FOX 32SC Factory vs Performance vs Rockshox SID 29"- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 31 of 31
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    21

    FOX 32SC Factory vs Performance vs Rockshox SID 29"

    The Rockshox SID Worldcup weighs in @ 1587g with remote lockout and switch. I've heard the Fox 32 SC Factory is roughly 1380g but is that with remote and switch? Is the Performance heavier?

    Also has anyone here tried all three forks? I'm trying to figure out which one to choose

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    210
    Quote Originally Posted by Krisbin View Post
    The Rockshox SID Worldcup weighs in @ 1587g with remote lockout and switch. I've heard the Fox 32 SC Factory is roughly 1380g but is that with remote and switch? Is the Performance heavier?

    Also has anyone here tried all three forks? I'm trying to figure out which one to choose
    I just made that decision and went with the Factory, mostly because surprisingly the Performance weighs more than a one half of a pound more (Fox Web Page) There is more adjustability on the Factory and there is a claimed better internals. Thanks to my builder, the increase was easy do deal with. Because I went with titanium instead of carbon, I am watching my weights a bit close. Went with a Project 321 Hub instead of an Onyx because they weigh like a very fat pig. Safe Travels.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Emdexpress View Post
    I just made that decision and went with the Factory, mostly because surprisingly the Performance weighs more than a one half of a pound more (Fox Web Page) There is more adjustability on the Factory and there is a claimed better internals. Thanks to my builder, the increase was easy do deal with. Because I went with titanium instead of carbon, I am watching my weights a bit close. Went with a Project 321 Hub instead of an Onyx because they weigh like a very fat pig. Safe Travels.
    Yeah that's what I feared I will most likely be the Factory

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    807
    Quote Originally Posted by Emdexpress View Post
    I just made that decision and went with the Factory, mostly because surprisingly the Performance weighs more than a one half of a pound more (Fox Web Page) There is more adjustability on the Factory and there is a claimed better internals. Thanks to my builder, the increase was easy do deal with. Because I went with titanium instead of carbon, I am watching my weights a bit close. Went with a Project 321 Hub instead of an Onyx because they weigh like a very fat pig. Safe Travels.
    The new SID with charger damper is a better performing fork, no idea about weight. How much do you weigh and what have you ridden previously OOC?

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Back2MTB View Post
    The new SID with charger damper is a better performing fork, no idea about weight. How much do you weigh and what have you ridden previously OOC?
    I'm 170 but the bike will be used for longer trips and needs to be as light as possible but obviously I also want well performing fork :-)

    My prior bikes have had Manitou Black, Manitou Minute and Lefty 2.0. Both the Manitous worked really well. I love the precision of the the Lefty but it may be to aggressive for longer trips.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    210
    I check in at 215. I have ridden several but I never pushed one hard. I bought the very first SID in 1988 on a 8900 Trek with Hayes disc brake. Still have that horse. Rebuilt it numerous times. It lack at lot of rigidity but worked well enough and still does (with maintance). Only the very top of the line SID was considered on my build but 1500 USD did not quite fit my budget. Not using a current model, I cannot comment with knowledge about how they well they work.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    210
    Quote Originally Posted by Back2MTB View Post
    The new SID with charger damper is a better performing fork, no idea about weight. How much do you weigh and what have you ridden previously OOC?
    Rock Shock will replace the steering tube on their forks if you want your new ride to have a higher tube. Trek will not send a Project One bike out without cutting the steering tube to fit their specs. So there is that.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: The Boz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    522
    Even the Rock Shox World Cup is heavier than the Fox 32 SC, but the Rock Shox can accommodate a much wider tire, if that means anything to you.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    210
    When researching my build, I wrote down in notes that the Fox 32SC Factory weighed 1379 and the Performance model was over 1/2 pound more. I must say that while looking up something lose, I was not able to confirme the weight of the Performance. I hate bad info so please be advised. Sorry! I am still looking to confirmed. Seems pretty high.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    21
    [QUOTE=Emdexpress;13549471]When researching my build, I wrote down in notes that the Fox 32SC Factory weighed 1379 and the Performance model was over 1/2 pound more. I must say that while looking up something lose, I was not able to confirme the weight of the Performance. I hate bad info so please be advised. Sorry! I am still looking to confirmed. Seems pretty high.[/

    Does 1379g include remote and switch and 29"

  11. #11
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    33,791
    Quote Originally Posted by Back2MTB View Post
    The new SID with charger damper is a better performing fork
    How do you figure? They both use similar bladder-damper technology with shimmed rebound and compression pistons, with a "quick range" adjuster and low-speed compression adjust. They are literally a lot more similar than different. Fox was able to shave a bunch of weight without using carbon, impressive. I've had 2 charger-damper forks and I have the 32 sc factory on my XC rig. The charger is not a better performing damper.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    210
    based on a review I saw with the Factory sitting on a scale, no remote or switch near the scale and was aprxoximatly 1379. I have not seen the weight of the remotes posted anywhere. I plan on reaching down and flip the dial on the move. Plan to anyway. Seems like weight that is not needed, or so I think so.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Emdexpress View Post
    based on a review I saw with the Factory sitting on a scale, no remote or switch near the scale and was aprxoximatly 1379. I have not seen the weight of the remotes posted anywhere. I plan on reaching down and flip the dial on the move. Plan to anyway. Seems like weight that is not needed, or so I think so.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Lone Rager's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    8,980
    I'm wondering how they fit 1/2 lb more weight into the Performance version. Where are the weights on the Fox website?
    What, me worry?

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,073
    Quote Originally Posted by Lone Rager View Post
    I'm wondering how they fit 1/2 lb more weight into the Performance version. Where are the weights on the Fox website?
    When comparing the weights, make sure you are comparing the 32 SC Performance and not the regular 32 that Fox still sells just to make things complicated when researching.

    Also, the 32 SC Factory comes with the Kabolt thru-axle which saves some weight and the 32 SC Performance does not.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    8,696
    Quote Originally Posted by The Boz View Post
    Even the Rock Shox World Cup is heavier than the Fox 32 SC, but the Rock Shox can accommodate a much wider tire, if that means anything to you.
    I would think if you're buying a SC fork for the weight, you aren't running a bigger heavier tire.
    Ripley LS v3
    OG Ripley v2 handed down to son

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    210
    Error as previously stated. Thanks!

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    13,447
    Everyone would prefer the lightest weight. Your terrain has an impact on what width tire and rim will give you the best overall performance. More of a trail bike a 2.6 tire may be a future choice and the SID would take it.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: JoePAz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    5,700
    I have Fox Factory 32 SC 15x100 with Kabolt. No remote and cut steer tube. 1377 grams on my home scale.
    Joe
    '18 Specialized Epic 29", 19' Vassago Optimus Ti SS 29", '19 Ibis Ripmo, XC, AM, blah blah blah.. I just ride.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: coke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,583
    This site is a good place to check for weights. They have scale shots of a lot of products.

    https://r2-bike.com/ROCK-SHOX-Suspen...T-tapered-2018

    https://r2-bike.com/FOX-Suspensionfo...-tapered-51-mm

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    8,696
    Quote Originally Posted by eb1888 View Post
    Everyone would prefer the lightest weight. Your terrain has an impact on what width tire and rim will give you the best overall performance. More of a trail bike a 2.6 tire may be a future choice and the SID would take it.
    What trail bike would you run 100mm fork on?
    Ripley LS v3
    OG Ripley v2 handed down to son

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    210
    Rechecked weight between Fox 32 SC Boost Factory vs Performance.

    Factory = 1353 vs Performance = 1780 Wow!

    Performance is a mind blowing 427 grams heavier. 1 pound = 454.4 grams so the Performance is 27 grams short of a pound. Sounds wrong and I have not weighed them but it seems those are the numbers reported by some that have the product in their hands. Mostly there is not much performance difference between the two shocks imho. But the weight deal makes it real easy to pick for me.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    210
    Some of the differences of reported weights of the Factory (not much however) may be if the two supplied spacers have been removed or two additional ones added. In addition, the steering tubes may have not been cut or cut to different lengths. Still the Proformance weighs like an overfed hog.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,562
    Quote Originally Posted by Emdexpress View Post
    I just made that decision and went with the Factory, mostly because surprisingly the Performance weighs more than a one half of a pound more (Fox Web Page) There is more adjustability on the Factory and there is a claimed better internals. Thanks to my builder, the increase was easy do deal with. Because I went with titanium instead of carbon, I am watching my weights a bit close. Went with a Project 321 Hub instead of an Onyx because they weigh like a very fat pig. Safe Travels.
    It is advertised as being that much heavier, but it is not that much heavier. Adding the Kabolt through axle brings the weights within about 100G.

    Mira estos:

    https://esmtb.com/fox-32-stepcast-fa...e-peso-precio/

    Quote Originally Posted by Emdexpress View Post
    based on a review I saw with the Factory sitting on a scale, no remote or switch near the scale and was aprxoximatly 1379. I have not seen the weight of the remotes posted anywhere. I plan on reaching down and flip the dial on the move. Plan to anyway. Seems like weight that is not needed, or so I think so.
    expect remote to be roughly 135 ish. I love my twin loc

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    210
    Nice post. If I could remember more from school, the article may say if the steering tubes were cut and to what length. 100 grams is about 1/4 pound. Heavier but not as much as claimed. Must want to sell more Factory units. Worked on me.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,562
    Quote Originally Posted by Emdexpress View Post
    Nice post. If I could remember more from school, the article may say if the steering tubes were cut and to what length. 100 grams is about 1/4 pound. Heavier but not as much as claimed. Must want to sell more Factory units. Worked on me.

    75 gram difference between forks

    Kabolt cost 45 dollars and makes a big weight difference:

    41 between bolts.

    116g total difference which is almost exactly 1/4 pounds.


    I found this article and these pictures when I was trying to sort out the weight gain between the F34 and the Performance stepcast. Fox would have you believe that these forks weigh almost the same. Sadly, I would gain a bit of a weight penalty t put on the F 34 120mm.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    8,696
    I just called up Fox and asked.
    Ripley LS v3
    OG Ripley v2 handed down to son

  28. #28
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    33,791
    Quote Originally Posted by Emdexpress View Post
    Rechecked weight between Fox 32 SC Boost Factory vs Performance.

    Factory = 1353 vs Performance = 1780 Wow!

    Performance is a mind blowing 427 grams heavier. 1 pound = 454.4 grams so the Performance is 27 grams short of a pound. Sounds wrong and I have not weighed them but it seems those are the numbers reported by some that have the product in their hands. Mostly there is not much performance difference between the two shocks imho. But the weight deal makes it real easy to pick for me.
    This was an older performance Float 100 that I had, but this shows some of the differences. They really went to extreme ends to shave weight from the SC and not use carbon, streamlining the crown, making it narrower, the lowers, and so on. The SC was with an uncut steerer at this point I believe.

    FOX 32SC Factory vs Performance vs Rockshox SID 29"-01ad7305a0485c5e79fdc014a31fe50281d7768159.jpg

    FOX 32SC Factory vs Performance vs Rockshox SID 29"-01a69785939e05f9ae6bf86d49bb036e2b98f5446a.jpg

    FOX 32SC Factory vs Performance vs Rockshox SID 29"-0112c632b13926e76e92d524fab963184de1d3e483.jpg

    The real choice IMO is the 34 or 32. If you are considering a 32 SC because you do XC racing and want a lightweight platform, it's a great fork for this. If you want a trail-capable fork, then deciding between the standard 32 or the 34 is much more difficult IMO, the 34 is really only slightly lighter and much beefier and capable of more travel. The 34 is a better 120mm platform IMO. It won't give you the feathery-light-weight, but it's a better match for the ~120mm rear travel bikes IMO and if you want to over-fork your XC bike a bit. For XC racing, the 32 SC is sweet.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    317
    I just swapped my Factory SC 32 to another bike but needed a new CSU as it had been cut too short. We couldn't get the Kashima factory one so just got the black performance version.
    They weighed the same (accounting for slightly longer steerer in new one). Performance feels identical, I'm sure the kashima coat works slightly better but I suspect its more marketing than performance.
    2019 Trance 29
    2018 Epic
    Procaliber- sold
    ASR-C- sold
    ARC Carbon- sold
    SB-95C- play bike- sold

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pedalon2018's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    557
    Quote Originally Posted by m3bas View Post
    I just swapped my Factory SC 32 to another bike but needed a new CSU as it had been cut too short. We couldn't get the Kashima factory one so just got the black performance version.
    They weighed the same (accounting for slightly longer steerer in new one). Performance feels identical, I'm sure the kashima coat works slightly better but I suspect its more marketing than performance.
    The coating may look nice to some but I could not tell any difference between the Factory vs Performance. I went Factory because of weight with little increase in the cost. Rockshock will replace the steerer tube on their forks while Fox not so much. But I much perfer metal tubes over carbon, mostly cause inspections require fork removal and my inherent caution on critical parts. While not a big deal, during riding season I tend not to do that.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by TwoTone View Post
    What trail bike would you run 100mm fork on?
    Bike packing. Big tire's have benefits in varied conditions.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-09-2018, 08:51 PM
  2. Rockshox SID RCT3 vs. Fox 32 Float Performance
    By prj71 in forum Shocks and Suspension
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 06-22-2017, 01:12 PM
  3. Fox 32sc Rebound Knob (removable?)
    By Lelandjt in forum XC Racing and Training
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-12-2017, 10:35 PM
  4. Deleted
    By Lelandjt in forum Vacations & Destinations
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-11-2017, 11:06 PM
  5. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 03-17-2016, 07:53 PM

Members who have read this thread: 59

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.