Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Mountain Biking Mountain biking is one of the fastest growing sports in the world. Check out this forum to discuss the latest tips, tricks, gear and equipment in the world of mountain biking.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-03-05, 08:57 AM   #1
GV27
Light Makes Right
Thread Starter
 
GV27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Green Mountain, Colorado
Bikes: Gianni Motta Criterium, Dean Hardtail
Posts: 1,521
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RockShox SID travel adjustment

Hi,

Just bought a new SID Team fork and I want to set the travel before I install it on my bike.

It comes with a piece to adjust the travel from 80mm down to 63mm. My initial thought was that doing this would shorten the fork's extended length by 17mm. I thought that this might be a good thing for me. My frame is pretty old, and the fork that's coming off of it (Manitou 4 - I should donate it to a museum ) didn't have much travel and it's extended length is shorter. I thought that lowering the fork would preserve the original geometry better plus I'm just not used to a lot of travel anyway.

However, looking at the service instructions for the fork, it looks like the spacer part just prevents the fork from compressing all the way. Looking at the pictures (I haven't actually disassembled the fork to play with it) it looks like the extended length stays the same, with the fully compressed length being 17mm longer.

Can this be right? Surely I'm looking at it wrong, right? I just can't imagine why you'd want to keep the fork long, but reduce its travel......

Thanks,

Chris
GV27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-05, 10:58 AM   #2
GV27
Light Makes Right
Thread Starter
 
GV27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Green Mountain, Colorado
Bikes: Gianni Motta Criterium, Dean Hardtail
Posts: 1,521
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
OK, so I think I'm wrong. I studied the service guide again and I guess the piece does shorten extension.

Now I have to decide if I want to do it. 80mm isn't considered a lot of travel these days, it it?
GV27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-05, 11:09 AM   #3
LowCel 
Throw the stick!!!!
 
LowCel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Charleston, WV
Bikes: GMC Denali
Posts: 17,588
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Nope, 80 mm is almost the minimum anymore. Some people still run 63 mm but not many.
__________________
I may be fat but I'm slow enough to make up for it.
LowCel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-05, 02:14 PM   #4
phantomcow2
la vache fantôme
 
phantomcow2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: NH
Bikes:
Posts: 6,266
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
i have a SID team as well, 80mm is not much. But for the intended purpose of the SID 80mm is great. 63 i just wouldnt do
__________________
C://dos
C://dos.run
run.dos.run
phantomcow2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-03-05, 02:57 PM   #5
darkmother
Get the stick.
 
darkmother's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Toronto, ON
Bikes: 12 Y.O. Litespeed MTB, IRO Jamie Roy fixie, Custom Habanero Ti 'Cross, No name SS MTB, Old school lugged steel track bike (soon)
Posts: 1,543
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I run a 12 Y.O. MTB frame that was designed for 50mm travel forks. 80mm is out of the question for this frame. Even the 63mm of my current fork, plus the increased tire clearance make the handling noticably slow. That said, I feel the short travel of this fork offers some advantage over the 80 and 100 mm forks. On climbs the bike is noticably quicker, and there is less dive when braking. I'm quite happy with it-only on fast downhills do I miss the extra travel.

I'd suggest try it with 80, and if you like it, keep it. If not, think about swapping it for the 63. 17mm isn't that much, but you will notice a difference in your bike's handling.
darkmother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-05, 09:07 AM   #6
GV27
Light Makes Right
Thread Starter
 
GV27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Green Mountain, Colorado
Bikes: Gianni Motta Criterium, Dean Hardtail
Posts: 1,521
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Yeah, that's what I'm thinking. I'm in the same boat as you - 12 yo frame (a Dean). Dunno what it was originally designed for, but I would guess less than 80mm. The SID does look like it lets the wheel suck up a bit more vs. my Manitou 4. It's only an inch longer at most fully extended, but certainly has more than 1 inch more travel. The lower tubes of the SID are shorter than the M4.

Laziness is also playing a part - you basically have to totally disassemble the fork to convert it and I don't really feel like doing that with a brand-new fork. I here the SID needs rebuilding a lot so maybe I'll plan to switch it to 63mm at the first rebuild. If I don't absolutely love the extra travel, that is!
GV27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-04-05, 07:28 PM   #7
badsac
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bathurst oz
Bikes:
Posts: 1,428
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Shame mtb forks don't come with triple clamps. Then you could slide the clamps down the tubes to get less rake and quicken the steering back up.
badsac is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:50 AM.