Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 201 to 250 of 254
  1. #201
    MTB Tandem Nut
    Reputation: TandemNut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    714
    Quote Originally Posted by dstke View Post
    Once I increased the pressure to a 25% sag I've had no problems with our Manitou Marvel Pro. Note that it did increase the height slightly which was a good thing as with the stock fork the pedals would occasionally hit the ground going over short rollers.
    Which is one of the biggest knocks against the Cannondale - low BB height. Not sure why they do that, but it's a trademark of Cannondale tandems since back in the dark ages of rim brakes. The low BB height creates problems on technical trails, but rocks on flat trails. At least they've improved the steering geometry.
    MTB Tandems Inc.
    678-445-0711
    www.MTBTandems.com

  2. #202
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by TandemNut View Post
    I had Manitou build us a shortened travel version of the Dorado to test out on tandems. In the end, the spring rate was way too linear, and the amount of preload necessary to hold the fork up without having more than 50% sag was well beyond the max recommended pressure in the fork. After some discussion with the folks at Manitou, it was determined that the internals weren't suited for high weight loads and the accompanying pressures. So the chassis of the fork would work, but the guts don't.

    White Bros will soon have the Stoke tandem fork out, and it's travel (100mm) will better match up to the Cannondale's geometry. There are also some other, non-tandem rated forks out there that would probably work better than the Dorado (great DH fork, but not that good as a tandem fork).

    PMK is a suspension wiz!
    TandemNut, that's exactly what I needed to know. Thanks for that insight. I'll be passing on the Dorado in hopes of getting a more appropriate fork for our load.

    Also, I understand your desire to recommend forks that have the manufacturer's backing for use on a tandem bike. Hypothetically speaking, if Fox was the only producer of MTB forks, which model would you "prefer" to use for a team weighing in at 340 lbs on the Cannondale Tandem 29er?

  3. #203
    PMK
    PMK is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: PMK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    2,501
    Tandemnut, thanks for the kind words, Suspension wiz is more like suspension geek or in reality, just old and been working on the stuff a long time.

    I would go with the tandemnuts Dorado advice. Personally I have no experience with that model. Also consider that some of the best forks ever made, moto and MTB have been conventional and not upside down.

    The tandemnut and I have spoken about forks many times. I still have two ATC forks tucked away. Myself, I got them dialed in with some mods and consider them the best tandem hardtail fork for what the wife and I would ride. The fork tubes are huge and larger than a Fox 40. The steering lock or turning radius is almost 90 degrees. So they work well without flex and turn tight. Downside is they are not the lightest fork made since they run springs. They don't have clickers, but overall are stupid simple to dial in for hartail use. And they are 29, 26 or 650b just by moving the fork brace.

    If I were to build another hardtail tandem (yes Alex it would be a Fandango), I would personally run a Fox 40 Kashima and modify the lower legs by removing enough fork brace to clear the tire.

    I am a control freak, not personally but rather when riding. Tandems get over features in a controlled crash type style. They are heavy and flexy forks have vague steering plus also can deflect if ridden real hard. That's me, and for most people normal forks work. Also consider a lot has to do with your terrain. If rocky, get a rugged suspension platform and dial it in.

    So Dorado would be a no in my book. Also, never rode a Maverick, but some folks swear by them. Cannondale development riders for that 29 were shown riding Lefties (Brave or Stupid), I guesss at a minimum single crown would be a dirt jump or similar style use such as the Fox 36 series.

    PK
    Reps! We don't need no stickin' reps!

  4. #204
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    58
    @PMK, I've been looking for reviews and more details regarding the ATC forks. Is their website atcracing.com? It's kind of lacking with info and details on their forks and looks really outdated so I was wondering if they were still in business. I'm open to any brand for fork suspension. And I don't think I'm too much of a stickler on fork weight on a tandem. I just want to get something that will work for our weight and riding style (gravel roads, light single track, and occasional technical single track).

    Regarding the Fox 40, I don't think I've seen a 29er iteration. Is that what you were referring to in modifying the lower legs to fit a 29er wheel/tire??

    I saw the development guys riding the Lefty. I would never consider using that fork based on our weight alone. Scares me.

    What are your thoughts on using a Fox 34? We have plenty of those used for sale in the Denver area. I don't ever see a 36 used fork in 29er.

  5. #205
    PMK
    PMK is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: PMK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    2,501
    In regards to the 34, many teams use them with good results. Not sure of their team size or terrain.

    For the 40 and 36, a properly modified fork brace is required to clear the tire. There was a company doing this a while back. Done correctly there is still a respectable amount of material left after fitting a 29 wheel / tire.

    Tandemnut is an ATC dealer unless things have changed. The design is older, certainly not a high tech lightweight fork, the website is out of date, and to get a smooth fork takes a little bit of mods. We put a lot of miles on our Fandango with an ATC. Never let us down that I recall.

    Our ECDM came with one installed, and I purchased another just because and for spares. The ATC on the ECDM was not capable of keeping up with the Fox DHX 5.0 air rear shock and was replaced with a FOX 40 Kashima.

    The modified ATC did work well with the ECDM stock RP series rear shock.

    PK
    Reps! We don't need no stickin' reps!

  6. #206
    PMK
    PMK is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: PMK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    2,501
    Just checked, the site is ATCRacing.com

    PK
    Reps! We don't need no stickin' reps!

  7. #207
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    407
    I'll chime in...for reference we are riding a Fandango 29'r with a Fox 34 Float that has been upgraded with a FIT damper. Our team weight, ready to ride, is about 285-290. We have put ~1700 miles on our Fox with a couple of bath oil changes only. I have however noticed that the press fit junction between the head tube and the crown is beginning to make a lot of noise, creaking and such, as we ride. I have also noticed that the bushings inside the fork legs are getting close to their limit as their is a noticeable increase in flex in the fork. We are exploring some options with TandemNut to look at replacing with the new MRP Stage platform, or similar, or possibly an X-fusion. Regardless, we'll have to do something by the Spring time even if just a total overhaul, bushings, damper service, etc., on the Fox.

    I will say that the Fox works well and we use it hard on rough singletrack, rocks, roots, etc. It's seen a few race miles and a few gravel miles and a lot in between. Overall it's a great fork, but definitely not tandem rated as can be seen in the overall durability. Based on your riding, YMMV.

    A shot of the Fox 34 on the front of our fandango.
    Suspension Fork Experience - What's Working? What's Not?-20140301_082555.jpg

  8. #208
    mtbr member
    Reputation: reamer41's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    617

    Suspension Fork Experience - What's Working? What's Not?

    I have a Fox 34 RLC FIT on my solo-bike.
    It creeks (clicks.) and the crown. Not sure if it's the crown to steerer or legs to crown interface, but no matter.

    I would look at a 36 for tandem use, but not a 34.
    In fact, I am considering getting a 36 for said solo-bike -- wanna buy a 34?
    Seriously though, I have no idea if the clicking crown is an issue that will deteriorate or just continue to be annoying forever.

    My first tandem had a ZZYZX fork -- the original ATC fork. It was a good platform, if a little crude. The damper was non adjustable and worn out... But the steering lock, and, after fitting 20mm axle, stiffness, and geometry were excellent.
    --Reamer

  9. #209
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    58
    Regarding the modified arch on a 36 or 40 to clear a 29er wheel, are you aware of anyone utilized this mod on a tandem?? This is favorable because its really easy to find used 36 forks in 26. If this arch mod has not failed for tandem users in the past, then I may consider it.

  10. #210
    PMK
    PMK is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: PMK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    2,501
    Quote Originally Posted by iLike29er View Post
    Regarding the modified arch on a 36 or 40 to clear a 29er wheel, are you aware of anyone utilized this mod on a tandem?? This is favorable because its really easy to find used 36 forks in 26. If this arch mod has not failed for tandem users in the past, then I may consider it.
    FWIW, failure or the brace is not a structural failure. The mod needs to be done properly but if it did fail, you should notice some less precise steering initially.

    Complete failure still should not see the front wheel go away, the stanchions snap or steer tube slip in the crown.

    If you do some looking, there were photos and the guy that was doing this posted on MTBR...somewhere.

    PK
    Reps! We don't need no stickin' reps!

  11. #211
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    9
    We're riding a Rock Shox Totem on the front of our ECDM. It's got the stock 180mm of travel but I ride it without about 40% sag. The fork isn't as progressive as I'd like (I think the solo air totem would have been better) but the price was right. The stiffness and tracking is unreal and a huge step up from anything else I've ridden. Very happy to have a super stiff single crown fork on the front of the bike.

  12. #212
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    64
    Awesome thread. I think I've skimmed through all 9 pages looking for my question, and didn't see it. Apologies if this has been asked before.

    So, wife and I are hooked on tandems, now. We've got our C-Dale road tandem for a pavement fix. Last year we bought a used, maybe 2008, C-Dale MTB Tandem to be used for mostly gravel, forest service roads, and an occasional jeep road. She's not too keen on singletrack, maybe someday. Lots of riding around North Carolina and West Virginia, lots of climbing too.

    Question: 380# combined weight, 26 inch x 2.0 tires/wheels, Thudbuster seatposts, what is the ideal shock for above described riding?

    I saw all the Fox 34, 36, 40 references, but may be over-kill for us. I just want something to take the edge off washboard gravel, but still hold up on those same gravel downhills if we let go of the brakes and start tickling 40mph. The last thing I want is to have a major failure, and not only take myself out, but also the liability of taking her with me.

    Dirt Jumper fork? 100mm travel, or more? Be nice to have a lockout, too.

    Advice?

  13. #213
    Long Live Long Rides
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    397
    The DJ 100mm is a great fork for what you want. Avoid anything over 120mm unless you want to deal with the change in steering. I would try to stay with air forks unless you know you can find a heavy enough spring for your team. Go Ride!

  14. #214
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    634
    Not much choice for a 100mm travel, 1-1/8 steerer fork that will be safe for a heavier teams on a tandem. The DJ may be it, but I might even be weary of it given your team weight. And DJs are coil. I have a DJ on my single bike, but the necessary preload may render it less than plush for you.

    FWIW we have a similar team weight, but run a Marz 66EVO. Too long in travel, but the 38mm stanctions make for a stiff front where it counts (and make up for the change in geo).

    You may also reconsider the 2.0 tires, especially on gravel. IME 2.0 tires are too narrow on my single. We run 2.5 on our tandem.

  15. #215
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    2,781
    Good thread, Getting back into tandeming after a long time off. Early to mid 90's KHS tandemanium bike with some upgrades. Put on a rigid 29er front fork but want to do a little more offroad with it. We want a better tandem but this will have to do for now. Want to a suspension fork and will go back to 26 inch wheel size. We are around 270 pounds of rider and want around 120 to 140 MM fork with lockout. Anything under $500? Straight 1 1/8 inch headset.

  16. #216
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    634
    We started off-road tandeming on a KHS, and put a DJ1 on it. No lockout, 100mm travel, but other parts of that bike limited it more than the 100mm.

    Marz has other stuff that might fit the travel (picked up a new $300 Marz 55 just recently), but straight steerers in that travel range with lockout aren't much available.

  17. #217
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    64
    Anybody heard any horror stories about a Manitou Circus Expert, or maybe Argyle RCT? Each appear to be built for abuse, shorter travel (100-120mm), and come with a straight 1-1/8 option, and 20mm axle. Wish they were more than 32mm stanchions, but we are just wanting something to ride gravel and the occasional dirt road.

  18. #218
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    634
    Not when paired with 380# team weight

  19. #219
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by Okayfine View Post
    Not when paired with 380# team weight
    My fears too. I think a Marz 55 may be in our future.

  20. #220
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    2,781
    I just bought a used 2013 Fox 36 Vanilla 180MM travel Fit fork with 20MM through axle for $400 on e-bay. 26 inch front fork. Will I be happy?? Also got a long travel thudbuster for my wife. Hopefully this will tide us over for a while.

  21. #221
    PMK
    PMK is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: PMK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    2,501
    Quote Originally Posted by richwolf View Post
    I just bought a used 2013 Fox 36 Vanilla 180MM travel Fit fork with 20MM through axle for $400 on e-bay. 26 inch front fork. Will I be happy?? Also got a long travel thudbuster for my wife. Hopefully this will tide us over for a while.
    If this is going on the KHS, it will need to be shortened to reduce length and travel.

    PK
    Reps! We don't need no stickin' reps!

  22. #222
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    2,781
    Quote Originally Posted by PMK View Post
    If this is going on the KHS, it will need to be shortened to reduce length and travel.

    PK
    I thought that might be the consensus but
    I am going to give it a shot. I have a suspension corrected 29er fork and wheel on the front now and it handles fine. Shouldn't raise it up too much more and I am going to run about 2 inches of sag. I figure if it is too much I can get my money out of it. Just can't afford a $4,000 ride right now!

  23. #223
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    2,781
    I did some research on reducing travel on my "new" 180 MM Fox Vanilla fork and it seems like I can reduce the travel a bunch by adding home made spacers and cutting the spring. Found a nice thread describing the process on pinkbike.

  24. #224
    PMK
    PMK is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: PMK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    2,501
    Quote Originally Posted by richwolf View Post
    I did some research on reducing travel on my "new" 180 MM Fox Vanilla fork and it seems like I can reduce the travel a bunch by adding home made spacers and cutting the spring. Found a nice thread describing the process on pinkbike.
    Many people don't realize how screwed up the bike becomes running too much sag.

    Your plan is good, I hope the execution is good per the PB posts.

    As for cutting springs, I have done it on some things, but not sure I would on a tandem fork. Seems easier to just find what you need since the spring you plan to cut is likely too soft and even adding spring rate by removing coils probably will still be too soft.

    My opinion is a soft fork is vague handling that is tiring to ride. A properly sprung fork is lively and fun to ride at all speeds.

    PK
    Reps! We don't need no stickin' reps!

  25. #225
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    2,781
    Quote Originally Posted by PMK View Post
    Many people don't realize how screwed up the bike becomes running too much sag.

    Your plan is good, I hope the execution is good per the PB posts.

    As for cutting springs, I have done it on some things, but not sure I would on a tandem fork. Seems easier to just find what you need since the spring you plan to cut is likely too soft and even adding spring rate by removing coils probably will still be too soft.

    My opinion is a soft fork is vague handling that is tiring to ride. A properly sprung fork is lively and fun to ride at all speeds.

    PK
    Thanks for the feedback. The plan is to leave the spring a little long when I do the travel reductions so it will firm it up a bit. The fork comes with the stiffest spring so that helps out. Travel recommendations? 120, 130 or 140?? Building up a wide 36 hole rim and with the 20mm through axle and 36mm stanchions it should make for a controllable front end. Going with Geax 2.4 inch Goma tires.

  26. #226
    mtbr member
    Reputation: reamer41's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    617

    Suspension Fork Experience - What's Working? What's Not?

    Agreed Paul!

    I tried riding our ECDM with a 170mm fork sagged at about 35-40%. It was sloppy at best and occasionally scary..
    --Reamer

  27. #227
    PMK
    PMK is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: PMK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    2,501
    Quote Originally Posted by richwolf View Post
    Thanks for the feedback. The plan is to leave the spring a little long when I do the travel reductions so it will firm it up a bit. The fork comes with the stiffest spring so that helps out. Travel recommendations? 120, 130 or 140?? Building up a wide 36 hole rim and with the 20mm through axle and 36mm stanchions it should make for a controllable front end. Going with Geax 2.4 inch Goma tires.
    If it were me accomplishing the travel reduction, two options

    #1 I would find some 2x4's, and set them under the front tire with the spring removed. Sort out the expected height of the front while under load and see where the headtube angle ends up using a digital protractor, smart level or similar. (fork is fully compressed and the 2x4 represent the forks extension to the position with riders on board.


    #2 With the spring removed, use a block of wood between the tire and crown / triple clamp to set the approximate desired travel, minus 30% for sag. (120mm travel would have a block of wood cut to represent approximately 90mm).

    In simple terms, and the above steps are easy to accomplish, you want to have an idea of where the headtube angle will be with your new fork on the older frame. I would be cautious of less than 68 degrees but would prefer more like 70 to prevent the steering from becoming floppy when turned.

    FWIW, the above methods to ballpark fork length do work well as opposed to an axle to crown dimension, unless you have the head angles for various length forks.

    If you live nearby I will help you with it.

    PK
    Reps! We don't need no stickin' reps!

  28. #228
    PMK
    PMK is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: PMK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    2,501
    Quote Originally Posted by reamer41 View Post
    Agreed Paul!

    I tried riding our ECDM with a 170mm fork sagged at about 35-40%. It was sloppy at best and occasionally scary..
    Quality shorter travel will be far better and more fun to ride than poor long travel...but quality long travel with good geometry beats pretty much everything except a better or stronger team.

    PK
    Reps! We don't need no stickin' reps!

  29. #229
    mtbr member
    Reputation: reamer41's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    617

    Suspension Fork Experience - What's Working? What's Not?

    Yeah. That was many years ago...
    --Reamer

  30. #230
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    2,781
    Quote Originally Posted by PMK View Post
    If it were me accomplishing the travel reduction, two options

    #1 I would find some 2x4's, and set them under the front tire with the spring removed. Sort out the expected height of the front while under load and see where the headtube angle ends up using a digital protractor, smart level or similar. (fork is fully compressed and the 2x4 represent the forks extension to the position with riders on board.


    #2 With the spring removed, use a block of wood between the tire and crown / triple clamp to set the approximate desired travel, minus 30% for sag. (120mm travel would have a block of wood cut to represent approximately 90mm).

    In simple terms, and the above steps are easy to accomplish, you want to have an idea of where the headtube angle will be with your new fork on the older frame. I would be cautious of less than 68 degrees but would prefer more like 70 to prevent the steering from becoming floppy when turned.

    FWIW, the above methods to ballpark fork length do work well as opposed to an axle to crown dimension, unless you have the head angles for various length forks.

    If you live nearby I will help you with it.

    PK
    Thanks for the offer. I live in southern Ca. The head angle of the KHS is 74 degrees so I have a lot of wiggle room. I run it with a suspension corrected 29 er fork and it handles fine but I will probably go a little lower than that.

  31. #231
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    2,781
    Got the fork travel reduced, wheel built and ready to roll! Head angle without sag of around 69 degrees.
    Reduced travel from 180 to 140 MM. Put in the stiffest spring (yellow). Built up a DMR 20MM through axle hub to a wide 36 hole Alex rim. Put on a 2.4 inch Geax Goma tire. Tried one in the back but it rubbed the chainstay. Went back to a 2.2 rear tire which fits fine. New Thudbuster LT seatpost for my wife.
    Just been riding it around on my own but it handles good and the front shock is nice. First test ride with wife today.
    Thanks for all the help!

    Suspension Fork Experience - What's Working? What's Not?-100.jpgSuspension Fork Experience - What's Working? What's Not?-101.jpgSuspension Fork Experience - What's Working? What's Not?-102.jpgSuspension Fork Experience - What's Working? What's Not?-103.jpg

  32. #232
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    2,781
    Fork transforms the bike both on and off road. Whole front end is flex free and the suspension works very well. Nothing like a coil spring for smoothness. Our off road dirt excursion exceeded my expectations and makes the bike super fun to ride. The Goma tire out front grips well and rolls well.

    Going to make a few position changes for me but this bike is ready for some single track. BB is plenty high so we aren't worried about that. Rolls over the bumps and rocks great.

  33. #233
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    175
    <Disclaimer-The-Fork-Will-Exploded-And-You-And-Your-Stoker-Will-Die>

    Since the following forks haven't been mentioned in this forum... anyone guinea-pigged the DVO stuff? Or perhaps a comment regarding how they might work out at tandem-loads? Either the massive Emerald DH (DVO Suspension | Emerald DH) with 36mm legs, with 42mm uppers, inverted-style (travel/ride-height restricted to say around 140~160mm); or the "Enduro Specific" Diamond (DVO Suspension | Diamond) which has 35mm legs?

    </Disclaimer-The-Fork-Will-Exploded-And-You-And-Your-Stoker-Will-Die>

  34. #234
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    634
    From a stanction-diameter standpoint, either would be fine. We're a 360lb team and had an '06 Marz 66SL for a few years. 35mm stanctions. Was fine everywhere except diagonal impacts on sharp/square bumps. I could feel some flex in the fork when hitting stuff like that.

    Only changed to a 38mm Marz fork because the air seals were dying in the 66SL. The 38 is noticeably less flexy, even above the 35 that I didn't really have problems with.

    DVO people came from Marzocchi.

  35. #235
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    16
    Anyone try the lefty? Heard the lefty max is the one to try? I see Calfee has one setup and a few other specialty builders do also. I know Cannondale doesn't condone it. Anyone?

  36. #236
    mtbr member
    Reputation: XC Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    596
    John I'm with you.... I would love to see a Lefty for the tandem...
    I just picked up a 2013 Flash 29er that has a Lefty and I'm love it so far

  37. #237
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    16
    We just sold our custom road tandem and want to build something unique and fun for the dirt and trails so i have a clean slate to start with. Thinking an older Cannondale MTN frame mount a lefty and discs with a 1x11 or 2x10? Any thoughts on which lefty the max, supermax, titanium....and how? Or if there is a better frame to start with? Was thinking tandem fatty and lefty but funding won't allow it right now.....anyone have a large or XL tandem frame to start with hook me up!! Any suggestions on the strongest lefty wheels out there? All thoughts and assistance is greatly appreciated!!

  38. #238
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    15
    My wife and I are building up a Ventana Gran Jefe tandem with 650B plus wheels and a suspension fork. Our team weight is under 300 lbs. with gear, and we ride mainly rough steep back roads and moderate single track. We are considering either a Carver Trans Fat inverted fork with a 135mm hub (also sold under numerous other small brand names),
    Trans-Fat Fork - Carver Bikes
    or the Manitou Magnum Pro 34mm with a 110mm boost hub.
    Plus Sized Gets Squishy with New Manitou Magnum Pro, Sun Ringle Plus Rims and Hubs.
    Really had some scary times with our current tandem under hard breaking on the steep and rough, so I want something reasonably stiff that can accommodate a 3.35" tire.

  39. #239
    Xtreme
    Reputation: freerider1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    50
    1. ATC Racing T-5 2005 ECDM full suspension
    2. Double crown
    3. no lock out
    4. 20mm thru axle
    5. was 350 now 280

    6. with my old stoker, freeriding ,downhill,drops and single track XC.
    with my new stoker, lots of single track XC until he gets used to riding on a tandem.

    7. fork handled well with heavier team, no issues,adjustments aren't too bad if yah know what your doing. with a lighter team, took air out of rear lightened up fork, and its sweet. fork is a bit heavy though.

  40. #240
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    1,412
    By what I've read here, I'm getting the sense that nobody is really concerned whether or not a fork has its mfr blessing for tandem use.

    I would love to entertain the crop of great trail forks out there as an upgrade, but I'm leery of this issue. Equally suspect when someone recommends "great so far."

    I want to ride some harder stuff, but with that terrain comes greater opportunity for a poor crash outcome. The head tube on our Fandango is the old style, so we are pretty limited in fork choices in any case, more so for "rated" forks.

    We've run the Magic T100 our bike was spec'ed for with good results; just looking to make the bike more confident and capable without altering too much. What say the minds here? TIA.

  41. #241
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    21

    Hardtail xc fork for under $500

    I'm looking for a sus fork for our Shwinn Sierra tandem. I have a 26" front wheel with a 15mm thru axle. I am considering a Pike DJ and a Marz 350. We are a 300lb team (excluding bike) looking to ride xc.
    1. Has anyone tried either?
    2. Is there much difference between the DJ Pike and normal one?
    3. Do we generally prefer springs or air for tandem use?
    4. Can the spring in a 350 R be changed?

  42. #242
    mtbr member
    Reputation: abikerider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    34

    Shortening a Marzocchi 66 RC3 Ti

    My wife and I ride and race an old 2000 ECDM. It came with a Strattos dual crown fork that I have been able to get a few years out of but really need to update, especially since it is impossible to get seals for it. I recently bought a 2010 Marzocchi 66 RC3 Ti fork for it which should be an awesome upgrade. I found it fairly easy to change the travel with a 2" piece of 3/4" PVC pipe to get it down to 130mm (I may change it to 140mm later on). The dilemma is that it is now next to impossible to get the top nut on the spring side screwed in because the original Ti spring has to be compressed 2" first. The two choices I have are to cut 2" off the Ti spring or find a suitable replacement spring. When finding a replacement spring, the problem is that nobody selling springs gives dimensions, only what fork it goes to.

    I am asking for help from any suspension gurus to find a suitable spring. The original Ti spring's dimensions are:
    free length: 315mm
    inside diameter: 23.3mm
    outside diameter: 32.3mm
    rate: 5.4N/mm

    Even something an inch or more shorter would be great to facilitate putting the fork back together. Ideally it should be 40mm shorter or 275mm free length. The inside diameter of 23.3mm is pretty important. The lower spring seat has a tube that sticks up 4.5" inside the spring as a guide and the spring needs to slide freely on it. The upper spring seat can fit an inside diameter as small as 20.3mm so one end could be smaller. Here is a picture of the lower spring seat and the spring for clarification.

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bxn...ew?usp=sharing

    A steel spring of suitable size would be fine. If anyone has any recommendations such as Marzocchi 55 or Fox 36 springs that would fit that would be awesome. Otherwise I guess I will have to cut the Ti spring (seems like a waste). Thanks.
    Mike S.
    Last edited by abikerider; 05-25-2016 at 02:38 PM. Reason: clarification

  43. #243
    mtbr member
    Reputation: abikerider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    34

    Shortening a Marzocchi 66 RC3 Ti

    My wife and I ride and race an old 2000 ECDM. It came with a Strattos dual crown fork that I have been able to get a few years out of but really need to update, especially since it is impossible to get seals for it. I recently bought a 2010 Marzocchi 66 RC3 Ti fork for it which should be an awesome upgrade. I found it fairly easy to change the travel with a 2" piece of 3/4" PVC pipe to get it down to 130mm (I may change it to 140mm later on). The dilemma is that it is now next to impossible to get the top nut on the spring side screwed in because the original Ti spring has to be compressed 2" first. The two choices I have are to cut 2" off the Ti spring or find a suitable replacement spring. When finding a replacement spring, the problem is that nobody selling springs gives dimensions, only what fork it goes to.

    I am asking for help from any suspension gurus to find a suitable spring. The original Ti spring's dimensions are:
    free length: 315mm
    inside diameter: 23.3mm
    outside diameter: 32.3mm
    rate: 5.4N/mm

    Even something an inch or more shorter would be great to facilitate putting the fork back together. Ideally it should be 40mm shorter or 275mm free length. The inside diameter of 23.3mm is pretty important. The lower spring seat has a tube that sticks up 4.5" inside the spring as a guide and the spring needs to slide freely on it. The upper spring seat can fit an inside diameter as small as 20.3mm so one end could be smaller. Here is a picture of the lower spring seat and the spring for clarification.

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bxn...ew?usp=sharing

    A steel spring of suitable size would be fine. If anyone has any recommendations such as Marzocchi 55 or Fox 36 springs that would fit that would be awesome. Otherwise I guess I will have to cut the Ti spring (seems like a waste). Thanks.
    Mike S.

  44. #244
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    634
    Keep in mind that if you end up cutting the spring, it will increase the spring rate. It's linear, so if you cut 10% of the length, you'll increase the spring rate by 10%.

  45. #245
    mtbr member
    Reputation: abikerider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    34
    An increase in rate would be a good thing for the tandem. I also would need to fabricate a steel spring seat to go over the plastic seat for the cut end of the spring to sit on, otherwise it will dig into the plastic seat.

  46. #246
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    634
    Depends on your team weight, I guess. We have a '11 Marz 66 EVO and I'm 200ish pounds on the front. I don't have any preload dialed in, and don't find the fork soft at all. I'm not sure I'd want 10-15% increase in rate, but YMMV.

  47. #247
    mtbr member
    Reputation: abikerider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    34
    Well I went ahead and cut the spring by 40mm, found a washer that will work to reinforce the spring seat, and installed the spring. I just finished installing the fork on the bike but have yet to get the wife on it to check the sag and go for a test ride. So far so good.

  48. #248
    PMK
    PMK is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: PMK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    2,501
    Did the ti spring you cut have coil or flattened ends. If the spring had flattened ends on each end, it is best to get it as close as possible to that before installing. Installing a cut spring with an open end in a flattened end design in most cases causes failure of something or excessive where as the spring buckles.

    Also, since you can determine the available space for the compressed spring, you should determine if the cut spring when coil bound will be longer than the available space. Coilbinding a spring often breaks the spring perch or other components inside the fork, plus usually feels really bad on the wrists.

    Hope it works out for you, just be safe since the stoker most often gets the worst in a crash.
    Reps! We don't need no stickin' reps!

  49. #249
    mtbr member
    Reputation: abikerider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by PMK View Post
    Did the ti spring you cut have coil or flattened ends. If the spring had flattened ends on each end, it is best to get it as close as possible to that before installing. Installing a cut spring with an open end in a flattened end design in most cases causes failure of something or excessive where as the spring buckles.

    Also, since you can determine the available space for the compressed spring, you should determine if the cut spring when coil bound will be longer than the available space. Coilbinding a spring often breaks the spring perch or other components inside the fork, plus usually feels really bad on the wrists.

    Hope it works out for you, just be safe since the stoker most often gets the worst in a crash.
    The spring had flattened ends but when I cut it I ground down the end on a grinding wheel till the surface of the end was flat with respect to spring's seat. I am also using a steel washer/bushing between it and the seat to prevent the spring from digging into the plastic. I also kept it cool by repeatedly dunking it in water while cutting and grinding the spring.

    Also, I am shortening the spring by almost the same amount that I am shortening the travel and there is a lot of space between the coils. There should be no binding problems.

    I had not considered the extra wear from the spring buckling. I have since decided to put the cut end on the bottom were it will be supported by the long tube seen in the link in my first post. This should help alleviate most of the buckling.

    Thank you to all for your valuable input.

  50. #250
    mtbr member
    Reputation: abikerider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by Okayfine View Post
    Depends on your team weight, I guess. We have a '11 Marz 66 EVO and I'm 200ish pounds on the front. I don't have any preload dialed in, and don't find the fork soft at all. I'm not sure I'd want 10-15% increase in rate, but YMMV.
    It could be that your fork came with stiffer springs. Our team weight is probable around 340lbs. Even after cutting the spring mine seems a little soft. I added air preload just to give it a little less sag. I will see how the test ride goes and and take it from there. I will report back about my experiences once we get a few rides in.

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 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
  •