# Maverick DUC 32 vs White Brothers Magic 100T



## andyman (Apr 7, 2007)

I plan on buying a Ventana El Conquistador in the next 6 months and was wondering about fork choice. We are a 250 pound team an will do mostly XC type riding on double and single track around Mount Tam in Marin, California. On steep hills, I usually stand while my wife likes to sit. We've been riding road tandems since 1995 and are interested in MTB. 
Two choices... The Maverick DUC 32 and WB Magic 100T. I am 5'9" and stoker is 5'2". For standover ht, our inseams are about 32.5 inches (with shoes) which I see we would fit a 17/14 size on Ventana specs. 
Will the DUC32 bring the standover ht higher than the Magic or are they the same? I suppose you can't go wrong on either one, but I'd like to hear other views on these forks pertaining to our riding style. I'm sure there are other forks that I have not thought of so please include them if you like them.

Thanks


----------



## ds2199 (Sep 16, 2008)

I've heard good things about the DUC32, but I think it is out of production. As such, when we spec'd out our new(ish) ECDM, we went with a Marzochi ATA55. So far so good on the fork. I like the ability to be able to lock it out. It is very plush and seems plenty stiff for our needs. We are NOT extreme downhillers, but do partake in most of the same trails that I would otherwise ride on my own (we do avoid the tight switchback trails and the super technical stuff), no fault of the bike or fork, just the lack of skills to operate the big bike on said obstacles.

I did look into the White Brothers fork, but I really wanted a lockout... so I am of no help to your original question  

We are similar size to your team (although not quite as light). I'm 5'8" and my stoker is 5'4" and we're about 265. I think we ended up on a 17" 16" frame and it fits us well.

I would also like to add that Alex at MTBtandems.com was EXCELLENT to work with and I highly recomend purchasing through him. He is VERY knowledgeable and his prices are as good as you can find. :thumbsup: 

Good luck with the purchase.
Dan


----------



## andyman (Apr 7, 2007)

Thanks Dan....
I noticed on a recent post that Alex said he had two DUC32's left in stock. I also spoke with Teresa at Ventana and gave her our dimensions and she recommended 17/14 frame.
We might be tempted to do technical downhill, but not like Mammoth mountain Kamikaze. I don't think tandems would fit on their gondola. I was there last year and only singles would fit in those things. Same with Northstar near Tahoe. Yes, I will most likeley go with MTB Tandems for purchase.


----------



## Sam Jones (Feb 25, 2005)

We have the DUC 32 on our ECDM and are very happy with it now that we have started running it with 2.5 inches of sag (so it is about the same height as the 4" travel forks the ECDM is designed for). Before we increased the sag, the front BB was too high and the bike felt clumsey in the tight stuff. Having the extra sag seems to work well and is an advantage in that it makes it easier on big steps, etc. because I can pull up on the bars and get full extension to soften the impact.


----------



## andyman (Apr 7, 2007)

Yes, I almost forgot that the ECDM is compatible with 100mm forks although I have seen pictures of bigger travel forks on the ECDM.
Sam,
On the mtbtandems web site, it recommends 35-40mm sag.. You mentioned 2.5 inches sag.. Is this a newer version fork.?
http://www.mtbtandems.com/Forks.html


----------



## Sam Jones (Feb 25, 2005)

No it is the same 6"150MM travel version. Actually we are probably running close to 3" of sag on the 6" fork which makes it the same height as a 4" fork with 1" of sag.


----------



## TandemNut (Mar 12, 2004)

IF you're a 250lb team, then the DUC will do fine for you. For teams over 275 or 300 lbs, the damping circuits in their stock form aren't up to the application. In fact, even a 250lb team (or 250lb individual such as me) can overload the rebound and compression damping on a standard DUC. The tweaks we've figured out over time help in this area.
You can set sag for 2" or so, and have decent geometry and standover. It is a somewhat tall fork, but Sam's comment is the first I've seen from customers reflecting an adverse effect on handling.
An el Conq will best accomodate a fork C2A length of 18.5" or so.
There will be another generation of DUC's later this year. They'll be carbon instead of alloy, will have larger diameter stanchions, and will be mucho expensive ($1600 retail). I'm told they've tested out to be stronger than the current DUC as well, and no problem for tandem use as far as Maverick is concerned. Only question is carbon durability off-road and when they'll actually be available....


----------



## andyman (Apr 7, 2007)

Doesn't the new WB Magic 100T now have a lockout like the DUC 32?


----------



## Sam Jones (Feb 25, 2005)

---


----------



## andyman (Apr 7, 2007)

Doesn't the new WB Magic 100T now have a lockout like the DUC 32?


----------



## TandemNut (Mar 12, 2004)

andyman said:


> Doesn't the new WB Magic 100T now have a lockout like the DUC 32?


Not really. They have a platform damping system with a high threshold built into it, but they don't have a true lockout. I've asked for a lockout again, but so far no go.
If your team weight is on the lower side, the platform threshold will effectively mitigate the fork activation while climbing, but a normal weight team will not enjoy the same effectiveness.


----------

