Fox/SKF low friction seals. Highly recommended!

Dirtydog11

With all this talk of Kashima coating I have been keen to find out how much of the reported lack of stiction is down to the Kashima coating and how much of it is down to the new seals. Today I decided to replace the standard Fox dust seals on my 36 RC2s and replace them with the the new low friction Fox/SKF seals .

First impressions are exellent, they work exactly as advertised and have made a substantial reduction to stiction, the fork now feels more lively and settles into it's sag easier. In terms of stiction they don't feel too dissimilar to a friends Kashima coated 36 RLCs 8) .

If anyone is looking for a cost effective upgrade (£25.00) to pre 2011 Fox forks I can only suggest you fit a set.

Highly Recommended!

stubs

Been thinking of servicing my F32 forks and popping in the new seals. Was it easy to lever old seals out and what tool did you use I was thinking of using a steel tyre lever wrapped in insulating tape.

Have you been on a proper cruddy ride yet and did they still feel smooth when coated in shit.

kenan

Thats a good call, will put that on my service list

Dirtydog11

Not been on any muddy rides just a quick blast but they feel smooth, I guess only time will tell if they keep the crap out.

I dropped the lowers and used a open ended spanner to lever the old seals out as per instructions on Foxs site, the new seals just pushed in.

getonyourbike

I ordered some Enduro seals from BETD for my Rebas but they're faulty so I'll send them back and get a refund. With the money I might get some of these SKF seals for my 36s along with doing a lower leg service. At the moment they've got a bit more stiction that I'd like.

lawman

along with perhaps some new XT brakes, this is my next major upgrade, along with upgrading and custom tuning my rp23 to kashima spec and a different compression tune, the kashima coat makes a difference, but the new seals should improve things even further, and judgng by skf's previous works, i shouldnt worry about them keeping crap out!

lawman

on another fox related point i forgot to mention, rumours are they're going to release a 26" version of the 34 in 150/160mm versions, if a 26" 34 float turns out to weigh the same as a 32 talas (which so many manufacturers fit when hardly anyone uses that kinda thing anymore), i'll sell a kidney for a pair!!

Dirtydog11

The 34mm chassis makes perfect sense for 120 -150mm forks, the increase in stiffness would more than compensate for any slight increase in weight, the 32mm chassis could be reserved for XC duties.

With the release of the 29" 34 chassis it was only a matter of time before they introduced a 26" version.

I think Fox 34s would fly off the shelves and would no doubt be the stiffest in their class!

lawman

Dirtydog11 wrote:

The 34mm chassis makes perfect sense for 120 -150mm forks, the increase in stiffness would more than compensate for any slight increase in weight, the 32mm chassis could be reserved for XC duties.

With the release of the 29" 34 chassis it was only a matter of time before they introduced a 26" version.

I think Fox 34s would fly off the shelves and would no doubt be the stiffest in their class!

yep, completely agree here, working by percentage weight changes over a 29" 32 120 float rlc and a 29" 140 float rlc, a 26" 34 float in 150mm form would be barely 100g, which imo the stiffness benefits far outweighs the increase, my 32 floats arent exactly flexy for me at around 160lbs but for i for one would be interested in such a fork should it be available, and if i have that kinda money to splash on a fork again

imo a 32 is a great long travel xc fork, and the 36 is a superb am fork, but for guys who want the best of both worlds on their 140/150mm trail bike, a 34 would be perfect!

supersonic

The 34 I agree does hit that middle ground. Weight wise? Hmm, will be interesting. Stiffness - the same?

I am still pretty sure that the general public does not understand what 'stiffness' actually means, and if you could test them blindfold many could not tell. And by many I mean I mean 90% plus.

bluechair84

Thanks for the recommend, I might upgrade to SKF next time I do a service on my 36s. getonyourbike - I bought some Enduro seals from BETD and they refused to go in no matter what I did. I thought I was doing something wrong until I tried installing standard fox seals - in first time, no blood drawn from doing so. What's up with yours?

Northwind

Aye, the 32 chassis feels a wee bit out of its depth at 150mm, compared to a Revelation... Course, Revs are 32mm as well but this'd give Fox the chance to close that gap as well as having a new cool product to sell

getonyourbike

bluechair84 wrote:

Thanks for the recommend, I might upgrade to SKF next time I do a service on my 36s. getonyourbike - I bought some Enduro seals from BETD and they refused to go in no matter what I did. I thought I was doing something wrong until I tried installing standard fox seals - in first time, no blood drawn from doing so. What's up with yours?

The problem with the Enduros for my Rebas is that one of the oil seals is broken and the inside has detacted itself from the outside if that makes sense. So they're effectively screwed. I can't get the stanchions back in and if I could then the seal would do nothing anyway.

angry_bird

Something I read the other day, can't quite remember where, I'll see if I can dig it out of my history later was comparing the current line of fox forks, and the idea of 26inch 34mm chassis. Came to the conclusion that it would be fairly pointless. For the potential gain in stiffness over a 32mm fork the weight would end up being very very close to that of a 36mm fork, in which case why wouldn't you get the 36mm?

Edit. Not sure whether the guy writing the article had taken into account that the current fox 34 forks are going to weigh more than the equivalent travel 26inchers due to them needing to be bigger for the larger wheels when he did all his working stuff out...

Simple answer is that peoples preconceptions are that 32mm are flexier xc forks and 36mm as stiff AM/DH forks, me included, if I were building something 140-150mm each end, (which I want to when funds permit) I'm not sure I'd want 32s up front, but then if I had 36s up front I'd be bugged by the fact the forks are big, heavy and possibly excessive. Which way to go... if I'm honest I'd probably buy a 34mm fork if they did one

But then again neither fox or rockshox do a 35/36mm 140/150mm travel fork... not sure about the other manufacturers.

lawman

Angry Bird wrote:

Something I read the other day, can't quite remember where, I'll see if I can dig it out of my history later was comparing the current line of fox forks, and the idea of 26inch 34mm chassis. Came to the conclusion that it would be fairly pointless. For the potential gain in stiffness over a 32mm fork the weight would end up being very very close to that of a 36mm fork, in which case why wouldn't you get the 36mm?

Edit. Not sure whether the guy writing the article had taken into account that the current fox 34 forks are going to weigh more than the equivalent travel 26inchers due to them needing to be bigger for the larger wheels when he did all his working stuff out...

Simple answer is that peoples preconceptions are that 32mm are flexier xc forks and 36mm as stiff AM/DH forks, me included, if I were building something 140-150mm each end, (which I want to when funds permit) I'm not sure I'd want 32s up front, but then if I had 36s up front I'd be bugged by the fact the forks are big, heavy and possibly excessive. Which way to go... if I'm honest I'd probably buy a 34mm fork if they did one

But then again neither fox or rockshox do a 35/36mm 140/150mm travel fork... not sure about the other manufacturers.

the thing is, a 36 float is barely 350g heavier than a 32 float, which is less than a pound, but still alot of riders, myself included, dont want the exta weight, if a 34 split the difference, say 150g or so, thats hardly anything in reality, especially when alot of riders still carry round 30 odd gears or so, when having 1x10 is so much lighter i saved a full 380grams!!!

supersonic

Fox seems to have split the 36 series into two groups ie the 180mm fork is not just the 160mm with longer stanchions, but uses a different chassis. (weight different of the R is about another 350g). This is similar to RS with the old Pike ie was a totally different lay out to Revs.

Thing is where do you draw the line? RS have forks with 28, 30, 32, 35 and 40mm - do they need a 33.5, or a 37.5 too? Do Fox also need a 38?

lawman

supersonic wrote:

Fox seems to have split the 36 series into two groups ie the 180mm fork is not just the 160mm with longer stanchions, but uses a different chassis. (weight different of the R is about another 350g). This is similar to RS with the old Pike ie was a totally different lay out to Revs.

Thing is where do you draw the line? RS have forks with 28, 30, 32, 35 and 40mm - do they need a 33.5, or a 37.5 too? Do Fox also need a 38?

there is definite over lap between manufacturers, a 36 can be spaced down 100mm if need be, the lyrik solo air can be reduced as low as 130mm afaik too, so there is the option, but a reduced 35/36mm fork isnt going to be as light as a dedicated 150mm 33/34mm fork. it would be interesting to gauge public reaction if such a fork were produced, i think it would do extremely, in a world where everyone wants the best of everything, im surprised people haven't caught onto the idea sooner. i think there is quite a wide market for such a fork, the current 32mm forks are not exactly noodles, but by the same token some frames with 12mm axles aren't as stiff as rivals with qr dropouts, whyte 146 and the orange 5 being the main bikes that spring to mind in such a case. like many of my POV's i imagine this all sounds abit odd, but i actually think it would make sense.

supersonic

Maybe Fox will do it, but RS won't as 32 and 35 are pretty close! I think they will lighten up the Lyrik to compete with the new lighter Fox 36, and the same with the Totem. Unless they drop the Lyrik to 34, and simialr with the Totem - I don't think any fork needs to be as big as the Totem! 32, 35, 38 seems a good comprommise to me.

Many will disagree, but I never saw why the SID was upped to 32. When it came out it was barely lighter than the Reba. Sure it was stiffer, but the whole point of the SID was a race snake fork or a fork for the very lightweight rider. Now that the new Reba weighs 1520g, and could be lighter with carbon, the SID still rests too close - I think a dedicated 'weight' focused fork like the old one would be better, and those wanting 32 should look at the Rebas. 120mm, bolt through SID I find bizarre.

In an ideal world we'd have a different stanchion size for every 10mm of travel lol.

bluechair84

supersonic wrote:

In an ideal world we'd have a different stanchion size for every 10mm of travel lol.

And as so many forks are adjustable - increasing the travel would automatically have to increase the diameter

getonyourbike

I think being able to space down a beefier fork is great. If you had a hard hitting hardtail for a freeride/slopestlye bike you could get some 36 Floats, space the, down to whatever travel you want and they'd be a s stiff, hard as nails fork with the travel that you want.

Personally, I like having 36 Floars on my 160mm bike as I ride DH on it too but I can see why people that don't do that with their 150/160mm travel bike would want a slightly lighter fork.

lawman

well, just as i thought for 2013 then seem like some good changes to the line up, good call on the 3 position damper too, allthough there will be no rp23 next year, not sure about that ...

http://mtbleaks.wordpress.com/2011/12/1 ... hox-2013/#

more 2013 stuff from shimano etc here too, new saint group and new direct mount rear mechs sound interesting...

http://www.mountainbike.com/mountainbik ... s?page=0,0

getonyourbike

Well, I've ordered some of the Low Friction seals for my 36s and some Fox Green 10wt fluid for the lower legs.

So, I'll do the lower leg service, fit the new seals and replace the Float fluid in the air spring and I'll see what difference it makes. I will report back!

386ka

So, what are the thoughts on the new seals? Are they worthy installing on 2010 Float R non-kashima?

Thewaylander

Well i spoke to the guys at Mojo, and there of the opinion the new seals are good, but the green fork oil is the win much more slippery was one of the engineers exact words

But after a service last year with the green stuff it was much better, gonna get osme of the newseals and try them next

bluechair84

Anything available for Rockshox forks? Is there a 'super' upgrade such as this? I've just picked up some Air Lyriks and might give them a service before they slot into the Torque.

Northwind

For lyriks there's a mod sometimes called the "boxxer mod" where you replace the internal oil wipers with, er, something else, foam rings maybe? Hopefully that's enough to get you started, I've not done it myself so don't know the full story.

Assuming yours have the lockout, getting rid of that is definately worthwhile if you like a sensitive fork, and it's very simple to do.