Results 1 to 11 of 11
  1. #1
    Happy Biker
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    19

    New question here. Fox Float 36 / 160 on an El Ciclon

    Hi, Thinking about sticking a Fox Float 36 / 160 on my Medium 2009 El Ciclon.

    Current set up is Pike 454 / 140 with a Romic rear shox.

    Taking bike to the Alps this summer last year flet the Pike was under equipped. Will the extra 20 mm work for or against.

    Let me know your thoughts.

  2. #2
    Team Chilidog!
    Reputation: Stripes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    7,231
    I replied to the other thread, but just in case

    I rode my X-5 (with the 140mm rockers) in the following setups, and here's my thoughts on each:

    - 160mm Fox 36 / 140mm rockers, good, but a bit choppered out
    - 160mm Fox 36 / 160mm rockers, much more balanced, but not my riding style
    - 140mm Fox 36 (lowered to 140mm) / 140mm rockers, best setup for me

    It is defnitely doable, but I would recommend running your bike with 160mm rockers too. I would double-check with Sherwood and make sure that there isn't any issues doing this for the El Ciclon. The good news is you can switch between 160mm setup and 140mm setup with the Fox Float (you can put in spacers to lower the travel on that fork as low as 100mm) and the right rockers.

    If you want a set of 160mm rockers barely used, please PM me.
    MTB4Her.com: mountain bike site for women, by women

  3. #3
    Happy Biker
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    19
    Thanks bud, interesting and interested, I'll check with Sherwood, I have PM'd as well.

  4. #4
    destination unknown
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,515
    160 rockers and float 36 @ 160 on a Ciclon -- Hope you don't mind your BB at 15" or higher

    Go with the Float lowered to 140 or 150 and standard 140 rockers. You might be able to get away with the fork at 160 but your BB will be pretty high, and you'll probably want to use a zero rise stem and flat bars or you'll have some climbing issues.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    417
    I enjoy my Ciclon with 160mm Lyrik u-turn. Also fun at 145. Get's pretty sketchy at 110. I went with the smaller rockers (I thought mine were 130mm?) for reasons cited by LncNuvue. A low BB makes the Ciclon shine.

  6. #6
    destination unknown
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,515
    Quote Originally Posted by P-townDave
    (I thought mine were 130mm?)
    I believe pre-2009 Ciclons had 130 rockers. I had an '08 with 130 rockers. For 09 SG lowered the BB to compensate for the 140 rockers and slackened the HA slightly.

  7. #7
    Happy Biker
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    19
    Thanks Guys. Comments noted about swithing rockers, good point, don't want to compromise lower ride height, as you loose it in the singletrack,

    I may give it a go with the float on and see how it sits, should be able to run it with low pressure. I'll keep the pike for now.

    Cheers.

  8. #8
    Team Chilidog!
    Reputation: Stripes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    7,231
    Keep in mind that running a 160mm front / 140mm rear is really choppered out, even with a lower BB. With the correct sag (30%), the 160mm rockers on the back aren't that bad, but it does raise your BB a bit.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bikerniloc
    Thanks Guys. Comments noted about swithing rockers, good point, don't want to compromise lower ride height, as you loose it in the singletrack,

    I may give it a go with the float on and see how it sits, should be able to run it with low pressure. I'll keep the pike for now.

    Cheers.
    MTB4Her.com: mountain bike site for women, by women

  9. #9
    Happy Biker
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    19
    Hi Stripes, had contact with Sherwood, he recons 160 on the front is ok, raises BB by 3/4 inch and salckens it a degree, says no go on putting the 160 rockers on.

    So may give it a go and see what it likes, can always go back to 140.

    Thanks

  10. #10
    Team Chilidog!
    Reputation: Stripes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    7,231
    Quote Originally Posted by Bikerniloc
    Hi Stripes, had contact with Sherwood, he recons 160 on the front is ok, raises BB by 3/4 inch and salckens it a degree, says no go on putting the 160 rockers on.

    So may give it a go and see what it likes, can always go back to 140.

    Thanks
    It'll be interesting to hear your thoughts on it. I didn't think that 160 really felt right until I had the 160mm matching in the rear, but everyone likes different things.

    Keep us posted on it.
    MTB4Her.com: mountain bike site for women, by women

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    417
    160 up front with 140 rockers would not be fun for uphill travel. No doubt. Too choppered. But if you can get a TALUS fork or if you are mainly going up gentle climbs or flat, then go for it.

    From what I've seen of the Alps, it ain't flat. But if there's a tram, lift, etc, you'll much prefer the beefier fork.

    The choppered feel is pretty fun coming down. I got to bring my Ciclon to Whistler this past Summer and actually liked it better for a lot of trails than my DH rig. I even liked it on trails like Original Sin, Khyber pass, Ho Chi Min, Angry pirate, etc. in addition to the ones you may expect like Crank it up and B-line. I even spent a day abusing it here locally at the Deer Valley trails like Fireswamp, Thieves and the old NORBA track. The AM tires didn't last the whole day, but the bike was a blast.

    Either way it'll be hard to have a bad time riding this bike in the Alps. ;-)

Posting Permissions

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