Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    D93
    D93 is offline
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    111

    Why doesn't Yeti offer the Fox 36 160 on any of the SB-66 builds?

    They have 6 or so builds listed for the SB66 and it looks like even the enduro builds are getting the 36 adjusted to 150. Do they really not recommend this fork on the SB66? It seems to be the fork of choice from the build thread. I believe at Interbike and many of the other shows the SB66 has 160's.

    Wondering if there was a problem during testing.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cdiers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    41
    It only takes 10 minutes to remove the all travel spacer and convert the fork back to 160 if you choose.

  3. #3
    D93
    D93 is offline
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    111
    Yeah, I got that. I'm just wondering why Yeti doesn't recommend it.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cdiers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    41
    It not that they don't recomend 160 forks. Acctually most of their employees run the fork in 160 on the 66. The bike rides the most balanced at 150 (climbing = to decending), and more customers want it at 150 than 160 as it can be too slack for many riders.

  5. #5
    Mr. Knowitall
    Reputation: hssp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    780
    160 also gets very tall on the larger sizes. I had to really adjust to such a tall front with my BOS Deville 160. But the descending is just superduper!

  6. #6
    D93
    D93 is offline
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    111
    So a 160 Talas or Lyrik seems like it could be the best of both worlds?

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bpnic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,218
    Floats keep the kit prices down; 160mm forks (and more importantly, their AC height) on a bike designed with slack geometry designed around a 150mm fork and their much shorter AC height doesn't make for great for climbing or even xc riding.

    Imho, of course.
    I'd hit it, but I bruise like a peach.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: drbelleville's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by cdiers View Post
    It not that they don't recomend 160 forks. Acctually most of their employees run the fork in 160 on the 66. The bike rides the most balanced at 150 (climbing = to decending), and more customers want it at 150 than 160 as it can be too slack for many riders.
    +1, I think too, that the people who test tide them find it easier to handle and more nimble with the 150mm setup. Might make them more likely to buy the bike? I am sure those that have bought it and were none the wiser may have left it at 150, while others might have wanted the extra 10mm and had the spacer removed?

Posting Permissions

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