Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: 180mm on EG V3?

  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    39

    180mm on EG V3?

    Anyone running 180mm?

    Acceptable or 170mm be the best bet?

    Currently i'm using a lowered 160mm Fox Float RC2 and i'm fiddling with the idea of bringing it back to 180mm or 170mm if the former is too much.

    Just wanna see the thoughts of the experienced riders!

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    119
    I did lots of research and lots of reading before I opted for the Marzocchi 170mm. A lot of the forums on various sites say that 180 will give the EG a strange geometry and a bit too much rake. The bike is ideally maximized at 160, so I"m pushing it at 170 and you'd really be pushing it at 180. If you get an on-the-fly adjustable fork for climbing, that may be possible so you don't tip over backwards I guess.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: craigstr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    4,302
    Has been done for more of a freeride/park bike geo. Wont climb very well for sure and not sure if it voids the warranty.

  4. #4
    Let the good times roll.
    Reputation: miniwisejosh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,156
    My v2 has a X-Fusion Vengenace that's supposed to be 170mm, but mine actually measures a bit over 560mm a2c. That's pretty close to the specs for a 180mm Fox 36. I also have a slackset.

    Downhill handling is amazing. Uphill handling is worse than when I had a 160mm Lyrik, but I can still get up everything I used to with a bit of extra effort. The 170mm setting feels sweet for what I want now - a super d bomber. I may shorten it to 160mm in a couple weeks after race season for better all around performance. Or maybe by then I'll be more used to it and won't bother...

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    39
    ah... ok then.

    maybe i'll just stay at 160mm then!

    cheers!

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,796
    I guess I'm just used to it.

    "I'm the fastest of the slow guys"

  7. #7
    Let the good times roll.
    Reputation: miniwisejosh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,156
    I'm usually not a huge fan of white frames, but that looks amazing!

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    119
    Quote Originally Posted by terrible View Post
    I guess I'm just used to it.

    I'm so glad I went with the white EG now after seeing yours; waiting to build mine all up. Can't wait. Your setup looks great. Mine's gonna match my SWP Optima SX perfectly with Thule white racks . White is just the sexiest color.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by terrible View Post
    I guess I'm just used to it.

    i'm a noob but is that a 180mm travel?

  10. #10
    Let the good times roll.
    Reputation: miniwisejosh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,156
    The graphics on the lowers identify that fork as a RS Totem.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    39
    ah... ok...

    told ya i'm a noob.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: anvil_den's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    918
    Quote Originally Posted by chrisingrassia View Post
    I did lots of research and lots of reading before I opted for the Marzocchi 170mm. A lot of the forums on various sites say that 180 will give the EG a strange geometry and a bit too much rake. The bike is ideally maximized at 160, so I"m pushing it at 170 and you'd really be pushing it at 180. If you get an on-the-fly adjustable fork for climbing, that may be possible so you don't tip over backwards I guess.
    I've been kinda repeating myself over a few threads lately..so hope people don't get annoyed reading. Just shorten up the reach a little to compensate but...

    Running a coil 170 Vengeance and like miniwisehosh the overall A-C is more like a 180mm fork. Definitely wheelbase and rake is a little longer compared to 160 fork. Very obvious when racking up and I have to shift the securing points on the rack.

    On descending turns that are open and wide-- nicer and more stable (ie can rail lower) but otherwise I think keeping geom closer to 160 makes the bike handles better, not just climb but overall.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: terrible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,796
    I find that my v3 with a 180 gets better climbing traction than my v1 with a 160. Im not sure if it's from the wheelbase added by the fork travel or the extra 10mm on the top tube.

    This is with the same tire/wheel/gearing on both bikes.
    "I'm the fastest of the slow guys"

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    5
    I've got a 2011 36 Talas on my '09. I love it. Yeah it doesn't climb like an XC bike but that's not why I got the EG.
    Running a Dueller out back and just put a Reverb on.
    I only use the 140 travel on steep climbs. Adjustable seatpost rocks btw.
    Not sure on the current weight but it doesn't bother me to have to walk the occasional bit of trail. I'm running a 50mm stem with 1/2" rise bars. I just enjoy being out in the middle of nowhere with my bike and my wife. The tough ups are always worth the downs!

Posting Permissions

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