# Fox TALAS 36 On Cannondale Tandem?



## Devine Intervention (Aug 29, 2005)

Anybody run a Fox TALAS 36 on a Cannondale Mountain Tandem?

I've been running a Marzocchi All Mountain SL (set to 5" travel with 25% sag) for a few weeks to get used to to modified head angle and top tube clearance and that seems to be OK on the street. I set it for 5" travel and it sags about 1-1/2 inches when I get on the bike alone. By increasing the air pressure, I can get the same sag settings with my stoker on board. I don't dare go slamming this set-up around off road for fear of breaking it or the quick release axle.

I've run the TALAS system on another bike and definitely like the concept, along with the air spring that lets me adjust ride height. I'm tempted by the Marzocchi 66 ATA, but that system doesn't seem to allow an initial travel setting of 4 to 5 inches.

I'm not ready to step up to a Ventana just yet, so other experiences and thoughts on this set-up would be appreciated. I would intend to use whatever fork I get on the Ventana in the future.


----------



## TandemNut (Mar 12, 2004)

Walt,
as posted on DF, look into the Marzocchi 55 SL ATA. It will adjust down to 120mm travel, has very good damping adjustments built in, and is tandem-rated. As noted before, Fox specifically does not recommend their forks for use on tandems.
As for the QR, if you're running a single-crown fork, a thru-axle will make a big difference in the fork's rigidity. I would strongly recommend that you look into lacing a 20mm hub into your front wheel and going to a thru-axle setup. Some hubs are easily switched over to thru-axle as well. It provides an extra margin of safety, which one cannot over emphasize on a tandem.
Marzocchi tells me the '09 forks should be available mid- to late September.
Good luck.


----------



## l84biking (Jul 1, 2005)

*Any 2009 Marzocchi changes?*

Alex,

Is there any updates to the 66 ATA for 2009? We've emailed before about a fork for our Ventana. I'm about to order the fork but wanted to wait for 2009.

I've seen two tandems with a Fox 36 and heard a third will be sporting one. Tempted but heed your advice about the crown. Our shop owner is leary of the Fox too. We'll be sporting the 66 ATA soon.

Thanks,
Steve


----------



## Yeti66 (Feb 20, 2008)

We're running a Fox 36 on our new Ventana tandem with no issues to date...givin we only have 6 long cc rides and 2 races on it. The fork is stiff, active and very plush, not to mention light. I've increased the air to handle the weight of the both of us and we have yet to fully bottom out the fork.....we have ridin some pretty gnarly stuff too. We'll stick with the 36 till something goes drastically wrong. We'll never go back to a triple after running this fork. Cheers


----------



## TandemNut (Mar 12, 2004)

Walt,
The 55 platform will go to 36mm stanchions from the 66 platform for 2009. The 66 series goes to 38mm stanchions.
I'm stoked to see the larger stanchions on the 55 series as I think the 66 platform was ideal for a single-crown tandem fork, but they all had too much travel. 
The other positive for the '09 version is that the 55 ATA version with travel adjust now goes down to 120mm instead of 140mm as minimum travel. 120mm is much closer to fork length spec for most tandem frames on the market today. Thru-axle is standard on the 55 series.

As for Fox forks on tandems, as long as Fox has a serious problem with their forks being used for tandems, we'll recognize and accomodate that. I can't speculate as to what Fox bases their position on, and they certainly haven't been forthcoming about it. All I can do is pass on the information that I have been provided by the manufacturers, and not sell products that aren't judged to be up to the task by their respective manufacturers. 

While the approach of using a product "until something goes drastically wrong", may work for some, I would gently remind everyone here that if/when something goes drastically wrong on tandem, two folks are affected instead of one. To me, it isn't worth the risk.


----------



## Yeti66 (Feb 20, 2008)

"drastically wrong" was far too harsh a statement from me, I was thinking more in the lines of the fork blowing a seal or failing mech. on the trail (not breaking). I can remember back racing our MTB Tandem at the Norba Nationals Finals at Mammoth in 1998 and again in 2000, 2001. Imagine the tech. then....we were racing on Rock Shox and or Mantiou forks with very little travel; not over built at all, and with heavy duty springs only as an option. The forks then are nothing like today. I think back at how crazy we were running a Manitou 4, etc. I'll see one of these forks at a swap meet or yard sale and just laugh thinking how lucky we are today to have options such as the Fox 36 and or Mazocchi 66. I'm not sure why Fox would have a seroius problem using a 36 on a tandem considering they market the fork as a freeride all mountain fork in which it's ok to huck, jump and do big drops on. But then again there maybe some crazy tandem folks out there too. Cheers


----------



## DaleTR (Apr 6, 2007)

*Fox 36 Talas on Ellsworth Witness*

3 Rides in on a new Fox 36 Talas on our Witness. Ridden some of the "usual" rocky, technical Colorado Front range stuff, and am VERY happy so far. Replaced a Rock Shox Pike 454 Coil with 20mm thru-axle. The Fox is FAR stiffer, and the suspension is a lot nicer, particularly the damping control & adjust met blows the Pike away. Durability questions are far from being answered yet.

The steering improvements from the stiffer fork are pretty dramatic, even with the taller crown height mucking with the head tube angle. I would also say that the adjustable travel works very well, and is going to be FAR more useful than I thought. at 100 mm, the handling is a lot more crisp, but when things open up and you go to the 140 mm travel, the slacker head tube & travel give you better stability and plushness at speed. I'll be tweaking the travel a LOT more than I initially thought.

Danger - <rant ON>
As for Fox not "approving" the forks for tandem use (Actually got the same "not approved" message from Fox when replacing the RP2 rear shock with a DHX air...), I would speculate it's totally Lawyer/Liability driven. I can see judging the tandem market too small to justify the "risk" of "approving" use on the big bikes. Even with that, given the "approved" use (think 200+ pounds of rider & pads 20+ feet in the air on a bike that weighs as much or more than a tandem.....) I have NO reservations trusting my wife & my own well being to that fork. Actually, given the design & quality of the Fox 36, I'd trust it MUCH more than some of the forks out there that ARE "Tandem Rated" 
Sorry - <rant OFF>


----------



## Devine Intervention (Aug 29, 2005)

*Marzocchi Updates*

All the features you are talking about are exactly what I'm looking for. I'm watching the countdown on the Marzocchi site now. I'll just take it easy on the fork I have on the bike today.

http://www.marzocchi.com/spa/mtb/?LN=UK&Sito=usa-mtb


----------



## TandemNut (Mar 12, 2004)

BigNut said:


> Walt,
> The 55 platform will go to 36mm stanchions from the 66 platform for 2009. The 66 series goes to 38mm stanchions.
> I'm stoked to see the larger stanchions on the 55 series as I think the 66 platform was ideal for a single-crown tandem fork, but they all had too much travel.
> The other positive for the '09 version is that the 55 ATA version with travel adjust now goes down to 120mm instead of 140mm as minimum travel. 120mm is much closer to fork length spec for most tandem frames on the market today. Thru-axle is standard on the 55 series.


I have posted inaccurate information; the stanchions on the 55 series are 35mm, not 36mm. The early 66 series forks (the ones we had success with on tandems) had 35mm stanchions as well. Apologies for any confusion.
Methinks I may have an '09 55 SL ATA on the way here now for some testing. I'll let folks know our first impressions if anyone's interested.


----------



## TandemNut (Mar 12, 2004)

Yeti66 said:


> "drastically wrong" was far too harsh a statement from me, I was thinking more in the lines of the fork blowing a seal or failing mech. on the trail (not breaking). I can remember back racing our MTB Tandem at the Norba Nationals Finals at Mammoth in 1998 and again in 2000, 2001. Imagine the tech. then....we were racing on Rock Shox and or Mantiou forks with very little travel; not over built at all, and with heavy duty springs only as an option. The forks then are nothing like today. I think back at how crazy we were running a Manitou 4, etc. I'll see one of these forks at a swap meet or yard sale and just laugh thinking how lucky we are today to have options such as the Fox 36 and or Mazocchi 66. I'm not sure why Fox would have a seroius problem using a 36 on a tandem considering they market the fork as a freeride all mountain fork in which it's ok to huck, jump and do big drops on. But then again there maybe some crazy tandem folks out there too. Cheers


I remember some of the same thing. 14 years ago, I met a couple from Texas on a Santana tandem with a Manitou 3 or 4 fork on it. Now that's a scary thought!
I'm not in any position to pass judgement about what forks individuals want to use on their tandems, but OTOH, I feel some sense of responsibility to pass on the manufacturer's position on the use of their product in a specifc way. 
Who knows, it may be like the Avid BB7; enough folks use them on tandems without problems and Fox may change their position. If they do, I'm all over it!
On another note, had a conversation with Spot (formerly Maverick) yesterday. DUC 32's are gone until probably 2010, but a carbon DUC may well be available next year. I expressed some concern about whether such a fork was suitable for tandem use, and was told that the initial versions are testing out to be 3-4 times as strong as the alloy DUC was. If that's the case, that's quite impressive. Talk about a light, tandem-approved fork!
Talk about expensive!!


----------

