Results 1 to 94 of 94
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    41

    ... and if we just ... Stumpjumper Evo with a 160mm Fork





    I just installed a new Fox Float 2012 **RC2** 160mm on my Stumpy.

    The feeling is AWESOME. Yes I lost a little bit on the climbs side but not very much.
    When it's the time to go Downhill it's like I have a new bike. I'm barely able to feel the roots or rocks under my front wheel. I'm able to go faster and with more control and the RC2 damper give a better feeling than the RLC. Anyway I will never lock the fork at 160mm.. so useless.

    I was not happy about my Revelation 150mm. I think I will keep the Fox on the bike
    Last edited by lavoiespeed3; 06-19-2012 at 09:03 AM.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    21
    Nice! Do you really notice the change of climbing ability? Or is it more or less negligible?

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    41
    yes I noticed the change of climbing ability by maybe -10%. The front wheel will lift more easy, anyway with my riding style I always stay in attack position when I'm climbing. I'm not fighting with the climb parts, some time I just push my bike and keep my energy for the technical parts. If I want to do XC I will take a XC bike..

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Yody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,175
    you should lower that fork to 140-150mm, looks too tall in the front

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr. Lynch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,277
    Very cool to see! I'm thinking of running a Fox 34 on mine, but I may drop it to 150.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    41
    It looks tall because i'm not on the bike, with the 30% sag it's lower..

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Neo-ST's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    246
    What didn't you like about Revelation and how will the new fork influence geometry changes and maybe warranty too ?

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    232
    Gonna try the 34 fox 160/120. I ll let you know how I like it once I've put it thru the paces.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,423
    I put a 160\130 lyrik on my evo. great addition to the bike. in the 130 mode the front end doesn't want to wander as much as the 150 did. in 160 mode you absolutely fly down stuff. IT is the fork that should have came on the bike.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by Neo-ST View Post
    What didn't you like about Revelation and how will the new fork influence geometry changes and maybe warranty too ?
    The compression speed was not ajustable, I dont need a lock on the fork, the fork is less reactive than the Fox, the fork doesnt work enough on small rocks. And with 160mm you still keep the warranty. It's less than 10% change.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    41
    i will try to reduce the travel to 150mm soon to compare with 160mm

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: EVOness's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by tim208 View Post
    I put a 160\130 lyrik on my evo. great addition to the bike. in the 130 mode the front end doesn't want to wander as much as the 150 did. in 160 mode you absolutely fly down stuff. IT is the fork that should have came on the bike.
    No way should it come with a 160mm fork as std, that's what the Enduro is for, the axle to crown would kills it adj is unnecessary with the right fork the 34 at 150mm.

    Fox 34 CTD float kills it on this bike, no way do you need 160, if you do its a rider issue not the bike, the 32rl was/is not the right fork however, I guess just timing that the 34 was not yet available for this frame as an OEM product, 2013 I can't see how Specialsed would not have this fork on the EVO.

    Mine has been internally lowered from 160mm to 150mm to maintain the std EVO geo, its amazingly balanced now, something it did not have with the standard Fox RL 32mm, nothing fazes it except now I have to look for harder terrain to ride ha.


  13. #13
    The Other Dude
    Reputation: jut8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,080
    If you drop your fox 36 to 150mm it will NOT give you the standard EVO geo, the 36 has a taller axle to crown height than the oem revelation/fox 32 at the same travel. With that said, I ran mine at 150mm and 160mm and really love the fox 36 on the front of my evo.
    Sponsors: Specialized, Honey Stinger, The Hive, Twenty6, 661, Elka Suspension, www.Chainsmokeracing.net

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    41
    jut8, what height are you riding now.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,423
    to each his own. the fork that came on the bike was a piece of ****, compared to the lyrik.

  16. #16
    The Other Dude
    Reputation: jut8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,080
    I ran it a 150 for quite a while and now I am back up at 160mm, to me the being 10mm higher wasent that noticeable on the climbing performance, but it is on the descents. The bike is just a ripper, the great thing is that we have the freedom to set it up for whatever suits us best!
    Sponsors: Specialized, Honey Stinger, The Hive, Twenty6, 661, Elka Suspension, www.Chainsmokeracing.net

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Neo-ST's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    246
    Quote Originally Posted by tim208 View Post
    to each his own. the fork that came on the bike was a piece of ****, compared to the lyrik.
    So you're saying that Revelation is piece of s*** ?

  18. #18
    Stand back
    Reputation: dbabuser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,183
    You ruint it! j/k. I'd love to ride an EVO back to back w/ my Enduro comp to see how much they differ.
    IMO, a Fox 34 is to the 35 or 36mm stanchion forks what the 15mm thru is to 20mm: an answer to a problem that didn't exist...
    Golden Bike Park

    Golden Connector Trails need your support!

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    367
    Threads like this make me want a 160 that much more for my Evo. I'm really interested in the X-Fusion Vengeance HLR. I'll drop it to 160 for awhile then maybe to 150 if I really don't like the geo. I rode an Evo the other day with a Fox 160 rlc and definitely liked it.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,423
    neo

    piece of ****, might be to much. but way to wimpy or not burly enough would have been better. But iam also 6'1 210, so my ride weight would be another 10lbs with gear. the fork just didn't seem right. But the lyrik, is another story altogether. Confidence inspiring is a great term for fork, and the lyrik seemed to make the a good bike great.

    I am also coming off of a 6 in all mountain bike.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Neo-ST's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    246
    Well ok, whatever suits you.
    I'm 6'2" 187lbs and find Revelation to be excellent. I don't do jumps and roughest DH trails though...

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: EVOness's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by dbabuser View Post
    You ruint it! j/k. I'd love to ride an EVO back to back w/ my Enduro comp to see how much they differ.
    IMO, a Fox 34 is to the 35 or 36mm stanchion forks what the 15mm thru is to 20mm: an answer to a problem that didn't exist...
    You obviously haven't ridden one on this bike then.

    32mm is not enough for over 130mm of travel-150mm, if you can push bikes hard enough a 36 is too much for weight and axle to crown if all round performance is important to you.

    I'm a downhiller first, but I also wanted my trail bike to be able to rip up hills, here we have allot of elevation and to get to the good trails I want to be able to ride up and also not at a crawl.

    The EVO clearly highlights the std32 RL is not in this frames class it is a cheap for such a high level of frame.

    I think you are missing the point of this bike, you can do anything you want to any bike, the point of the EVO series was so you didn't have to reconfigure or redesign a bike that was intended to please everybody that's why they have the std Stumpy and Enduro, which are great bikes and capable for people without a higher skill level to go fast and enjoy.

    The EVO is about tempo bike and rider!

    People if they have the money can buy what they like, but I can tell you now if you don't have the tempo to match the EVO series I bet most won't enjoy riding them, raking them out with big forks,clearly spells out to me rider mismatch.

    I can see why some people have upgraded to a 36 or Lyrik because they also found that the std 32 was lacking and wanted something too better compliment the frame, That's not they're fault, only now is they're another and the right option.

    Ride one on the EVO then come back and say it not awesome, comparing it to 15mm vs 20mm axles is so far off the mark. this is not a different standard, it can fit any current tapered or 44/ 1.5 frame design.

    But more importantly it's stiff light and matches 130 -150mm aggressive style of riding perfectly without compromising uphill capability, this fork could re invigorate the 130mm-150mm 26" bikes that 29ers are aiming to take over.

    I can tell you now they're is no comparison between the 32rl and the 34 especially on this frame, if you think not you're clearly not riding this frame to it's capability, heck I'm not even doing that and I knew that before I rode it, but afterwards I couldn't believe how big the gap was with the fork wheels that came on this frame.

    My float 34 rlc is the best single crown I've ridden to date, I've ridden lots of forks, I've not always been Fox's biggest fan but they have been getting it right lately and I'm very impressed with this fork.

    Forks in this category I think have hurt the 26" evolution more than anything else in recent times and it's great to see a fork finally step up, it''s changed/improved my EVO that much, now I just need more trails to match the bikes capability and without going to 160mm!

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,723
    I am truly hoping the '13 evo's come with the 34 forks, personally. Hopefully not too long before we find out!

  24. #24
    The Other Dude
    Reputation: jut8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,080
    Quote Originally Posted by EVOness View Post
    32mm is not enough for over 130mm of travel-150mm
    Totally agree with you on this, it feels true at least for my weight and riding. I do love the 36 on the bike now, but I am intrigued to try a 34 on it. I have a 34 on my '12 s-works sj 29er fsr, and it is a great fork, a much better choice than 32's that came on the previous year stumpy 29er fsr's. There is a bit more flex to it than the 36 on my stumpy, but that is also comparing a smaller stantioned fork to a larger one, and a 29 vs a 26 fork, so its not comparing apples to apples at all.

    So tell me about the 34 on your evo a bit more. I see it weighs about .4lbs less than the 36, and you get a 15mm vs. a 20mm, and the 2mm smaller stantion, then you have the new CTD adjustment vs High/Low Speed compression, whats your thoughts on it, what makes it better for the bike than the 36, and what does it lack compared to the 36?

    The reason I ask is I have to order a few parts from fox today, and might be interested in the 34 and playing around with the travel on it. Its nice to have options.
    Sponsors: Specialized, Honey Stinger, The Hive, Twenty6, 661, Elka Suspension, www.Chainsmokeracing.net

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    367
    This was one of my concerns. None of the manufacturers are putting their DH dampers into the 34 forks. If they did, I'd try it out first before the 36. I like to tinker with fork settings. It doesn't matter to me to get some bobbing while standing and mashing on the pedals. My evo is 4lbs lighter than my previous bike and I still suck when it comes to climbing. I've ridden XC 29ers and 26ers and don't do much better. I just don't climb well and probably never will. As long as I can get to the top then I'm pleased. I think I'm still going to try a 36. If 160 feels like too much, I'll just drop it to 150 or 140.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    127
    I've already had two 32s warrantied by Fox. I'm only 155lbs, but ride the bike pretty hard and can sometimes not be the smoothest rider on sizable jumps

    the stock RL fork is ****... the dampening is crap and I just couldn't get it to work for me. It really is a limiter on this bike and Specialized severely cheaped out, especially for the price point. It ended up failing at the steerer to crown bond.

    so I got a 2012 TALAS 32 which was a major improvement over the RL, but still came up really short when compared to the RC2 damper setups on my 40 and 36s. I really enjoyed the ability to drop the fork down for climbing which I never really used on other bikes but this one, possibly due to the lighter front end, really benefited on the climbs. It too failed at the stanchion to crown bond and I just got it back from Fox.

    They said that they found 32 stanchions came up a little short for more aggressive riders on the 150mm forks and offered me a crash replacement with the 34, but I didn't go with it as it was still ~$550 or so and they would keep my 32.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    14

    nice

    really nice setup

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    3
    I asked Specialized, they say:

    Me: Hi, I want to ride a 160mm fork on my Stumpjumper FSR Carbon EVO 2012. Is that possible?
    Specialized Service: 160 is too big. That frame is at it's recommended limit with a 150...

    Do you have other statements from Specialized? I really want to ride a 34 Talas on the bike.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr. Lynch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,277
    The spesh rep told me the same thing at my LBS. He said if i go with a Fox 34 I should space it down to 150.

  30. #30
    Broken but on the mend
    Reputation: mzorich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    850
    anyone who thinks this bike needs 36 or more travel should not be on this bike. how does anyone figure a trail bike needs more travel. i ride this **** on super tech downhill almost every weekend and granted i don't like the 32( just because it is a base line 32) but i never ever need more travel. a 36 kills everything this bike is about. if you want or need more travel you need to learn how to ride smoother. yes the 32 kind sucks but its not that bad. there is a reason they didn't put the 36 on this bike or slacken the HA any more. this bike is sick i think if you need more travel your on the wrong rig or your using the bike for the wrong thing

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: EVOness's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by jut8 View Post
    Totally agree with you on this, it feels true at least for my weight and riding. I do love the 36 on the bike now, but I am intrigued to try a 34 on it. I have a 34 on my '12 s-works sj 29er fsr, and it is a great fork, a much better choice than 32's that came on the previous year stumpy 29er fsr's. There is a bit more flex to it than the 36 on my stumpy, but that is also comparing a smaller stantioned fork to a larger one, and a 29 vs a 26 fork, so its not comparing apples to apples at all.

    So tell me about the 34 on your evo a bit more. I see it weighs about .4lbs less than the 36, and you get a 15mm vs. a 20mm, and the 2mm smaller stantion, then you have the new CTD adjustment vs High/Low Speed compression, whats your thoughts on it, what makes it better for the bike than the 36, and what does it lack compared to the 36?

    The reason I ask is I have to order a few parts from fox today, and might be interested in the 34 and playing around with the travel on it. Its nice to have options.
    Yeah I would say a 34 is a must on a good 29er but if you push hard over 120mm, 32 is probably ok 120mm down, I ran a 32mm Zocchi on my HT Sir9er last year and it was stiff enough.

    Comparing a 34mm 26 float to a 36mm float it feels like a lighter 36, not a heavier 32mm, I feel no flex, as someone said above the more important factor is the axle to crown is maintained a 36 alters this even in reduced travel.

    This fork just feels made for the EVO!

    Comparing it to the 36 is imo not the right way to look at it, you can make anything go on any bike, but finally the 34 addresses the 130 -150mm 26er category without compromise on either end, I notice nothing in weight but a massive difference in tracking stability and capability.

    I've run this now for over a month and I've given it heaps, it almost feels like a small 40 with what it can handle, I have a 2012 40 on my DH bike and have ridden it back to back on some grade 5 trails that I used to take my DH bike down, not true DH tracks but still gnarly, the 34 just nails it, I smash it into some pretty not so smooth landings and its stable, I'm no light weight either, I run around 220psi in the rear shock.

    I run my CTD in trail mode and compression in DH mode so its firm, stays up in the travel on the downs, but flies up the hills, stand and hammer and very little movement, yet it still tracks the ground in rough rooty corners, something the 32 RL would not do at speed or my speed, I run 90psi in the air chamber and enough rebound it doesn't pack up, but not too fast either so it remains stable on bigger hits, I'd possibly like a re valve for a firmer compression between modes, but its very impressive and almost coil like in it's performance. I just love it.

    I would highly recommend this fork to anyone on a Stumpy Evo, on the std Stumpy you don''t notice it as much and I think a decent 32 like the RLC or newer CTD float 32s would be ok, you'd get away with it but not the EVO, it begs for this fork.

    I'm, not a fan of Talas, one of the key reasons I choose an EVO was I didn't want to play around with the GEO, I wanted to set and forget and go hammer the trails without compromise!

    If anything, most of my riding is now pretty boring this thing just slays single track, I feel I could do with less travel, I've yet to bottom this thing out, I will get some decent GoPro sometime, on a jump to gnarly landing to show you what I mean.

    Each to his own, but I agree with everything that mzorich has stated.

    I don't even have to ride smooth, the Stumpy can take a beating and then some.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    254
    Hey EVOness - What are your thoughts on the new 34 Talas 160MM? You mentioned something about the 36 axle to crown length being too long for the EVO platform. Do you know if the axle to crown on the 34 is the same as the 32?

    I don't want to mess with the stock GEO, but I recently came across a 34 Talas and as you know you can't make talas 150MM like the float.

    With that restriction what are your thoughts on running the 34 Talas in 160MM mode on the EVO?
    ---------------------
    Evil Following

    weareelements.com

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    3
    To clarify warranty using a 160mm 34 Talas I twittert with Specialized:

    Me: Hi, I want to ride a 160mm fork on my Stumpjumper FSR Carbon EVO 2012. Is that possible?
    Specialized: Sorry, 160 is too big. That frame is at it's recommended limit with a 150...
    Me: Does that mean there is no warranty any more or do you not recommend it because of geometrie changes?
    Specialized: Both, frankly....

    So: do not use a 160mm fork in the EVO if you want to keep your warranty.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: EVOness's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by michaeldorian View Post
    Hey EVOness - What are your thoughts on the new 34 Talas 160MM? You mentioned something about the 36 axle to crown length being too long for the EVO platform. Do you know if the axle to crown on the 34 is the same as the 32?

    I don't want to mess with the stock GEO, but I recently came across a 34 Talas and as you know you can't make talas 150MM like the float.

    With that restriction what are your thoughts on running the 34 Talas in 160MM mode on the EVO?
    I have not tried the new Talas 160mm, my thoughts on 160mm are pretty strong, I think it alters the bike too much and people looking at the EVO versions shouldn't be looking at compensating imo.

    The big reason I think this may have happened is due to the std 32RL which is a POS on this frame, its fine with the std Stumpy without being stellar, but the EVO has so much capability its a shame that fork came on this bike, I hope S do a better job with the specc in 2013 on the EVO it deserves it esp at that price range.

    If you setup your suspension right at 150mm with the Float 34 or 32RLC/CTD version or a Zocchi 44ti or A Rev with 20mm ta then the rest is up to the rider.

    I'd still pick the 34 CTD out of that bunch as the 34 chassis is impressive, I do prefer 20mm axles but the 15mm axle system on the Fox is better than the 36 thru axle system and more than a match for Srams maxle light, they're might be some slight advantages in 20mm over 15mm but on this bike and travel range and under you'd not notice it.

    Good wheels fork and setup will make up for it and should be more of riders focus.

    I'd not compromise on this bike, if you can get an EVO then don't let it down by settling on upgrades that don't do it justice, upgrade is supposed to be that an upgrade, it should be significantly better or your'e just throwing cash down the drain and you're better off looking elsewhere.


    PS A2C on the 34 @ 150mm is the same as the 32 @ 150mm, though I've not measured it, I've still got the 32rl so I can check it to be sure. 36 definitely has a longer A2C though.
    Jmo/e
    Last edited by EVOness; 07-10-2012 at 02:43 PM.

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: EVOness's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    37
    Early reviews and reports of the 2013 model, and good to see a 34 specc on they're not so sure it should be a Talas, but it might appeal to a wider range, also not sure that's what the EVO is about but hey market forces.

    2013 EVO

    http://nsmb.com/assets/2012/images/b...=430&width=700

    Specc EVO 29/26ers

    Dam would have been good to have seen, XX1 groupset on here as well, like the new EnduroC.
    Last edited by EVOness; 07-10-2012 at 03:30 PM.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rcjonessnp175's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    525
    Totally agree when i get my 34 float i will space it down to 150 as i agree no need for more travel, just more stiffness when it comes to the fork.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,423
    all i can say is with the stock fork i was not impressed with this bike. With the lyrik i love the bike. I am not a techy dude or anything like that. i just like to climb up hills and rip down stuff and hopefully it is in the backcountry. The lyrik just made the bike a great bike. i don't know if is th extra 10 mm or the stiffness, nor do i care. I just know the lyrik will put a smile on your face on the evo.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    254
    Quote Originally Posted by EVOness View Post
    Early reviews and reports of the 2013 model, and good to see a 34 specc on they're not so sure it should be a Talas, but it might appeal to a wider range, also not sure that's what the EVO is about but hey market forces.

    2013 EVO

    http://nsmb.com/assets/2012/images/b...=430&width=700

    Specc EVO 29/26ers

    Dam would have been good to have seen, XX1 groupset on here as well, like the new EnduroC.
    Looks like fox is making a custom version of the 34 talas at 150mm for them. With the retail version you can only get 160mm.

    Still can't believe 10mm makes that much of a difference. I have a brand new 34 talas. Maybe I'll try to return it and get the float.
    ---------------------
    Evil Following

    weareelements.com

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    41
    I just put back the oem fork(150mm RS revelation)... The A2C is 1.5 inches less than the fox 36 160.. I think I will reduce the fox to 150 or 140.. It was more fun and more maniable with the oem fork, I think i'm faster too with less travel...

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    171
    this is great!!! I myself have destroyed the oem 32 on my evo and a 32rlc i bought aftermarket; destroyed the bushings pretty quickly......
    talked w/ Fox yesterday and next week im goin to order a talas 34 then pay the extra 100.00 to have them swap out the internals to a regular float 34; this way fork is still black....didnt like the way a white fork looked on my evo, call it what you will....
    BTW, dude at Fox told me the the A2C on a lowered to 150mm 34 will be approx. 7mm taller than a 32 150mm
    I will have them drop travel of the 34 to 150mm when they swap the internals too

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,723
    Fox is making a 150mm 34 Talas for the 2013 carbon evo. You might ask if it's possible to get one of those, rather than futzing with internals and stuff. And, it's black already

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    171
    hmmm, souds good, but i dont feel a need for a talas and feel that the talas models dont feel as nice thru travel as none talas....
    Dont think it would be a big deal if they swapped internals as its all done in house by the techs...

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    254
    Quote Originally Posted by osty View Post
    this is great!!! I myself have destroyed the oem 32 on my evo and a 32rlc i bought aftermarket; destroyed the bushings pretty quickly......
    talked w/ Fox yesterday and next week im goin to order a talas 34 then pay the extra 100.00 to have them swap out the internals to a regular float 34; this way fork is still black....didnt like the way a white fork looked on my evo, call it what you will....
    BTW, dude at Fox told me the the A2C on a lowered to 150mm 34 will be approx. 7mm taller than a 32 150mm
    I will have them drop travel of the 34 to 150mm when they swap the internals too
    Thanks for the tip. I just called FOX and they are going to do the same thing to my TALAS. I currently have a TALAS 34 160 and I'm sending it in to swap for FLOAT 34 internals and lowering it to 150MM.

    I can do without the travel adjust but I really want a black fork too.
    ---------------------
    Evil Following

    weareelements.com

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    171
    LOL, well i ordered just the float 34 since I needed to buy some DH parts for other bike....BUT, Fox is lowering the fork and labor for free...I know its not a big thing, but its something.
    Looks like im back to a white fork...
    AND, they don't have any of the 2013 Talas 150's until next year sometime and prob wont offer aftermarket

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    41
    I'm now riding with the fork at 140mm.. I put 2 spacers of 10mm each, i prefer the bike with the 140now, more easy to control, but my fork is still at 150mm after I lowered with 2 spacer :P

  46. #46
    scn
    scn is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    68
    So I posted on another thread about this as well, but do any of you on the Evo's feel there is a lack of compression dampening for the rear shock? I test rode one and even after increasing the pressure about 20 psi over AutoSag was blowing through the travel. I am 160 without gear and was riding a medium 2012 Evo Comp. If so, have you found that compensating with more pressure works, or have you had additional aftermarket tuning? Thanks in advance.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    160
    Ive a 160mm Lyrik in my 2012 Stumpi Elite and I absolutly love it! The bike still climbs well and decents like a champ!

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,723
    Just wondering if any of you guys who have swapped for a Fox34 on their bikes have noticed any difference in weight. My 2013 Revelation, as far as I can find on the web, weighs around 3.6 pounds. A Fox34 Float weighs 4.3 pounds. That's fairly significant.. are you guys feeling a difference?

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    37
    Just put a float 36 onto mine today after finding the revelation a bit weak up front on the past few rides, and can definately feel the extra stiffness up front from the 36's. Not been on a proper ride yet so can't decide on whether to drop it down to 150mm yet.

    Off to a bike park this weekend so will see how it goes there, but doesn't feel as high at the front as i thought.


  50. #50
    just ride
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    643
    So I switched to Fox 34 talas 120/160 and didn't know what was happening with the frontend. It was very stable going over rocky terrain. I didn't have to fight the handlebar unlike before with the OE fork (Float 32 150mm). It also feels that the bike is in attack mode all the time. I end up sprinting on the sections I normally would go easy on. I started breaking all my PR's on this bike (DH).

    As mentioned by Evoness...

    Quote Originally Posted by EVOness View Post
    massive difference in tracking stability and capability.
    Other thing I noticed was the chain slapping on the stay is louder than before. To the point that I had to stop few times to check what was going on back there. Must be the speed I'm now carrying over those bumpy terrains.

    http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphoto...17335151_n.jpg

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    54
    i put an old float 36-160 rc2 on my EVO 2012 supercustom...
    i feel very very good the bike. the climb is very similar, in the down part awesome!!
    very satisfy. after 4 riding, i switch to an RS Lyric rc2l dh, 160/120.
    i can't try the bike. too much snow and mud...
    Stumpjumper Evo with a 160mm Fork-20130124_124955-1-1.jpg

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    63
    If fox came out with a 34 with RC2 I would consider it, but until then I'll never buy a CTD fork. For experienced riders who like to tune their shock to their liking it seriously lacks in the performance dept. It is either has too little damping or too much, and I hate that it just feels off. The 34 150 may be the "right size" for the EVO, but quite frankly riders will be faster if they put on what they're comfortable with and rip it. For some, that means an RC2 36, for others it's a CTD 34 or 32, Rockshox Lyric etc etc. Rider experience and style more than makes up for a few tenths of a degree or mm's of change in a geometry spec. I personally ride a 2011 36 VAN RC2...and it is by far the best single crown fork I have ever ridden, it literally is a small 40 in terms of components and feel. Yeah, it's hefty, but does that ~1lb make a real difference? Remember what Greg Lemond said - "skip the upgrade, hit the grades." You don't see out of shape guys winning climbs because they ride a brand new carbon everything XC steed.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    125
    I'll have to keep an eye on this thread as I'm looking to upgrade the front and rear shocks on my 12 SJ Comp FSR. I just Blew out my Triad rear shock. The lake is at the shop with the rear shock sent off to Fox. The bike store told me that there is a kit available for the 12 stumpjumper FSR to convert it to the next level up Fox shock with the EVO linkage. It's sold as a package. $600 plus $100 labor. Seems pricey. It bumps the travel up to 150mm and would allow running a 160mm front fork (under warranty) You have to pay the $100 labor fee to have it installed at your LBS to be able to warranty it.

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rcjonessnp175's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    525

    Stumpjumper Evo with a 160mm Fork

    Bro I would do it, we'll worth it will put a smile on that face lol

    Stumpjumper Evo with a 160mm Fork-imageuploadedbytapatalk-hd1368311695.629950.jpg


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr. Lynch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,277
    When I was building my 2013 SJ evo the spesh rep recommended I run my Fox 34 at 150 and said that 160 was more than the frame was designed for.
    14 Aurum, 16 Fuse, 17 T130

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rcjonessnp175's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    525

    Stumpjumper Evo with a 160mm Fork

    Every rep says something different all I know is the shops here in Colorado say no problem with a 160mm. Plus if frame breaks which it won't I have a spare 150mm factory float so not worried


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr. Lynch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,277
    When I rebuilt my 2013 I was going to leave my Fox 34 at 160, but my LBS converted before I could talk to them.
    It is kind of like the stuff they said about the shocks. They said the 2011 Evo shock doesnt work on the non-evo models and the 2011 stuff isnt compatible with the 12/13.

    The 2011 Evo shock fit the 2011 Elite just fine and it fits on my 2013 too. I hung onto it as a backup shock.
    14 Aurum, 16 Fuse, 17 T130

  58. #58
    just ride
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    643
    Quote Originally Posted by rcjonessnp175 View Post
    Bro I would do it, we'll worth it will put a smile on that face lol

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	ImageUploadedByTapatalk HD1368311695.629950.jpg 
Views:	999 
Size:	343.8 KB 
ID:	798243


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
    I agree! My 2012 Carbon Evo was night and day difference eversince I've invested on that Talas 34. I can climb without back pain at 120. Almost felt like an XC bike and then bomb with confidence at 160mm. It still rails the corners since it really didn't get the BB lifted up that high... It is awesome although it's a bit pricey at $1k for a fork. Well worth it though.

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rcjonessnp175's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    525

    Stumpjumper Evo with a 160mm Fork

    Amen to that!

    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation: terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,989
    So have any of you guys running the 36 at 160mm had the head tube fly off the bike yet? Ready to order my new uppers and put mine on. Might order a couple spacers to drop it to 150 while I'm at it.

    After doing the math the 36 at 150mm travel will only be 3/16th of an inch taller.
    "I'm the fastest of the slow guys"

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    367

    Stumpjumper Evo with a 160mm Fork

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Lynch View Post
    When I was building my 2013 SJ evo the spesh rep recommended I run my Fox 34 at 150 and said that 160 was more than the frame was designed for.
    I agree with the other poster that Spesh certainly doesn't get their reps together to make sure they all say the same thing. At a Specialized demo last year, the rep had his personal bike which happened to be an evo with a fox 160. I asked him about it and assumed the warranty is still good with a 160, and he said they wouldn't care if I put a 180 on it. They'll still warranty the frame. I rode his bike for a few miles and was sold. Bought a Lyrik soon after that for my evo.

  62. #62
    endorphin addict
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    235
    According to spesh you can increase fork travel up to 10% without compromising your warranty. The EVO 26 came with a 150mm fork, adding 10% means you could run up to 165mm on the SJ EVO.

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr. Lynch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,277
    I'm running my Fox 34 at 160 now and I love it. Still climbs great and I like the little extra travel up front on the descents.

    I just put a RS Lyrik RC2DH 170 on my Enduro Evo, and I've thought about throwing in the spacer and dropping it to 160 to try it on my SJ. I'm just curious how it would perform.
    14 Aurum, 16 Fuse, 17 T130

  64. #64
    endorphin addict
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    235
    Have you tried it at 160 or just speculating then?

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr. Lynch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,277
    Im liking the Fox 34 at 160, but I kind of want to try the Lyrik. The Lyrik is stiffer and has more tuneability. It's a .6 lb weight penalty, but my SJ is 25.6lbs right now so I'm not too concerned.
    14 Aurum, 16 Fuse, 17 T130

  66. #66
    endorphin addict
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    235
    I'm going to be shopping for a new Pike soon and leaning towards the 160mm version.

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,723
    the axle to crown of 160 pike is supposed to be 542mm
    the axle to crown of 150 pike is supposed to be 532mm

    my existing fox 34 (presumably adjusted to 150 before I purchased) is about 537. I'm thinking if the time comes for a new Pike I might be leaning towards the 160 too.

  68. #68
    endorphin addict
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    235
    Alot of guys on PB are running 160mm forks and don't seem to be having problems. I tried a google search on "Stumpjumper FSR EVO Frame Failure" and came up with zilch.

  69. #69
    endorphin addict
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    235
    The A2C on the Fox 34 at 160 is about 537....

    150mm Fox 34 -- 527.9 mm
    160mm Fox 34 -- 537.9 mm

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    367
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Lynch View Post
    I'm running my Fox 34 at 160 now and I love it. Still climbs great and I like the little extra travel up front on the descents.

    I just put a RS Lyrik RC2DH 170 on my Enduro Evo, and I've thought about throwing in the spacer and dropping it to 160 to try it on my SJ. I'm just curious how it would perform.
    Mr. Lynch, this is exactly how I have my 2012 Stumpy Evo; 2013 Lyrik lowered to 160mm. I like it more than the 150mm Revelation it replaced, but I always wanted to like it 'more'. It gets the job done and I didn't notice any real difference on climbs unless the terrain got really steep and I would definitely say this fork likes to be ridden fast, but I've always thought this fork lacked a bit in other areas. I was hoping to have a bit more tuning with this fork. I have to run the low speed compression almost fully open to get any small bump compliance or it will feel way too harsh. Same goes for the high speed compression if I don't want large hits to feel harsh. The problem of course is that the fork dives like crazy when standing and mashing and also braking. I can't put any more air in the spring or else it'll get too stiff. I'm completely stuck. Fork is either too harsh or too soft. Can't seem to find a happy middle ground. The Lyrik has always felt 'ok', but I never got that 'wow' factor from it. I hear it gets much better with the avalanche cartridge or trying to mess with the shim stack, but I can't seem to get the nut removed from the damper to get to the stack. Hope you get more out of the fork than I did.

    At one point I was going to try the X-Fusion Vengeance HLR, but I ended up being on a waiting list with those guys for 9 months. Finally gave up. Getting one of those 29er enduros soon to try something different, but can't get rid of my 26 Stumpy. Love that bike way too much. Maybe in the future after I'm done with my Enduro build I'll get a Vengeance for the Stumpy to try out since it seems like X-Fusion finally caught up with their manufacturing.

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    54
    this is my EVO last update:
    KS LEV
    MRP 2x chainguide

    ready for BP:

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr. Lynch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,277
    I love the Lyrik on my Enduro and I have zero complaints about the Fox 34 on the SJ, so I probably wont mess with it. I am very interested in the new Pike, but not enough to drop another big chunk on it and try to sell the Fox 34. I have the 2014 damper in my Fox 34 and i think it is outstanding.
    14 Aurum, 16 Fuse, 17 T130

  73. #73
    just ride
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    643
    I had my Evo with 34/160 and it was great! The front tracked straight and was also able to slacken the HA a bit since I was on 32/150. I'm not sure about the 170 Lyrik though but I guess it all depends on where you take your bike to. If the trail is just plowing into things in front, I guess I can see why you want 170 but if the trails is not too steep, flowy/twisty, I wouldn't want 170 on there.

    I have a Santa Cruz Nickel and I tried the 34/160. The bike runs like shit with this fork on. It was perfect if the trail is rocky, rooty & just plain high speed going straight kind of terrain but not on flowy/twisty trails. I slapped a Revelation 150 which dropped the height by 17-20mm and the bike is PERFECT!

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation: terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,989
    I decided to go with the pike in 150. I was planning on picking up another bike for park duty and found a good deal on a 2010 sx trail. So know the stumpy has only gotten better. This fork is awesome. I've ran fox forks in 36 and 32 but never a 34. That being said, if I would have been able to get uppers for my 2010 float I would have had it on the stumpy. But I was able to get the pike and it is perfect for my intents and purposes with the stumpy.
    "I'm the fastest of the slow guys"

  75. #75
    endorphin addict
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    235
    2012 Stumpjumper FSR EVO 26 switch from 150mm to 160mm fork
    Tim Cardoza Jul 26, 2013 09:47AM PDT
    Hi, I have read that it is ok to increase the fork travel up to 10% on Specialized bikes. My 2012 Stumpjumper FSR EVO came with a 150mm revelation fork, and I want to upgrade with the new Pike fork at 160mm. According to the 10% rule, I should be able to run up to a 165mm fork on the SJ EVO 26, correct?

    Thanks --Tim
    Up 0 Rated
    Down Kyle Blomquist
    Jul 30, 2013 09:21AM PDT
    SPECIALIZED Agent Hi, Tim!

    That is absolutely correct. Enjoy the Pike!

    Happy riding!

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    12
    anyone using the new RS Pike on a Stumpy Evo? How is it compared to fox 34 ctd?

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation: terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,989
    Dont know about the fox but the pike is alot better than the stock revelation that wa s on mine. And it's almost as stiff as my old fox 36 but alot more plush in the smaller vibration type bumps.
    "I'm the fastest of the slow guys"

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,723
    I have a 34, but not a Pike. Briefly checked out a friend's pike he put in his Pivot. His Pike is sweet. It seemed just as plush, but I didn't really have much of a ride on it, just a quick hop and 10 second check - but it felt really super plush - like the descend mode of the 34 - yet hopefully with less brake dive? I tend to ride my 34 in trail mode most of the time to avoid excessive brake dive and keep the ride higher in it's travel. That's pretty much the design goal of the Pike so I dunno - maybe I can get a longer test soon to really be able to compare them better.

  79. #79
    endorphin addict
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    235

    EVO w/ Pike 160

    Stumpjumper Evo with a 160mm Fork-i251.jpgStumpjumper Evo with a 160mm Fork-evo1.jpgHere it is with the new fork and a new front wheel......Need to shorten the steer tube more, but better too long than too short for now... Trail test this weekend.

    Stumpjumper Evo with a 160mm Fork-dsc01922.jpg

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr. Lynch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,277
    What I like about the Pike is the 160 is the same Axle to crown height as the Fox 34 150. More travel without messing with the geometry!
    14 Aurum, 16 Fuse, 17 T130

  81. #81
    endorphin addict
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    235
    The a2c on the pike 160 is 542mm, which is about 13mm more than the stock 150 revelation. I think the Fox 34 a2c is about 528? With some of that being used in sag, 13mm is not going to be a huge change I think. On my 08 Heckler I remember switching from the old pike at about 520 a2c to a Fox 36 at 545 a2c which worked out very well and was a lot bigger change.

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation: molopoko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    71

    Stumpjumper Evo with a 160mm Fork

    Is it a 26 or 27,5 Pike?
    Very nice, I have the same bike and thunking about a 150-27,5 Pike.

  83. #83
    endorphin addict
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    235
    It's a 26. Curious why you would want the 27.5? Going to run a bigger front wheel? Looks like a 150mm 27.5 has the same a2c as the 160mm 26"

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation: molopoko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    71

    Stumpjumper Evo with a 160mm Fork

    Quote Originally Posted by BushPilot View Post
    It's a 26. Curious why you would want the 27.5? Going to run a bigger front wheel? Looks like a 150mm 27.5 has the same a2c as the 160mm 26"
    Well... I'm buying an Epic 2014 in two months or so. I will have two bikes and thinking about a new Pike for my 2012 SJ Evo 26. If I take a 27,5 Pike it would be easier to sell in a future and i Still can use it with a 26" wheel.
    I've been reading and ppl says AC is smaller on the Pike than in other forks, that's why the 2014 Enduro29 comes with 160pike instead a 150 fox from the 2013.

    Hope u'll be able to understand my bad english...

  85. #85
    endorphin addict
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    235
    Axle to crown for pikes is more than for the Fox 34's, at least in the 26" versions. Go with the pike because it's better than the Fox ctd crap.

    Fox 34 150mm a2c 527.9, Fox 34 160mm 537.9
    Pike 150mm a2c 532mm, Pike 160mm a2c 542mm

  86. #86
    endorphin addict
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    235
    The 160mm Pike is working great. I run it with more sag than I did the rev 150, so the geo isn't much different -- but a whole lot stiffer and plusher. The bike feels much more dialed now.

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by molopoko View Post
    Well... I'm buying an Epic 2014 in two months or so. I will have two bikes and thinking about a new Pike for my 2012 SJ Evo 26. If I take a 27,5 Pike it would be easier to sell in a future and i Still can use it with a 26" wheel.
    I've been reading and ppl says AC is smaller on the Pike than in other forks, that's why the 2014 Enduro29 comes with 160pike instead a 150 fox from the 2013.

    Hope u'll be able to understand my bad english...
    Hi Molopoko, I let you here the A2C measures.

    Have you find the conversion kit to 15mm for your Haven front wheel?

    Fork Legs Travel Wheel A2C +-5 Offset
    Revelation 32 150 26 530 40
    Lyrik 35 160 26 545 40
    Pike 35 160 26 542 40
    Pike 35 160 27'5 552 42
    Fox 36 160 26 545 40
    Fox 34 160 26 540 40
    Fox 34 160 27'5 550 44

    Regards.

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,386
    I have a 2012 stumpy fsr comp 26er. I have been considering a new fork however since I dont have the evo link I was going to with a standard 140mm fork. The manitou mattoc comes in 140mm and has beefy sanctions.

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr. Lynch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,277
    A riding buddy of mine has a 2012 Sworks Stumpy and is running a 160 pike. It slackens it out to 67 degrees like the Evo model and he loves it.
    14 Aurum, 16 Fuse, 17 T130

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation: molopoko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    71

    Stumpjumper Evo with a 160mm Fork

    Quote Originally Posted by Ziurpe View Post
    Hi Molopoko, I let you here the A2C measures.

    Have you find the conversion kit to 15mm for your Haven front wheel?

    Regards.
    Hey thanks m8! I am using the stock Roval in the front. I didn't buy the Pike cause I think I will buy the new Canyon Spectral 27,5. Just waiting to read some reviews.

    3 weeks ago I took my Evo to spanish "Pirineos" and that was amazing. Lots of sun in November.
    Here are some pics and a very good vid. Enjoy!



    The vid, I'm the one on green pants:

    Los MIR en la Zona Zero II - YouTube


  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,386
    Great vid. How many miles you guys ride that day?

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation: molopoko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    71

    Stumpjumper Evo with a 160mm Fork

    We were there for six days and rode around 20-30 miles/day.

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr. Lynch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,277
    I ran a Fox 34 at 150, then a Fox 34 at 160 and now Im running a Pike 160. 160 feels perfect on the SJ evo and the Pike makes the Fox 34 feel like poo. The reviews are corrent, the Pike is one of the best trail forks ever created!
    14 Aurum, 16 Fuse, 17 T130

  94. #94
    endorphin addict
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    235
    Ditto that!

Members who have read this thread: 5

Posting Permissions

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