# Reverse Arch



## Raptordude (Mar 30, 2004)

Is Manitou's reverse arch actually stiffer and more reinforced versus the traditional arch? Or is it just a gimmick and more unique?

I can't really make up my mind about which is better (Reverse or traditional). I mean, ALL the other manufacturers run the traditional, but that may be because Manitou has patents. Logically, it seems like a superior engineered design, but realistically...I really have no idea.

Discuss.


----------



## Chicodude01 (Sep 5, 2004)

Raptordude said:


> Is Manitou's reverse arch actually stiffer and more reinforced versus the traditional arch? Or is it just a gimmick and more unique?
> 
> I can't really make up my mind about which is better (Reverse or traditional). I mean, ALL the other manufacturers run the traditional, but that may be because Manitou has patents. Logically, it seems like a superior engineered design, but realistically...I really have no idea.
> 
> Discuss.


Who cares?


----------



## Roaming Oregon (Feb 24, 2004)

The reverse arch certainly has a feeling of being "stiffer." While this is an advantage to the Manitou forks Marz has overcome it by using white lowers, or using pin-up girls on the lowers (06 forks,) and Fox has overcome it with superior internals and larger stanchions (sp.)


----------



## SHIVER ME TIMBERS (Jan 12, 2004)

Roaming Oregon said:


> The reverse arch certainly has a feeling of being "stiffer." While this is an advantage to the Manitou forks Marz has overcome it by using white lowers, or using pin-up girls on the lowers (06 forks,) and Fox has overcome it with superior internals and larger stanchions (sp.)


absolutely.............therefore do not get a Manipoo


----------



## finchy (Jan 21, 2004)

ive owned a 20mm thru manitou sherman and a marz dj 3 and a marz 888 and honestly they are all pretty stiff the sherman flexed the most out of the three fore and aft though imo


----------



## rpl3000 (Feb 24, 2004)

i've seen the reverse arch smack the down tube on some frames. ask me what frame, I cant tell you but I remember debating this a long time ago (when looking for a new fork) and I saw a few dented frames that helped with my fork decision.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

Raptordude said:


> Is Manitou's reverse arch actually stiffer and more reinforced versus the traditional arch? Or is it just a gimmick and more unique?


Well, there's advantages, but the way that manitou incorperates it on forks is kinda funky. If you look at the slider+ or virtually any manitou fork, they have a LOT of exposed stanchion for the amount of travel. Like 9-10" of stanchion for 170mm of travel on the slider plus. On my buddies breakout, it's got about 7.5" of exposed stanchion for 6" of travel. What I'm getting to is that the manitou forks have less bushing overlap because of this, so while the reverse arch is good and stiffer than the traditional arch, they kind of mess up by decreasing the stanchion overlap. This is kind of required because to go any higher would make the reverse arch crash into the downtube, so it's got positives and negatives.


----------



## MDJ (Jan 21, 2005)

The reverese arch is just like a Lefty...it just doesn't look or feel right. I couldn't force myself to buy either one.


----------



## WheelieMan (Jan 19, 2004)

rpl3000 said:


> i've seen the reverse arch smack the down tube on some frames. ask me what frame, I cant tell you but I remember debating this a long time ago (when looking for a new fork) and I saw a few dented frames that helped with my fork decision.


Sounds like the person who installed the fork didn't follow the axle-to-crown-height guidelines provided in the manual. As JM said, manitou forks have quite a bit of exposed stanchion, so if you set up the fork (slider and travis in this case) to have the same amount of exposed stanchion as fork travel, you will have some major problems. As long as you follow the guidelines there should not be any contact. Theoretically if a bike had an extremely steep downtube there is a possibility that the arch would contact unless the crown was moved up a bit. But I have yet to see this problem. Not only would the steep downtube design be hideous but it would not be functional.


----------



## Hardtails Are Better (May 4, 2005)

My Skareb comes within 2-3mm of hitting the crown on the lowers when you fully compress it. And it is WAY stiffer than other superlight XC forks. Whether or not the reverse arch has anything to do with that I couldn't say...


----------



## Huck Banzai (May 8, 2005)

And what is this nonsense about less bushing overlap? and what stretch of logic related it to 'exposed stanchion'?

You should also note that shermans lowers extend beneath the dropouts which allow for longer stanchions/bushings - aka MORE overlap. I have *NEVER* felt a sloppy sherman. I hit a tree at ~20 on mine (on a Chameleon) -- tore my seat off/apart, bent my Thomson post forward (took a mean hit to the stomach) - and forky A-OK!

All the tech talk is meaningless when you dont understand it.

Reverse arch works, is not a _just_ a gimmick (different always sells - at least a bit) - I realy like my RA MAnitous, the damping is excellent, they are super stiff - and my dealings with Manitou excellent. Sane for MZ. I tend to prefer Marz because they are so uber tunable without excessive maintenance. But any of the Big 3 have a decent fork in any category.

Im headin out on a Pike Team ASAP


----------



## Hardtails Are Better (May 4, 2005)

I've got 2-3" of clearance on my Skareb, mounted on a Klein HT, and the was even more during the entire week I had the Skareb on my Haro Escape.


----------

