Rock Shox parts and Maintenance

[Rob]

Rock Shox parts and Maintenance

I have some older Rock Shox forks Judy XC 1996 pre the one piece type.


Two problems - can't get them completely apart and spare parts.

In the manual they say just to unscrew the 6mm bolts from the lower
tubes and slide the the forks free of the upper tubes.

This hasn't happened is there something I'm missing to dismantle the forks.


I have removed the MCU spring from the top of the forks. one side has
collapsed completely and the other is in tact. Also need the damper unit

Where do I buy parts for these forks?

Thanks

 

[Parbs]

Rob wrote:
> <snip some stuff about Rock Shox parts and Maintenance >
>
> Where do I buy parts for these forks?
>
No, but this would be a better performing replacement - stiffer & more
travel

http://www.phantomcycles.com.au/product.php?productid=2542&cat=62&page=1

Parbs

 

[Dave Hughes]

On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 10:00:30 +0000, Parbs wrote:

> No, but this would be a better performing replacement - stiffer & more
> travel

$100 more, but probably more appropriate.

http://www.phantomcycles.com.au/product.php?productid=3141&cat=62&page=3

Or for $150,
http://www.phantomcycles.com.au/product.php?productid=3368&cat=62&page=3

Seriously though, a 96 Judy is a piece of **** compared to even a budget
modern fork. Add to that you'll be doing well to find parts, and they'll
probably cost you a fair whack, a new fork isn't insane. Phantom's got a
few from Rock Shox and Manitou under $200.

--
Dave Hughes | [email protected]
Thus leading us to the obvious conclusion that all software should look
like a nipple. - Eric the Read

 

[Parbs]

Dave Hughes wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 10:00:30 +0000, Parbs wrote:
>
>> No, but this would be a better performing replacement - stiffer & more
>> travel
>
> $100 more, but probably more appropriate.
>
> http://www.phantomcycles.com.au/product.php?productid=3141&cat=62&page=3
>
> Or for $150,
> http://www.phantomcycles.com.au/product.php?productid=3368&cat=62&page=3
>
Yup with prices like that unless you were a retro nutter why would you
even repair a 5 year old fork let alone a '96 RockShock.

Parbs - who's liking his new Fox.

 

[Donga]

If it's a '96 bike, it probably has a 1" steerer. It's not easy to find
new or recent forks with 1" steerers. Ebay might be the go. Shops might
not have them on display or in the catalogue, so ask in person or by
email and they might have something out the back.

.... and if you find some, let me know, please. I've got an old RockShox
Quadra on one bike, and would like to replace it.

Donga

 

[Rob]

Parbs wrote:
> Dave Hughes wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 10:00:30 +0000, Parbs wrote:
>>
>>> No, but this would be a better performing replacement - stiffer &
>>> more travel
>>
>>
>> $100 more, but probably more appropriate.
>>
>> http://www.phantomcycles.com.au/product.php?productid=3141&cat=62&page=3
>>
>> Or for $150,
>> http://www.phantomcycles.com.au/product.php?productid=3368&cat=62&page=3
>>
> Yup with prices like that unless you were a retro nutter why would you
> even repair a 5 year old fork let alone a '96 RockShock.
>
> Parbs - who's liking his new Fox.


The bike is a VOODOO Bokor with XT gear and I would like to keep it
original to some extent. Its had little use, done about 500Km, no
serious cross country stuff. Its comfortable and light to ride.

I might have to rethink the fork situation and its a good suggestion to
update the forks BTW.


Just looked at the Voodoocycle.net site they now fit the Fox F100RL
forks to the Bokor frame.

Thanks

 

[Rob]

Parbs wrote:


> http://www.phantomcycles.com.au/product.php?productid=2542&cat=62&page=1
>
> Parbs


Actually might drive up and see what they have in stock most likely buy
something better than the RShox.

rm

 

[Rob]

Parbs wrote:


> http://www.phantomcycles.com.au/product.php?productid=2542&cat=62&page=1
>
> Parbs


Actually might drive up and see what they have in stock most likely buy
something better than the RShox.

rm

 

[Rob]

Donga wrote:

> If it's a '96 bike, it probably has a 1" steerer.

At the time it was a full spec bike.

No its bigger than that looks like 1.25" or something like that.


It's not easy to find
> new or recent forks with 1" steerers. Ebay might be the go. Shops might
> not have them on display or in the catalogue, so ask in person or by
> email and they might have something out the back.
>
> ... and if you find some, let me know, please. I've got an old RockShox
> Quadra on one bike, and would like to replace it.
>
> Donga
>

 

[Rob]

Donga wrote:

> If it's a '96 bike, it probably has a 1" steerer.

At the time it was a full spec bike.

No its bigger than that looks like 1.25" or something like that.


It's not easy to find
> new or recent forks with 1" steerers. Ebay might be the go. Shops might
> not have them on display or in the catalogue, so ask in person or by
> email and they might have something out the back.
>
> ... and if you find some, let me know, please. I've got an old RockShox
> Quadra on one bike, and would like to replace it.
>
> Donga
>

 

[Donga]

Rob wrote:
> Donga wrote:
>
> > If it's a '96 bike, it probably has a 1" steerer.
>
> At the time it was a full spec bike.
>
> No its bigger than that looks like 1.25" or something like that.

Not likely a 1.25" - these are pretty recent. 1 1/8" started coming out
in the late 90s. Try googling for your fork model and year - some
odd-bods have tables with all these specs. Also there might be
something on the RockShox website. I recall the Quadra was around '95
or '96 and these were pretty fine things at the time, though they
quickly became very obsolete and now are a complete joke - my bike with
these forks was also specced with XT.

Donga

 

[Friday]

Donga wrote:
> Rob wrote:
>
>>Donga wrote:
>>
>>
>>>If it's a '96 bike, it probably has a 1" steerer.
>>
>>At the time it was a full spec bike.
>>
>>No its bigger than that looks like 1.25" or something like that.
>
>
> Not likely a 1.25" - these are pretty recent. 1 1/8" started coming out
> in the late 90s. Try googling for your fork model and year - some
> odd-bods have tables with all these specs. Also there might be
> something on the RockShox website. I recall the Quadra was around '95
> or '96 and these were pretty fine things at the time, though they
> quickly became very obsolete and now are a complete joke - my bike with
> these forks was also specced with XT.
>
> Donga
>

Are the Quadras the same as the Mag21? I inherited a set of those off my
brother and then passed them onto a friend and they're still going
strong. I have a set of Judys in the shed collecting dust, replaced by Sids.

Friday

 

[Rob]

Donga wrote:

> Rob wrote:
>
>>Donga wrote:
>>
>>
>>>If it's a '96 bike, it probably has a 1" steerer.
>>
>>At the time it was a full spec bike.
>>
>>No its bigger than that looks like 1.25" or something like that.
>
>
> Not likely a 1.25" - these are pretty recent. 1 1/8" started coming out
> in the late 90s. Try googling for your fork model and year - some
> odd-bods have tables with all these specs. Also there might be
> something on the RockShox website. I recall the Quadra was around '95
> or '96 and these were pretty fine things at the time, though they
> quickly became very obsolete and now are a complete joke - my bike with
> these forks was also specced with XT.
>
> Donga
>

1 1/8" now I have measured it up.

Sent off an email to www.hippiesuspension.com

see what happens.

 

[Rob]

Friday wrote:

> Donga wrote:
>
>> Rob wrote:
>>
>>> Donga wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> If it's a '96 bike, it probably has a 1" steerer.
>>>
>>>
>>> At the time it was a full spec bike.
>>>
>>> No its bigger than that looks like 1.25" or something like that.
>>
>>
>>
>> Not likely a 1.25" - these are pretty recent. 1 1/8" started coming out
>> in the late 90s. Try googling for your fork model and year - some
>> odd-bods have tables with all these specs. Also there might be
>> something on the RockShox website. I recall the Quadra was around '95
>> or '96 and these were pretty fine things at the time, though they
>> quickly became very obsolete and now are a complete joke - my bike with
>> these forks was also specced with XT.
>>
>> Donga
>>
>
> Are the Quadras the same as the Mag21? I inherited a set of those off my
> brother and then passed them onto a friend and they're still going
> strong. I have a set of Judys in the shed collecting dust, replaced by
> Sids.
>
> Friday


So what are the Judys like want to sell them?

Think the quadra and Mag21 may have had a steel coil spring. (maybe wrong)

 

[Friday]

Rob wrote:
> Friday wrote:
>
>> Donga wrote:
>>
>>> Rob wrote:
>>>
>>>> Donga wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> If it's a '96 bike, it probably has a 1" steerer.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> At the time it was a full spec bike.
>>>>
>>>> No its bigger than that looks like 1.25" or something like that.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Not likely a 1.25" - these are pretty recent. 1 1/8" started coming out
>>> in the late 90s. Try googling for your fork model and year - some
>>> odd-bods have tables with all these specs. Also there might be
>>> something on the RockShox website. I recall the Quadra was around '95
>>> or '96 and these were pretty fine things at the time, though they
>>> quickly became very obsolete and now are a complete joke - my bike with
>>> these forks was also specced with XT.
>>>
>>> Donga
>>>
>>
>> Are the Quadras the same as the Mag21? I inherited a set of those off
>> my brother and then passed them onto a friend and they're still going
>> strong. I have a set of Judys in the shed collecting dust, replaced by
>> Sids.
>>
>> Friday
>
>
>
> So what are the Judys like want to sell them?
>
> Think the quadra and Mag21 may have had a steel coil spring. (maybe wrong)


Oops, I just checked and they're Pilot C. The stem length is 18cm and 1
and 1/8 inch diameter. Are you still interested in them?

Friday

 

[Dave Hughes]

On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 11:36:11 +0000, Rob wrote:

> Actually might drive up and see what they have in stock most likely buy
> something better than the RShox.

For along time RS were about all you had choice wise. Then Marzocchi and
some others made them look bad. In the last year or so RS have lifted
their game, and I think are worth looking at again. I've just bought a new
one, but I'll let you know if it's any good when I've had a chance to
bounce it off a few roots.

--
Dave Hughes | [email protected]
"This isn't life in the fast lane, it's life in the oncoming traffic."
- (Terry Pratchett, alt.fan.pratchett)

 

[Rob]

Dave Hughes wrote:

> On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 11:36:11 +0000, Rob wrote:
>
>
>>Actually might drive up and see what they have in stock most likely buy
>>something better than the RShox.
>
>
> For along time RS were about all you had choice wise. Then Marzocchi and
> some others made them look bad. In the last year or so RS have lifted
> their game, and I think are worth looking at again. I've just bought a new
> one, but I'll let you know if it's any good when I've had a chance to
> bounce it off a few roots.
>

Interesting

I've now actually tee'd up getting some elastomers made, just to get the
bike back running.

measuring them up, the RS only have 60mm travel

 

[Dave Hughes]

On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 12:22:05 +0000, Rob wrote:

> I've now actually tee'd up getting some elastomers made, just to get the
> bike back running.

What's the diameter and length? I've got various old elastomers floating
about the place and could send some your way if that falls through.
Assuming they're anywhere near the sizes I have

> measuring them up, the RS only have 60mm travel

Is that vertically or laterally?

--
Dave Hughes | [email protected]
If you drink Real beer, you become horizontal... so, if you
drink Imaginary beer, you become vertical... -- Thorfinn

 

[Rob]

Dave Hughes wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 12:22:05 +0000, Rob wrote:
>
>
>>I've now actually tee'd up getting some elastomers made, just to get the
>>bike back running.
>
>
> What's the diameter and length? I've got various old elastomers floating
> about the place and could send some your way if that falls through.
> Assuming they're anywhere near the sizes I have
>
>
>>measuring them up, the RS only have 60mm travel
>
>
> Is that vertically or laterally?
>

Dave

Sent you a message