Nomad fork: Fox 36 Van RC2 or Marzocchi 66 RC2X?
I can't decide between the two forks.
The 36 has 160mm of travel and the 66 has 170mm of travel. But are those real numbers or do they get less than advertised?
The 36 is 5.5lbs and the 66 is 6.5lbs. But are those real numbers or do they weigh more than advertised?
Will the extra .79 inches of crown to axle height of the 66 over the 36 affect the handling/climbing dramatically?
Any input would be appreciated.
The honest weight of a Van 36 is 5lbs., 9oz....or about 5.6lbs...not sure on the Marz. As I mentioned in a prior post on this forum, the Nomad is a lot more capable of taking a taller fork than I first anticipated. Exactly how tall is too tall is still up in the air...sorry...couldn't pass that up. Personally I wouldn't want anything shorter than my Van 36 on my Nomad because of pedal smacking...that's just me and where I ride that influences that opinion. I'm not sure I'd like the extra pound that the Marz adds to the bike. Have you considered a 66SL? I think this fork is going to be tuneable for ride height and travel preferences than the RC2X through the negative chamber...an it's only 1 or 2 ounces heavier than the Van 36.
Thanks for the info TNC.
I had just read your posts on the other thread before seeing your reply here.
Originally Posted by TNC
I'm afraid of trying the 66SL. It looks great on paper being 170mm of travel at 5.6lbs. But everyone knows how awesomely buttery plush Marzocchi coil forks are. The 66SL being an all air fork sort of scares me.
I'd feel better if someone had ridden both the 66RC2X and the 66SL and posted a comparison of the two along with a glowing remarks about the 66SL. The specs are right, but the reputation of air forks isn't.
I'd also consider the 66 Air Light since it's half coil - half air. But it appears to weigh the same as the 66RC2X. So why bother.
Another thing that disturbed me about the 66SL was the actual weight. At interbike, I weighed the 66RC2X and the 66SL. The 66SL actually weighed a tenth of a pound more. I asked one of the reps if they were actual production units with oil and I was told yes, they were. So I pointed out the weight discrepancy and it stumped them. They had no explanation.
I've seen the digital scale weight of that fork posted here by at least two reputable poseurs...I mean posters here on the forum, or I'd be leary of it too. On the SL being an air fork, I'd only be leary of it if I were expecting a full 170mm out of it. I've had two Z150SL models. While they were air forks, they worked extremely well, but you had to sag them about a good half inchmore than recommended to get full travel stroke...or you could put recommended sag into it and leave a half inch of travel still in the fork. Either way the fork was an awesome 5.5" travel fork...until I turned them into air/coil hybrids...and still have both. So what I'm saying is that I don't really want a 170mm single crown fork for my Nomad or Bullit, but a 155-165mm fork at that weight and stability platform would be awesome. I would have absolutely no fears of the travel and damping quality on a 66SL...I just wouldn't be shocked to see it not get the whole 170mm. If it did, that would just be a pleasant bonus...but I'd still probably have it regularly set at around 160mm on my bikes.
Originally Posted by k1dude
Last edited by TNC; 02-07-2006 at 07:30 PM.
Reason: add text
Don't fear the 66SL!
I'd give the 66SL a really long second look. I strongly suggest doing a search on the Turner board for all the many, many threads on the 66SL. They LOVE the 66SL for trail bike use. Enough to convince me to put it on my new Nomad. Here is a good starting point. Scroll down that thread and you'll see postings with links to even more 66SL threads on that board. I've been doing a lot of reading on it and the consensus seems to be that Marz air forks are solid, and plenty plush.
Originally Posted by k1dude