"The patent gives us some insight into how Fox’s long-travel mountain bike forks such as the 36, 38, and 40 may evolve in the future, with the inventions described working to reduce binding at ever-slacker head angles, while also continuously lubricating the wiper seals during use."
Might aswell make a upside down fork at that point?
Binding is still an issue. But it wouldn't be that much different even with a rolling element bushing to be honest, the load paths are just wonky when you go really slack - at 60° HA 85 % of the vertical force goes into moving the system along the axis of travel with 50 % of the vertical force going into sideloading either the bushing or the rolling elements. It will be better, but still not great (let's not go into the topic of if it makes sense going to or past 60° HA).
Sooner or later slackening the head angle you start moving into the territory where a linkage fork will simply work better. But we've seen how well that turned out.
Wondering how smart using balls in there is, creating super high loads because of their tiny contact area?
I guess one of the reasons for lefties...
Wondering how smart using balls in there is, creating super high loads because of their tiny contact area?
I guess one of the reasons for lefties to use cylindrical elements is also much better liad distribution ( besides transferring steering inputs)
The four surfaces on the Lefty also are the only thing preventing twisting forces to keep things tracking so well. What if fox made their version using lowers to prevent the twisting forces and just used roller bearings on the front and back to lower stiction and relied on the lowers to prevent twist?
How about you turn everything around and suddenly have no stiffnes problems with slack head-angles and the lubricant in the right place?
Wait that already exists…
You keep mostly the same binding/friction issues that come from sideloading bushings and while improving fore-aft stiffness, you destroy torsional stiffness (with an upside down fork which I guess you're aiming at).
You keep mostly the same binding/friction issues that come from sideloading bushings and while improving fore-aft stiffness, you destroy torsional stiffness (with an upside down fork...
You keep mostly the same binding/friction issues that come from sideloading bushings and while improving fore-aft stiffness, you destroy torsional stiffness (with an upside down fork which I guess you're aiming at).
It all depends on the design of the axle interface and axle. Torque caps are brilliant for that. And too much torsional stiffness is not good either. This is one reason I prefer normal forks over Lefty, as Leftys are too torsionally stiff and gives a lot of feedback to the handlebars through rocky section etc.
You keep mostly the same binding/friction issues that come from sideloading bushings and while improving fore-aft stiffness, you destroy torsional stiffness (with an upside down fork...
You keep mostly the same binding/friction issues that come from sideloading bushings and while improving fore-aft stiffness, you destroy torsional stiffness (with an upside down fork which I guess you're aiming at).
Truly depends on who you ask with that torsional stiffnes. Just like with everything else, things need to be in a certain window to work. And from my personal experience (dorado) and hearing other peoples opinions the torsional stiffnes while riding is not that much different. Some people even prefer that the fork is able to track the ground in certain scenarios.
I simply think that (for me and my riding style) the benefits from the gained fore-aft drastically outweight the losses in torsional stiffnes (plus other advantages)
I think with minimal effort you could develop a lower fork lug to hub interface that could really reel in the torsional stiffness thing that people complain about. One question I have though is that if the torsional issue is actually an issue at all, or is it that people know it does exist and have convinced themselves that it is a much worse problem then it actually is.
One thing that hasn't been mentioned is the decrease in unspring mass with a USD fork. People lose their minds when talking about how good it is to lower unsprung mass, so shouldn't there be a small army worth of bike people pushing for USD forks?
Aluminum wheels with the same lifetime guarantee as carbon and a DH axle option is something to consider. Looks like the only option is 28 spoke though.
I think with minimal effort you could develop a lower fork lug to hub interface that could really reel in the torsional stiffness thing that people...
I think with minimal effort you could develop a lower fork lug to hub interface that could really reel in the torsional stiffness thing that people complain about. One question I have though is that if the torsional issue is actually an issue at all, or is it that people know it does exist and have convinced themselves that it is a much worse problem then it actually is.
One thing that hasn't been mentioned is the decrease in unspring mass with a USD fork. People lose their minds when talking about how good it is to lower unsprung mass, so shouldn't there be a small army worth of bike people pushing for USD forks?
My ONLY concern with USD forks is the lack of a functioning mudguard mount.
I think with minimal effort you could develop a lower fork lug to hub interface that could really reel in the torsional stiffness thing that people...
I think with minimal effort you could develop a lower fork lug to hub interface that could really reel in the torsional stiffness thing that people complain about. One question I have though is that if the torsional issue is actually an issue at all, or is it that people know it does exist and have convinced themselves that it is a much worse problem then it actually is.
One thing that hasn't been mentioned is the decrease in unspring mass with a USD fork. People lose their minds when talking about how good it is to lower unsprung mass, so shouldn't there be a small army worth of bike people pushing for USD forks?
this gets super hard when you're trying to maintain or improve weight and not invent another new hub standard.
Aluminum wheels with the same lifetime guarantee as carbon and a DH axle option is something to consider. Looks like the only option is 28 spoke...
Aluminum wheels with the same lifetime guarantee as carbon and a DH axle option is something to consider. Looks like the only option is 28 spoke though.
there's 32 hole 30|HD AL option too (on that homepage). for some reason we have to wait until embargo lift (and our review) in an hour.
I think with minimal effort you could develop a lower fork lug to hub interface that could really reel in the torsional stiffness thing that people...
I think with minimal effort you could develop a lower fork lug to hub interface that could really reel in the torsional stiffness thing that people complain about. One question I have though is that if the torsional issue is actually an issue at all, or is it that people know it does exist and have convinced themselves that it is a much worse problem then it actually is.
One thing that hasn't been mentioned is the decrease in unspring mass with a USD fork. People lose their minds when talking about how good it is to lower unsprung mass, so shouldn't there be a small army worth of bike people pushing for USD forks?
magnesium lowers are really light things; given all the lower bits of a usd fork are alu, and the dropouts will probably use more beef to resist twisting, i'd bet the lower weight advantage is negligible, if any (esp. if you add in stantion guards).
Aluminum wheels with the same lifetime guarantee as carbon and a DH axle option is something to consider. Looks like the only option is 28 spoke...
Aluminum wheels with the same lifetime guarantee as carbon and a DH axle option is something to consider. Looks like the only option is 28 spoke though.
The guarantee isn't quite the same as their carbon wheels. If there's a manufacturer defect with your wheel like a seam split, you get a replacement; but it's only a 50% off crash replacement discount for dents etc.
I think it's still a whole lot better than what you get from other alloy rim manufacturers, but they're not quite the NQA alloy wheels we've all been dreaming of.
What's the crash replacement warranty on Industry Nine 305 alloy rims? I was looking at those also, and would just get the Reserves if the warranty is the same or better.
I've got a nice set of WAO Unions, and a crappy set of Roval wheels that came on my ebike. I've run both back to back on both bikes, and like the compliance of the alloy better on my enduro bike. The stiffness of the carbon is nicer on the ebike though.
Speaking of USD forks/torsional stiffness/tech rumors, does anyone know when the Manitou Hexlock axle patent runs out? I think they've had that for over 17 years (I'm thinking back to the phenomenal 2003 Dorado here). The hexlock is pretty brilliant and always seemed like the perfect solution for a potential USD manufacturer to increase torsional stiffness without increasing fore/aft or adding weight.
Weird... 32-hole makes more sense, and the image shows a 32-spoke wheel, but the "Details" section only lists 28.
This.
28 spokes on 29" rims don't work particularly well (at least with aluminium rims). I've had to replace spokes on my XM1501 wheelset (2019, so XM481 rim) after two seasons since the spokes started to go one after another. It was OK on a similar 650B wheelset.
And 150 USD for a rim? How much is an EX511 over there? It's ~80 € here in Europe. It's hard for me to see a reason not to go with an EX511 (maybe FR541 if needed) and 350 hub combo to be honest... It's such a no-nonsense workhorse.
Meh those are definitely push 11-6 shocks
red spring bushing
blue and silver knobs
Meh, good point actually. Twin compression dials and perpendicular reservoir. Good eye.
Just a screen grab on the potential patent parts…
"The patent gives us some insight into how Fox’s long-travel mountain bike forks such as the 36, 38, and 40 may evolve in the future, with the inventions described working to reduce binding at ever-slacker head angles, while also continuously lubricating the wiper seals during use."
Might aswell make a upside down fork at that point?
Binding is still an issue. But it wouldn't be that much different even with a rolling element bushing to be honest, the load paths are just wonky when you go really slack - at 60° HA 85 % of the vertical force goes into moving the system along the axis of travel with 50 % of the vertical force going into sideloading either the bushing or the rolling elements. It will be better, but still not great (let's not go into the topic of if it makes sense going to or past 60° HA).
Sooner or later slackening the head angle you start moving into the territory where a linkage fork will simply work better. But we've seen how well that turned out.
Was already mentioned and discussed on the previous page. Including the cost implications of doing what Cannondale does with the Lefty.
Right you are. That's twice I've done that in a week, post deleted, thanks!
here is another look at the new XX1
https://www.instagram.com/p/CopoS_NqfMV/
Wondering how smart using balls in there is, creating super high loads because of their tiny contact area?
I guess one of the reasons for lefties to use cylindrical elements is also much better liad distribution ( besides transferring steering inputs)
The four surfaces on the Lefty also are the only thing preventing twisting forces to keep things tracking so well. What if fox made their version using lowers to prevent the twisting forces and just used roller bearings on the front and back to lower stiction and relied on the lowers to prevent twist?
How about you turn everything around and suddenly have no stiffnes problems with slack head-angles and the lubricant in the right place?
Wait that already exists…
Stop trying to make USD forks happen, they’re not gonna happen
You keep mostly the same binding/friction issues that come from sideloading bushings and while improving fore-aft stiffness, you destroy torsional stiffness (with an upside down fork which I guess you're aiming at).
It all depends on the design of the axle interface and axle. Torque caps are brilliant for that. And too much torsional stiffness is not good either. This is one reason I prefer normal forks over Lefty, as Leftys are too torsionally stiff and gives a lot of feedback to the handlebars through rocky section etc.
Truly depends on who you ask with that torsional stiffnes. Just like with everything else, things need to be in a certain window to work. And from my personal experience (dorado) and hearing other peoples opinions the torsional stiffnes while riding is not that much different. Some people even prefer that the fork is able to track the ground in certain scenarios.
I simply think that (for me and my riding style) the benefits from the gained fore-aft drastically outweight the losses in torsional stiffnes (plus other advantages)
Can we get back to rumors and spy shots please?
Looks like Reserve released their AL rims/wheels.
https://reservewheels.com
I think with minimal effort you could develop a lower fork lug to hub interface that could really reel in the torsional stiffness thing that people complain about. One question I have though is that if the torsional issue is actually an issue at all, or is it that people know it does exist and have convinced themselves that it is a much worse problem then it actually is.
One thing that hasn't been mentioned is the decrease in unspring mass with a USD fork. People lose their minds when talking about how good it is to lower unsprung mass, so shouldn't there be a small army worth of bike people pushing for USD forks?
Aluminum wheels with the same lifetime guarantee as carbon and a DH axle option is something to consider. Looks like the only option is 28 spoke though.
My ONLY concern with USD forks is the lack of a functioning mudguard mount.
this gets super hard when you're trying to maintain or improve weight and not invent another new hub standard.
there's 32 hole 30|HD AL option too (on that homepage). for some reason we have to wait until embargo lift (and our review) in an hour.
magnesium lowers are really light things; given all the lower bits of a usd fork are alu, and the dropouts will probably use more beef to resist twisting, i'd bet the lower weight advantage is negligible, if any (esp. if you add in stantion guards).
The guarantee isn't quite the same as their carbon wheels. If there's a manufacturer defect with your wheel like a seam split, you get a replacement; but it's only a 50% off crash replacement discount for dents etc.
I think it's still a whole lot better than what you get from other alloy rim manufacturers, but they're not quite the NQA alloy wheels we've all been dreaming of.
What's the crash replacement warranty on Industry Nine 305 alloy rims? I was looking at those also, and would just get the Reserves if the warranty is the same or better.
I've got a nice set of WAO Unions, and a crappy set of Roval wheels that came on my ebike. I've run both back to back on both bikes, and like the compliance of the alloy better on my enduro bike. The stiffness of the carbon is nicer on the ebike though.
Looks like the release of the new Smuggler is imminent. Nice that they're moving back to a non-trunnion shock.
Speaking of USD forks/torsional stiffness/tech rumors, does anyone know when the Manitou Hexlock axle patent runs out? I think they've had that for over 17 years (I'm thinking back to the phenomenal 2003 Dorado here). The hexlock is pretty brilliant and always seemed like the perfect solution for a potential USD manufacturer to increase torsional stiffness without increasing fore/aft or adding weight.
The whole album is ready to go on the other site.
Weird... 32-hole makes more sense, and the image shows a 32-spoke wheel, but the "Details" section only lists 28.
This.
28 spokes on 29" rims don't work particularly well (at least with aluminium rims). I've had to replace spokes on my XM1501 wheelset (2019, so XM481 rim) after two seasons since the spokes started to go one after another. It was OK on a similar 650B wheelset.
And 150 USD for a rim? How much is an EX511 over there? It's ~80 € here in Europe. It's hard for me to see a reason not to go with an EX511 (maybe FR541 if needed) and 350 hub combo to be honest... It's such a no-nonsense workhorse.
Post a reply to: MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation