Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 107
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: honns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    520

    Inverted X-Fusion


  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bike Whisperer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,872
    Quote Originally Posted by honns View Post
    Read the article

    It boils down to less unsprung weight (mass not supported by the suspension) that allows the suspension to react quicker to impacts, with another plus being that the fork's lubrication oil is likely to spend more time around the seals and bushings, thereby keeping the fork running smooth.
    Former bicycle mechanic for 8 years, current soil scientist.

    Blog

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    7,891
    Quote Originally Posted by honns View Post
    If you had read the article you'd have already found the answer.

    edit: whisperer beat me to it!

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: honns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    520
    Missed the important paragraph, it would seem.

  5. #5
    What?
    Reputation: mullen119's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,166
    If it becomes available, I will be the first in line to buy it. I want to upgrade my Lyrik to a Vengeance anyway, and I have always been a huge USD fork fan. At 155lbs, its a match made in heaven.

  6. #6
    Outcast
    Reputation: Renegade's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    8,435
    " Why would X-Fusion, among others, pursue an inverted design, especially when it presents such a design challenge? It boils down to less unsprung weight (mass not supported by the suspension) that allows the suspension to react quicker to impacts, with another plus being that the fork's lubrication oil is likely to spend more time around the seals and bushings, thereby keeping the fork running smooth. "


    there you go
    ****

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Salespunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,598
    So sick! Hopefully they build it and it works.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Kiwiplague's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,108
    Plus they look amazing! If they do nail the stiffness issues, they could be onto a winner with that fork.
    I don't crash, I just have slightly uncontrolled dismounts!

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    874
    Can anyone explain to me why all motocross bikes use inverted forks but mtb uses standard? I'm a mechanical engineer but this has me stumped. My buddy that rides both says Honda came out with a standard MX fork once but then everyone complained it was too flexy!?!?

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: honns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    520
    Yea, I see the benefits now. I'm with ryguy, why did the motorcycle world move to inverted? Seems like if it works better for the motorcycle world, it would also work better for MTB.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,333
    Quote Originally Posted by ryguy135 View Post
    Can anyone explain to me why all motocross bikes use inverted forks but mtb uses standard? I'm a mechanical engineer but this has me stumped. My buddy that rides both says Honda came out with a standard MX fork once but then everyone complained it was too flexy!?!?
    Just guessing...maybe cause MTb has only recently had thru axle type connections. Couldn't do inverted with old style 9mm bicycle dropouts.
    whatever...

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    874
    Quote Originally Posted by steadite View Post
    Just guessing...maybe cause MTb has only recently had thru axle type connections. Couldn't do inverted with old style 9mm bicycle dropouts.
    Good guess, but this can't be it. Fox had a prototype inverted DH fork that Aaron Gwin had been spotted doing practice runs on at World Cup races. Here maybe 6 months ago though they made an official announcement saying they were abandoning development citing excessive flex as the reason.

  13. #13
    What?
    Reputation: mullen119's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,166
    The larger diameter stanchions on motocross bikes allow for extra stiffness. There have been many attempts at inverted mtb forks, but larger riders still complain of flex. If someone makes a stiff USD fork, it would take over.

  14. #14
    Save Jesus
    Reputation: beanbag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2,691
    I have enough scratches on my fork lowers that I wouldn't want my delicate stanchions to be in that area.

    This fork is stiffer than a standard fork in certain ways (front-back motion, for example), but seems much less stiff against the wheel tilting from side to side due to independent leg compressions.

  15. #15
    What?
    Reputation: mullen119's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,166
    Assuming this fork ever makes it to production, I would be very surprised if it doesnt come with stanchion guards similar to what comes on the Manitou Dorado or White Brothers Groove. I would think they just kept them out of the picture to give a better look at the fork.

    Its long been said that to make a bicycle USD fork stiff enough(twisting wise), for larger riders and extremely aggressive riders, a larger diameter axle would be required. Manitous 20mm Hex axle is suppose to be the best thing at 20mm, but still suffers from some flex. At this point, nobody wants to make a 25mm axled fork that comes with a hub. They dont feel the market is big enough to have the inconvenience.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Fix the Spade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,373
    Quote Originally Posted by honns View Post
    Benefits are what, exactly?
    It looks badass.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Fix the Spade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,373
    Quote Originally Posted by steadite View Post
    Just guessing...maybe cause MTb has only recently had thru axle type connections. Couldn't do inverted with old style 9mm bicycle dropouts.
    Marzocchi were doing 20mm inverted Shivers in 2002, they were great forks relative to what else was available (like Psylos...) but did suffer from left-right twisting. Mine didn't, but I was 14 and weighed bugger all, big guys could get visible flap out of them.

    My guess is X Fusion have taken the keyed stanchions from the HiLo post and applied them to the inverted fork. If one little stanchion can resist twisting at the saddle, then two bigger ones bolted together should have no problems at the front wheel. As long as they stay in the uppers and avoid the wiper seals that should solve any twist issues.

    Regardless, I definately want one!

  18. #18
    Huckin' trails
    Reputation: David C's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    6,122
    Another issue so far with USD forks being stiffer is the weight. They are already heavier than most big forks on the market and to get a stiffer fork, you will need to either find a killer design or use stronger, but heavier materials and structure. And I'm pretty sure an inverted motocross fork weights a lot more than any MTB fork already. But I'm pretty sure they're gonna come up with something good one day, as carbon fiber, titanium, magnesium and other superior materials are being used in better ways and designs.
    Quote Originally Posted by NicoleB28 View Post
    topless. that's what all mtb girls do. we go ride, get topless, have pillow fights in the woods, scissor, then ride home!

  19. #19
    What?
    Reputation: mullen119's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,166
    I dont know, 4.3lbs for a 160mm fork is pretty damn light. Dorado's are pretty light at 6.6 lbs as well. There used to be a carbon legged Dorado but at 2400msrp, it didn't last very long.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    7,689
    There's a reason every USB single crown fork has failed in the bicycle market. Without a second crown the fork cannot be made stiff enough without making it weigh a ton. Aside from that you're still dealing with more easily damaged stanchions and less wear/damage tolerant seals. Then at the end of the day the benefits from going USD on a bicycle are questionable.

    On a motorcycle weight doesn't matter nearly as much and USD forks can be beefed up to be stiff enough. You can also run tighter and better seals since the weight of the motorcycle makes it more tolerant of stiction.

    I really like X-Fusion, but it makes me sad they're wasting their resources on a evolutionary dead end.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    681
    Quote Originally Posted by bad mechanic View Post
    There's a reason every USB single crown fork has failed in the bicycle market. Without a second crown the fork cannot be made stiff enough without making it weigh a ton. Aside from that you're still dealing with more easily damaged stanchions and less wear/damage tolerant seals. Then at the end of the day the benefits from going USD on a bicycle are questionable.

    On a motorcycle weight doesn't matter nearly as much and USD forks can be beefed up to be stiff enough. You can also run tighter and better seals since the weight of the motorcycle makes it more tolerant of stiction.

    I really like X-Fusion, but it makes me sad they're wasting their resources on a evolutionary dead end.
    But they look so coooooooool

    I've become a fan of X-Fusion stuff, but I am also a bit concerned about heading down this path. They already make good stuff that is way cheaper than the competition. Why not just go head-on into the DH scene with a traditional fork. There are no shortage of poor downhillers who will appreciate the value.

    I'll try to withhold judgement though. I hope its totally badass.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    493
    Just for fun. 2002 Marzocchi Shiver SC. My wife's retro Klunker.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Fix the Spade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,373
    Interesting note.

    There is an interview with the DVO suspension guys in this month's Dirt. There are no pictures but apparently DVO's new downhill fork will be inverted as well.

    Inverted revival time?

  24. #24
    What?
    Reputation: mullen119's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,166
    You can't say they have all failed since a couple companies still make USD mtb forks. You can't say weight for motorcycles doesn't matter either. People spend hundreds of dollars on TI bolts for motocross bikes just to save a pound. The flex issue is real though, and its caused by the stanchions being able to twist inside the uppers. If x fusion had found a way to solve this, and they sound confident that they did, it could be a great step forward. Anyone who has ridden on a USD fork loves the feel they give, other then the twisting of course.

  25. #25
    Registered text offender
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,146
    Isn't Paul Turner of Maverick Bikes now in league with X-Fusion? I love my DUC32 forks for trail duty.

Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 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
  •