Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 53
  1. #1
    gone walk about
    Reputation: nvphatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    8,248

    maverick sc32 29er

    Tis a bit outdated and hard to find used so thought i would shake the tree and see if anything falls out.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    2,679
    Plus Maverick frames tend to have very short head tubes, so finding one to fit the taller head tube of a fat bike will be even more difficult.

  3. #3
    gone walk about
    Reputation: nvphatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    8,248
    Quote Originally Posted by patineto View Post
    Plus Maverick frames tend to have very short head tubes, so finding one to fit the taller head tube of a fat bike will be even more difficult.
    I figured you would know this after acquiring one. Seems a viable suss fork option IF one can locate it.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    2,679
    Quote Originally Posted by nvphatty View Post
    I figured you would know this after acquiring one. Seems a viable suss fork option IF one can locate it.
    Yeah the steering is a issue for sure, I got my steer tube exchange for a longer one (custom made), about performance you can always send it to Ethan the Maverick guru for a tune up..

    Ps: they are suppose to be flexy, but mine is plenty rigid for me and i'm pretty chubby and big..

    Ps2: the DUC32 (dual crown) are very rigid but they have diminish tire clearance because the legs are taper, plus finding the parts for a long head tube can prove to be a total pain in the butt..

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    2,679
    You can also look for Marzocchi Shivers SC, they are heavier freeride forks but very tunable and I'm sure convertible to 29er/fatbike travel.

  6. #6
    gone walk about
    Reputation: nvphatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    8,248
    Quote Originally Posted by patineto View Post
    Yeah the steering is a issue for sure, I got my steer tube exchange for a longer one (custom made), about performance you can always send it to Ethan the Maverick guru for a tune up..

    Ps: they are suppose to be flexy, but mine is plenty rigid for me and i'm pretty chubby and big..
    in the event i locate one in decent shape having a steer tube made is no problem, as for the flex i suspect the design along with the 24mm hub axle was to help retain some strength but keep the weight down which was successful it seems.

  7. #7
    All Lefty's, all the time Moderator
    Reputation: MendonCycleSmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,921
    Though I have ponies in the race, this is not intended to steer you towards what I'm doing, but more to save you money and hassle.

    SC32's may be fine with a skinny tire, but I'd venture they aren't even that great then.

    With the additional friction of an increased contact patch, I found the fork to lag behind my steering input, badly. Created this really odd, disconnected feeling.

    Might be "stiff enough" and it does squish, but you'll need to build a wheel, buy the fork, only to find out that it's underwhelming at best, and barely fits a Rolling Darryl with a Larry.

    Just my two cents. having bought one, as well as a DUC, only to be fairly bummed at the time and money wasted.

    Skinny tires? Yeah, the forks feel nice, and the DUC is plenty stiff. My comments are targeted purely at use with fatties....

    Got DUC/wheel for you if you have a hankering, the SC is on my wifes Pug, and she only uses it in snow, so doesn't find issue with it, but I'm sure being all of a buck 20 doesn't hurt either.....
    This is a Pugs not some carbon wannabee pretzel wagon!!

    - FrostyStruthers



    www.mendoncyclesmith.com

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    2,679
    Quote Originally Posted by MendonCycleSmith View Post
    Though I have ponies in the race, this is not intended to steer you towards what I'm doing, but more to save you money and hassle.

    SC32's may be fine with a skinny tire, but I'd venture they aren't even that great then.

    With the additional friction of an increased contact patch, I found the fork to lag behind my steering input, badly. Created this really odd, disconnected feeling.

    Might be "stiff enough" and it does squish, but you'll need t]o build a wheel, buy the fork, only to find out that it's underwhelming at best.
    I think you are up to something..

    I just came back from my first "real ride" and I feel the disconnect you are taking about, I attribute it more to the slack head angle of the frame (even slacker do to the fork) but maybe you are right and is the fork, I just don't have anything to compare too.


    and barely fits a Rolling Darryl with a Larry.
    Right again..

    My Larry has about 4mm of clearance on each side, but as well all know this tires are not exactly "round" so with the wobble, I can see marks on the "Lowers" already (nothing serious)



    Just my two cents. having bought one, as well as a DUC, only to be fairly bummed at the time and money wasted.

    Skinny tires? Yeah, the forks feel nice, and the DUC is plenty stiff. My comments are targeted purely at use with fatties....

    Got DUC/wheel for you if you have a hankering, the SC is on my wifes Pug, and she only uses it in snow, so doesn't find issue with it, but I'm sure being all of a buck 20 doesn't hurt either.....
    You have a ton of experience plus you willingness to share it make you a tremendous asset to this community..

    About the Lefty's, personally I never got around the "Asymmetrical" build of the rim (same reason why I got a 170mm rear end frame), the tinny distance in between the hub flanges and the "steeper" angle of the spokes, but that is just me annal retentive wheel builder, I'm sure it work fine but is just not for me..

  9. #9
    All fat, all the time.
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    6,739
    My sc 32 will be up for sale if I ever get my lefty installed....waiting on shop....I should mention another member has dibs on it if he chooses to buy it when the time comes.
    Last edited by Shark; 11-20-2012 at 06:23 PM.

  10. #10
    All fat, all the time.
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    6,739
    Fyi there is one on ebay right now

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    8
    I have two that I'm going to be getting rid of as well as a chris king hub.

    Used the Maverick on my Mukluk for a few months but now I'm back to rigid.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails maverick sc32 29er-sc32.jpg  

    maverick sc32 29er-mukluk.jpg  


  12. #12
    gone walk about
    Reputation: nvphatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    8,248
    I appreciate all the feedback good, bad or indifferent. For those fat owners out there who own a sc32 are selling them for one reason or another just as i seek one simply to have squish HOWEVER not at the cost of a underwhelming squish, is it tunable? i suspect they are for an additional fee. If the crystal ball would only reveal the next mass produced fattie conventional squish fork NOW it would make many a happy owner.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    179
    Quote Originally Posted by nvphatty View Post
    I appreciate all the feedback good, bad or indifferent. For those fat owners out there who own a sc32 are selling them for one reason or another just as i seek one simply to have squish HOWEVER not at the cost of a underwhelming squish, is it tunable? i suspect they are for an additional fee. If the crystal ball would only reveal the next mass produced fattie conventional squish fork NOW it would make many a happy owner.
    You mean like this one from the crystal ball of Bike Rumor 2015 X-Fusion Inverted All Mountain Suspension Fork - Bike Rumor




    I have nothing to add on the SC32 search other than I found them on ebay and over at pink bike when I was looking for one. Ultimately decided to go the budget route and build my bomber pugs fork. I like it alot though I experience slow steering and lots of autosteer too. I figure it has to do with the huge contact patch, mixed with a much slacker head angle than stock and possibly my bar setup.

  14. #14
    All Lefty's, all the time Moderator
    Reputation: MendonCycleSmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,921
    Quote Originally Posted by patineto View Post
    About the Lefty's, personally I never got around the "Asymmetrical" build of the rim (same reason why I got a 170mm rear end frame), the tinny distance in between the hub flanges and the "steeper" angle of the spokes, but that is just me annal retentive wheel builder, I'm sure it work fine but is just not for me..
    I won't pollute this with self serving propaganda, but if I had a dime for everyone that quotes that as a concern, and paid a dime for every offset wheel (Lefty or otherwise) I've seen fail or even have issues due to offset nature, I would be quite well off in the financial department.
    This is a Pugs not some carbon wannabee pretzel wagon!!

    - FrostyStruthers



    www.mendoncyclesmith.com

  15. #15
    All Lefty's, all the time Moderator
    Reputation: MendonCycleSmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,921
    Quote Originally Posted by nvphatty View Post
    I appreciate all the feedback good, bad or indifferent. For those fat owners out there who own a sc32 are selling them for one reason or another just as i seek one simply to have squish HOWEVER not at the cost of a underwhelming squish, is it tunable? i suspect they are for an additional fee. If the crystal ball would only reveal the next mass produced fattie conventional squish fork NOW it would make many a happy owner.
    Is it tunable to get rid of the flex? No. Tunable in terms of travel, oil weight, rebound etc, yes.

    Sadly for X Fusion, unless that thing is made of some unobtanium material, it's going to suffer the same issue as the SC, seeing as the functional design aspect is identical.....
    This is a Pugs not some carbon wannabee pretzel wagon!!

    - FrostyStruthers



    www.mendoncyclesmith.com

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Smallfurry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    413
    Quote Originally Posted by patineto View Post
    About the Lefty's, personally I never got around the "Asymmetrical" build of the rim (same reason why I got a 170mm rear end frame), the tinny distance in between the hub flanges and the "steeper" angle of the spokes, but that is just me annal retentive wheel builder, I'm sure it work fine but is just not for me..
    Sorry to fuel a derail. But I having built quite a few wheels, and having a deep fondness of strength through design (as apposed to weight ). I was a bit unsure about going the fat lefty route.

    My Lefty front fatty came out near dishless, and with nice bracing angles. I'll also admitt to be somewhat surprised by the even spoke tension required.

    Before this I was looking at SC32s, and might have some old leads laying around in my bookmarks, or inbox. I'll have a rumage.
    A big boy did it, and ran away.
    62*28'

  17. #17
    bikeboatbrewski
    Reputation: scottybinwv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,396
    I have my sc32 and wheel off for seasonal reasons. Still interested?

  18. #18
    All fat, all the time.
    Reputation: Shark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    6,739
    I e-mailed Xfusion about that fork, got the standard reply "prototype only at this time".....

    The SC32 is decent if you don't want the rigid front end, & are on a budget. As noted though, you are limited to 3.8 tires on no larger than a 82mm rim like the RD or you'll get rub.

    Yes there is some flex, but you get used to it. I've ridden mine pretty hard & the ++ outweight the --.

    Of course, if budget allows, the lefty conversion is likely the best option right now (from what I've read).

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: RockyRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    822
    Quote Originally Posted by nvphatty View Post
    I appreciate all the feedback good, bad or indifferent. For those fat owners out there who own a sc32 are selling them for one reason or another just as i seek one simply to have squish HOWEVER not at the cost of a underwhelming squish, is it tunable? i suspect they are for an additional fee. If the crystal ball would only reveal the next mass produced fattie conventional squish fork NOW it would make many a happy owner.
    I love the SC 32 I've been running on my Pug for 5 years now and yes they are tunable. In fact I found out from Ethan that they can put an inertial damper in them now and a full rebuild with pro tuning is something like $150 plus shipping. Never had any flex issues with mine but at the tire pressures I run I get squirm even when its rigid

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    564
    Quote Originally Posted by MendonCycleSmith View Post
    Is it tunable to get rid of the flex? No. Tunable in terms of travel, oil weight, rebound etc, yes.

    Sadly for X Fusion, unless that thing is made of some unobtanium material, it's going to suffer the same issue as the SC, seeing as the functional design aspect is identical.....
    The SC32 is indeed tuneable. Basic tune is easy through playing aorund with oil viscosity and oil level (smaller airchamber above the oil = harder "spring"). And there's a lockout on it.

    The reason it's flexible is not inherent of its design, but because it's outdated (ok, maybe part of the flex comes from its weird dropouts/front hub design).
    A current, modern German Answer "wide" is much, much stiffer compared to an SC32 - on par with a "normal" suspension fork. And the new soon-to-arrive Sandman Javelina (which is USD as well) is another step above that in stiffness with massive 36mm stanchions, it's even tandem rated.

    All are around the same weight, give or take 50gr.

    The X-Fusion is more or less comparable to the German A, all sizes compared. So the stiffness should be more or less the same if they don't skimp on the internal design.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,043
    I have heard lots of people complain about the SC32 being flexy, so apparently it is a legitimate problem. I really don't notice it when riding mine, or at least it isn't enough of a problem that it has made me wish for a different fork. I am about 160 and only run mine with 3.8 tires on 47mm rims, and only in the summer months.

    One big difference in the X-Fusion, or either of the Sandman forks, is that their axle interfaces are a lot better design than Maverick's. A lot of the flex in the SC32 comes from the silly "quick release" setup, which is not only slower and more finicky to use than a standard thru-axle, but also sacrifices a lot of strength and stiffness.

    The SC32 is definitely tuneable, but not in the sense of a RockShox fork where you just twiddle some knobs and you're done- tuning the Maverick requires oil changes, changing shims, ect.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    564
    Quote Originally Posted by Andy FitzGibbon View Post
    I have heard lots of people complain about the SC32 being flexy, so apparently it is a legitimate problem. I really don't notice it when riding mine, or at least it isn't enough of a problem that it has made me wish for a different fork. I am about 160 and only run mine with 3.8 tires on 47mm rims, and only in the summer months.

    One big difference in the X-Fusion, or either of the Sandman forks, is that their axle interfaces are a lot better design than Maverick's. A lot of the flex in the SC32 comes from the silly "quick release" setup, which is not only slower and more finicky to use than a standard thru-axle, but also sacrifices a lot of strength and stiffness.

    The SC32 is definitely tuneable, but not in the sense of a RockShox fork where you just twiddle some knobs and you're done- tuning the Maverick requires oil changes, changing shims, ect.
    I remember the first ride with a Maverick, the first moment I grabbed the front brake actually (200mm discs, Avid Code brakes) . It was like "whohooo, easy does it, let's countersteer !!".

    But after a few rides you don't notice it anymore, it becomes 2nd nature. I wouldn't go back to them, but I do have fond memories of the SC32 on my fatbike. I'd prefer it anytime over a rigid fork.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    2,679
    Quote Originally Posted by caminoloco View Post
    I remember the first ride with a Maverick, the first moment I grabbed the front brake actually (200mm discs, Avid Code brakes) . It was like "whohooo, easy does it, let's countersteer !!".

    >>
    I did not feel that and I'm glad, running 183mm rotors on XTR brakes, very powerful brake actually..

  24. #24
    gone walk about
    Reputation: nvphatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    8,248
    I like that there's opinions / thoughts surrounding suspension within this thread from various angles and it gives me ideas to ponder from whats avail now to items on the rise next spring/summer...........i enjoy squish plain & simple and while the fat pug is new to me it was built for mainly hard packed, rocky terrain ST riding just as my 26r full suss is so the current ML and 4.0 tires are as lrg as it gets for me leaving the setup doable for the SC32 width wise.
    I know squishy forks are slowly making their way to us so its either wait patiently for the new goods or source something long on R&D. I've seen / read of the X-fusion just as i have about the german-A, sandmans javelina with all 3 fat compatable WOOT so i'm not completely out of the loop. I've no interest in a dbl crown unit as its far more than what i deem necessary for my riding so single it is.

    I spread some green chiclette love to ya's.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    564
    Quote Originally Posted by patineto View Post
    I did not feel that and I'm glad, running 183mm rotors on XTR brakes, very powerful brake actually..
    Off topic: my current setup too, better than the bigger Code's

  26. #26
    gone walk about
    Reputation: nvphatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    8,248
    Quote Originally Posted by Andy FitzGibbon View Post

    One big difference in the X-Fusion, or either of the Sandman forks, is that their axle interfaces are a lot better design than Maverick's. A lot of the flex in the SC32 comes from the silly "quick release" setup, which is not only slower and more finicky to use than a standard thru-axle, but also sacrifices a lot of strength and stiffness.

    The SC32 is definitely tuneable, but not in the sense of a RockShox fork where you just twiddle some knobs and you're done- tuning the Maverick requires oil changes, changing shims, ect.
    In tech terms these items are tangible differences i enjoy when dolling out cabbage so it seems patience is whats required on my end.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: canardian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    117
    If you want an SC32, I might be persuaded to part with mine. The damper in the stock fork was pretty Fred Flinstone, but I've made some pretty hefty mods to the shim stack and added an IFP for better overall damping (no emulsification), awesome bottom-out resistance and more rebound control. PM me if you're interested - I also have a wheel that's built with a Marge Lite and Chris King hub laced with DT Competition spokes and purple nipples that would be part of the deal. It's ready to rock - just add brake and 4" tire of choice. An 8" (180mm) rotor is an absolute necessity with this setup.

    As for the funky or sluggish handling that some have mentioned, this is most likely due to the Mav's ol' skool 40mm offset versus the 46-51mm used on most current 29er forks. Increasing fork offset decreases trail which makes the handling quicker. This was an issue with all forks when 29ers first came out and the 26er fork geos hadn't been revised to accomodate the uber stable and longer contact patch of the larger wheels.

    Another cause for the slow handling issues might be the A-C of the Pugsley. The stock fork is 450mm A-C, so installing a 90mm suspension fork (at 480mm A-C) would slacken the head angle by a 1.5 degrees, which will heighten the feeling that the front wheel is slow to respond.

    That being said, the Mav has been fine on my 9:zero:7. I ride more trail than snow, so the extra squish up front is a nice change when the going gets rough.

  28. #28
    All Lefty's, all the time Moderator
    Reputation: MendonCycleSmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,921
    [QUOTE=canardian;9895647As for the funky or sluggish handling that some have mentioned, this is most likely due to the Mav's ol' skool 40mm offset versus the 46-51mm used on most current 29er forks..[/QUOTE]

    Mmmm, the old wheel in the knees, twist the bars test would beg to differ....

    All good that you enjoyed it though, but it's not HTA or offset causing what I am talking about.
    This is a Pugs not some carbon wannabee pretzel wagon!!

    - FrostyStruthers



    www.mendoncyclesmith.com

  29. #29
    gone walk about
    Reputation: nvphatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    8,248
    Quote Originally Posted by MendonCycleSmith View Post
    Mmmm, the old wheel in the knees, twist the bars test would beg to differ....
    ok it twists like a pretzel when performing this ritual but then any conventional fork without a brace would yes? given the 32mm tubes + no brace it makes sense however for a 3.9lb SC fork it was light which was part of the equation when designed.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: canardian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    117
    Quote Originally Posted by MendonCycleSmith View Post
    Mmmm, the old wheel in the knees, twist the bars test would beg to differ....

    All good that you enjoyed it though, but it's not HTA or offset causing what I am talking about.
    Admittedly, any inverted fork will be slightly less torsionally rigid than a 'normal' suspension fork, but the fore and aft stiffness is superior. Another benefit is that the seals are constantly lubed by the oil bath in an inverted fork and that unsuspended weight is lower overall which makes the fork more responsive to small bump input. Given that creating space for large volume tires while maintaining the shortest possible A-C for downtube clearance is of paramount importance, I'd certainly consider purchasing a fat-bike specific inverted fork with a better axle interface and modern damping if it was put on the market.

    I still believe that the funky handling is more attributable to the offset or geo changes on short A-C bikes like the Pugs. This has proven itself on 29er forks, which is why fork offset has changed to accomodate the quirks of the larger wheels. My 07 SJ HT with a first gen Reba 29er fork handled like it had a sheet of plywood attached to the front end. My experience with the latest generation of 29er forks using the bigger offset (rigid and suspended) has been highly favorable.

  31. #31
    All Lefty's, all the time Moderator
    Reputation: MendonCycleSmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,921
    I think what's being missed in what I'm trying to get at is this.

    These forks were never designed with fat tires in mind. They work pretty well, and are pretty light for the given travel, with skinny tires.

    For me, adding fatties made the fork really pretty difficult to love. Handling (for me) was so disconnected feeling, that I found the suspension benefit to be not worth the added detriment.

    I simply add this info so that other folks don't spend money on a set up they think will work close to as crisply as their rigid fork. It noodles it's way down the trail when run at say, 8 PSI, and run hard like an MTB as opposed to a "snow bike" on nice, twisty singletrack. Snow and straight riding are wholesale different situations.
    This is a Pugs not some carbon wannabee pretzel wagon!!

    - FrostyStruthers



    www.mendoncyclesmith.com

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by MendonCycleSmith View Post
    For me, adding fatties made the fork really pretty difficult to love. Handling (for me) was so disconnected feeling, that I found the suspension benefit to be not worth the added detriment.
    Definitely agree with this comment and as I mentioned earlier, I'm back to rigid and much happier that I did. That being said, anyone that wants to go this route let me know and I'd be happy to make a deal for mine.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails maverick sc32 29er-dscf2437_02.jpg  


  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    709
    Well, are there any drawbacks to the lefty? I haven't heard anyone complain about flex. Apparently the wheel still builds quite strong with the offset, tire clearance is limited only by the offset you can achieve either by rotating the clamps or getting longer ones made, and the cost seems to be reasonable. I know I am going to go with the lefty myself, but I have not determined what frame to put it on. I am considering designing my own frame.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Smallfurry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    413
    Its not cheap. But its by far the best option IMHO.

    I've designed my 'soon to be completed' Custum Ti frame around it. So I hope its good.
    A big boy did it, and ran away.
    62*28'

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    564
    Quote Originally Posted by autodoctor911 View Post
    Well, are there any drawbacks to the lefty? I haven't heard anyone complain about flex. Apparently the wheel still builds quite strong with the offset, tire clearance is limited only by the offset you can achieve either by rotating the clamps or getting longer ones made, and the cost seems to be reasonable. I know I am going to go with the lefty myself, but I have not determined what frame to put it on. I am considering designing my own frame.
    A Lefty is plenty stiff, no worries about that. What I didn't appreciate during my 4 years running Lefties (on the older models, haven't ridden a newer one for longer periods) is the need to get it serviced pretty often. They also have a tendency to loose travel if not serviced often (forgot the exact reason why, it's been some time).

    If ridden hard, the bolts on the clamps work loose so definitely use locktite there.

    Above comments are for old Lefties (4 years or older, correct me here if I'm wrong), newer ones can't be used on a fatbike because the clamps are glued so they can't be changed.

    Front wheel removal is a ***** on all models...

    I've got no experience offsetting the front wheel (and I'm not sorry for that.. ).

  36. #36
    All Lefty's, all the time Moderator
    Reputation: MendonCycleSmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,921
    Quote Originally Posted by caminoloco View Post
    What I didn't appreciate during my 4 years running Lefties (on the older models, haven't ridden a newer one for longer periods) is the need to get it serviced pretty often. They also have a tendency to loose travel if not serviced often (forgot the exact reason why, it's been some time).

    If ridden hard, the bolts on the clamps work loose so definitely use locktite there.

    Above comments are for old Lefties (4 years or older, correct me here if I'm wrong), newer ones can't be used on a fatbike because the clamps are glued so they can't be changed.

    Front wheel removal is a ***** on all models...
    The issue with service for them is real. Not so much the forks fault though, but the industry as a whole.

    Any high performance fork will need routine maintenance. If you don't have a viable source for that, you ride it till it becomes unrideable, then get desperate and do whatever you can to make it stop doing whatever it is it's doing. Fox, Marzocchi, Manitou, Rock Shox, they all puke oil sooner or later, lose so kind of functionality, and need lovin' to keep working well.

    Since the industry values good wrenches by paying them 8 to 10 bucks an hour for as long as they can hold their nose as well as a wrench, you're not likely to find too many competent, long standing experienced wrenches out there at the LBS level. They just gain enough experience to be good, then graduate form college and go get a "real job". Bye bye experienced wrench, hello 14 year old willing to haul cardboard and garbage for minimum wage as well as do your "tune up".

    Cannondale answered this issue by offering full service in house, but they charge a ton, and replace all internals whether it's needed or not. I equate it with charging $200 for an cars oil change. Also makes folks averse to doing the routine work, fork turns to crap, and they blame the fork as a crappy design. That being said, I can't tell you how many 8, 9 etc year old forks I see that have been ridden hard, and seen zero work till they land on my bench, still working well.

    So, finding someone able to reliably work on your Lefty, Fox, Maverick whatever, can be tricky to say the least. I do my part in the Lefty and Headshock world by providing helpful friendly, reasonably priced, competent service, as well as lots of info for all who ask.

    The bearing migration/travel loss you speak of is an inherent part of any needle bearing design, not a flaw (you didn't say it was, but many seem to think it is). Early forks required shop tools for reset, all the designs after 2005 have easy user resettable bearings, takes all of 2 or 3 minutes to DIY, maybe once every couple of months. It is also tunable to reduce frequency if you have a decent mechanic.

    Bolts loosen anywhere if ridden hard, don't see how that's Lefty specific.

    Wheel removal? One 5 mm allen wrench, loosen (no need to remove them) two bolts, slide off brake caliper off it's mounts, then unscrew front hub, which self extracts the wheel? I dunno, I've fought several sticky Fox thru axles for a lot longer than it takes to remove a Lefty wheel.....

    Wish I could make the new 2013's work (working really hard on that right now actually). They now have automatic bearing reset, and a bootless chassis which they have more than 400 hours on protos, with zero telescope maintenance. Damper service still needs to be done annually, or bi-annulally at best.

    Apologies to the OP for the massive thread derail....
    This is a Pugs not some carbon wannabee pretzel wagon!!

    - FrostyStruthers



    www.mendoncyclesmith.com

  37. #37
    gone walk about
    Reputation: nvphatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    8,248
    I appreciate the concern over derail but honestly it's related to said topic so i'm good with it. Overall there's plenty of feedback here for myself as well as others to sift through and make their own decisions myself included.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    709
    On the new lefties, why not just chuck it up in a lathe and cut the clamps off, then make a new clamp to fit whatever diameter is left?
    you could even leave a little material from the old clamp if you feel the clamping pressure is going to hurt the possibly thinner upper.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    709
    sorry to turn this into another lefty thread though.

    but, on wheel removal, I would really like to see Cannondale(or a hub mfr.) take the one sided axle to it's full potential, and make the hub and rotor separate from the wheel. It would make wheel replacement on a race bike very quick, while reducing the cost of having to have extra brake rotors and complete hubs for each replacement wheel. the wheel would just have a sleeve with spoke flanges, and some kind of push button, or sliding ring engaugement mechanism like a steering wheel on a race car.

  40. #40
    All Lefty's, all the time Moderator
    Reputation: MendonCycleSmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,921
    Quote Originally Posted by autodoctor911 View Post
    On the new lefties, why not just chuck it up in a lathe and cut the clamps off, then make a new clamp to fit whatever diameter is left?
    you could even leave a little material from the old clamp if you feel the clamping pressure is going to hurt the possibly thinner upper.
    I'm not a structural engineer, nor do I have access to a full complement of machining tools.

    On top of that, being in the bike industry as I am, I ain't rich!

    If you have all the tools, knowledge, and a grand to blow on an "experiment" I would love to see how it turns out (pardoning the pun).

    I've heard this sentiment from a number of folks over the last year or so, and to date, have not heard back with success from any of them.....

    As for wheel removal, since the caliper is mounted to the fork leg, it needs to get out of the way for the rotor to move out.

    Honestly, I can take on off in less time than your average TA fork, same wrench, three bolts, 30 seconds, tops.

    Note you can change a flat without removing the wheel, if we're talking race pace concerns here, so it's even faster.
    This is a Pugs not some carbon wannabee pretzel wagon!!

    - FrostyStruthers



    www.mendoncyclesmith.com

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    564
    Since OT replies are allowed , just my 2c here: removing the bonded clamps is not for the faint of heart... I wouldn't do it without some feedback from a C'dale engineer. Not because of the removal of the old clamps, but maybe the bonded-clamp region isn't designed anymore to stand torqued-clamp forces ?

    As for wheel removal: I never understood with the engineering capability C'dale has that they never came up with a better system. Redesigning the front hub & axle so that the hub comes off but the disc brake with flange stays in place would be really cool. Add to that a QR for that hub and we're talking .
    I suspect that they designed & keep it like this for liability reasons: by the time the front wheel comes off you're already standing still a ways with a severe case of brake/disc rub.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    709
    what I was suggesting was to be able to remove the wheel while the rotor and bearings and a hub minus spoke flanges remain on the fork. the wheel would have a hub that is hollow in the middle with no bearings, and would slip over the rotor/spindle and engauge with splines in the ID or pins on a flange by the rotor. It would be retained by a single nut, or better yet some ball bearingsin a groove on the ID, release by a pushbutton in the center. You would just grab the wheel through the spokes and push the button with your thumb and pull.

    completely off subject, I just ordered my first Fat bike: the On-One Fatty.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    2,679
    I had two more rides on my SC32 since the last time I wrote here, "the getting used to" period is definitely working and I feel more at easy at speed, still far from perfect or natural, but now I can place the wheel wherever I want to, 710mm bars help I guess.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by autodoctor911 View Post
    sorry to turn this into another lefty thread though.

    but, on wheel removal, I would really like to see Cannondale(or a hub mfr.) take the one sided axle to it's full potential, and make the hub and rotor separate from the wheel. It would make wheel replacement on a race bike very quick, while reducing the cost of having to have extra brake rotors and complete hubs for each replacement wheel. the wheel would just have a sleeve with spoke flanges, and some kind of push button, or sliding ring engaugement mechanism like a steering wheel on a race car.
    take a look at this:
    Lefty HUB Quick Release 6 BOLT 32H Cannondale BMX FIXIE SOLO BADBOY | eBay

    I have been considering one for a few months now...
    Last edited by jnl1105; 11-23-2012 at 08:12 PM.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    709
    Ah. yes, that is exactly what I was envisioning. I like how they integrated the pin drive with the rotor mounting holes. that cuts out a good bit of machine work to make it. I can't tell from the photos if the retaining nut has a positive lock feature, or relies solely on the serrated surfaces of the nut and wheel flange.. It all rotates together, so it shouldn't loosen itself, but could be loosened by contact with rocks, or just not sufficiently tightened by the user. Not something I would worry about, but would definitely be a concern for the manufacturerer's liability. Not that what I see is any less safe than a standard quick release, just that it could be perfect if it had some kind of spring loaded ball bearing that locked in, or a simple clip that goes through the nut and hub(not really feasible with the internal thread setup I see here). As long as you tighten the nut sufficiently with the nice little flip out lever, which I do see a spring loaded ball bearing to retain it when folded in, or at least I can see the end of the hole they bored for it and the indentation in the lever for it to hold on to.
    definitely a nice product, and If I see another one for sale I will probably try to get it. Overall it would not be very difficult to reproduce using standard machine tools, and you could even widen the whole thing, and flip the threads to the outside and use a regular nut and drill a through hole for a safety clip. the regular nut would require a wrench though, but it would be easier to machine.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    270
    not to hijack the thread but yes it is a nice product about a month ago there were several on ebay but not now......

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    564
    Quote Originally Posted by jnl1105 View Post
    I love this forum, great find jnl1105 ! It almost makes me sorry I don't have a Lefty anymore, just to try it out - love it .

    Here's the (a bit cheaper...) link to the shop that makes it:
    Mozzo Lefty Sgancio Rapido - SHOP Online www.leowheels.it

    A longer version of the outer/over hub (and in combination with the longer clamps)... offset spoking would be history.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    709
    I will try to order one if they sell to the US. Well, first I will get a lefty and some longer clamps. Was someone selling the longer clamps, or better yet does someone have a dimensioned drawing they are willing to share. I may want to go for more or less length to achieve a slightly different trail, depending on the head tube angle my new Fatty ends up being. Maybe I could even run bent clamps to raise up the steerer, and allow full 26er travel. I don't think I will want more than 80mm really though with a hard tail.
    That brings up another question I have about the way frame manufacturers are always playing with head tube angles, but forks generally come in only one preset offset. wouldn't each head tube angle require a unique offset to achieve the right trail, or is the reason they change the head angle only aimed at changing the trail. I haven't ridden very many of these newer bikes with slacker angles, but the ones I have I don't like the way the steering pulls into the turn at low speeds. Why not get more trail with less offset and a steeper head angle to achieve high speed stability while avoiding the flop?

  49. #49
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    23,992
    Quote Originally Posted by patineto View Post
    You can also look for Marzocchi Shivers SC, they are heavier freeride forks but very tunable and I'm sure convertible to 29er/fatbike travel.
    Not really, the Shiver SC uses closed carts that are not serviceable where you could possibly install spacers and stiffer shorter springs. There were kits with less travel that used 100mm carts and different springs, but it's essentially replacing the entire innards. I guess if you were really handy you could make shortened travel version IF you had the 100mm carts AND you fashioned cartridge extenders (have done this myself, but it's only going to get you about 20mm to work with) to bring it back to the "normal" height. They did use dynamic bushings though, one of only a few forks to do so. Pretty neat idea, where the stanchion has a bushing and the uppers are a surface that the bushing slides upon, rather than having the bushing fixed in the uppers. This helps to make the fork stiff, stiffer as it goes through it's travel.

    But...

    Single crown inverted forks are about the worst idea to come out of the fork industry. I had a shiver SC. Flexy as hell. If you were going through a rock-garden, just hold on and hope the bike "chooses" a good line, because it's going to go where it wants to. The reason dual crown inverted forks work decently is that you got that 2nd crown and much greater amount of bushing overlap, and the entire reason they are used is usually due to situations where you can't get enough bushing overlap with a normal fork. The maverick DUC is a totally different animal than the SUC(k), it works because of the "bulged" uppers, welded crown, and of course second crown. With none of these features, the SUC is way behind conventional forks in terms of chassi rigidity and steering.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    2,679
    I had about 25 rides with my SC32 and all my complains/fears are long gone since I trade the larry for a Nate,, other than the narrow tire clearance issue the forks work great...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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