Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: AM1 or AM SL?

  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Buzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    754

    AM1 or AM SL?

    So I have decided to start thinking about building up my new Burner which has been sadly sitting in its shipping box for over a year. I am looking at putting a 2005 AM1 or AM SL on it. Apart from the weight, the ETA and the baby poo color, are there any real differences between the two? The price for each is about the same. I would be riding around Squamish/Whistler on the 'XC' trails so I want something that can take a bit of a beating and am a fan of Zokes off of my Shore bike. If you can think of another shock that I should be looking at, please feel free to say. Oh and I would be looking at the 110/130 versions of both forks....

    Cheers,

    Buzz
    MCM#45

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AndyN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,118
    If you're a light weight I'd definitely stay away from the SL.

    I had one was never happy with it.

    I now have an 06' All Mountain 1 and love it.

  3. #3
    Natl. Champ DH Poser/Hack
    Reputation: cactuscorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    12,971
    im lightish, 165 lbs anyway, and i love the sl. love - it! mines bolted to a 5" old style rfx and it takes a ton of shite without complaint. i might think in the other direction of andy and reccomend the sl for its tuneability and better ability to match a burner if, and only if ya stuck some xr rockers on it and plunged the fork down to 100mm or so. otherwise i feel the geo would be crap in so many words. a 5" - 5 lb am 1 on a 3.6" xc bike? now really andy. i know its friday night and all but really.
    No, I'm NOT back!

  4. #4
    ... I guess you won't be
    Reputation: jokermtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,925
    110mm on a burner? are you insane man! why not eat wasabi for lunch tomorrow?

    100 mm or bust....think again
    Yes, we do indeed rock...http://www.myspace.com/spokedrunkies

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Buzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    754

    100mm max?

    Just how much screwed up geometry are we talking about here? 110mm vs 100mm is NOT going to make that much of a difference.....and most of the XC around Whistler/Squamish leans toward the technical descending (go figure eh?). So if it didnt have pure XC geometry, I would probably be more than happy. I might be going from a 70 degree head angle to 69 with 110mm? I am probably 175lbs with gear so I am sure weight wont be an issue. Any other suggestions??? Other forks I should be looking at?

    Buzz
    MCM#45

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    4,162
    I've had a few of what might be called "pure" xc bikes.

    Like them all better with an inch bigger fork than called for.

    It's all just personal preference, but that was mine, and it's absolute nonsense to think that a 10 mm longer fork matters.

  7. #7
    PSI
    PSI is offline
    I want that one
    Reputation: PSI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,037
    Quote Originally Posted by Buzz
    Just how much screwed up geometry are we talking about here? 110mm vs 100mm is NOT going to make that much of a difference.....and most of the XC around Whistler/Squamish leans toward the technical descending (go figure eh?). So if it didnt have pure XC geometry, I would probably be more than happy. I might be going from a 70 degree head angle to 69 with 110mm? I am probably 175lbs with gear so I am sure weight wont be an issue. Any other suggestions??? Other forks I should be looking at?

    Buzz
    MCM#45

    any given frame's geo is designed for a certain A2C range, too much or too less will screw it up. look for something that starts less than 100 mm and goes up from there like a talas or whatever marzoochi offer in that range.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 006_007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,096
    Quote Originally Posted by PSI
    any given frame's geo is designed for a certain A2C range, too much or too less will screw it up. look for something that starts less than 100 mm and goes up from there like a talas or whatever marzoochi offer in that range.

    I tend to agree on this one. The AM series is a relatively tall fork, even in its 110 configuration. I have a 130/150 on my 5 spot, and it always resides in the 130 setup. I wished I had opted for the 110/130 as I might use the ETA more often.

    That being said, the AM1 is a great fork. I really love mine. absolutely perfect for what I want it to do. Any of the canadian bound 05 am1's were black, not the hershey squirt brown. But I assume the purchase would be web based. Mine is the 06 model, but I dont think there was any major differences.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DLine's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    673
    I gotta agree with most of what's said here. The AM is PROBABLY too much fork for the Burner. I run a Fox Float at 130mm (too lazy or busy to take it apart and reduce the travel, yet), and it pushes on corners and wanders on steep climbs. It's not awful, and I can compensate for most of it, but it's not ideal.

    The funny thing is that at 130mm, the amount of travel feels similar to the rear (with XR rockers). But, the AM has a much bigger AtoC than the Foxes do, so it would only worsen the handling at 130. Running at 110 you might be fine depeding on what you ride and what you like...

  10. #10
    Roy
    Roy is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Roy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    1,998
    Many people run their XCE's with a 5" fork in front and like the handling. 110 will be fine, just a little different than standard cross country. You'll go down like a fiend and it will excel in the technical. The front will wander more on climbs.

    It's not a fork for a race bike but if you want to thrash the Burner in all mountain type riding, it's definately worth the experiment. Just find one with black lowers.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Buzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    754

    So...

    Some good help here....thanks fellas. Still AM1 or AM SL??? Would be a web based order as 006_007 said so baby poo would be the color of the AM1. The AM SL would be 'silver dust' which would be much more aesthetically pleasing. Going to be a tough call for sure....

    Buzz

    MCM#45

  12. #12
    not so super...
    Reputation: SSINGA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    11,457
    Quote Originally Posted by Buzz
    Some good help here....thanks fellas. Still AM1 or AM SL??? Would be a web based order as 006_007 said so baby poo would be the color of the AM1. The AM SL would be 'silver dust' which would be much more aesthetically pleasing. Going to be a tough call for sure....

    Buzz

    MCM#45
    Get a 05 Reba. Still has the 32mm stanchions and if you can find a u-turn model they go up to 115mm. It is a very nice riding fork and can be had in normal colors like silver, black and red.





    Nothing to see here.

  13. #13
    mr. wonderful
    Reputation: dirtbag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    880
    or how about a marathon xc? it's basically the AM1's little brother; ETA, TST, 100-120 adjustable. last i looked you could pick 05s up cheap.

    i appreciate the comments of not going too tall, but i think it is a matter of personal opinion on what is too tall, especially for what and where you ride. i tend to like running an adjustable fork with its optimum trail/climbing height as its minimum, to be able to extend it for DH and tech DH. i have a talas on my ventana SS, designed for a 3" fork, and i like it best at about 110. 110 might feel too tall for some people, but i find it very balanced. for fast or gnarly, it rides great knocked up to 125.

    likewise, on my rfx, i have a 66 SL that feels weird at 170 on flats, but point it down steep stuff and it's glorious. for this reason, i ride it at about 140 for general trail riding, up and down, and knock it out to 170 when it becomes serious for any length of time.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Buzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    754

    Reba

    Yes....this is definitely in the running as well.....Just not sure that I might want a bit more travel than the REBA offers. Price is again, comparable with the AM forks, but would be saving weight....tougher decision....

    Buzz
    MCM#45

Posting Permissions

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