Results 1 to 22 of 22
  1. #1
    zod
    zod is offline
    Southern Fried mUni
    Reputation: zod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,080

    New Ciclon with 160mm fork?

    Anyone running the new Cilcon with a 160mm fork? Is that even acceptable or does it screw up the geometry. I am personally waiting on the new Terremoto however if for some reason there is something I don't like about it the Ciclon (which is what I currently run) would probably be my 2nd or third pick but I want to run a 6&6 setup. The main thing I never liked about the first Ciclon was the headtube angle....glad to see it slackened in the new model!

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,360
    that 160 fork is only 10mm longer than the long setting on the frame. unlikely to cause a problem , of any kind. you'd then be running a 6X61/3. sounds pretty nice to me
    breezy shade

  3. #3
    Proud lame eBiker
    Reputation: Internal14's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,524
    The Demo Ciclon I have on the shop is running a 160 up front. Many rave reviews with this set-up.
    www.velocitybicycles.comWhere customers become friends, not simply a dollar sign.

  4. #4
    zod
    zod is offline
    Southern Fried mUni
    Reputation: zod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,080
    Cool deal. At this point I'm holding out to see the new Moto but good to know the Ciclon is an option. I'll be interested in knowing the frame weight of the new Moto versus the old. Any idea on if the new Cilcon frame is lighter than the old and if so how much?

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    375
    The frame seems plenty robust to benefit from a 36mm fork, and I think the geometry would be excellent with 160mm of travel. The only issue I can forsee is the lack of standover, as it's already pretty high with a 150mm fork.

    Weight wise, I measured my 17" Ciclon frame w/ RP23 at 7lb. 1.5oz without seat collar, 142mm axle, or axle/nut.

  6. #6
    zod
    zod is offline
    Southern Fried mUni
    Reputation: zod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,080
    Anyone remember what the old 17" Ciclon weight is?

  7. #7
    Team Chilidog!
    Reputation: Stripes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    7,229
    Been running a 2012 El Ciclon with a Fox 36 since I got the bike in July of last year. Wouldn't run it any other way. Ran it with both the Float and the Van. the Van feels much better IMO, but then again mine is 35 lbs with a CCDB in the back too.

    Running 150mm in the back, and it feels awesome. I wouldn't be hesitant to take this bike to N* or ride it down anything.

    Mine has a semi custom HA of 66.5 degrees with a 160mm fork, but it climbs just fine and descends even better.

    I haven't rode the TM, but this rides so much better than the X-5 with 160mm rockers and a 160mm fork. Pedals a helluva lot better too.
    MTB4Her.com: mountain bike site for women, by women

  8. #8
    Fragilie
    Reputation: Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    763
    I'm doing it and love it. Well, that's besides the rear shock anyway. Anyone have problems blowing through travel easily in the 150mm mode? I'm right on the fine line of ordering up a CCDB right now.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails New Ciclon with 160mm fork?-imag0024.jpg  

    It's Better To Die On Your Feet Than To Live On Your Knees. (Emiliano Zapata)

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    375
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    Anyone have problems blowing through travel easily in the 150mm mode?
    Absolutely. I've been toying with air pressure to help eliminate bottoming out, but I think the problem lies in the RP23 itself, particularly with the HV air can. I thought about ordering up the volume tuning kit from fox, or just making a shim, but as of now I'm using my old Manitou Evolver, which is really a much better shock (for this bike anyway). Much more bottom out resistant, and actually much better damped in rough terrain.

    Nice looking Ciclon BTW!

  10. #10
    Team Chilidog!
    Reputation: Stripes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    7,229
    Quote Originally Posted by albeant View Post
    Absolutely. I've been toying with air pressure to help eliminate bottoming out, but I think the problem lies in the RP23 itself, particularly with the HV air can. I thought about ordering up the volume tuning kit from fox, or just making a shim, but as of now I'm using my old Manitou Evolver, which is really a much better shock (for this bike anyway). Much more bottom out resistant, and actually much better damped in rough terrain.

    Nice looking Ciclon BTW!
    +1 on the nice looking Ciclón

    I didn't have that problem with the Monarch Plus, FWIW.

    Here's mine with 150mm travel CCDB in the back and Fox Van in the front.

    If anyone is getting a CCDB for your bike, let me know and I'll send you my settings if you want.
    MTB4Her.com: mountain bike site for women, by women

  11. #11
    Lightly salted
    Reputation: fuenstock's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,217
    The way the rear of the new Ciclon feels at 150mm, I think it would match up nice with 160mm forks. I've also bottomed out my shock(rp23) plenty of times, but it never felt harsh and I wouldln,t have known it bottomed if it wasn't for the o-ring off the shaft.

  12. #12
    fai
    fai is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    113
    I also use 160mm forks and have no issues at all. I have been experimenting with a volume kit in the RP23. I have used all the three sizes in the kit and found in the 150mm travel setting that the largest size gave me the best result. It is so easy to change that it is easy to try them all to get the shock working how you like it.I dropped the air pressure to get the plushest ride possible and it will not knock the ring off the shock even on big hits although I am using all the shocks travel. You can feel it ramp up right at the end of its travel. I also use an El Ciclon with 140mm forks and rear setting and have now fitted the smallest spacer in that shock.

    chicksands by Alanatriversidecyclecentre, on Flickr
    AJR

  13. #13
    Lightly salted
    Reputation: fuenstock's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,217
    @ Fai,

    I've been thinking of trying the volume kit in my rp23. I really like my suspension performance as is, but could use a little more bottom out resistance. Do you find that the volume kit only effects the end stroke/bottom out, or does it also effect the beginning stroke/sag?

  14. #14
    fai
    fai is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    113
    Before I fitted the kit in the 150mm setting I was using a bit less sag than was ideal for me to stop the shock going through all its travel to easily when I was pushing hard into really rough stuff or on some of the bigger drops. I have been able to have more sag and not bottom the shock out with the large spacer fitted. It does not seem to affect the ride but is noticeable only when the shock is almost at the end of its stroke. You can feel the shock ramp up at the very end of its stroke allowing me to get the full travel on big hits and a plush ride just how I like it for the rest of the time. It is an easy way of tuning the shock because you do not even have to remove it from your bike to fit or remove the spacers, so you can tune in the ride feel you like with the minimum of hassle.
    AJR

  15. #15
    zod
    zod is offline
    Southern Fried mUni
    Reputation: zod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,080
    Does this bottoming out issue with the RP23 occur if you run the shock in the 6" setting or does it only occur at 5"?

  16. #16
    fai
    fai is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    113
    I would not call it an issue. I ride two El Ciclons, one 140mm front and back and the other 160mm front and 150mm back.I did not feel any harsh bottom out on either bikes but noticed at times I had pushed the o-ring off the shock. I upped the pressure to stop this at certain places I ride but missed the supple suspension action so I tried the volume kit and now can get the supple ride and full travel without taking the ring off the shock. Some riders will not need to do this as they will be more than satisfied with the ride without changing anything and if I did not use my bike on DH runs and off ladder drops I doubt if I would have fitted it.
    AJR

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    375
    I think the bottoming out issue is more of an issue with the shock than the frame, as lots of people on different frames have complained about floats blowing through their travel. The small volume air can, or shims inside the HV can are both good fixes to get more bottom-out resistance.

    Changing FLOAT Air Spring Compression

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    375
    Quote Originally Posted by nhodge View Post
    that 160 fork is only 10mm longer than the long setting on the frame. unlikely to cause a problem , of any kind. you'd then be running a 6X61/3. sounds pretty nice to me
    Ventana's 2012 Ciclon page lists 150mm fork length as 521mm, while the Fox 36/160mm forks come in at 545mm, so that adds 24mm to the recommended fork length, but other than the standover I think it would still be a sweet setup.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,360
    Quote Originally Posted by albeant View Post
    Ventana's 2012 Ciclon page lists 150mm fork length as 521mm, while the Fox 36/160mm forks come in at 545mm, so that adds 24mm to the recommended fork length, but other than the standover I think it would still be a sweet setup.
    that's true of Fox forks but not all 160 forks are 545. a friend of mine just recently got in on the rediculously good deal on the Marzocchi 44 RC3 Ti sale. it's 520 mm A-C & 6 inches for $411! model year 2011 i think, could be 2010. i would be more concerned about BB height myself w/ the 545's. a # of people have commented on the setup & nobody has complained about that even. i'm a little surprised. anybody care to post their BB height w/ the 545 fork?
    breezy shade

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    375
    Right, but the 44's are 150mm rather than 160mm. I think the Marzocchi 55's @ 160mm are actually a bit taller than the Fox 36's.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,360
    Quote Originally Posted by albeant View Post
    Right, but the 44's are 150mm rather than 160mm. I think the Marzocchi 55's @ 160mm are actually a bit taller than the Fox 36's.
    absolutely true, but for someone concerned w/ messing w/ Sherwood's intended geometry, they get 1/3" less travel & the designed geo. keep in mind, the OP said he wanted to run a 6X6 setup, even though he also was asking about a 160 fork
    breezy shade

  22. #22
    Lightly salted
    Reputation: fuenstock's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,217
    Quote Originally Posted by zod View Post
    Does this bottoming out issue with the RP23 occur if you run the shock in the 6" setting or does it only occur at 5"?
    I wouldn't call the bottoming out of the shock a problem. It only happens for me on drops greater than 3' with a flat or hard landing. It does bottom out at 140mm and 150mm about the same, Im riding mine at 140mm rear and 150mm front. The bottom out is never harsh and I wouldn't have even known it bottomed if it wasn't for the o-ring off the shaft. I really like the way the new Ciclon rides as is and don't really see to much need for the volume kit unless your hitting jumps and drops.

Posting Permissions

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