Results 1 to 12 of 12
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: antonio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,915

    Trance X - Revelation or F-120?

    Hi all,
    I need some advice from Trance X owners on which of the two forks I should include in my build.

    I recently picked up a Trance X1 w/ the F120 RL on ebay. Because I've been so happy over the last 2 years with my Pike 454 (now on my hardtail), my original plan was to go ahead and buy a Dual Air Revalation, and to sell the F120 as unused on eBay. This would allow me to stick with my goal of building a "light" long travel XC bike (for epic rides, a couple of 24 hour races, a xc race or two), but also allow me to slacken out the HA by 1/2 a degree or so (our trails here in the New England are pretty choppy and steep).

    Well, recently I read an article in a British mag that, while giving the Rev higher ratings overall, praised the high speed compression damping of the 2008 Fox Float series (while stating that the Rev gets a little overwhelemed in these situations). This has me reconsidering my original plan, as part of me would love to see what this "better" compression feels like in the many fast, rocky (bouldery) downhill sections I ride. I have no complaints with my Pike, but the only other quality forks I can compare it to have been an older Minute, a 125 Vanilla, and a leaky Zoke AM1.

    So, before my new F120 becomes a slightly used F120, I hope that some of you with experience with either (or both) forks can chime in with your thoughts. Is the taller fork and slacker HA enough to make the Rev a winner? Or is the high speed damping of the Fox worth the loss of a little travel and a slightly steeper geometry?

    Best,
    Antonio

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CRogge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    291
    I did the same swap that you are planning to do with my Trance X1. I sold the F120 RL when it was new and installed a RS Revelation Dual Air U-Turn. I can't compare it to an '08 Fox, but my "07 Anthem had a F80 RL on it and I like the Rev better. I like being able to tune the Pos/Neg springs and I love the U-Turn! I tend to run it a little low on tight courses for a steep head angle and let it out for the fast, rough stuff. Also, if my back ever gets a little sore or my hands start to go numb, I love being able to raise the front 5mm or so to shift my weight back.
    One thing I discovered in my research before the swap was that the Revelation had about an 8mm longer Axle to Crown length than the Fox at any given travel. i.e....The F120 is 490 A-C and the Revelation is 508 +-5 mm at the 130mm setting according to http://www.sram.com/_media/techdocs/...0385-000_A.pdf
    So, the head angle really slackens out almost a full degree at 130mm. To be honest, 90% of the time I run the fork right around the 115mm setting, which is right about where the F120 would sit as far as A-C. I think that the Giant engineers did a superbly thorough job getting the balance right on the Trance X.
    One last thing to note is that the Revelation is about .2 lbs heavier.
    Considering all of this, I would still never trade my Revelation for the Fox.
    Ride More

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: EGF168's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,420
    “The F120 is a totally new fork for 2008, and frankly, if your 5in travel bike hasn’t got one, you’re on a losing wicket already”

    Here’s a review from the same UK mag about the F120:
    http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/category/components/forks-suspension/product/f120-rlc-31352

    There’s more adjustability and a slacker head angle if you want it on the Revelation, and a few people have had trouble getting full travel from the Fox as you may have read on here but the Fox is better in every other way than the Revelation and the ordinary Fox Float series. Performance was great on my 07 Float 120 but the 08 F120 is nothing other than the best.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: antonio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,915
    Thanks CRogge and EGF. I never took into consideration that the two forks might have different A-C heights at the same travel length (although I should know better), and I'd rather not deviate more than a 1/2 degree over what was originally designed by Giant, at least not until I've had more time on the bike. That review on the F120 was very encouraging, and since I'm not a fan of travel adjust forks (no extended climbs where I ride), I think I'll stick with the F120 for now.

    Best,
    Antonio

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    139

    Revelation

    Here's the review for RS Revelation: It might not be a new fork, but this multiple test winner is still the best trail fork around in 2008.
    http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/catego...r-u-turn-13310

    5 inch = 127mm therefore its closer to 130mm. I am thinking of getting a 'Revelation' as well because I like the adjustment of travel but like you I am still trying to find out if it is wise to get the 'REV' or just stick with the F120.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: EGF168's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,420
    [SIZE=2]They did the test before the F120 so they may have changed their minds if that makes any difference but I’m sure in a couple of months they will have the WMB awards issue out with what they actually thought was the best, maybe to late but still interesting.
    [/SIZE]

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bermluvr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    683
    Quote Originally Posted by EGF168
    “The F120 is a totally new fork for 2008, and frankly, if your 5in travel bike hasn’t got one, you’re on a losing wicket already”

    Here’s a review from the same UK mag about the F120:
    http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/category/components/forks-suspension/product/f120-rlc-31352

    There’s more adjustability and a slacker head angle if you want it on the Revelation, and a few people have had trouble getting full travel from the Fox as you may have read on here but the Fox is better in every other way than the Revelation and the ordinary Fox Float series. Performance was great on my 07 Float 120 but the 08 F120 is nothing other than the best.
    I agree, performance was amazing on my 07 Float, however, I absolutely love my Reba (and my 06 Reba before it) and would have a hard time deciding between a Rev and an F120 if I had the choice... I love RS stuff equally :P
    2013 Cannondale F29 2
    2013 Giant Seek 0
    2010 Specialized SX Trail
    2009 Cannondale Rize 4

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    97

    A/c

    The Rev is a dual air chamber fork and therefore when set up and ready to ride does sit within the 130mm available travel, which reduces the A/C length and the Fox does not. Not to say that either one is better or not but to point out the A/C length for comparison should be measured ready to ride. In other words the Rev rides in its travel and the Fox rides on it, once the sag is set. I have both a 2008 Rev on my X and a 2008 Fox RLC 140 set to a 120. I will try to measure both for you later, fwiw I weigh 160 and run the Rev with 110 psi in both chambers. And in the Fox I run right at 75 psi both forks are set right at the manuals stated settings. Lastly not that it matters as far as A/C both of my forks are Pushed within the last month. Did I mention I love my X.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: EGF168's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,420
    Quote Originally Posted by Timan
    I have both a 2008 Rev on my X and a 2008 Fox RLC 140 set to a 120.
    [SIZE=2]The Float 120/140 has different internals to the F120 so will they have the same measurement?
    [/SIZE]

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    97

    A/c

    Fox states A/C length the same between the F series and Float and Talas.
    100mm = 471, 120 = 491, 140 = 511
    Each being 20mm difference.

    See this link for the specs.

    http://service.foxracingshox.com/consumers/index.htm

    I can't help but think about claimed weights from different manufactureres and disc capacity stated on hard drives, need to be taken with a grain or two of salt.

    But in this case ride height after sag is adjusted is really what's at stake. And all I was saying is forks with negative air chambers will likely when ready to ride be a shorter A/C all else being equal.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,500
    I could never get that last 20 mm or so of travel out of my F120r. I switched to a tora, and I like that way better on my X2.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    97

    A/c

    Mountainbiker 24 Your right many can't get all the stated travel out of the Fox 32 sereis. Some have modified the air chamber but that's another story look up Zack for that one.

Posting Permissions

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