 2 10mm spacers with a new fork....
    If you put 1 on the bottom of each leg....you have a 110 fork and will have 10mm more clearance to the crown

  37. #737
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,703
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    That is not what I understand.

    I think we need Douglal to chime in as I am not gonna spend my time taking apart forks to prove/disprove something I do not plan to use.

    Tapping out until Dougal chimes in.
    Again....pretty simple math. If you take spacers off the top of the air shaft....it extends the fork and the a-c (take 20mm of spacers off....and you have a 120 travel fork with the a/c of the 140 STD...or the same as 120 EXT)

  38. #738
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,727
    Okay, now I see what your saying.

    It is simple math.

    The A-C will be a combination of the changes made.

    So to maintain the A-C for an STD 120mm fork AND have 20mm of travel limit for 29+ wheels, you can only get 100mm of travel.

    Yes, that makes sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by the mayor View Post
    You get 2 10mm spacers with a new fork....
    If you put 1 on the bottom of each leg....you have a 110 fork and will have 10mm more clearance to the crown

  39. #739
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,703
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Okay, now I see what your saying.

    It is simple math.

    The A-C will be a combination of the changes made.

    So to maintain the A-C for an STD 120mm fork AND have 20mm of travel limit for 29+ wheels, you can only get 100mm of travel.

    Yes, that makes sense.
    It is simple math.
    It only took me 42 times of taking these forks apart to figure it out.....doh!
    Then....the "ah ha!" moment happened.
    And there is a reason for the EXT fork that Manitou will probably reveal later this year.

  40. #740
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,703
    And for those of you with angst over a-c length.....I have tried these forks in several configurations on 5 different bikes( my Echo and Farley EX,,and a Fatboy Carbon, a Bucksaw carbon and a Mukluk)......myself and the other people always end up liking the EXT's extra length.
    Where you ride and how you ride may have varied results.

    Pretty easy to test if you like a shorter fork using the pump method. Longer fork takes disassembly

  41. #741
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,703
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Okay, now I see what your saying.

    It is simple math.

    The A-C will be a combination of the changes made.

    So to maintain the A-C for an STD 120mm fork AND have 20mm of travel limit for 29+ wheels, you can only get 100mm of travel.

    Yes, that makes sense.
    Also....I took a 120STD....added 10mm on the bottom andtook off 20mm on top of the air shaft.
    I now have a 130 travel fork with the same a-c as the 140std/120 EXT ( 551) and still has almost 1 inch of clearance on the Chapucabra ( so with out the 10 on the bottom...you still have almost a 1/2 inch of clearance

  42. #742
    fat guy on a little bike
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    324
    i have that one. it doesn't work.

  43. #743
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,703
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodney Jekyl View Post
    i have that one. it doesn't work.
    I'm using a fender that's sold under a bunch of different names.....easiest to find on Ebay sold by Fourier.
    A little cutting and it does the job.

  44. #744
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,727
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodney Jekyl View Post
    i have that one. it doesn't work.
    Mine works, let me see who makes it.

  45. #745
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,727
    Quote Originally Posted by the mayor View Post
    It is simple math.
    It only took me 42 times of taking these forks apart to figure it out.....doh!
    Then....the "ah ha!" moment happened.
    And there is a reason for the EXT fork that Manitou will probably reveal later this year.
    Okay, you drop a hint, but no details?

    Pray tell, what other purpose could a 20mm longer air shaft serve?

    I want it!

  46. #746
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    219
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    I kinda wonder why Manitou didn't simply set the STD for travel limitations from the outset, skipping the EXT air shaft and using spacers as we're looking to do. Wierd.
    There is no strange reason for different legs between EXT/STD.
    You need the EXT air shaft to be a longer shaft to stop the end stroke before the STD. Also you need starting point a bit further out than the STD. This gives you longer A-C.

    The EXT air shaft is 20mm longer. It has in the 150mm version 2 spacer lower and 1 spacer in the upper part. Compared to the standard one that has 1 spacer lower and 0 in the upper. Difference between those two are 2 spacers=20 mm.

    In theory you could cut off 20mm of an EXT air shaft and get a STD one.
    Last edited by Rumblefish2010; 09-15-2017 at 04:34 AM.

  47. #747
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,703
    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    There is no strange reason for different legs between EXT/STD.
    You need the EXT air shaft to be a longer shaft to stop the end stroke before the STD. Also you need starting point a bit further out than the STD. This gives you longer A-C.

    The EXT air shaft is 20mm longer. It has in the 150mm version 2 spacer lower and 1 spacer in the upper part. Compared to the standard one that has 1 spacer lower and 0 in the upper. Difference between those two are 2 spacers=20 mm.

    In theory you could cut off 20mm of an EXT air shaft and get a STD one.
    Pssst.....the longer air shaft doesn't stop the end stroke.....the spacers at the bottom do.
    I have both versions.
    Read my post above.

  48. #748
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    219
    Quote Originally Posted by the mayor View Post
    Pssst.....the longer air shaft doesn't stop the end stroke.....the spacers at the bottom do.
    Read my post above.
    Yes of course, but the shaft has to be 20mm longer anyway, to get the spacers at the bottom and to keep enough travel on top??

  49. #749
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,727
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodney Jekyl View Post
    In. i have a mastodon on my Fattilac.

    is there a fender for these things? my muckynuts won't work...
    Manitou Mastodon?-kimg0062.jpg

  50. #750
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dougal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,284
    Quote Originally Posted by the mayor View Post
    Pssst.....the longer air shaft doesn't stop the end stroke.....the spacers at the bottom do.
    I have both versions.
    Read my post above.
    The spacers are needed at the bottom so the longer shafts don't meet internally. Otherwise Manitou would be using longer shafts for all.
    Owner of www.shockcraft.co.nz and NZ Manitou Agent.
    www.dougal.co.nz Suspension setup & tuning.
    SPV Devolve

  51. #751
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,703
    Quote Originally Posted by Dougal View Post
    The spacers are needed at the bottom so the longer shafts don't meet internally. Otherwise Manitou would be using longer shafts for all.
    Dougal...I tried to PM this...but your inbox is full:
    On a 120 EXT:
    There is 2 1/2 inches of space from the top of the air shaft to the IVA compressed.
    Nothing hits if you take out 2 spacers at the bottom of the EXT dampers(which now makes it a 140 non EXT).
    What does happen is the air spring rate goes up because of the changed volume from the longer airshaft.
    (I don't know if the 150 EXT airshaft/rebound will hit)
    I am running a EXT120 where I removed 1 set of spacers from the bottom...it now has 130 trravel and still has plenty of clearance for 29+ tire. ( I had to remove the o-ring on the IVA per your suggestion to get better air spring progression)

    AND for anyone who has a early EXT 120 fork that only gets 107mm travel.....check how many spacers are at the bottom of the shafts.
    Mine had 4....there should be 3! ( You will notice the travel adjust guide on their site is now a B revision)

    Does anyone have a saved copy of the original travel guide? I thought it showed 4 spacers at the bottom of the EXT120....
    Last edited by the mayor; 09-17-2017 at 09:38 AM.

  52. #752
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dougal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,284
    Quote Originally Posted by the mayor View Post
    Dougal...I tried to PM this...but your inbox is full:
    On a 120 EXT:
    There is 2 1/2 inches of space from the top of the air shaft to the IVA compressed.
    Nothing hits if you take out 2 spacers at the bottom of the EXT dampers(which now makes it a 140 non EXT).
    What does happen is the air spring rate goes up because of the changed volume from the longer airshaft.
    (I don't know if the 150 EXT airshaft/rebound will hit)
    I am running a EXT120 where I removed 1 set of spacers from the bottom...it now has 130 trravel and still has plenty of clearance for 29+ tire. ( I had to remove the o-ring on the IVA per your suggestion to get better air spring progression)

    AND for anyone who has a early EXT 120 fork that only gets 107mm travel.....check how many spacers are at the bottom of the shafts.
    Mine had 4....there should be 3! ( You will notice the travel adjust guide on their site is now a B revision)

    Does anyone have a saved copy of the original travel guide? I thought it showed 4 spacers at the bottom of the EXT120....
    The stanchions are tapered internally near the top too. The Mattoc gets tight inside near full travel and stanchion length is the same. But I guess not having HBO gives the Mastodon a bit more breathing room.

    I've got original and rev B travel guides open here. No difference in the spacer diagrams on pages 9/10.
    Owner of www.shockcraft.co.nz and NZ Manitou Agent.
    www.dougal.co.nz Suspension setup & tuning.
    SPV Devolve

  53. #753
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,703
    Quote Originally Posted by Dougal View Post
    The stanchions are tapered internally near the top too. The Mattoc gets tight inside near full travel and stanchion length is the same. But I guess not having HBO gives the Mastodon a bit more breathing room.

    I've got original and rev B travel guides open here. No difference in the spacer diagrams on pages 9/10.
    Yes...the taper starts about 4ish inches down....which is the length of the IVA,,,,
    Thanks for looking at the Travel guide.

  54. #754
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    219
    Quote Originally Posted by the mayor View Post
    Yes...the taper starts about 4ish inches down....which is the length of the IVA,,,,
    Thanks for looking at the Travel guide.
    So conclusion is that you can convert a EXT to a 140 STD just by taking off 2 of 3 bottom tokens (2 of the 3 outside of the inner leg)??

    Why not just change settings on air cap volume adjustment if compression is getting to high.

  55. #755
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    239
    The options on the Manitou site are confusing to me.
    I have a 2016 Farley 7 and currently run 26x5 2xl's.
    If I want a fork that would allow me to run the 5 inch tires or 27.5x4.5, which option should I select?
    I see chain reaction offers 26 or 27.5 forks in 100mm or 120mm travel. Would the 120mm 27.5 give me enough clearance? I see Trek specs the new Farley 7 with an 80mm fork.

  56. #756
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,703
    Quote Originally Posted by headwind View Post
    The options on the Manitou site are confusing to me.
    I have a 2016 Farley 7 and currently run 26x5 2xl's.
    If I want a fork that would allow me to run the 5 inch tires or 27.5x4.5, which option should I select?
    I see chain reaction offers 26 or 27.5 forks in 100mm or 120mm travel. Would the 120mm 27.5 give me enough clearance? I see Trek specs the new Farley 7 with an 80mm fork.
    You want the EXT model....which is what some places are calling the 27.5
    If you get the 100 model.....that's the longest it will go, and you can shorten it to 80 easily..
    If you get the 120....you can go up to 140....and easily shorten it.
    And check Universalcycles....better pricing and I think they ship to Canada

  57. #757
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    239
    Quote Originally Posted by the mayor View Post
    You want the EXT model....which is what some places are calling the 27.5
    If you get the 100 model.....that's the longest it will go, and you can shorten it to 80 easily..
    If you get the 120....you can go up to 140....and easily shorten it.
    And check Universalcycles....better pricing and I think they ship to Canada
    Thanks for explaining this!
    I'll check them out also.

  58. #758
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    14

    Mudguard

    Quote Originally Posted by Rodney Jekyl View Post
    In. i have a mastodon on my Fattilac.

    is there a fender for these things? my muckynuts won't work...
    Fathugger from Mudhugger works brilliantly and fits really good, just have to drill a couple of extra holes as its designed around the Bluto with the fork bridge at the front. I'm using one front & one on the rear!

  59. #759
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    124
    Fyi worldwide cyclery has been floating a couple coupon codes online at their website for 13 and 15%. With a code you can snag the 120mm std comp version for about $435-$445. Free shipping in US.

    I have no affiliation with them whatsoever. Just passing along what I thought was a solid price.

  60. #760
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    124
    This may be old news, but it was new to me....I think the manitou chart for which tires fit was done assuming 65mm rims.

    I say this because they list max tire diameter for std fork at 756mm. They list the 45north dillinger 5 tires max diameter at 759mm on their chart, so its a no go. However 45north does list that tire as having a 756mm diameter on 65mm rims, but only 750mm diameter on 82mm rims.

    So judging by this they should work with the std since 750 is well under the 756mm max. Since those are my winter tires and my winter rim size, I'll confirm this eventually, once temps drop.

  61. #761
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jddjirikian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    457
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    Anyone know if you can retro a Mastodon onto an ICT and not have the crown cream the downtube when the bars are rotated?
    Has anyone definitively answered this question? I'm thinking about going with an ICT/Mastodon combo, but would like to verify before pulling the trigger.

    I know Chris King used to make a race/baseplate extension but in checking their website I haven't seen if they make one for a fork lower the size of the Mastodon.
    "Ride what you love, love what you ride"

  62. #762
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    247
    Quote Originally Posted by jddjirikian View Post
    Has anyone definitively answered this question? I'm thinking about going with an ICT/Mastodon combo, but would like to verify before pulling the trigger.

    I know Chris King used to make a race/baseplate extension but in checking their website I haven't seen if they make one for a fork lower the size of the Mastodon.
    Yes. Here...

    Surly ICT thread

  63. #763
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    124
    Quote Originally Posted by jddjirikian View Post
    Has anyone definitively answered this question? I'm thinking about going with an ICT/Mastodon combo, but would like to verify before pulling the trigger.

    I know Chris King used to make a race/baseplate extension but in checking their website I haven't seen if they make one for a fork lower the size of the Mastodon.
    The one I have on order is for an ICT. I emailed Surly about it up front and they said they thought it should clear by 3mm Looking at all the measurements. A guy on one of the ICT forums put one on his a week or so back and it cleared. Cant recall for certain but think it was a med frame.

    He went with the 120mm ext comp. used the pump trick to set the travel lower to drop the A/C length.

  64. #764
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jddjirikian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    457
    Quote Originally Posted by mohrgan View Post
    Yes. Here...

    Surly ICT thread
    Thanks!
    "Ride what you love, love what you ride"

  65. #765
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,703
    Circling back....
    My removing 10mm of bottom out spacers on the EXT didn't work out too well for me.
    The air spring ramps up too much for my weight ( about 175 geared up)
    I even tried removing all the IVA internals to get a little more volume...
    Maybe it would work for a heavier person though
    After playing with the IVA on both the EXT and STD....for me, it works best with the IVA disabled ( o ring removed).
    As usual, your weight and riding style can change all this.

  66. #766
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    219
    Tested more seriously the 150 EXT today. First I have to say I am not convinced yet. Something feels loose in the fork like the feel of something that is loose moving that should not be moving. Almost like the head tube bearings is loose.

    Second I was not happy bottoming out the fork 2 times on the test ride. I have some nice steep roll overs that ends pretty flat in the end. I was suprised that I used all the travel, since the ramp up seems really progressive. The air Setting set to sag at 27% and approx. 110psi. The set up guide says 92psi in 150mm??? That is to all little pressure obviously. I am 250-260lb so I need much high pressure, maybe that helps? All the tokens sits below piston on the IVA.

    The fork has measured travel at approx 150mm.

    Any suggestions for taking care of these issues?

  67. #767
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    10,704
    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    Any suggestions for taking care of these issues?

    The most effective solutions usually involve posting on the internet. Since time immemorial actually.

  68. #768
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    219
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    The most effective solutions usually involve posting on the internet. Since time immemorial actually.
    Could you explain what you actually mean?

  69. #769
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,727
    That's a lot of pressure you're running.

    I'm 200#, on my 150mm STD 50psi worked great all summer, recently bumped to 55psi for the colder weather. Pressure is similar on my EXT 120. I have not notice the fork bottoming out, but I will use all of the travel on occassion.

    Maybe if you completely disassemble the fork and reassemble, you'll find the problem.

    I did this ^ and didn't find any problems, but it was educational.

    [QUOTE=Rumblefish2010;13357557]Tested more seriously the 150 EXT today. First I have to say I am not convinced yet. Something feels loose in the fork like the feel of something that is loose moving that should not be moving. Almost like the head tube bearings is loose.

    Second I was not happy bottoming out the fork 2 times on the test ride. I have some nice steep roll overs that ends pretty flat in the end. I was suprised that I used all the travel, since the ramp up seems really progressive. The air Setting set to sag at 27% and approx. 110psi. The set up guide says 92psi in 150mm??? That is to all little pressure obviously. I am 250

  70. #770
    Flying Sasquatch
    Reputation: KTMNealio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    240
    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    Tested more seriously the 150 EXT today. First I have to say I am not convinced yet. Something feels loose in the fork like the feel of something that is loose moving that should not be moving. Almost like the head tube bearings is loose.

    Second I was not happy bottoming out the fork 2 times on the test ride. I have some nice steep roll overs that ends pretty flat in the end. I was suprised that I used all the travel, since the ramp up seems really progressive. The air Setting set to sag at 27% and approx. 110psi. The set up guide says 92psi in 150mm??? That is to all little pressure obviously. I am 250-260lb so I need much high pressure, maybe that helps? All the tokens sits below piston on the IVA.
    I weigh 265 with gear and I had to put all the tokens above the piston to get it to act as progressively as I wanted. Mine felt way too linear with 1 token above.

  71. #771
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    219
    Quote Originally Posted by KTMNealio View Post
    I weigh 265 with gear and I had to put all the tokens above the piston to get it to act as progressively as I wanted. Mine felt way too linear with 1 token above.
    Okay, moving the piston below the tokens then. At what air pressure do you run your fork With? Mine is an original OEM 150 mm travel build from factory.

    Anyone tried the Manitou IRT kit, with air pressure adjustment instead of tokens?

  72. #772
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    219
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    That's a lot of pressure you're running.

    I'm 200#, on my 150mm STD 50psi worked great all summer, recently bumped to 55psi for the colder weather. Pressure is similar on my EXT 120. I have not notice the fork bottoming out, but I will use all of the travel on occassion.
    I would say you are running far to low, since the air pressure guide says 84 psi in your weight range. I will say I am 15% off the suggested, but you are 30% off the suggested??

  73. #773
    RAKC Industries
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    2,152
    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    Okay, moving the piston below the tokens then. At what air pressure do you run your fork With? Mine is an original OEM 150 mm travel build from factory.

    Anyone tried the Manitou IRT kit, with air pressure adjustment instead of tokens?
    Irt acts a lot differently than tokens. The piston with tokens cant move, IRT it can, so the deeper you push into travel the further the IRT piston will compress.

    Talk about some serious tinkering to get that set up right but could make for a really nice tune.

    But your problems are in the lack of spacers decreasing volume. Way too linear. Get those spacers flipped and give it a good ride, followed by some pressure tinkering and probably be gtg.

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
    Life on a bike doesn't begin till the sun goes down.

    US partner for Ravemen:
    www.rakclighting.com

  74. #774
    Flying Sasquatch
    Reputation: KTMNealio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    240
    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    Okay, moving the piston below the tokens then. At what air pressure do you run your fork With? Mine is an original OEM 150 mm travel build from factory.
    Mine is set at 120mm, and I run about 95 psi (high speed at 1, low speed at 2) on my pump (I think I lose about 5 psi when I disconnect).
    I've ran mine as high as 110psi (high speed at 2 and low speed at 1) and as low as 75psi (high speed at 2 and low speed at 2).

  75. #775
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    93
    Quote: (Late to the party here, but I can say the Fox 34 140 Boost Plus has plenty of clearance for a VanHelga 4.0 on Marge Lite. I have crammed a 4.6 Flowbeist in that fork with enough clearance to have fun and no problems.)

    What's the width of the two tires at the widest point? Also the width of the fork at the narrowest point.
    I picked up a Manitou Magnum Comp 27.5+ 110 boost to try on my Bucksaw built because I wanted a narrower fork. I mounted up a Vee Tire H-Billy 4.25" which measures 3.5" on a 26" Surly Rabbit Hole 50mm rim. I've got about 1/16" clearance on each side between the tire and fork.
    Sounds like the Fox 34 might have more clearance.

  76. #776
    RAKC Industries
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    2,152
    I think the 2 manitou threads threw you off, this is the Mastodon thread, huge fat bike forks (much bigger than magnum or fox 34).

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
    Life on a bike doesn't begin till the sun goes down.

    US partner for Ravemen:
    www.rakclighting.com

  77. #777
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    93
    The quote above is from page 7. Looks like he through it in as an option to the Mastodon, and guys just skipped over it. Since I'm limited to 3.8" tire width I was looking for an alternative to the Mastodon.

  78. #778
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,727
    Yup, but the clearance is still not great with the Fox...

    There's a bunch of us in this boat, but only because the Mastodon is so friggin huge and we're all weight weenies at heart. But seriously, what's a pound on a fat bike?

    Width is just an appearance thing; from the side the Mastodon doesn't like that big

    I'd run a plus fork on my Fatillac if there was a true 4" between fork legs, that would be good enough for B Fat and it would work okay for 26 x 4" tires on narrower rims.

    In other words, the Mastodon is a great fork if you can get over the perception that it makes your butt look fat.

    Quote Originally Posted by gumba View Post
    The quote above is from page 7. Looks like he through it in as an option to the Mastodon, and guys just skipped over it. Since I'm limited to 3.8" tire width I was looking for an alternative to the Mastodon.

  79. #779
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kntr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,694
    I'm 200 with gear and run 50-55 psi in my 150 Pro and its perfect. I use all the travel and have never felt it bottom either.

  80. #780
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,727
    And I would say that you don't know what you're talking about "yet".

    Look, you just got the fork, we've been riding them for months. Listen to the prevailing wisdom and learn.

    It was discussed on this thread, months ago, that the factory suggested pressures were to high.

    I'm not running my pressure to low, I'm running it right where it should be. I have no excessive bottoming, I have full travel utilization, and the ride is exceptional.

    I'm not sure who set your fork up "from the factory", but it ain't working right.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    I would say you are running far to low, since the air pressure guide says 84 psi in your weight range. I will say I am 15% off the suggested, but you are 30% off the suggested??

  81. #781
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,703
    Quote Originally Posted by Rumblefish2010 View Post
    Tested more seriously the 150 EXT today. First I ?
    You have a 150 EXT?
    Last I heard, they weren't going to be available for a while

  82. #782
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    219
    Quote Originally Posted by the mayor View Post
    You have a 150 EXT?
    Last I heard, they weren't going to be available for a while
    Bought it through a dealer on a bike. So it is specified as a OEM part. LBS called Hayes/Manitou technical dep. today and they comfirmed that it is broken. There is something loose/broken inside the airside. It also got confirmed that the negative and the positive air is not balanced since the fork gets stuck down when relasing the air. We tried to fill up again and it did not extend.

    This is strange, but I commented to LBS that it got a loud mechanical sound only one time when cycling the fork after the first airfilling of the fork. The sound was like a metalpeace snapping.

    Anyway Manitou is replacing the fork so LBS will receive during next week. Very expedite service I will say.
    So let us hope for a better start of these fork.

    BTW they put on the IRT ( infinite rate tune) kit, so I can tune the mid stroke and end stroke infinite :-)

    Also thinking of taking out 1 token at bump stop....since it will not have any influence when using IRT, I mean any problem hitting the bored part of the tube with the IRT is impossible. And the IRT will probably get the compression correct.

  83. #783
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    219
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    And I would say that you don't know what you're talking about "yet".

    Look, you just got the fork, we've been riding them for months. Listen to the prevailing wisdom and learn.

    It was discussed on this thread, months ago, that the factory suggested pressures were to high.

    I'm not running my pressure to low.
    I think you are right, due to broken air assembly, it probably was wrong the pressure I used. Still really exited to see these fork will do alright with 60psi, 20% more than your riding weight considered.

  84. #784
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,727
    SOLD

    FS: Manitou Mastodon, EXT, 120mm, steerer cut to ~8" (will confirm tonight).

    Currently mounted on a Wozo. No issues, works great, ridden a couple dozen times, no scratches.

    Selling due to no longer riding 29+ wheels; don't need the extra clearance.

    $650 shipped in Continental US.
    Last edited by Nurse Ben; 10-12-2017 at 04:04 PM.

  85. #785
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    131
    Those that have had this fork apart, if your starting with a 100mm Pro STD and occasionally want to bump up to 120mm, would it be as easy of swapping the 120-140mm air shaft and go?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  86. #786
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,727
    No. Think rebuild breakdown.

    The easy way is to get the 120mm, then use a fork shock to reduce height.

    [QUOTE=Haste11;13375167]Those that have had this fork apart, if your starting with a 100mm Pro STD and occasionally want to bump up to 120mm, would it be as easy of swapping the 120

  87. #787
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,703
    Quote Originally Posted by Haste11 View Post
    Those that have had this fork apart, if your starting with a 100mm Pro STD and occasionally want to bump up to 120mm, would it be as easy of swapping the 120-140mm air shaft and go?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    You can't bump a 100 up to 120.
    The 100 has shorter Stanchions.
    You can shorten the 120 to 100....but you can't lengthen the 100 to 120

  88. #788
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,727
    Just got my second Mastodon STD 120mm fork mounted on the Wozo, replacing an EXT 120mm.

    I figured on adding a 10mm spacer and stretching the travel to 130mm, but before breaking the fork down I decided to measure clearance with Barbegazi 27.5 x 4.5" on Jackalopes.

    Completely aired down and slammed (multiple times), there was 4-5mm of clearance between the crown and the tire.

    The tire diameter measures out to ~ 765mm.

    I'm thinking no spacer and 140mm travel

  89. #789
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    5
    I normally lurk, but in wrapping my brain around mod options I decided to throw this chart together based on the Manitou docs and what's been discussed in this thread. I took liberty of simplifying tire sizes, and did not include any options for removing bottom spacers.

    LMK if there are any mistakes.

    Bottom line - if you have the tools, get the STD. If you want it to work out of the box with larger tires, get the EXT.

    Manitou Mastodon?-manitou-mastodon-mod-chart.png

  90. #790
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,703
    In the travel range....there is no minimum....it could be zero.
    Don't know how you came up with the max 130 in the 29+
    And I don't know why you have all the B numbers in there.You might add 1 or 2 to the STD to make it a EXT....but that's it.
    I didn't bother to check the rest....
    And Manitou updated the travel guide on their site
    https://wwwmanitoumtbcom-ct78ltl6iyp...ange-Guide.pdf

  91. #791
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by the mayor View Post
    Don't know how you came up with the max 130 in the 29+
    Max 130 for 29+ is simple math: add 2 to bottom (total of 3, gives you EXT clearance), remove all 3 top spacers. This 130mm max has been mentioned previously in this thread.

    Also, italics part notes that 140mm may be possible as a "tweener" between STD and EXT if using just 2 bottom spacers provides satisfactory clearance.

    Quote Originally Posted by the mayor View Post
    In the travel range....there is no minimum....it could be zero.
    And I don't know why you have all the B numbers in there.You might add 1 or 2 to the STD to make it a EXT....but that's it.
    I didn't bother to check the rest....
    And Manitou updated the travel guide on their site
    https://wwwmanitoumtbcom-ct78ltl6iyp...ange-Guide.pdf
    Chart is based on the rev B guide.

    I do pretty clearly claim at the bottom the B4/5 don't make much sense, and I agree that 0 travel or anything in between is possible using methods not involving spacers.

    Point of this is to give a reference for the spacer and travel/ac/tire questions, as sometimes seeing the larger picture helps people (incld myself) grasp what's going on.

  92. #792
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,727
    It would be best to have a fork in hand to do these measurements. Going off Manitou's info without first hand knowledge is a fools's errand.

    For example: I have measured a Barbegazi mounted on a Jackalope on a Mastodon STD and there was 1/8 clearance; diameter is 765mm. According to Manitou, there is only spacing for a 756mm diameter. Perhaps they are being very conservative, but still it's not accurate.

    My opinion, having had an EXT and currentyly owning two STD, is that the EXT is only necessay if you want to run 140mm travel with wheels taller than 760mm.

    If you don't need all that travel, it is much easier and better geo, to use an STD and add a 10mm travel limiting spacer. You can still use up to 140mm of travel without changing A-C.

    So really there is very little reason to get an EXT at this time as even the tallest 29+ can be managed on an STD with a travel reducing spacer, without changing A-C.

    Quote Originally Posted by mrcheviot View Post
    Max 130 for 29+ is simple math: add 2 to bottom (total of 3, gives you EXT clearance), remove all 3 top spacers. This 130mm max has been mentioned previously in this thread.

    Also, italics part notes that 140mm may be possible as a "tweener" between STD and EXT if using just 2 bottom spacers provides satisfactory clearance.



    Chart is based on the rev B guide.

    I do pretty clearly claim at the bottom the B4/5 don't make much sense, and I agree that 0 travel or anything in between is possible using methods not involving spacers.

    Point of this is to give a reference for the spacer and travel/ac/tire questions, as sometimes seeing the larger picture helps people (incld myself) grasp what's going on.

  93. #793
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dougal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,284
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post
    Perhaps they are being very conservative
    Yes they are. Published figures need to be safe for the worst conditions of wheel flex and over-inflated tyres.

    Which is a good thing. If you want to take responsibility then you can do whatever you want.
    Owner of www.shockcraft.co.nz and NZ Manitou Agent.
    www.dougal.co.nz Suspension setup & tuning.
    SPV Devolve

  94. #794
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,703
    Quote Originally Posted by mrcheviot View Post
    Max 130 for 29+ is simple math: add 2 to bottom (total of 3, gives you EXT clearance), remove all 3 top spacers. This 130mm max has been mentioned previously in this thread.

    Also, italics part notes that 140mm may be possible as a "tweener" between STD and EXT if using just 2 bottom spacers provides satisfactory clearance.
    You are bad at math. I have a 120 STD here set at 150 and a 29+ works fine.
    Do you even have one of these forks? Ever actually have one apart?

  95. #795
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,727
    Yup, conservative, but with a 10mm spacer it would be quite safe, so I'll go there.

    Still leaves me scratching my head as to the need for an EXT.

    [QUOTE=Dougal;13381870]Yes they are. Published figures need to be safe for the worst conditions of wheel flex and over

  96. #796
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,703
    [QUOTE=Nurse Ben;13382068]Yup, conservative, but with a 10mm spacer it would be quite safe, so I'll go there.

    Still leaves me scratching my head as to the need for an EXT.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dougal View Post
    Yes they are. Published figures need to be safe for the worst conditions of wheel flex and over
    The Snowshoe 2XL won't fit in the STD unless it's modified....so it's a good idea to have a off the shelf product.And a few more big tires are coming.
    I also like the longer fork on my bikes.

  97. #797
    mtbr member
    Reputation: akacoke's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    678
    i have 2xl mounted on 90mm spesh rim on ext. clearance is ok. just enough. i imagine std would clear
    16 Trek Farley 5 W/2XL snowshoe
    07 Kona Stab
    14 Specialized Fatboy
    04 Giant Simple
    04 SC V10

    My Parts for sale link

  98. #798
    Flying Sasquatch
    Reputation: KTMNealio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    240
    Quote Originally Posted by Nurse Ben View Post

    If you don't need all that travel, it is much easier and better geo, to use an STD and add a 10mm travel limiting spacer.
    So you're saying steeper head angles are better now...??? wtf

  99. #799
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,703
    Quote Originally Posted by KTMNealio View Post
    So you're saying steeper head angles are better now...??? wtf
    HaHAHAHA! and here we go!

  100. #800
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,727
    Quote Originally Posted by KTMNealio View Post
    So you're saying steeper head angles are better now...??? wtf
    Neal, have you been drinking too much coffee again?

    Increasing A-C is not the way to slacken steering angle. There are anglesets that can decrease HTA by up to 1.5 degrees, equivalent to a 30mm increase in A-C, without adding to stack.

    My Wozo began life with a 69deg HTA based on a 100mm Bluto. I'm riding a Mastodon STD 130/140mm fork which works out to a 67-67.5 HTA.

    I had an angleset installed on the Wozo when I was running a Mastodon EXT 120 (same A-C as a Mastodon STD 120) and I found that I liked the ride with a 67 deg HTA, so I pulled the angleset.

    Most people would consider a 67 deg HTA on a fat bike to be fairly slack. My Fatillac is also running an HTA of 67deg.

    Each person and set up has a sweet spot. Slack is relative, too slack has it's disadvantaged as does having an HTA that is too steep.

    If you take the time to learn a bike and you can experiment with setups, you'll learn first hand the pros and cons of changing HTA.

Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678910 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Manitou Minute vs Manitou R7?
    By Numbtoyou in forum Shocks and Suspension
    Replies: 77
    Last Post: 04-19-2015, 04:25 PM
  2. Manitou R7 PRO vs MRD
    By coldrain in forum Shocks and Suspension
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-22-2013, 07:32 AM
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 07-20-2013, 09:02 PM
  4. Manitou - I have to ask...
    By Aresab in forum Shocks and Suspension
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 02-26-2013, 08:15 PM
  5. Manitou SX-r
    By TraumaARNP in forum Vintage, Retro, Classic
    Replies: 82
    Last Post: 05-17-2012, 12:38 PM

Members who have read this thread: 660

Posting Permissions

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