or Connect
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Off-Season Sports & The Lighter Side › Cycling › Attention bike techs- Need advice on possible conversion on my Superfly 100 - Fox Talus 32 29 CDT 120
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Attention bike techs- Need advice on possible conversion on my Superfly 100 - Fox Talus 32 29 CDT 120

post #1 of 29
Thread Starter 

I was thinking about upgrading my OEM shock and going to 120 on my 2012 SuperFly 100AL. I really like the bike but not thrilled with the OEM fork. I would also like to go to 120 (although if this is not a good idea, I'm fine with just upgrading to a good 100 fork). The issue is that the Superfly (like other treks/Gary's) have the G2, 51mm offset.  The standard Fox is 46, and I have been told that there is no issue with using the 46 however, it has to have an effect on the Head tube Angle. I don't mind a slightly slacker Head tube (its 70*) but I don't want to change it substantially; I love its climbing ability and quickness. Yeah, it can be a little twitchy on the down.   The other option of course is to order a G2 from Fox.    

 

Here's an article saying its fine but I would like to hear other opinions. 

 

http://blog.artscyclery.com/ask-a-mechanic/ask-a-mechanic-29er-forks-46mm-or-51mm-offset/http://blog.artscyclery.com/ask-a-mechanic/ask-a-mechanic-29er-forks-46mm-or-51mm-offset/

 

 

thoughts are appreciated.  

post #2 of 29
Link appears to be messed up. Have you checked the warranty on the frame wrt using more fork? What don't you like about the oem fork?
post #3 of 29
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by qcanoe View Post

Link appears to be messed up. Have you checked the warranty on the frame wrt using more fork? What don't you like about the oem fork?

 

 

Link works fine on safari...  

 

I have attempted to contact Trek but no response yet.  That's the new norm these days for customer service........  Haven't you noticed that?  

I spoke to Fox, they told me it would fit but I had to speak with trek....  I also spoke with a shop who wasn't sure.......

 

 

OEM fork is vague. I have adjusted and played with all controls but its just not what I am looking for. I think going to 120 would give me what I want; a little more travel with better performance. The shock is more like on or off, if you set it soft even with the response quickened, its just mushy and sloppy, if you increase the air pressure and go mid on the response, its just too harsh, I can't seem to find a good setting.  Keep in mind I am riding this on pretty much classic XC terrain in CO but there are rocky areas, steeper sections and rocky rooted climbs and descents with a lot of switchbacks.  I don't want a long travel bike; I like the feel of the Superfly so i don't want to change the bike substantively . 

post #4 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finndog View Post
 

I was thinking about upgrading my OEM shock and going to 120 on my 2012 SuperFly 100AL. I really like the bike but not thrilled with the OEM fork. I would also like to go to 120 (although if this is not a good idea, I'm fine with just upgrading to a good 100 fork). The issue is that the Superfly (like other treks/Gary's) have the G2, 51mm offset.  The standard Fox is 46, and I have been told that there is no issue with using the 46 however, it has to have an effect on the Head tube Angle. I don't mind a slightly slacker Head tube (its 70*) but I don't want to change it substantially; I love its climbing ability and quickness. Yeah, it can be a little twitchy on the down.   The other option of course is to order a G2 from Fox.    

 

Here's an article saying its fine but I would like to hear other opinions. 

 

http://blog.artscyclery.com/ask-a-mechanic/ask-a-mechanic-29er-forks-46mm-or-51mm-offset/http://blog.artscyclery.com/ask-a-mechanic/ask-a-mechanic-29er-forks-46mm-or-51mm-offset/

 

 

thoughts are appreciated.  

 

 

you head angle does not change by changing the off set your "trail" does.  More Trail make a bike more likely to stay straight(effectively feeling slacker) and more nimble under steering(but not leaning) efforts which actually feels effectively like a steeper angle fork.

 

this is why offset and trail are funny characteristics and how they fit into the overall bike geometery can be extremely hard to simplify it for one I do not know if you lean the bike over or steer it, I have no idea what tires you use, and have a vague idea of your superfly other geometery numbers. 

 

Also by going to longer travel fork upfront you are going to raise your hands up, on my recent experiment I had to take some spacers out from under my stem to make the bike feel normal again. Keep that in mind if you decide to go with a longer travel fork 

 

My experince is this. 

 

on my anthem X 29er(bike that is really similar in scope to the superfly)  I trying to dial a 120mm Manitou in before my Kona Honzo frame arrives. The 120mm fork on the Anthem X is for sure a better setup for plowing straight though chunky stuff, but its leaned over turning has for sure been affected in negative way and its got a tiny bit slower when in steered turns. The Manitou has a 48 mm offset though which is just slightly more than the 3 others fork I have had on this bike (Fox Float 100 RL, Marzoricchi 44 TSY 2, RockShox Reba RLTi). The 120 fork does not make this bike more fun. It just make it slower to climb and more ponderous to turn. 

 

the conclusion is that the Reba is the most fun fork this bike, and that my anthem is just not a trail bike. IE that if the Geo is something you are not happy with it might be time to move on to another bike. 

 

 

curious what dont you like about your stock fork? If it small bump compliance the issue is not the level of Fox fork, its the fact its a fox fork. 

post #5 of 29
Thread Starter 

@Josh 

 

See post above.  As I originally posted, I may just benefit from a better quality fork.  For 100 though, a Talas CDT control is pretty useless.  See my comments and maybe there are better settings to try.    Also open to suggestions for forks.  I agree about the 120 being more ponderous in climbing which is why the Talas would allow the ability to restrict to 95 on the climbs, and then go to 120 on the traverses and the down.  

 

 

Current fork 

 

Air- 85#, 7 or 8 clicks.   

 

Me, figure 175 dressed for riding. 

 

Bike- Stans Arches wheeelset (thanks Dawg) tires, Schwalbe NNics, 2.35, inflated to 20#, I try to lean and not steer.  I am not a fast rider but learning and increasing speed. 

post #6 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finndog View Post
 

@Josh 

 

See post above.  As I originally posted, I may just benefit from a better quality fork.  For 100 though, a Talas CDT control is pretty useless.  See my comments and maybe there are better settings to try.    Also open to suggestions for forks. 

 

 

Current fork 

 

Air- 85#, 7 or 8 clicks.   

 

Me, figure 175 dressed for riding. 

 

Bike- Stans Arches wheeelset (thanks Dawg) tires, Schwalbe NNics, 2.35, inflated to 20#, I try to lean and not steer.  I am not a fast rider but learning and increasing speed. 

 

Finn, IMHO the obvious next step for you is to call Push and just tell them the whole story and ask them what they think. They are relatively local to you in Colorado, too, if that matters. It's been a while since I used them, but I was always impressed by their honesty, speed, expertise, and the performance of shocks they've worked on for me.

post #7 of 29
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by qcanoe View Post
 

 

Finn, IMHO the obvious next step for you is to call Push and just tell them the whole story and ask them what they think. They are relatively local to you in Colorado, too, if that matters. It's been a while since I used them, but I was always impressed by their honesty, speed, expertise, and the performance of shocks they've worked on for me.

 

 

Great advice.  thanks.  

post #8 of 29
Thread Starter 

@qcanoe 

 

I called Push today, great people.  I am going to send in my fork and shock to be rebuilt and have a high pressure Air piston installed in the fork and a factory tune on the shock (which includes a similar product to a Fox Booster and then its tuned to rider weight and terrain) .  I am on the fence in converting it to a RLC (compression) shock.  They can increase my fork travel to 110. So for about $415, I am getting essentially a new fork and shock. I also think the added 1cm in travel will add enough to make rocky terrain and the down a bit more stable.  From our conversation "Nick" was positive they could increase the responsiveness of the fork and get it working better than OEM.  

 

I can't say enough about the outstanding initial experience with Push.   Thanks Qcanoe.  

post #9 of 29

My own personal opinion, FWIW, 99% of people would not be able to tell the difference in 5mm of offset in a blind test.  You're talking about a suspension fork where travel affects the geometry far more significantly.

post #10 of 29
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott43 View Post
 

My own personal opinion, FWIW, 99% of people would not be able to tell the difference in 5mm of offset in a blind test.  You're talking about a suspension fork where travel affects the geometry far more significantly.

 

 

As I researched and learned more the offset is not really the issue. As @Josh posted the height is more of an issue than anything else which really can be remedied or easliy adjusted to personal taste.   I am going to have Push do the rebuilds. When you look at the cost and value its a no-brainer.

 

much thanks to all.  Thumbs Up 

post #11 of 29
Perhaps PUSH can install a Talas cartridge so you can adjust the travel to your liking.
post #12 of 29
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by epic View Post

Perhaps PUSH can install a Talas cartridge so you can adjust the travel to your liking.

 

 

I think with 110, there's really no advantage. At that point, I can just lock it out on the climb. 

post #13 of 29

 maybe just get more "trail" geometery bike that if you spent enough would be lighter and climb better than your Superfly..... while being more fun anyplace else.

 

As someone who owns 2 xc geometery bikes. Long travel, slacker easier to throw around bike are just plain more fun to ride and with enough money will be lighter and faster than a aluminin Superfly......

 

You can get a sub 25lb trance X 27.5 

post #14 of 29
Th
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finndog View Post


I think with 110, there's really no advantage. At that point, I can just lock it out on the climb. 
The point is that if you are afraid of the increased travel affecting your geometry this would let you change it back. Also people like Talas for climbing because a slacker head can feel floppy. Lockout doesn't change that.
post #15 of 29

Finndog has a nice bike and I have no doubt he'll tweak some things and renew the honeymoon feeling for at least another season. (Remember whom we're talking about here. Long-term loyalty to a single piece of gear is not his forte.) 

 

Meanwhile, in the longer term, Josh is probably onto something(s). The state of the art for "trail" bikes is now such that the people I know who genuinely prefer a true XC style bike (80 or 100mm travel, steepish angles, longish cockpit, lots of platform in the suspension, maybe even a hardtail) are few and far between. Singlespeed mania has waxed and now waned back to a sensible level. The people riding true XC bikes tend to be young masochistic hard-bodies who are very into race results. The rest of us middle-aged slobs seem to think your basic 5-inch travel trail ride sacrifices so little in weight and speed - relative to the gains in rider endurance and pleasure that come from more cush and and more idiot-proof handling - that it's a no-brainer.

 

Also, Josh, re: the small-bump compliance on Fox forks that you mention: Years ago when I sent my old Float to Push I specifically asked them to look at that and they did improve it.

 

When I got my new bike in 2010 I got another Fox, but ended up swapping it out for a Reba because the dual air thing worked better for me at my weight and preference for running lots of sag. The problem with the Fox was that it has a built-in non-adjustable negative pressure spring, and when you get down below a certain psi in the fork the negative pressure starts to overwhelm the air pressure and the fork will never fully extend, even in the air or whatever.

post #16 of 29

I just had Trance Carbon advance SX 160 front and 140 rear on the scale here and its was 25.4 lb.  I am certain it actually faster XC bike than my 27.5 Lb Anthem X 29err......while being more fun all round.

 

Qcanoe my next bike is a hardtail SS "trail" bike. 120-140 front fork, 67.5 degree headangle, long top tube(to run a short stem), and 16.3 chainstays.... I bet @Liam can guess what it is. My next bike after that is 27.5 Trance X........

 

 

 

 

on my demo it descended far better than my FS XC biike....

post #17 of 29

the point is Geometery and how it all works together has so much with how a bike handles....

post #18 of 29
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by qcanoe View Post
 

Finndog has a nice bike and I have no doubt he'll tweak some things and renew the honeymoon feeling for at least another season. (Remember whom we're talking about here. Long-term loyalty to a single piece of gear is not his forte.) 

 

Meanwhile, in the longer term, Josh is probably onto something(s). The state of the art for "trail" bikes is now such that the people I know who genuinely prefer a true XC style bike (80 or 100mm travel, steepish angles, longish cockpit, lots of platform in the suspension, maybe even a hardtail) are few and far between. Singlespeed mania has waxed and now waned back to a sensible level. The people riding true XC bikes tend to be young masochistic hard-bodies who are very into race results. The rest of us middle-aged slobs seem to think your basic 5-inch travel trail ride sacrifices so little in weight and speed - relative to the gains in rider endurance and pleasure that come from more cush and and more idiot-proof handling - that it's a no-brainer.

 

Also, Josh, re: the small-bump compliance on Fox forks that you mention: Years ago when I sent my old Float to Push I specifically asked them to look at that and they did improve it.

 

When I got my new bike in 2010 I got another Fox, but ended up swapping it out for a Reba because the dual air thing worked better for me at my weight and preference for running lots of sag. The problem with the Fox was that it has a built-in non-adjustable negative pressure spring, and when you get down below a certain psi in the fork the negative pressure starts to overwhelm the air pressure and the fork will never fully extend, even in the air or whatever.

The typical Emerald Mountain ride encompasses ~1200' climb up buffed switchbacks over about 1.5 to 2 miles which puts you up on the mountain and then from there you can do some traversing, more climbing, some descent, climbing and so on. nothing highly technical. Classic XC terrain which makes the S_FLy one of the most popular bikes up here for Emerald MTN.  You will still see plenty of Htails up here.   

 

@qcanoe @Josh I really enjoy this bike and if I can ever heal and recover from my past 3 years of damage I would ride it much more. (I am still not permitted to climb). Although you are correct, I like to ride different bikes and different skis, the S-Fly is dialed in for my CO backyard, so for now, I don't even want a new bike. I bought the S-Fly on closeout (its a 2012) a year and half ago thinking I would have been all rehabbed and ready to roll  (hahhahaha) anyway, it was a screaming deal since I need a larger frame for my long legs (21" fits me fine a 19" puts me sitting way too high on the seat post requiring me to jack the H-bars too high) My next bike will almost definitely be a 27.5 with 130/40 for different riding terrain and I will keep the S-Fly 

 

 

So this leads me to the fork. Do I need 120? no, it would be nice to have a little more on the Down, if there's one thing the S-Fly doesn't do well is the down, Its not that its bad but with that steep head, you have to get your ass way off the back on steeper switchback descents and rocky loose stuff can be tricky. Its more skill-related than anything else. @epic you are correct but putting a Talas on for 10mm of travel doesn't seem to be worthwhile for the difference; I think 110 won't really change the geometry materially.   The shock needs to be tweaked as well. Its not very good at smoothing out slow speed bumps; needs to be smoother and more dynamic.   So...  the rebuild of both from Push seems to be just what I need....  Ride on my friends..  since I can't  :)    


Edited by Finndog - 7/4/14 at 5:01am
post #19 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finndog View Post
 

 

@qcanoe @Josh I really enjoy this bike and if I can ever heal and recover from my past 3 years of damage I would ride it much more. (I am still not permitted to climb). Although you are correct, I like to ride different bikes and different skis, the S-Fly is dialed in for my CO backyard, that right now, I don't even want a new bike. I bought the S-Fly on closeout (its a 2012) a year and half ago thinking I would have been all rehabbed and ready to roll  (hahhahaha) anyway, it was a screaming deal since I need a larger frame for my long legs (21" fits me fine) and  19" puts me sitting way too high on the seat post.  My next bike will almost definitely be a 27.5 with 130/40 for different riding terrain and I will keep the S-Fly 

 

The basic ride encompasses 1200' over about 1.5 to 2 miles which puts you up on the mountain and then from there you can do some traversing, more climbing, some descent, climbing and so on.  Lots of switchbacks. Classic XC terrain which makes the S_FLy one of the most popular bikes up here for Emerald MTN.   

 

So this leads me to the fork. Do I need 120? no, it would be nice to have a little more on the Down, if there's one thing the S-Fly doesn't do well is the down, Its not that its bad but with that steep head, you have to get your ass way off the back on steeper switchback descents and rocky loose stuff can be tricky. Its more skill-related than anything else. @epic you are correct but putting a Talas on for 10mm of travel doesn't seem to be worthwhile for the difference; I think 110 won't really change the geometry materially.   The shock needs to be tweaked as well. Its not very good at smoothing out slow speed bumps; needs to be smoother and more dynamic.   So...  the rebuild of both from Push seems to be just what I need....  Ride on my friends..  since I can't  :)    

 

 

the thing is I am certain sticking a 120mm fork on to that bike will just make it just longer and less nimble with very little plow gain over 100 mm fork, Most XC style bike just have truly screw up geometery for actually riding and it hard to know that till you get on something with good geo. 

post #20 of 29
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Matta View Post
 

 

 

 

curious what dont you like about your stock fork? If it small bump compliance the issue is not the level of Fox fork, its the fact its a fox fork. 

@Josh    I missed this before-  YES  100% correct.  

 

did discuss this with Push and they said they can address this on the rebuild. I want better compliance from both the fork and shock 

post #21 of 29
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh Matta View Post
 

 

 

the thing is I am certain sticking a 120mm fork on to that bike will just make it just longer and less nimble with very little plow gain over 100 mm fork, Most XC style bike just have truly screw up geometery for actually riding and it hard to know that till you get on something with good geo. 

 

yep, I agree upon investigation and speaking to Push. I am fine with just having the rebuild and having better shock/fork performance over longer travel. I have the OPTION to extend the fork to 110, it was suggested by Push. But after speaking with them, I have a lot of confidence the main issue I am having is just a poorly performing shock/fork much more than a travel issue.  I like the S-Fly geo, it climbs crazy well and I like the handling.  For a bike I paid $1,600 for I have built it up to perform pretty dam well and still pretty light. 

post #22 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finndog View Post
 

Ride on my friends..  since I can't  :)    

 

What the heck did you do to yourself?

post #23 of 29
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by qcanoe View Post

 

Also, Josh, re: the small-bump compliance on Fox forks that you mention: Years ago when I sent my old Float to Push I specifically asked them to look at that and they did improve it.

 

When I got my new bike in 2010 I got another Fox, but ended up swapping it out for a Reba because the dual air thing worked better for me at my weight and preference for running lots of sag. The problem with the Fox was that it has a built-in non-adjustable negative pressure spring, and when you get down below a certain psi in the fork the negative pressure starts to overwhelm the air pressure and the fork will never fully extend, even in the air or whatever.

I should have combined this with my post to Josh.  

 

So @qcanoe  did they improve the response enough?  Did Push install the high pressure system? 

post #24 of 29
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by epic View Post
 

 

What the heck did you do to yourself?

still recovering from Hip Surgery from March.  Its been very slow. Much slower than predicted. Lots of issues with muscles that had shut down and aren't engaging correctly in the Glutes. Causes other muscles to overload. Have to be very careful when riding/exercising to not overload the legs. VERY frustrating  

post #25 of 29

You'll like (and notice) the 110 up front.  I'm late to the thread, or I would have encouraged you wholeheartedly to buy a 120.  Every year, my race bike comes with a 100 and it ends the season with a 120 or 110.

 

Unless you're pinning it every week on the xc course, the benefits of a 120 far outweigh a 100 IMO.

 

Good luck with the hip recovery!

post #26 of 29
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by HRPufnStf View Post
 

You'll like (and notice) the 110 up front.  I'm late to the thread, or I would have encouraged you wholeheartedly to buy a 120.  Every year, my race bike comes with a 100 and it ends the season with a 120 or 110.

 

Unless you're pinning it every week on the xc course, the benefits of a 120 far outweigh a 100 IMO.

 

Good luck with the hip recovery!

thanks! Info and feedback is greatly appreciated. You nailed it. Rding for fun, period, end of story.  No racing.  I am going to send in the fork this week

post #27 of 29

If you riding for plain fun why ride an XC race bike? 

post #28 of 29
Thread Starter 

oh Josh.....  

post #29 of 29
Thread Starter 

The fork is sitting at PUSH scheduled for work this week........ I ordered the rebuild with the High Volume Piston kit and increasing the travel to 110.  I figured that since I can't climb yet, I might as well get it all done, plus it just helps mentally for stoke. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Cycling
EpicSki › The Barking Bear Forums › Off-Season Sports & The Lighter Side › Cycling › Attention bike techs- Need advice on possible conversion on my Superfly 100 - Fox Talus 32 29 CDT 120