2019 Prototype Boxxer ?

Create New Tag

2/24/2018 3:12 AM







|

2/24/2018 4:03 AM



|

2/24/2018 8:59 AM

Interested.

|

2/24/2018 3:09 PM

|

2/25/2018 1:30 PM

Offset on those forks!

|

2/26/2018 9:40 PM
Edited Date/Time: 2/26/2018 11:28 PM

Is it just me that thinks the stanchions look wider than the current boxxer?

|

2/26/2018 9:42 PM

Off topic and poor image, but it looks like Damien Oton is running a RockShox fork with red lowers.
O

|

3/1/2018 1:27 AM

|

3/2/2018 3:56 PM

more pics of jack's boxxer at aussie nats. dean has one too. thanks dylan!






|

3/2/2018 4:40 PM

Does that much offset make anyone else throw up in their mouths? Whats the point of that?

|

yak

3/2/2018 4:50 PM

jackhill wrote:

Does that much offset make anyone else throw up in their mouths? Whats the point of that?

Not totally sure, it might have something to do with trying to nail the geo with the big wheels. Or maybe its a custom little deal since jack is such a big dude.

|

3/2/2018 5:17 PM

jackhill wrote:

Does that much offset make anyone else throw up in their mouths? Whats the point of that?

My guess is it has to do with rotor size and the brake mount on the lowers. If the rotor is larger than 203mm, RS may have to move the offset forward. .02

|

3/2/2018 5:22 PM
Edited Date/Time: 3/2/2018 5:22 PM

Another picture of Jack's bike from his insta story. Also with red lowers




|

3/2/2018 5:42 PM

Troy Brosnan and Connor Fearon both on red blackbox forks.

|

3/2/2018 7:27 PM

Almost all the offset is in the lowers, crowns are nearly neutral so its probably not as much as it may look. Check the position of the stanchions in relation to the steerer in the upper crown. They're def more rearward than the current Boxxer. I really wish they would finally make it wider to improve steering angle, but it looks similar to the current setup.

|

3/2/2018 9:05 PM

Silver Crowns, Red Lowers can I smell a 20th anniversary Boxxer ?









|

3/2/2018 11:41 PM

I think the black box crowns look like they've reduced the offset?
Chris Porter has said that the offset on the Fox 49 is 60mm and he is playing with reducing them with new crowns.

|

3/3/2018 12:17 AM

jackhill wrote:

Does that much offset make anyone else throw up in their mouths? Whats the point of that?

Breyton wrote:

Not totally sure, it might have something to do with trying to nail the geo with the big wheels. Or maybe its a custom little deal since jack is such a big dude.

I can almost guarantee that it's not a one off for racers, the cost of a mold to cast lowers is crazy high and these companies do not invest in something like that unless they are going to produce a large amount. This is probably going to be production and is because of the long travel, big wheels, and head angle that a trail like this is necessary. still speculation though, so who knows. I don't know of a cost effective way for casting lowers that would be worth it just for the race program.

|

3/3/2018 5:19 AM

jackhill wrote:

Does that much offset make anyone else throw up in their mouths? Whats the point of that?

Yep, can’t stand big offsets on my 29er . Front wheel tuck tastic!! Maybe the crown is modified so it’s not as big as it would appear...

|

Fristonboy

3/3/2018 7:38 AM
Edited Date/Time: 3/3/2018 7:40 AM

|

3/3/2018 9:18 AM

Here's a link to a quick article on fork geometry from the website of a motorcycle shop where I used to work.

http://www.bankeperformance.com/tech/tech_forks.html

|

3/3/2018 10:39 PM

jackhill wrote:

Does that much offset make anyone else throw up in their mouths? Whats the point of that?

Jim_Oxborrow wrote:

Yep, can’t stand big offsets on my 29er . Front wheel tuck tastic!! Maybe the crown is modified so it’s not as big as it would appear...

If your front wheel is tuck is a problem on your 29er then I think you need to look at your headangle rather than your fork offset. How much travel do you have on the fork and what is your headangle? If it is +150mm and +65º then you need to go slacker. MX bikes have more offset and they have DH like headangles with more travel and they don't suffer. I have a 160mm travel fork with 51mm offset and have run it with 29er and 650b with no problems. My old Shiver had 50mm offset and worked great with 26 and 650b wheels.

|

3/4/2018 12:40 AM
Edited Date/Time: 3/4/2018 1:47 AM

jackhill wrote:

Does that much offset make anyone else throw up in their mouths? Whats the point of that?

Jim_Oxborrow wrote:

Yep, can’t stand big offsets on my 29er . Front wheel tuck tastic!! Maybe the crown is modified so it’s not as big as it would appear...

Fred_Pop wrote:

If your front wheel is tuck is a problem on your 29er then I think you need to look at your headangle rather than your fork offset. How much travel do you have on the fork and what is your headangle? If it is +150mm and +65º then you need to go slacker. MX bikes have more offset and they have DH like headangles with more travel and they don't suffer. I have a 160mm travel fork with 51mm offset and have run it with 29er and 650b with no problems. My old Shiver had 50mm offset and worked great with 26 and 650b wheels.

Agreed. Don’t believe tuck necessarily related to ‘normal’ or more offset alone. Ime it can also be an issue with reduced offset. With the caveat that reducing offset will generally put more weight on the front wheel and therefore more grip all else being the same. Offset is the hot topic at the mo but it’s not as clear cut as people want other people to think. You can’t just reduce the offset and make everything better. I think you need to look at both the head angle AND the offset as well as a few other factors like how far the front wheel is from the BB, how much reach you got (and more generally where the bars are and the resulting body position). And even stem length. Not saying you don’t have an issue, just that there are many contributing factors.

On the Boxxers I was wondering if there are issues with the stanchions/ bar plane altercations? My thoughts were that riders are likely to try and get the bar height down which would lead to possibility of the stanchions in the way of (or maybe just too close to) the bars. But looking at Jacks bars maybe I was completely off base!!




|

3/4/2018 5:27 AM

Well It may be a personal riding style thing but I went from a 2016 enduro 29 with 46mm offset to a 2017 model with 51mm. Even though its slacker the bike kept on under steering when really pushed. The longer offset creates a faster turn in but then The contact patch is overloaded and effectively tucks under. Ive since purchased an old pair of pikes and it now corners like a beauty. If you haven’t tried shorter offset then I recommend it. One thing I actually agree with Chris Porter on....

|

Fristonboy

3/4/2018 9:25 AM

Mojo's attempt at gaslighting is pretty easy to debunk. The 29ers that saw success and remained on the would cup were the refined production type bikes (Santa Cruz, Intense and Commencal(Pierron )). It was the hacked together bikes (Eddie Masters, Scott) that were quickly abandoned.

|

3/4/2018 12:54 PM

Jim_Oxborrow wrote:

Well It may be a personal riding style thing but I went from a 2016 enduro 29 with 46mm offset to a 2017 model with 51mm. Even though its slacker the bike kept on under steering when really pushed. The longer offset creates a faster turn in but then The contact patch is overloaded and effectively tucks under. Ive since purchased an old pair of pikes and it now corners like a beauty. If you haven’t tried shorter offset then I recommend it. One thing I actually agree with Chris Porter on....

You have actually tried it on your own bike for yourself so your findings are obviously legit and I’m not here to question that - I’m happy you found a way to make your ride work better for you. And you make another good point that as well as all those factors I listed off it may also come down to the way you corner the bike and where your weight is etc. So yeah many things at play.
Sounds like you know what you’re talking about and I reiterate I’m not looking for an argument, it’s interesting you mention the bigger offset forks had a quicker turn-in as I actually find shorter offsets turn in more readily. That’s my main reason for disliking them, at slow speeds the front wheel wants to turn in on deflection and camber where you want it to stay straight. I find it this can be a benefit at speed on the right tracks etc but after a while i found I was experiencing the negatives more often than the positives (lots of short and twisty, slower speed trails). I found 64° and 46mm offset to give too much flop and preferred 51mm. In the end though I decided to keep the 46mm and steepend the HA to about 65.5° (this was a 29er of course). Then I decided to sack it all off and go back to 27.5 XD

|

3/4/2018 11:05 PM
Edited Date/Time: 3/4/2018 11:06 PM

Hey man no worries same here I just wanted to to share the outcome of what I found when I changed the offset, but quite amazing how you felt the exact opposite! As you say I guess it must come down to individual style, I have more of a rear wheel weighted rider so this could account for my preference. Also the rest of the geometry of the bike is so important to get it all sweet. Happy riding !!

|

Fristonboy

3/5/2018 12:53 AM

This weekend, in the Brioude DH CUP (a regional cup in France), I saw Amaury Pierrond running on his new bike Commencal equipped with the new fork Boxxer. The same that we can see on the bike of Myriam Nicole at the top, and Sam Blekinsop.
There were also Rudy Cabirou with his new Devinci 29", equipped with new Boxxer "black box" red too.

|