# What is the worst fork you have ridden??



## Luther (Aug 29, 2004)

The worst I have ridden was a Trek branded fork that was on my MB2 when I bought it in the early 90's.


----------



## Shayne (Jan 14, 2004)

Manitou 1


Thankfully I never had a chance to ride one of those Trek forks.


----------



## mtdbike (Jan 17, 2004)

RockShox One- rs1


----------



## t2p (Jul 22, 2004)

Rock Shox 1 .... RS1 or whatever it was called ....... horrible .......
.
A Manitou 1 felt like a quality motorcyle fork compared to that pogo stick ........ okay - maybe I am exaggerating a tad ..... 
.


----------



## Luther (Aug 29, 2004)

Shayne said:


> Manitou 1
> 
> Thankfully I never had a chance to ride one of those Trek forks.


If I remember correctly the Trek fork was a rebranded Showa fork


----------



## Boy named SSue (Jan 7, 2004)

t2p said:


> Rock Shox 1 .... RS1 or whatever it was called ....... horrible .......
> .
> A Manitou 1 felt like a quality motorcyle fork compared to that pogo stick ........ okay - maybe I am exaggerating a tad .....
> .


The Manitou 1 avoided the pogo stick problem by never using its travel due to stiction.

The only time I notced the travel on my Manitou 1 was while climbing because the brace was so noodly that the brake pads would rub on each pedal stroke as one leg compressed. The fork felt com-pletely different with the addition of a brodie brace, almost tolerable.


----------



## bulC (Mar 12, 2004)

*I know, I know*

Rigid: Tange Switchblades for sure, so harsh it made me not want to ride.
Suspension: McMahon, did not do squat.

re: the RS-1 comments. I didn't think that fork was as bad as some others that came out later. If you ran lighter weight shock oil in it, it was actually fairly plush given its limited travel.


----------



## t2p (Jul 22, 2004)

Boy named SSue said:


> The Manitou 1 avoided the pogo stick problem by never using its travel due to stiction.
> 
> The only time I notced the travel on my Manitou 1 was while climbing because the brace was so noodly that the brake pads would rub on each pedal stroke as one leg compressed. The fork felt com-pletely different with the addition of a brodie brace, almost tolerable.


.
I can't remember ........... did they have 25mm of travel - or was it 2.5 mm travel ? ....... (those were the days !) ............
.
I rode with a guy that had a Manitou 1 outfitted with Ti stanchions ..... etc ..........


----------



## Guitar Ted (Jan 14, 2004)

*Telescoping Suspension Forks*

Almost every telescoping suspension fork I found to be deficient in some way. Rigid fork: Klein Attitude- circa '92. In fact, the whole bike was so rigid, it was a bone shaker! Beatiful, but deadly!


----------



## LQQK (Jan 6, 2004)

*Edson and IRD Forks*

The Australian made Edson (sp?) fork from the early to mid '90s. Really long axle to crown length to jack the front of the bike up, bugger all travel and had performance that made Manitou 1 forks seem like the were hi-tech!

Also the IRD fork from the early 90's had a lot of flex and did'nt really seem to do anything.


----------



## apexspeed (Jul 6, 2004)

Rock Shox Quadra. What a low-end piece of junk. What a totally useless fork. I'd have rather used a rigid fork. Glad to have never owned one.


----------



## ti_pin_man (Apr 27, 2004)

Mag 21's - they were almost elasticated! The tracking was awful! Worse than Manitou's or anything else.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

*Scott Bouncyball*



Luther said:


> The worst I have ridden was a Trek branded fork that was on my MB2 when I bought it in the early 90's.


Remember that Scott unicrown telesoping fork that allegedly used friction as the damping medium? boing...Boing...BOING AAAHHHHH [into the bushes]!!!

The Trek (Showa) that came on my Trek 9000 was a close 2nd.


----------



## Elevation12000 (Jun 16, 2004)

Giant Sabre (or Sorber?), because of two broken crowns. People who have experienced that know you will have a very unpleasant landing than. After the second I replaced fork including the rest of the Giant Cadex.  

Friend of me rode a Marzochi XC500. He jumped it in pieces multiple times and if it's wasn't already collapsed it leaked.

Weird is that the best fork I have ever had and still have is form the same era; the RondWP HydroPro 2. For XC the absorbing qualities are sufficient, ok. Besides this the fork does it's work in a hardly noticable way. Still very convincing. Consider it beats my 2000 SX-LT easily - no match, in a comparison that's like a pogostick! Also take into account this RondWP HP2 fork is almost entirely machined.  No plastic bits. Top notch finishing that can hardly been seen these days.


----------



## endoMaster (Aug 6, 2004)

One of the crappiest forks I've ridden was a RST Mozo RM-120. How crappy you may ask? It gives the fork on my Wally world beater a run for its money and makes the RST Gila T4 that came on my Hardrock feel like a Fox Float in comparison.


----------



## funboarder1971 (Feb 16, 2004)

I had a RockShox Indy C for many years and loved it. It wasn't until I bought a bike with a Marzocchi MXC when I realized what a pile the Indy was.

The Indy never did get serviced in the 5+ years I rode it. I don't think it would have made a difference though.



endoMaster said:


> One of the crappiest forks I've ridden was a RST Mozo RM-120. How crappy you may ask? It gives the fork on my Wally world beater a run for its money and makes the RST Gila T4 that came on my Hardrock feel like a Fox Float in comparison.


----------



## grawbass (Aug 23, 2004)

*This is an easy one.........*

Without a doubt, the worst fork I've ridden and possibly the worst fork ever made, was my first suspension fork, around 1994. It was a Girvin Proforx. This was a telescopic Girvin unlike the later and much better linkage forks. This thing flexed so much while turning or hitting bumps that it was actually scary. I put an Odyssey brake booster on it which helped a little, but not much. The travel was about 3/4" and the overly soft elastamers broke down after about a year, which reduced the travel to about 1/2". About the only thing not horrible about that fork was that it was sorta light. A ridgid fork with a fat tire would have been far superior, but back then 1.95 tires were all the rage, so I kept it for a couple years before upgrading to a first gen Manitou SX, which was light years ahead in performance.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

grawbass said:


> Without a doubt, the worst fork I've ridden and possibly the worst fork ever made, was my first suspension fork, around 1994. It was a Girvin Proforx. This was a telescopic Girvin unlike the later and much better linkage forks. This thing flexed so much while turning or hitting bumps that it was actually scary. I put an Odyssey brake booster on it which helped a little, but not much. The travel was about 3/4" and the overly soft elastamers broke down after about a year, which reduced the travel to about 1/2". About the only thing not horrible about that fork was that it was sorta light. A ridgid fork with a fat tire would have been far superior, but back then 1.95 tires were all the rage, so I kept it for a couple years before upgrading to a first gen Manitou SX, which was light years ahead in performance.


I gotta wonder about some folks in this thread... this one in particular... its like they've all had memory loss issues already. Or they're comparing them to forks that they ride today.

For example, the girvin proforx was stiffer than anything rockshox or marzocchi had at the time, had 2.1" of travel for the XC version and 3" for the LT version (which was good enough for I think it was Mike King to win a world championships DH on).


----------



## flyingsuperpetis (Jan 16, 2004)

*Oh crap, you got me started...*

The Sid Whirled Cup was easily the worst fork I ever rode. The worst fork I ever sold was... the entire remainder of the rockshox line. I know someone has to target the lightweight fork market, but to underbuild a FORK to keep it light & make it cheaper... just reckless. And the forks retail hasn't reflected the huge cheapening of the product. And I thought we were over the "stupid light" fad. We were getting about a hundred hours on a set of bushings. A hundred hours. Sixty on their seals. This is atrocious, but at least you know you'll be able to get parts. They're a big enough company, they're not going to disappear, right? Nope. When you need replacement bushings, you get the famous "We only support our products for three years..." speech. Wich means your cost per hour of riding their products are pretty damn high.

We made more money selling RockOx's but had to drop em once we started losing customers. People were pissed, and they were pissed at us for selling them this crap. And I always liked my Mag 20s. I could go on for a thunderous hour about the disappointment that company's turned out to be.


----------



## TheRedMantra (Jan 12, 2004)

RS Jett


----------



## Adrian (Oct 7, 2004)

the worst fork i ever rode was the Kona Z-Link fork. I can't find a pic of it, but it was just like the Harley "springer" fork. It had an elastomer spring and flexed so much when you turned it felt like the bike was going to throw you off. And that was on a parking lot ride - off-road must have been frightening on these things.

kinda looked like this;


----------



## grawbass (Aug 23, 2004)

DeeEight said:


> I gotta wonder about some folks in this thread... this one in particular... its like they've all had memory loss issues already. Or they're comparing them to forks that they ride today.
> 
> For example, the girvin proforx was stiffer than anything rockshox or marzocchi had at the time, had 2.1" of travel for the XC version and 3" for the LT version (which was good enough for I think it was Mike King to win a world championships DH on).


Are you kidding me..........this thing was an absolute noodle and I only weighed about 150 lbs at the time. Granted I may have exagerated on the lack of travel a bit, although with sag, it was never getting 2.1 inches. A riding buddy at the time had a Mag 21 that was much stiffer torsionally. Are you thinking of the Girvin linkage fork?


----------



## Bikinfoolferlife (Feb 3, 2004)

*The Trek (Showa) fork that came on my*

9800 in the early (mid?) nineties was pretty much useless.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

grawbass said:


> Are you kidding me..........this thing was an absolute noodle and I only weighed about 150 lbs at the time. Granted I may have exagerated on the lack of travel a bit, although with sag, it was never getting 2.1 inches. A riding buddy at the time had a Mag 21 that was much stiffer torsionally. Are you thinking of the Girvin linkage fork?


#1 I've owned that fork since 1993, and I still haven't worn out the bushings (after thousands of hours of riding), I raced expert XC on it, and the flex was no worse than any other 25.4mm diameter CrMo stanchion fork of the time. In fact, given how the fork had as much stanchion/slider overlap as a Manitou fork (rockshox and marzocchi forks had about half the overlap of manitous), they steered very well. You really have to be a moron to compare linkage forks to telescopic ones though in terms of steering precision. But that's only going to last as long as the bushings, which Girvin Vector forks and Amp forks went thru like crazy. And I know as I still own an original Amp F1 fork, and was an Amp dealer, and have owned the vector also.

#2 Forks of that era were designed to be run WITHOUT sag. Perhaps you're confusing preload with sag.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

LQQK said:


> The Australian made Edson (sp?) fork from the early to mid '90s. Really long axle to crown length to jack the front of the bike up, bugger all travel and had performance that made Manitou 1 forks seem like the were hi-tech!
> 
> Also the IRD fork from the early 90's had a lot of flex and did'nt really seem to do anything.


I don't remember the Edson, or did you mean the Ellison Titanium fork? Looked like a Manitou 1.

IRD used a goofy triple-clamp crown that allowed fore/aft flex in the stanchion tubes that was supposed to help with brake chatter or something but while maybe a good idea for their rigid fork was a silly thing to do to the suspension fork also.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

As to the scott fork, almost every non-oil damped fork of the period relied on friction of some sort to aid the damping. Remember, back then the theme was suspension not being fully active or plush because people still wanted their bikes to sprint like fully rigid hardtails. So friction damping worked to keep the fork from bobbing and this is why the rockshox dampers used a spring-loaded blowoff circuit in the compression damping (think ancestor to platform damping). 

As to the Joe Murray Z-Link (originally called Vector but didn't wanna go thru a fight over the name with girvin), well, the principal was sound but their bushing tolerances were not, so the leading link fork quickly got sloppy. It also only had 1.25" of travel.

And as to trek forks, they did at least have TRULY adjustable compression and rebound damping adjustments going for them, not simply a lockout adjustment like Rockshox forks did.


----------



## scant (Jan 5, 2004)

worst for me AMP by a country mile. fork rate altering underbraking, DH & hard compression. pivot slop in no time with nice side to side wiggle.

I got on fine with mag21s.


----------



## Elevation12000 (Jun 16, 2004)

flyingsuperpetis said:


> They're a big enough company, they're not going to disappear, right? Nope. When you need replacement bushings, you get the famous "We only support our products for three years..." speech. Wich means your cost per hour of riding their products are pretty damn high.


Compare: Gerard Rond serviced my RondWP personally! Talked with the guy a few times on the phone - very helpfull and freindly. For servicing you simply sent your Rond to Gerard and next day the post will bring a completely rebuilt fork (24h service)!

Last time I had it serviced (already three years ago, I have so many bikes that I don't ride it often) he also did extra work for which I didn't have to pay. He made modern V-brakes possible by mounting new bosses (I requested for that), replaced the brace by a new hangerless example (I hadn't asked for that, but OK thanx!) and on request he replaced the the ahead steerer by a threaded one.

So different from RockShox! Completely opposite! Before everybody leaves to the shop for buying a brand new Rond/Magura; I don't know whether this service still applies to modern Magura's. And if it does and you are in the US it's not likely it's Gerard who services your fork.


----------



## LQQK (Jan 6, 2004)

DeeEight said:


> I don't remember the Edson, or did you mean the Ellison Titanium fork? Looked like a Manitou 1.
> 
> IRD used a goofy triple-clamp crown that allowed fore/aft flex in the stanchion tubes
> that was supposed to help with brake chatter or something but while maybe a good idea for their rigid fork was a silly thing to do to the suspension fork also.


No they were definitely called Edson (not sure of the exact spelling); Australian made, used a solid rubber tube down each leg and relied on friction to control the rebound. I wish I kept the thing now as a curio - but one of the few bike parts I actually threw out because it was so bad.

My friend who owned the IRD swears that under brakes going down a steep hill at speed the fork flexed so far back that it hit the down-tube! (sweet bike though, IRD frame with switch-back brakes and Mavic Mountain Magic group set).


----------



## bulC (Mar 12, 2004)

*forgot about amp, add that to my list*



scant said:


> worst for me AMP by a country mile. fork rate altering underbraking, DH & hard compression. pivot slop in no time with nice side to side wiggle.
> 
> I got on fine with mag21s.


yeah AMP forks blew, I guess my mind blocked out those abortions. they got good reviews in the socal rags because they were good forks if you liked to catch big air and then land not quite perpendicular to the earth, because of their rigid blades. but for actual shock action, the blew. and the teeny tiny shocks wheezed and failed.
thing that caused me to take mine off my Obed and sell it cheap was the offset. I think it was close to 2" when fully extended, combine that with the obed's 71.5 degree head angle and you got a "hunt and seek" front end with insufficient trail for precise tracking at speed. other riders would say I looked "busy" on it, as I was always correcting the steering rather than railing. I spoke to Herr Leitner, God of All Suspension, about it, He claimed the fork was always compressed enough not to offer its full offset when a rider was aboard. That was a falsehood. AMP in general deserves an A for the designs, and an F for execution of them.


----------



## bulC (Mar 12, 2004)

*100 percent agreement*



flyingsuperpetis said:


> The Sid Whirled Cup was easily the worst fork I ever rode. The worst fork I ever sold was... the entire remainder of the rockshox line. I know someone has to target the lightweight fork market, but to underbuild a FORK to keep it light & make it cheaper... just reckless. And the forks retail hasn't reflected the huge cheapening of the product. And I thought we were over the "stupid light" fad. We were getting about a hundred hours on a set of bushings. A hundred hours. Sixty on their seals. This is atrocious, but at least you know you'll be able to get parts. They're a big enough company, they're not going to disappear, right? Nope. When you need replacement bushings, you get the famous "We only support our products for three years..." speech. Wich means your cost per hour of riding their products are pretty damn high.
> 
> We made more money selling RockOx's but had to drop em once we started losing customers. People were pissed, and they were pissed at us for selling them this crap. And I always liked my Mag 20s. I could go on for a thunderous hour about the disappointment that company's turned out to be.


I could not agree with you more. So would my buddy with his unsupported not all that ancient SID. And he's built like a twig and the SID is flexy for him. I'd never buy a RS product...


----------



## scant (Jan 5, 2004)

I think the A & F grades are very apt.. 

the amp frame designs sparked so many new suspension bikes, but there own was very poorly executed.


----------



## Guest (Dec 16, 2004)

Nat said:


> Remember that Scott unicrown telesoping fork that allegedly used friction as the damping medium? boing...Boing...BOING AAAHHHHH [into the bushes]!!!


That's EXACTLY what I was going to say. I took a hell of a header jumping off a curb in State College, PA, having the Scott fork compress and shoot me right OTB. SUCK!


----------



## halez (Nov 11, 2004)

*Ird*



LQQK said:


> No they were definitely called Edson (not sure of the exact spelling); Australian made, used a solid rubber tube down each leg and relied on friction to control the rebound. I wish I kept the thing now as a curio - but one of the few bike parts I actually threw out because it was so bad.
> 
> My friend who owned the IRD swears that under brakes going down a steep hill at speed the fork flexed so far back that it hit the down-tube! (sweet bike though, IRD frame with switch-back brakes and Mavic Mountain Magic group set).


The IRD's also had pretty weak steer tubes (I bent 2 of 'em until Rod Moses sent me a heavy duty one designed for a tandem). The forks were pretty flexy but steering was super fast. In my opinion, not a fork that needs to be discussed in a "worst forks" forks forum...


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

The three early forks I had experience with were teh RS1, the Manitou 1, and the Scott Unishock.

The Scott had its problems , plastic friction damping, flexy, etc, but atleast it had a coil spring which provided good response on compression. The rebound was a different story and varied if you rode in the rain as it would noticably change the damping. It also wasnt a good "big hit" or jumping fork but for all around riding on sharp hits it was the best as far as pure shock absorbing abilities in my opinion. You could also tune it to get 2.5 or 3 inches of travel if you wanted to take out the bottom and top out bumpers.

The early Manitous didnt offer much suspension. Just a slight give over a hard bump.

The RS-1 worked pretty nicely although it was tuned out of the box to only soak up big hits. I had Paul Turner tune mine to soak up smaller hits, it worked great although they were flexy, but like Ive said before, even though flexy, on really rough trails they dont change the path of a bike as much as a rigid fork where the rigid is getting bashed around.

Just my $.02.


----------



## Jeroen (Jan 12, 2004)

Elevation12 said:


> Compare: Gerard Rond serviced my RondWP personally! Talked with the guy a few times on the phone - very helpfull and freindly. For servicing you simply sent your Rond to Gerard and next day the post will bring a completely rebuilt fork (24h service)!
> 
> Last time I had it serviced (already three years ago, I have so many bikes that I don't ride it often) he also did extra work for which I didn't have to pay. He made modern V-brakes possible by mounting new bosses (I requested for that), replaced the brace by a new hangerless example (I hadn't asked for that, but OK thanx!) and on request he replaced the the ahead steerer by a threaded one.
> 
> So different from RockShox! Completely opposite! Before everybody leaves to the shop for buying a brand new Rond/Magura; I don't know whether this service still applies to modern Magura's. And if it does and you are in the US it's not likely it's Gerard who services your fork.


Elevation;

with all due respect, but the times you recall here are long and forgotton. Rond doesn't have anything here in the Netherlands left, except a distributor. The former Rond factory in Lienden is closed and all production is overseas. At first the word was that the name Rond never would be left away from the product... look at it now; it only says Magura. Thats it....

Still Magura has a good quality and fairly good service but nothing like back in the days when it was still a very small family business. You just cannot compare the old Rond/WP product support with that of a company like Manitou or RockShox. They work at a totally different level and have a very big difference in market spreading.

To come to the quality of the Rond/WP units; sure they were build solid and strong, but you could hardly call that suspension. The force required to break free was inmens high. Favorred amoung a lot of dutch road-racers who turned to fat tire bikes in the winter who wanted a suspension fork that hardly moved (get a rigid!)... Next to that, if the fork began to go into its travel, the whole system worked so slow it could not do what a good suspension is designed for; soak up hits in a fast way to make a bike more comfortable and give it better handling.

From all the Rond forks I came across, none ever left an impression of having the essential caracteristics to compensate for the inmens heavy weight these forks had, coupled to the prices back than. The LBS I occasionally work for, still has customers riding these forks. They do last a long time.. But I still cannot believe that people are so in full believe of the function of the fork. 'It never broke down!'... no perhaps indeed, but the fork never really goes into its travel, right...? And when it does, it does it at a painstakingly slow pace.

To come back to the main issue in this topic; the worst suspension experience I have ever had were the Rond WP's and they Quadra/Indy/Jett series from RockShox, next to the second (one piece casting) Manitou SX series. Virtually no sealing and crappy plastic parts that broke down on some very first rides..... But I should also state that Im a fanatic rigid fork rider and still prefer it on all my hardtails. The only suspension I have is on my Freeride bike; Fox Vanila RLC, which I really dig. But its actually there to compensate for my weekness of not having enough skills and thus to catch up my mistakes


----------



## JmZ (Jan 10, 2004)

scant said:


> worst for me AMP by a country mile. fork rate altering underbraking, DH & hard compression. pivot slop in no time with nice side to side wiggle.
> 
> I got on fine with mag21s.


I can't agree with the Amp's. Maybe the early efforts didn't work that good, but I have ridden the F-3's and F-4's for a while.

When I bought my first Amp - Judy was leaking like the Valdez, and the Manitou forks had a slight problem about dropout sheering off. Figured I couldn't do worse. I got an F-3 and it was a good, if not overly plush, XC fork. Rode that fork for a while, until I sold the bike and parted it out, but put another Amp F-3 on the next bike, and again another Amp on the next bike (this time a F-4).

I had problems with Quadra's and Judy's that flexed badly. I got to ride a Judy back to back with an F-4 when I was looking to purchase my first one. Took the same line on similar bikes, and the Judy felt like a joke. Took a very small jump (6 inches, a foot maybe) and the landing was almost botched because how much the fork flexed. No problems with the Amp. I was sold. One linkage fork was enough that I didn't look back, (well until I got a bike set up for disc brakes that is. :O )

The forks tracked great and were nice and light. For Midwest XC, they worked well. Well for me at least. Amp's always seemed to have a love or hate relationship, and it looks like it's pretty easy to tell where I fall, eh? I never had a problem with Amp-ahesa, and I ran lighter springs than recommended (without much preload) and was able to use most of the travel.

I'd happily buy another F-4, today, if I could, and I have been watching E-Bay for months for a 1" Threadless F-3. Got a bike that's waiting for it.  I'll be very happy to replace the RS Quadra that's on that bike now.

A good linkage fork is a thing of beauty. The Amp F-4 is one of the forks I place on that list. I'd like to see some of the Euro offerings, I think there isn't (currently) an American company brave enough to try an updated linkage fork.

JmZ


----------



## s1ngletrack (Aug 31, 2004)

Rock Shox dual crown SID


----------



## grawbass (Aug 23, 2004)

DeeEight said:


> #1 I've owned that fork since 1993, and I still haven't worn out the bushings (after thousands of hours of riding), I raced expert XC on it, and the flex was no worse than any other 25.4mm diameter CrMo stanchion fork of the time. In fact, given how the fork had as much stanchion/slider overlap as a Manitou fork (rockshox and marzocchi forks had about half the overlap of manitous), they steered very well. You really have to be a moron to compare linkage forks to telescopic ones though in terms of steering precision. But that's only going to last as long as the bushings, which Girvin Vector forks and Amp forks went thru like crazy. And I know as I still own an original Amp F1 fork, and was an Amp dealer, and have owned the vector also.
> 
> #2 Forks of that era were designed to be run WITHOUT sag. Perhaps you're confusing preload with sag.


Ok Dee Eight, I respect your opinion, as you are a veritable encyclopedia of old school knowledge, but i have to disagree this one time. True the bushing were good (I never said they weren't) They may have had more overlap than RS or Zokes but this is not the only factor in the stiffness of a fork, as I'm sure you know.

They may have been designed to be run without sag, but that doesn't mean that they didn't sag. The stock elastomers were simply too soft and like I said, I only weighed about 150 lbs at the time. Maybe yours are better, maybe I got a bad batch of elastomers, but all I know, is that mine had were mush and the steering was VERY sloppy. Not just a little sloppy, but to the point of being scary. If you like em great, but i hated mine and before you ask why i continued to ride them for 2+ years, it was because i was a poor college student. When I did finally upgrade to a 1st gen Manitou SX, the difference was night and day and those SXs are no where near as stiff as current Fox, Noleen, Rond, etc. By the way, I'm as big a retro grouch as anyone, so its not like i'm biased against the old stuff. I still run original Spec Ground Control, Storm Control, Yeti Factor, Dart SC 2.2 tires, DX components, cantis, thumb shifters, etc. Remember this tread is about personal OPINION as to which is the worst fork you've ridden.


----------



## lucifer (Sep 27, 2004)

Cannondale Pepperoni

I had it on my sm1000 for about a week. 
Needless to say i ran into the shop and forked over a ridiculous wad of cash for a spec future shock... It wasnt great either but it sure was better.


----------



## Elevation12000 (Jun 16, 2004)

Jeroen,

With all due respect, but.....read further (or not  )



> Elevation;
> 
> with all due respect, but the times you recall here are long and forgotton. Rond doesn't have anything here in the Netherlands left, except a distributor. The former Rond factory in Lienden is closed and all production is overseas. At first the word was that the name Rond never would be left away from the product... look at it now; it only says Magura. Thats it....


I already mentioned that possibility in my post. Wasn't sure as I am not really in new stuff.



> Still Magura has a good quality and fairly good service but nothing like back in the days when it was still a very small family business. You just cannot compare the old Rond/WP product support with that of a company like Manitou or RockShox. They work at a totally different level and have a very big difference in market spreading.


Can not compare? Well I can, I did. The RondWP HP2 was about fl 895 back then. So I could spend that amount on a RondWP that was tested good and had great aftersales sevice or on a almost simillar priced M4, Mag21 or XC 500. I chose RondWP and of course I did compare the support of the various offerings.



> To come to the quality of the Rond/WP units; sure they were build solid and strong, but you could hardly call that suspension. The force required to break free was inmens high. Favorred amoung a lot of dutch road-racers who turned to fat tire bikes in the winter who wanted a suspension fork that hardly moved (get a rigid!)... Next to that, if the fork began to go into its travel, the whole system worked so slow it could not do what a good suspension is designed for; soak up hits in a fast way to make a bike more comfortable and give it better handling.


Break free is indeed quite high, but no doubt it's more comfortable than a rigid fork. Nevertheless I like the feel of rigid forks and it are probabably charactaristics like the later break free that make that I can live with it so well although it's susp. To me it's a great compromise.



> From all the Rond forks I came across, none ever left an impression of having the essential caracteristics to compensate for the inmens heavy weight these forks had, coupled to the prices back than. The LBS I occasionally work for, still has customers riding these forks. They do last a long time.. But I still cannot believe that people are so in full believe of the function of the fork. 'It never broke down!'... no perhaps indeed, but the fork never really goes into its travel, right...? And when it does, it does it at a painstakingly slow pace.


Heavy weight? Consider I am KogaDRIVER, not a weightweenie. I like stuff being a bit overbuilt. I am light enough to compensate for a heavier bike.

Funny fact is that it seems we experienced very much the same but our conclusions turn out very different.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Elevation12 said:


> Compare: Gerard Rond serviced my RondWP personally! Talked with the guy a few times on the phone - very helpfull and freindly. For servicing you simply sent your Rond to Gerard and next day the post will bring a completely rebuilt fork (24h service)!


Heh... I still remember when WP Suspension had to change their name to WP (it was originally *********** Suspension - which wasn't going over to well when they tried selling in europe and america).


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

grawbass said:


> They may have been designed to be run without sag, but that doesn't mean that they didn't sag. The stock elastomers were simply too soft and like I said, I only weighed about 150 lbs at the time. Maybe yours are better, maybe I got a bad batch of elastomers, but all I know, is that mine had were mush and the steering was VERY sloppy. Not just a little sloppy, but to the point of being scary. If you like em great, but i hated mine and before you ask why i continued to ride them for 2+ years, it was because i was a poor college student. When I did finally upgrade to a 1st gen Manitou SX, the difference was night and day and those SXs are no where near as stiff as current Fox, Noleen, Rond, etc. By the way, I'm as big a retro grouch as anyone, so its not like i'm biased against the old stuff. I still run original Spec Ground Control, Storm Control, Yeti Factor, Dart SC 2.2 tires, DX components, cantis, thumb shifters, etc. Remember this tread is about personal OPINION as to which is the worst fork you've ridden.


I outweight you by a good 40 pounds and didn't have sag problems. Perhaps you should have adjusted the preload on the fork correctly? I own a 95 Manitou Mach SX also and Manitou elastomers in them were overly stiff but then, manitou always had weird spring ratings to their elastomers. The M1/M2 had FIVE grades of elastomer.


----------



## neveride (Feb 7, 2004)

*Worst fork is a tough one for me*

As, particularly back in the early days, suspension was such a novelty that no "early" forks felt that bad.

Compared to today, many old forks do suffer, though I've been riding my Manitou 1 a great deal recently, getting my whopping 1.5" of travel, and it feels good for such an old fork.

I had the RS1 first, when it originally came out. I loved that fork for the 10 or so rides until the seals blew the 1st time. Then I borrowed a buddies bike with the Manitou 1 on it and felt that it didn't screw with the steering as bad, so I switched to that and sold the RS 1

When the Manitou 2 came out, I "upgraded" and sold the 1, only to discover that I couldn't put fork boots on it (till odi or someone came out with an adapter. Imagine, an adapter for fork boots!) and so every month I had to dissassemble it and dump the water out. And then the adjuster dials siezed up. Rode fine for the time but a ***** to maintain.

At one point I had a Lawill leader, but never felt it was plush enough due to the air shock.

I had a judy DH, which rode okay as well, but the cartridge blew every 2 weeks (no exageration) and during the 1st Pedrosfest, on Friday Rock Shox themselves replaced the cartridge and it was leaking by Sunday.

For me, its rarely been performance thats bothered me, but more of the maintenance side. I even had the Trek/Showa fork for a bit, and though somewhat stiff in its travel, that fork was a definite improvement over Rock Shoxs RS1 (though the Trek was a freebee from the rep).

Early Headshock were a ***** to work on, but I never rode them other than around the parking lot.

Maybe my absolute worst fork experience, and again falls under mechanics, was the Bullet Brothers Zzyzyx fork (or however you spelled it). As an inexepensize (relatively) DH fork, dual crown, with six inches of travel, this sucker felt great out of the box and around town. Then, the first trip to plattekill (3 hour drive), a bit cold and wet, and the first ride down the fork completely seizes up. Won't move even a centimeter. In the parking lot, I break the fork down, clean it (its spotless tho'), lube it up nicely, ride the lift, and again, halfway down the fork seizes up again. According to Bullet, they had a problem with the bushings swelling. Their solution till they can get new bushings is to dremel the currently bushings down, which will cause the fork to have a bit of slop till you ride it for a bit. I replace that with a 1st generation Marzocchi bomber, which was fantastic. Weeks later up at Mount Snow for the nationals, I stop by Bullet Bros to get some bushings for my fork, and when the mechanic learns that I'm a mechanic and have taken apart a Zzyzyk before he presses me into service to help replace all the bushings on the forks of riders encountering the same swelling on their forks and steaming mad because they can't race. I was paid in a couple of beers and a T-shirt. I finally sold the fork with the new bushings without ever riding it, and Bullet Bros eventually folded.

Forks I never owned because I heard so many bad things at the time from other riders but spent some time on on borrowed bikes included the IRD (they actually touted the fore/aft flex as beneficial!!), Tange Shockblades, and the Scott. Of these, my vote would be the Scott as the worst.


----------



## Guitar Ted (Jan 14, 2004)

JmZ said:


> I can't agree with the Amp's. Maybe the early efforts didn't work that good, but I have ridden the F-3's and F-4's for a while.
> 
> When I bought my first Amp - Judy was leaking like the Valdez, and the Manitou forks had a slight problem about dropout sheering off. Figured I couldn't do worse. I got an F-3 and it was a good, if not overly plush, XC fork. Rode that fork for a while, until I sold the bike and parted it out, but put another Amp F-3 on the next bike, and again another Amp on the next bike (this time a F-4).
> 
> ...


I also picked up on the Amp fork for similar reasons. Agree that it was a fantastic steering fork- no brake rub. You could slam it into any bump, and it seemed to walk right up over it. Downfalls were few, but significant. Downhill runs into something like a pothole or drop was a recipe for sketchy handling, if not endo time. I could never keep oil in the damper, either. Ran an Amp fork in the Chequamegon 40, and about a third of the way in, I heard a rattle. Thought my headset was coming apart! Turns out that when the damper runs dry, it tops out with quite a clang! Spewed oil all over the downtube! Oh well. Still really like the idea, not necessarily the execution of it. I would like to see a revival of this type of design, as well. Then again, I'd like to fix the two F-3's I have sitting under my bench! Any ideas on damper fixes for these old dogs?


----------



## Adrian (Oct 7, 2004)

DeeEight said:


> As to the Joe Murray Z-Link (originally called Vector but didn't wanna go thru a fight over the name with girvin),QUOTE]
> 
> i remember it originally being called 'Future Shock' and since Specialized had their re-badged Judy with that name, they had to change it.
> 
> memory is getting fuzzier every year though...


----------



## OregonMTB (Sep 1, 2004)

*'97 RS Judy XC*

I won't argue with everybody's complaints about the late 80's and early 90's forks. The worst for me by far was the 1997 Rock Shox Judy XC. I swear each fork moved independently of each other forward and backward. I blew 4 cartridges. The first three were replaced under warranty and on the fourth they made me buy 1998 legs. That thing was so flexy. Rock Shox should have really known better by then.

When I replaced it with a 2000 X-fly--it was a completely different and better riding experience.

BTW--a friend of mine rides a SID double crown on his single speed. It came on his NOS FourBanger. It is kinda really funny and makes no since--but at least they solved the flex issue. Give it another 10 years and it will be 100% old school.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Adrian said:


> DeeEight said:
> 
> 
> > As to the Joe Murray Z-Link (originally called Vector but didn't wanna go thru a fight over the name with girvin),QUOTE]
> ...


----------



## uphiller (Jan 13, 2004)

So many bad forks... which was the worst?

The first suspension fork I remember seeing was one of those Trek forks, one of which I remember being on my uncle's bike. Pushing down on it, I remember thinking, what's the point? It doesn't even budge no matter how hard I push.

The first suspension fork I ever rode was a MAG21. My brother had bought a Stumpjumper M2 at a bike shop he worked at for a friend, and before his friend came to pick up the bike, I was allowed to ride it. I only weighed 85lbs, but I remember how flexy the fork felt in hard turns. But the performance over sharp hits was a revelation comapred to the rigid steel fork I was riding, and I knew I had to have a suspension fork.

I tried out quite a few forks, and actually not all of them rode so badly, even though today's offerings make them all feel like a joke. My friend's Giant had a Zorber on it- god, what a piece. Totally flimsy-feeling in the turns, virtually no suspension motion even on the hardest hits and heavy as a tank. It was there so the salesperson could say the bike was suspended. 

The really early Manitous worked fine for the day, but were a pain in the arse to take apart with those super-long allen keys. And the M2 was the worst of all with those non-indexed, non-accesible preload adjuster caps on the bottom of the legs. Difficult re-assembly procedures coupled with weather-sensitive spring elements which went unprotected by ineffective sealing was a recipe for a maintenance disaster of a fork. If you kept them up, they worked alright though. The Manitous with aluminum stanchions- the Magnum, 3, 4, and EFC, also didn't last very long under sustained use because the Teflon coating on the legs wore off, which made the fork rattle like hell. 

The Judys had a ton of overlap compared to what had been offered previously and were just plain a lot more rigid, but the cartridge, apart from being tremendously unreliable, was also a huge step back from the actually quite advanced internals of the MAG21. One step forward, two steps back.

I knew a skinny 140lb racer guy who rode smooth but fast and often, and his AMP was always, always coming apart. The bushings in that thing were just such a joke- half as thick as a pencil and always coming loose. He sent the thing back so many times to get either the bushings repaired or the damper fixed, because if it wasn't oozing oil, it was vomiting it. 

I also tried my older brother's Girvin Vector, which was pretty amazing for the time- no bob, better-than-rigid steering, and decent bump compliance. I wanted one bad, but I had a one-inch steerer and the Vector 2 didn't come in 1". I wound up with a Halson Inversion, which actually rode pretty damn well. It was a lot stiffer torsionally than a lot of forks out there at the time, and the long, top-loading elastomer stack was easy to switch out without using tools, which made the fork useable in all temperatures without any real disassembly, unlike most elastomer forks.The brace was an ugly, flexy piece of crap, though, and the fact that all the fork rake was in the crown made the fork feel heavy when turning. It's a shame that the steerer came loose, and a good thing I noticed it before I got killed. They had gone under by the time I could get it repaired.

I got a PDS on closeout from Steve Wilson, the owner of Halson Designs, and the brace was the stiffest I have ever ridden- absolutely zero brake flex, nada. And all the offset was in the dropouts. It broke, too though. Their QC was just plain a joke.

There is some new stuff which is just undeniably better, and I think suspension forks belong in that category. Yeah, they don't make spare parts for very long and they are expensive, but at least they perform consistently in all weather, steer straight, and isolate the rider from shocks better than anyone would have dreamed ten years ago.


----------



## Luther (Aug 29, 2004)

*1" Vector 2*



uphiller said:


> or the damper fixed, because if it wasn't oozing oil, it was vomiting it.
> 
> I also tried my older brother's Girvin Vector, which was pretty amazing for the time- no bob, better-than-rigid steering, and decent bump compliance. I wanted one bad, but I had a one-inch steerer and the Vector 2 didn't come in 1". .


Actually the Vector 2 did come in 1" I had one on my MB2 for a few years. Much better that the Trek fork. I actually liked it quite a bit. I thought the stem limitations sucked though.
www.pbase.com/shawnluther/mb2


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

I was gonna say, vectors only came 1" steerers... they used adapters to fit to 1 1/8 headsets and frames. This is actually a lot more sensible way to do it, especially with a dual crown (and all motorcycle forks are done that way still, 1" steerers).


----------



## EBasil (Jan 30, 2004)

I'll try to keep appropriate time frames in mind...and toy-store bike parts are out.

Early on, I rode the RS-1, the Manitou 1 and the Scott Unicrown, in addition to several rigid forks. I found the RS-1 to be noodly and problematic. The Scott Unicrown wasn't problematic, but it was either stuck in stiction or bouncy and it ting-a-ling'ed down the trail as the coil would bounce off the inside of the leg. The Manitou 1, steered better, worked better and could be dialed in more plush but hit-compliant than either, and it became the one I kept. We still have one on my wife's Parts Bin Bike, and it still gives a full, plush 1.5-1.7" of travel that feels better than my nomination for Worst Fork could ever provide.

Worst Fork: RockShock Quadra. When this came out, it was an entry level fork using a Manitou-style elastomer with none of the Manitou design features like a SKEWER (I may still be bitter about this), so the stiction-prone fork also experienced elastomer binding on the internals as it compressed. I didn't own one, but got a recall deal on one that I threw on my brother's bike and I still think it was worse than the Pepperoni fork we swapped it for.

Years later, my neighbor pulled down his bike with a yellow Quadra 21R on it, it the piece of hack was no better (albeit longer travel) than the original was, yet RockShox still sold this overpriced crime to unsuspecting riders.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

EBasil said:


> ...it still gives a full, plush 1.5-1.7" of travel


It's kind of funny to read 1.7" and plush in the same sentence.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

On the point of lack of skewer rods on elastomer stacks... considering halson invented and patented them, and fought and won lawsuits against rockshox and manitou for patent infringement, the lack of one on a fork like the quadra, with its ONE PIECE elastomer in each leg really wasn't an issue to me. Want to get the elastomers out? How hard is it to remove the top caps and push down on the bars to compress the fork an inch or so until the elastomers stick out the crown, then just pull them out.

As to the Q21R being sold at a criminal price... well ummm... have you forgotten what forks cost at the time and what the available choices were?

Oh and one more point about the Unishocks... it was a clark-kent design, produced by Scott USA, and ridden to a world XC championship by Ruthie Mathes, so its not like it was all bad. 

How about a refresher here for those of poor memory (or weren't there actually at the time)...

In 1993 high end rigid forks were still popular, and definitely not cheap. Answer Accutrax were $170, Joe Murray Frontline/Project 2 forks (Joe had lots of products being renamed on him) were $120, and that's not to mention what a FatCity or a Syncros or a Bontrager fork went for ($250 plus). Suspension forks for like the unishocks started at about $200 and went upwards around $550 for things like Ellison Ti forks and Mountain Cycles Suspenders forks (although that one included a disc brake and front hub in the price). A Mag-21 was $370, a Girvin Vector was $425, a marzocchi XC-400 was $380, a Manitou 2 was $385,. and an Amp F1 was $390. 

1994 and prices were on the rise and models expanding/changing. Suspenders forks were up to $700, rockshox had its Mag-21 SL Ti at $599, Specialized had its Future shock FSX at $550, and a quadra was $260. 

1995 and things were still all over the place, the Q21R was $270 which considering tech wise it was comparable to the Manitou Magnum which cost $280, wasn't that damn bad. A Judy XC started at $410 and went up to $495 for the Judy DH and $599 for the Judy SL. Try and remember the Judy XC only had 2" of travel that year while the Q21R had 1.9". So for $140 less you got a fork that had a tenth of an inch less travel and didn't have a leaking cartridge and weighed the same. Geee... such a crime there. There really wasn't much better for the price. You had the Giant EGS which was a license made Marzocchi XC-51, for $250, but marzocchi seals back then SUCKED. It also weighed more and only had 2" of travel. Otherwise the only forks cheaper really were SR Duotracks and RST models that weren't any better quality than Q21R, and weighed more. 1995 was the year scott got out of suspension forks after having a recall over dropout bonding issues with their fork sliders.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

DeeEight said:


> Oh and one more point about the Unishocks... it was a clark-kent design,


 Weren't they notorious for frame failures or something like that? Isn't one of them wanted by the law and is "missing?"



> produced by Scott USA, and ridden to a world XC championship by Ruthie Mathes, so its not like it was all bad.


 Ruthie was such a bad-ass she could've ridden a Wal-Mart fork to a championship.


----------



## Canuck Doc (Apr 20, 2004)

*Pretty easy fix, actually...*



Guitar Ted said:


> I also picked up on the Amp fork for similar reasons. Agree that it was a fantastic steering fork- no brake rub. You could slam it into any bump, and it seemed to walk right up over it. Downfalls were few, but significant. Downhill runs into something like a pothole or drop was a recipe for sketchy handling, if not endo time. I could never keep oil in the damper, either. Ran an Amp fork in the Chequamegon 40, and about a third of the way in, I heard a rattle. Thought my headset was coming apart! Turns out that when the damper runs dry, it tops out with quite a clang! Spewed oil all over the downtube! Oh well. Still really like the idea, not necessarily the execution of it. I would like to see a revival of this type of design, as well. Then again, I'd like to fix the two F-3's I have sitting under my bench! Any ideas on damper fixes for these old dogs?


I have all the stuff - in fact, I still have amp fork parts if needed (F3's and F4's). To fix the damping cartridge, you need a special tool to clamp the cartridge in a work bench, then its easy. You also need the rebuild kit (a bunch of new seals, etc.). I can provide both if needed, not sure how much but it won't be too much. I have a few of the clamps, so I can sell a few (I only need one).

I have all the stuff needed for those forks, or can get whatever is needed (I am the Canadian distributor - a moot point since they don't sell stuff anymore, but I have stock left that I can sell). Feel free to email me directly at larryjklassen (at) hotmail (dot) com (replace words in parentheses with symbols, of course) - by the way, I too am a huge AMP fan, and still run carbon F3's and F4's. Still perform awesome.

Larry


----------



## vdubbusrider (Jul 28, 2004)

the worst for me is the Mcmahon fork!!! they were stiff, and had nicer travel than a lot of other forks at the time but they make one big mistake. there was no bottom out! well, i guess there was when the tire hit the crown! yeah, it happened to me! 40mph into rocks.


----------



## nwmtb (Jan 3, 2004)

*yucky forks !!*



EBasil said:


> I'll try to keep appropriate time frames in mind...and toy-store bike parts are out.
> 
> Early on, I rode the RS-1, the Manitou 1 and the Scott Unicrown, in addition to several rigid forks. I found the RS-1 to be noodly and problematic. The Scott Unicrown wasn't problematic, but it was either stuck in stiction or bouncy and it ting-a-ling'ed down the trail as the coil would bounce off the inside of the leg. The Manitou 1, steered better, worked better and could be dialed in more plush but hit-compliant than either, and it became the one I kept. We still have one on my wife's Parts Bin Bike, and it still gives a full, plush 1.5-1.7" of travel that feels better than my nomination for Worst Fork could ever provide.
> 
> ...


Okay for me personally i'd have to say it was my Scott uni-shock that came equipped on my ol' Scott Uni-track CST .... i had the fork for about 2 months until the harsh Nebraska winters had accumulated enough moisture on the internals to freeze and rust the steel coils to the steel inner stanchions ( at this point in my life, maintenence wasn't done unless absolutely necassary). If you don't trust me that it was one of the worse just ask my shop mechanic, Mr. Voyles ...who is now one of the lead mechanics for Answer Products ... he'd have to literally beat on the fork until he could break the coils free , and this was after soaking the spings overnight in a bath of WD-40. Just a beautiful fork !!!

other top nominees: Tange Struts, Quadra 10, oh..and the old Manitou Mach 5 that had an early issue with the compression rods ejecting out of the fork and aiming right towards the eye with some serious force !!!

hahaha...greeat thread !

later, Chad
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://redbarnbicycles.com/


----------



## EBasil (Jan 30, 2004)

Nat said:


> It's kind of funny to read 1.7" and plush in the same sentence.


Yeah, that's a fun line to type. I also have a line about a "massive 5 inch..." oh, nevermind.


----------



## EBasil (Jan 30, 2004)

I didn't know about the Halson issue. Interesting.

On the subject of "refreshers", this may be helpful. For those others that may not remember or may not have had to deal with it, the shortcoming with the lack of the skewer through the elastomer(s) isn't over extraction of the bumper, but rather that the long elastomer "rod" would deflect or arch as it was compressed and then bind against the sides of the fork. Also, one of the "tricks" used by the Manitou race mechanics and others of us that raced the Manitou elastomer forks was to use a stack of bumpers cut short, or just use the "short" length Manitou already produced. Using shorter bumpers on a skewer reduced the "bowing effect" of the bumpers, reduced splitting, allowed one to tune the stack with different durometers and allowed noticeable improvements in the fork(s). The skewerless design prevented the tuning and had the binding. Haven't you posted in the past with some indication you know about those issues?

I still think the Quadra and all its variations were "worse junk" than similarly-priced competitive products by Manitou and even Marzocchi at the time. That doesn't mean I thing the Mag21 or the Judy were great, nor that the preload adjusters on the bottom of Manitou 2 legs weren't dumb, etc...


----------



## aka brad (Dec 24, 2003)

*Judy, Judy, Judy...*



OregonMTB said:


> I won't argue with everybody's complaints about the late 80's and early 90's forks. The worst for me by far was the 1997 Rock Shox Judy XC. I swear each fork moved independently of each other forward and backward. I blew 4 cartridges. The first three were replaced under warranty and on the fourth they made me buy 1998 legs. That thing was so flexy. Rock Shox should have really known better by then.
> 
> When I replaced it with a 2000 X-fly--it was a completely different and better riding experience.
> 
> BTW--a friend of mine rides a SID double crown on his single speed. It came on his NOS FourBanger. It is kinda really funny and makes no since--but at least they solved the flex issue. Give it another 10 years and it will be 100% old school.


The 1998 T2 to be exact. Some of the blame must go to my LBS. I bought a '98 Bontrager that came with a RS T2 and the Bonty crown. For those of you that don't remember the T2 was an elastomer shock the could be upgraded to a Judy XC with a cartridge/ spring kit. Well I rode it around without the kit for awhile and it was like the shock had a sponge inside. I had the kit installed ($60) and now I had a dampened sponge. The first time I hit a good bump the dampening went away, which actually worked better. I decided to tear down the shock myself and when I removed the bottom retainer bolts from the sliders, black oil oozed out.Hmmm a blown cartridge. When I took the sliders off I discovered not only was the cartridge blown, but my LBS left the elastomers inside; no springs!! I went back to my LBS with my cartridge and elastimers in hand and asked, "what gives?" Oh they say "you want the cartridge  and the spring kit". Well we'll replace the blown cartridge but you'll have to buy a new spring/cartridge kit from us for ($100). Well I had them warranty the cartridge and found a spring kit online for about $50 I think. Anyway, the next big bump I hit and whammo!, instant pogo stick. I put in the remaining good cartridge and sold that sucker faster than you can say "Buy it now"; I replaced it with a Marzocchi Super Fly (still one of the best shocks I've ever owned).


----------



## @dam (Jan 28, 2004)

Hmmm...well, my Mag 20 has to be the worst fork I've owned. For the time, however, it was pretty damned sweet. I bought it at 16 (still have it) and I was SO stoked! It really only worked on big hits though. (does anybody know where I can get air seals for a mag 20? PM me if you do)

A couple of years later, in early 1995, I bought a slightly used gen 1 Judy XC. WOW! Now this was a plush, small-bump-eating fork, or seemed so at the time. Super stoked about that. My dad still rides this fork, but he is heavier than I so he runs it at about 80% sag since it didn't come with other bumpers being used  Whatever. I rode this fork recently, and other than the unreliable cartridges I really don't think this fork is as bad as many make it out to be, and it was about as good as it got in 1995.

I briefly rode the unishox. Crap. Dirt damping?! They were light and cheap though.

Now, this last summer I rode a 2002 or 2003 Manitou Axel on a used bike I was looking at for my wife. I think I'd rather have a rigid fork! Maybe the person didn't know what they were doing maintaince wise, but there seemed to be no damping whatsoever, and it was VERY undersprung. My wife would bottom out HARD riding off a curb at 2 mph! She thought it was locked out it blew threw it's travel so quickly! There didn't seem to be any sort of bottom out padding either. VERY jarring on the hands. I recently rode a new Axel, and it wasn't so bad for a cheap fork. Manitou either fixed the design, or the one I had was seriously F'ed up. Anyway, that has to be the worst fork I've ever ridden.


----------



## AG1 (Jun 27, 2004)

Cannondale Pepperoni

I agree. This is the harshest fork I ever rode.


----------



## Blizzard (Oct 8, 2004)

I think everyone needs to remember the alternative back then-nothing!

My friend had the Manitou 1 and it was great (sure beat the ridgid on downhill). Then I got a Mag 21, my first, it was awesome compared to the Manitou 1. It was pretty rare to have a fork back then.

The Scott was pretty junky I thought. I know people won races on them, but a lot of people won races on a lot of "crappy" equipment, I say that because usually the units made for them were modified.

The worst suspension had to be the Flexstem (not really suspension, but a bargain at around a $100 back then I think). Sure it helped your hands out, but not the bike.

My Tange Big Fork was pretty awful, plenty of stiffness, too much, it beat you to death on rough terrain.


----------



## ssmike (Jan 21, 2004)

I feel fortunate, after reading these posts, to say that I spent suspension's formation years riding rigid. That's not to say that I didn't sell a lot of those forks and give one or two a try. I still have an original Specialized Future Shock that I ran for a short period but the only reason it didn't make the cut was that it was used on my Salsa which was made in the mid '80s and _really _wasn't made with the thought of installing a suspension fork.

If I had to pick one fork as the "worst" I've ridden, I'd say the Marzocchi Marathon 29" model. Could never get the air pressure to feel right and it is pretty flexy.


----------



## 88milesperhour (Apr 10, 2007)

Definitely my 93 Rock Shox Quadras. I was so conflicted by this fork. Although I complained about it every day I rode, the novelty of having front suspension back in '93 was a huge rush. Frig - how can you complain when you're riding a suspension fork while still in high school? 

Sad part is - I still ride with this fork.


----------



## mountaindewberry (Sep 7, 2005)

"The worst suspension had to be the Flexstem (not really suspension, but a bargain at around a $100 back then I think). Sure it helped your hands out, but not the bike."

Hilarious, the worst fork was the Flexstem. Maybe they should re-release them with a Maverick Speedball set-up so you can instantly become more aggressive.


----------



## corprin (Mar 12, 2007)

I loved my Quadra 21R which for my allowance collecting 16yo self, was a GREAT fork. Granted I was stepping up from a RST-400 which came on a used bike I saved to buy from some dude down the street. I went to the stock specialized direct drive fork when I finally got a frame that fit me (16" rockhopper comp) bought used from a friend. I was rigid till I saved enough to buy the Q21R, and compared to what I had before it was a welcome ride. I am trying to track down that bike still so I can ride it again. It's been locked away in storage for a decade now. It's a time capsule!!!

I am on a used, abused, and blown up Judy DH now. It's... well crap, but I don't have the rigid fork to match my '00 Stumpy M2. Eagerly waiting for my Fox vanilla RLC to come from Speedgoat 

So all time worst fork... RST-400 flex flex and more flex.. no travel, and weighed a TON. Good luck finding any parts to repair or upgrade it. Like I said, I gladly went back to a rigid fork from that thing.


----------



## IF52 (Jan 10, 2004)

Blizzard said:


> I think everyone needs to remember the alternative back then-nothing!


I agree. How about "what is the worst fork you have ridden in context of the time when you used it/it was new."

In hindsight I was pretty underwhelmed by suspension when it first started getting popular, but went with an EFC on my bike anyway. Then I built up the bar bike, an old Stumpjumper Comp, which has a rigid fork and quickly came to appreciate front suspension.

I am preparing myself to be unhappy with the titanium fork I put on the IF. That thing is really flexy. While I don't plan on taking the bike offroad I'm interested to see how it handles under my big ass.


----------



## EliM (May 6, 2006)

Sountour something or other.


----------



## eccentricbottombracket (Nov 13, 2006)

*Amp still sells replacement parts. Check out their website.*



Guitar Ted said:


> I also picked up on the Amp fork for similar reasons. Agree that it was a fantastic steering fork- no brake rub. You could slam it into any bump, and it seemed to walk right up over it. Downfalls were few, but significant. Downhill runs into something like a pothole or drop was a recipe for sketchy handling, if not endo time. I could never keep oil in the damper, either. Ran an Amp fork in the Chequamegon 40, and about a third of the way in, I heard a rattle. Thought my headset was coming apart! Turns out that when the damper runs dry, it tops out with quite a clang! Spewed oil all over the downtube! Oh well. Still really like the idea, not necessarily the execution of it. I would like to see a revival of this type of design, as well. Then again, I'd like to fix the two F-3's I have sitting under my bench! Any ideas on damper fixes for these old dogs?


I had them supply me with some bolts a week ago. Great service. I love my F-4. I have never had a problem with it.


----------



## eccentricbottombracket (Nov 13, 2006)

*Worst fork? Marzocchi XC 700.*

The early Marzocchi's with the 'stiletto' legs were scarey flexy. The tall crown destroyed my Kona Explosif downtube when the fork over rotated on a mishap.


----------



## pinguwin (Aug 20, 2004)

I have to say that the IRD titanium fork was the worst for me. Yes, a lot of the suspension forks were bad but with a rigid fork that wasn't rigid, you can't forgive that.

I rode that fork and it chattered every time the brakes applied. I felt the front end flopping around and look down and watch the fork moving all over the place. Best if you just pretended it wasn't there. Yes, a cool fork, but not one to ride. Guy who had it swore it was the greatest thing in the world but he had all the Ti doo-dads that didn't work so well. IMHO, of course.

pinguwin


----------



## gm1230126 (Nov 4, 2005)

What amazes me about all these posts is everybody forgets that many of those forks were the BEST back then. Even reviewed by riders and magazines back then as "State of the Art". Yes, compared to what's available today they may have been the worst fork you ever rode. I think the one thing that has happened in todays forks is excess weight to satisfy manufacturers liability issues with all the big drop free riding that's going on. I still feel that many of the low 3lb or less forks from the mid 90's are all anyone needs on many of the XC trails that are ridden today. 63-80mm of travel is more than enough to take the edge off tree roots and rocks on most xc trails.


----------



## mudlover71 (May 20, 2006)

95 Judy or Mach 5 they both pretty much sucked..........


----------



## OregonMTB (Sep 1, 2004)

I wholeheartedly disagree. Some of the forks may have been touted as the greatest thing since sliced bread (usually because of light weight) but they simply were not good at all. A perfect example is my 97 Judy XC--in the name of light weight, a way too flexy fork was created. It continually blew cartridges.

You are correct, that for some people that ride simple trails 70 to 80mm is sufficient. It depends on your surrounding terrian and speed you ride it at. However--if your trails are not buttery smooth and you ride with any speed--in my opinion, 100mm is the minimum.


----------



## ong (Jun 26, 2006)

I didn't ride many of the older suspension forks, having a big old constant-radius rigid fork on my Alpinestars, but I did rent a bike after disabling mine, and it came with one of the Scott coil-sprung unicrown numbers. It was enough to put me off suspension for years to come, bouncing all over the place. Felt like I was about to be bucked off even on slow climbs, whenever the front tire left the ground. I think it was pretty well broken by the time I wheeled the bike back in. I finally got a real suspension fork last year, and was enormously relieved to find it nothing like the Scott....


----------



## rkj__ (Feb 29, 2004)

OregonMTB said:


> However--if your trails are not buttery smooth and you ride with any speed--in my opinion, 100mm is the minimum.


I wonder what you mean by "the minimum?"

Every race i do, i get my @$$ handed to me by guys on rigid bikes, regardless of how tech the course is. Clearly not everybody desires that their fork be buttery smooth. If it really beat them up that bad, they probably would not choose to do it.

Personally, I'm pretty happy with my 5 year old 3" travel fork.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

OregonMTB said:


> I wholeheartedly disagree. Some of the forks may have been touted as the greatest thing since sliced bread (usually because of light weight) but they simply were not good at all. A perfect example is my 97 Judy XC--in the name of light weight, a way too flexy fork was created. It continually blew cartridges.
> 
> You are correct, that for some people that ride simple trails 70 to 80mm is sufficient. It depends on your surrounding terrian and speed you ride it at. However--if your trails are not buttery smooth and you ride with any speed--in my opinion, 100mm is the minimum.


susp. is about comfort. not performance. and when it's really technical rigid gives you precision.


----------



## uphiller (Jan 13, 2004)

Technical? What do we mean by technical? Personally, I find that a rigid is far superior when descending very slow speed technical lines, the braking is just so muchbetter and the lack of brake dive make the bike a lot more manageable, plus at that speed bumps are better dealt with by effective body English than springs and dampers.
However, once things get going fast, it's a completely different story.
DeeEight rightly points out that we should judge the forks of the day by the standard of the day, but at the same time there was a reason most people were still riding rigid back then. Melting or freezing elastomers, pogo-stick damping, incredibly flimsy fork construction, lack of adjustability... I may have nostalgia for a Manitou 3, but there's no way I'm gong to swap even my 2002 Fox Vanilla for one. I also think the idea of calling friction damping an ancestor to modern-day platform-valved shocks a little silly, even if the end effect was similar.


----------



## rkj__ (Feb 29, 2004)

uphiller said:


> Technical? What do we mean by technical? Personally, I find that a rigid is far superior when descending very slow speed technical lines, the braking is just so muchbetter and the lack of brake dive make the bike a lot more manageable, plus at that speed bumps are better dealt with by effective body English than springs and dampers.
> However, once things get going fast, it's a completely different story.


You make some good points uphiller.

BTW, i just noticed this thread was started in 2004. :lol:


----------



## richieb (Oct 21, 2004)

The only fork I ever road AT THE TIME IT WAS STATE OF THE ART that I simply despised was the AMP fork...noisiest damper ever, dove massively under the slightest braking forces, the steer tube started spinning in the crown on the first ride, and the damper had to be overhauled at least once every 2 rides.

Aside form that, most forks I've ever ridden when they were a company's newest offering were pretty good...except for the Girvin vector...again with the diving under braking forces...

but then again, I'm a mechanic, and customizing and tuning forks is what I loved to do in the 90's...and for that, the Mag 21 was the best fork EVER!!! If Rock Shox and manitou would make forks with the quality and precision that the Mag 21 was made with, but on a more modern platform, THEN we'd have good forks to ride these days...sort of like Maverick and Fox forks...

my 2 cents

richard


----------



## CEB (Mar 17, 2005)

Manitou Mach 5....... 1996

Thing just sucked.........


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

uphiller said:


> Technical? What do we mean by technical? Personally, I find that a rigid is far superior when descending very slow speed technical lines, the braking is just so muchbetter and the lack of brake dive make the bike a lot more manageable, plus at that speed bumps are better dealt with by effective body English than springs and dampers.


that's exactly what i meant; slow speeds technical lines. for some of us that's what mountain biking means.


----------



## Tracerboy (Oct 13, 2002)

Funny.I was looking for reviews on the Unishock fork and I find this old post.I read the posts on the Scott Unishock and I have to agree with members on this one.When I tear down the fork for maintanence I always check the fork's unicrown,steerer,fork drop-outs and the kevlar fork legs for any problems. It has slight flex when braking.I haven't noticed any pogoing when climbing. What I like to know is where did these forks break in regards to the recall as the old recall notice does not mention specific details?


----------



## OregonMTB (Sep 1, 2004)

CEB said:


> Manitou Mach 5....... 1996
> 
> Thing just sucked.........


 I put a Mach 5 on my 1998 Ibis Mojo in 2000 and the bike actually rode very nicely with it. I was quite amazed at how well it worked. It was basic and had limited travel--but it worked.


----------



## Tor Nup (Mar 13, 2007)

richieb said:


> ...the Mag 21 was the best fork EVER!!! If Rock Shox and manitou would make forks with the quality and precision that the Mag 21 was made with, but on a more modern platform, THEN we'd have good forks to ride these days...sort of like Maverick and Fox forks...
> 
> my 2 cents
> 
> richard


Still often ride a '94 Brontrager with a Mag 21. The bike is not limited by the 48mm of travel, and I never worried about the "flex". Worst thing about the bike compared to newer ones is the brakes, not the fork. Old canties just don't grab like 185mm discs. :cryin:

My FS ride is a '03 Stumpy FSR XC. This bike made me hate Rock-Shox. Came with a Puke, err Duke XC 80mm. Worst fork I ever rode. Was always bottomed out, and caused many bails and wrecks. After complaining to both the LBS I bought the bike from, and Rock Shox, I ended up getting a Marzocchi Marathon SL to replace it. Great fork, and compliments the FSR's rear air shock.

Basically Rock Shox sucks. I've never tried a Fox, and it's been years since I been on a spongee Manitou, but after being a faithful RS fan during the early years, they will never get my business again. Thier lack of Customer Service with my Duke issue was the capper on the poor service they offer.

Already been posted here, but they only want to support products for 3 years. Can you imagine any automaker or home appliance company making this kind of policy? That means zero parts, nada, nothing after 3 years, no help, suggestions or anything, only "we don't support that product anymore". They would be laughed out of business.

Thankfully, I got a couple of rebuild kits off eBay back in the day for my pair of Mag 21's. Those forks where built to last with minimal maintenance. As for the lastest crap from Rock Shox, I guess I understand why they won't support it after a few years, cause they suck brand new and get worse with age. :madman:

Tor


----------



## KDXdog (Mar 15, 2007)

I've had Mag-21, several old school manitous, still have a green "palmer" one, but the worst fork I've ridden is the steel "spinner" that came with my Klien Fervor.

I built the bike with a Manitiu EFC (red & black legs) for a few years, then rreibuilt the Klien. Put the Spinner back on, damn, it just flexed in odd ways! in the woods, on the street, it just felt strange. For a rigid fork, it wasn't so rigid. 

Replaced it with a FAT big 1 inch ($50 as a take off from Bike Pro) bike was wonderful again.

Years later, I put the spinner back on, FAT moved to another project...Jesus I forgot how odd that fork was. I'm still puzzled by it. Yes, took it off again, the only good thing about it, is that it matches that pimpy green and black nebula paint on the Fervor!


----------



## JohnnyTooBad (Mar 24, 2004)

Started with a '93 RS Q10. Since it was my first MTB, I didn't realize how bad it was until I got another bike.

My next bike was a '98 K2 Proflex 4000 with a Noleen (Girvin) Crosslink ELT. At the time, only knowing the Q10, I thought it was da shizzle, but got upgradeitis and bought a Marz MXC in '02. Holy crap, what a POS that Noleen was!!! The first 100 yards of my first ride on the bike with the Marz, and I was "oh, WOW, the bike goes where I point it!".

Oh yeah, the K2 also had a Noleen rear shock. It turned my bike into a pogo stick after about 2 years. Total POS rear shock!

I still run that Marz, on my '02 GF Sugar, and have done zero maintenance to it in 5 years, and it's still smooth and damp as ever!:thumbsup:


----------



## POG (May 20, 2004)

*1998 SID by far!*

I've owned some of the other forks mentioned in this thread and they do not even remotely approach the original SID in suckiness. It had everything - obscene price and poor performance complimented by supreme unreliability. I swore I would never buy anything made by RS again. I actually emailed them once a year or so for a time to let them know how angry I was. I contemplated cutting the fork in little pieces and shipping it back to them. I would like to know the "inside story" behind that fork. Surely there was some disgruntled engineer who sabotaged it on purpose.


----------



## CB2 (May 7, 2006)

Rock Shox Judy's and SID's were always too flexy for my mammoth 140#'s.


----------



## uphiller (Jan 13, 2004)

CB2 said:


> Rock Shox Judy's and SID's were always too flexy for my mammoth 140#'s.


Let's not forget that although the original 1995 Judy XC was a giant backward leap in terms of reliability, it WAS a giant leap forward in terms of rigidity compared to what preceeded it, the MAG21. The Judy did have 7" of stanchion-slider overlap, whereas the MAG21 had something under 2.5" of overlap with skinny sliders. And the Judy's reliability problem could be solved by buying a new damper.


----------



## jms (Feb 4, 2006)

*Like choosing an incurable disease*



pinguwin said:


> I have to say that the IRD titanium fork was the worst for me. Yes, a lot of the suspension forks were bad but with a rigid fork that wasn't rigid, you can't forgive that.
> 
> I rode that fork and it chattered every time the brakes applied. I felt the front end flopping around and look down and watch the fork moving all over the place. Best if you just pretended it wasn't there. Yes, a cool fork, but not one to ride. Guy who had it swore it was the greatest thing in the world but he had all the Ti doo-dads that didn't work so well. IMHO, of course.
> 
> pinguwin


 This thread is like trying to agree who has the worst incurable disease - how do you win?I've owned or tried most of the "nominees" for this award, and I've Gotta agree with pinguwin on the IRD: Because I rarely could get a ride in without the steerer tube slipping through the crown just enough to cause the headset to rattle [fixed that with a set screw through the back of crown into the steerer]; Because the brake bosses would rotate away from the force of the severely toed [to limit the brake chatter under heavy braking] brake pads [fixed that with a DKG brake bridge behind the fork baldes]; Because the fork blades would occasionally slip independently and the front wheel wouldn't track properly.
Coupled with the fabulous IRD Switchback or Widget brakes, I spent many enchanting moments exploring the frustration induced limits of hand tool velocity and/or verbal profanity, trying to keep all the latest and greatest from IRD functioning properly. That said, they made great seatpost. Sigh, oh good times!


----------

