RockShox Solo Air

[[email protected]]

I am planning on buying a new Trek fuel bike which will either have a
Rockshox tora 318 solo air or recon 351 solo air.

I am a 240lb rider and my son is a bit lighter who may be an
occasional rider.

I like the idea of adjusting the fork using only air since I am told
to really setup many of the rockshox forks right for a 240lb rider you
would have to tear down the fork and build it with a heavier spring,
so the adjustability of the solo air forks without new springs for
different riders seems good.

So my question ... is a 240lb rider too heavy for the solo air forks?
The manuals list air pressures for >220lb. (of course as I keep riding
I seem to be getting lighter).

So people think it's fine, others tell me the seals will not be
reliable but there experience seems to be on forks a couple of years
old, feedback appreciated, particulay if you have real experience with
these fork, thx.

 

[Steve Gravrock]

On 2007-06-09, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I am planning on buying a new Trek fuel bike which will either have a
> Rockshox tora 318 solo air or recon 351 solo air.
>
> I am a 240lb rider and my son is a bit lighter who may be an
> occasional rider.

[...]

> So my question ... is a 240lb rider too heavy for the solo air forks?
> The manuals list air pressures for >220lb. (of course as I keep riding
> I seem to be getting lighter).
>
> So people think it's fine, others tell me the seals will not be
> reliable but there experience seems to be on forks a couple of years
> old, feedback appreciated, particulay if you have real experience with
> these fork, thx.

I have last year's 29er version of that fork, which has 20mm less travel
and wants a correspondingly higher pressure. I weigh 200 lbs and run the
reccommended 200 PSI. The fork doesn't flex, doesn't leak, and doesn't
blow seals. I ride moderately technical trails but am not aggressive
and don't go off any big drops.

My guess is that you'll probably be ok, but if you're concerned about it
you should ask whether blown seals are covered under warranty. I don't
see any weight limit in the Tora manual.

 

[Chris Nelson]

On Jun 9, 2:05 pm, [email protected] wrote:
> I am planning on buying a new Trek fuel bike which will either have a
> Rockshox tora 318 solo air or recon 351 solo air.
>
> I am a 240lb rider and my son is a bit lighter who may be an
> occasional rider.
>
> I like the idea of adjusting the fork using only air since I am told
> to really setup many of the rockshox forks right for a 240lb rider you
> would have to tear down the fork and build it with a heavier spring,
> so the adjustability of the solo air forks without new springs for
> different riders seems good.
>
> So my question ... is a 240lb rider too heavy for the solo air forks?
> The manuals list air pressures for >220lb. (of course as I keep riding
> I seem to be getting lighter).
>
> So people think it's fine, others tell me the seals will not be
> reliable but there experience seems to be on forks a couple of years
> old, feedback appreciated, particulay if you have real experience with
> these fork, thx.

You might want to take a look at the Remedy instead of the Fuel. It
may be overkill on travel, but an all around beefier bike. The seals
are not the only thing that can blow.

Chris

 

[Callistus Valerius]

> I have last year's 29er version of that fork,
======
What is the advantage of a 29er? It would seem to me it would put your
center of gravity higher, and be a big disadvantage in mountain biking. I'm
a complete newbie to mtb, if this seems like a stupid question. Is it for
tall guys?

 

[Steve Gravrock]

On 2007-06-09, Callistus Valerius <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I have last year's 29er version of that fork,
>======
> What is the advantage of a 29er? It would seem to me it would put your
> center of gravity higher, and be a big disadvantage in mountain biking. I'm
> a complete newbie to mtb, if this seems like a stupid question.

Your center of gravity is determined by the placement of the bottom
bracket, saddle, and handlebars. None of those are necessarily raised
by going to larger wheels. One of the claimed advantages of 29ers is
that your center of gravity ends up lower relative to the axles, which
is supposed to help stability.

Whatever the cause, I do find the bike to be more stable. Increased low
speed stability and a lower stall speed sold me on it, since I usually
crash due to losing control at low speed while picking my way through
sections that intimidate me. Since then, I've found that the stability
difference is even more dramatic at higher speeds.

The larger tire volume allows you to run lower pressures without getting
pinch flats, which makes for better grip and provides a measure of extra
suspension. It's also possible to ride over somewhat bigger obstacles
without lifting the front wheel.

Disadvantages: 29ers tend to have shorter travel forks. The front end is
tall despite that, which makes it difficult to design frames for shorter
riders. The smaller frame sizes can end up looking pretty odd. I find
that my 29er is a little harder to ride through switchbacks, although
there may be other factors than wheel size at play there. At a given
price point, you'll typically get better components and lighter wheels
on a 26" wheeled bike.

> Is it for tall guys?

Not necessarily, although I understand that taller riders benefit more.
I'm 5'6 and ride the smallest Gary Fisher 29er hardtail frame. Some of
the boutique builders (of which there are many in the 29er world) go a
bit smaller.

Wheel size is becoming a contentious issue in mountain biking, and there
are plenty who disagree with me.

More than you ever wanted to know: <http://www.mtbr.com/29er/>

 

[Callistus Valerius]

> > What is the advantage of a 29er? It would seem to me it would put your
> > center of gravity higher, and be a big disadvantage in mountain biking.
I'm
> > a complete newbie to mtb, if this seems like a stupid question.
>
> Your center of gravity is determined by the placement of the bottom
> bracket, saddle, and handlebars. None of those are necessarily raised
> by going to larger wheels. One of the claimed advantages of 29ers is
> that your center of gravity ends up lower relative to the axles, which
> is supposed to help stability.
>
> Whatever the cause, I do find the bike to be more stable. Increased low
> speed stability and a lower stall speed sold me on it, since I usually
> crash due to losing control at low speed while picking my way through
> sections that intimidate me. Since then, I've found that the stability
> difference is even more dramatic at higher speeds.
>
> The larger tire volume allows you to run lower pressures without getting
> pinch flats, which makes for better grip and provides a measure of extra
> suspension. It's also possible to ride over somewhat bigger obstacles
> without lifting the front wheel.

>
> Disadvantages: 29ers tend to have shorter travel forks. The front end is
> tall despite that, which makes it difficult to design frames for shorter
> riders. The smaller frame sizes can end up looking pretty odd. I find
> that my 29er is a little harder to ride through switchbacks, although
> there may be other factors than wheel size at play there. At a given
> price point, you'll typically get better components and lighter wheels
> on a 26" wheeled bike.
>
> > Is it for tall guys?
>
> Not necessarily, although I understand that taller riders benefit more.
> I'm 5'6 and ride the smallest Gary Fisher 29er hardtail frame. Some of
> the boutique builders (of which there are many in the 29er world) go a
> bit smaller.
>
> Wheel size is becoming a contentious issue in mountain biking, and there
> are plenty who disagree with me.
>
> More than you ever wanted to know: <http://www.mtbr.com/29er/>
---------
hey, thanks -- learn something new everyday. They look good.