140 vs 160??

mr joey

right did"nt get much response to my other topic Hmmmmm! so question is 140 or 160 on a heckler

bennett_346

What?

mr joey

ive bought a heckler frame and want to know would you have a 140mm or a 160 up front

chazkayak

Whats the rear?

oodboo

160mm, you can always reduce them if you find it's too much (depending on fork anyway).

mr joey

and is there mega difference in travel between the two??

oodboo

mr joey wrote:

and is there mega difference in travel between the two??

There's 20mm difference.

mr joey

knew someone was gonna say that! is it worth spending more for the sake of 20mm?

oodboo

Would be for me as a fat bloke as the 160mm forks usually have a burlier construction and would flex less under my weight. If I was wanting to buy 140mm forks I'd be looking at fox 36 floats (36mm stanchions) or RS Lyriks (35mm stanchions) with a view to reducing them.

MountainMonster

Same or more travel up front than rear is what I always say. I'd go 160.

philRM

150

bennett_346

Isn't the rear 150?

miss notax

150.

For a couple of reasons, firstly because Notax has 150 forks on his Heckler and I have always thought that it's a good solid 'fun on the downs but can climb too' amount of travel. Secondly because I consider a Heckler to be a good all-purpose MTB, and as someone that bikes with both 140 and 160 forks, I can confirm that whilst the 140 forks can sometime sbe a tad 'lively' on the descents, the 160 forks are a bugger on a long technical climb

delcol

IME the heckler is better with 160mm forks it slackens the head angle off nicely and it really comes to live on the downs.. still climbs well to...


when i built my heckler up i had it on fox tals r 140mm i would blow through the travel and bottom them out to easy. the bike felt twitchy and sketchey, esp on the decents... it was worse when i took it to whistler for the first time, after sevral scary moments, and nearly going otb one a teccy rock roll,, i went to the shop and got some 160mm forks..
it was a massive imporvement straight away.. the slacker headangle was more confidence inspiring the twitchey felling had gone the handling was improved,, and no more bottoming out and no more scary moments.. especially on that slick rock,(rock roll) which i had to go try again...

Anonymous

I'd be edging towards 160 for the slacker angle but that all depends what and how you like to ride.

But at 160 you're into Blur LT and Nomad territory anyway which are more suited to 160.

Thewaylander

160 especially if your thinking fox.

All the 32's are awfully flexy and no fun when you try and push the pace a little.

b45her

wait a little while and get the 34mm x-fusions , best of both worlds .

bennett_346

I've been very tempted by them recently. Sometimes it's nice to ride something out of the ordinary.

compo

Not fully clued up on forks, but why not just get a travel adjustable one?

warpcow

160mm here too. I've had 140 and 160 (Pike and Wotan) on my Heckler and, like delcol says, 160 improves the handling for the better. Also, the increased stiffness is a noticable bonus too. I have travel-adjust on both forks and have never felt the need to use it, but thats probably more personal choice.

weescott

The Heckler front end tends to get a bit light on the steep climbs with 160mm forks. It's a bike where Talas works well. Go for 160 if you tend to do more agressive riding, or 140mm if you are more classic XC orientated.

bennett_346

150 revs would be my choice

supersonic

Lyriks for harder riding, Revs if you are lighter. Simple as that.

mr joey

abit of a pain really as i like blasting up and down descents probaly go with a 150 fork?? have a budget of £450 any ideas??

delcol

i never had my front end lifting on either my heckler my butcher or my stylus on steep climbs, and all have 160mm forks on them... and i done some pretty big steep climbs in whistler on both the santacruz's.

as for the travel adjust both had talas rc2 on so can be adjusted i never use it though i tend to leave them at 160mm up and down....

Anonymous

I climb no problem on 170 lyriks on the Nomad. Feels just the same as my 130 did on the old GT and the same forks now on my c456 (slacker bike than the GT).

I don't even use (or have) lock out on the forks and have never had a need for it.

On an all mountain bike, whilst they are slacker, they are designed for *all mountain*. They will climb fine. I'm really impressed at how the Nomad is a very competent and nippy trail bike as much as it's a big rig for the downs and spot of freeride.

Though if climbing is the only thing you ride for, then you want a carbon XC whippet climbing race machine, and lots of lycra

mr joey

no thanks!

1mancity2

for £450 id be looking at a top end 150 Rev or a Lyrik spaced down, if you can push the budget a Marzocchi 44

mr joey

my lbs told me to stay away from marzocchi as their not made in italy anymore :?:

Anonymous

Santa Cruz frames are made in Taiwan. Still the dogs danglies.

Frankly I'd trust something made in Taiwan over Italy anyway

And whatever advice your LBS gives is based on what they want to sell. Probably trying to shift something else they get more profit on

bennett_346

deadkenny wrote:

Frankly I'd trust something made in Taiwan over Italy anyway

Really, really this.