Retrobike Forum Index

It is currently Fri Dec 02, 2016 7:16 pm

* Login   * Register * Search  * FAQ



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 17 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:07 am 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 1:14 am
Posts: 1871
Location: Kuranda DH circa 1991
Interested to hear thoughts from others...

I have had my 96 model Judy XC on two frames now, and it feels to me the handling and steering is not good. I am no expert on rake and trail, however the Judy just feels like they got it all wrong..

It feels sluggish, floppy and imprecise. In stark contrast, the rigid steel fork on my 92 Zaskar is sharp, precise and steers perfectly.

Thoughts from others?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:11 am 
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
retrobike rider / Gold Trader

Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2007 9:48 am
Posts: 6974
Location: Bristle
The judy was one of the first forks that steered anything approaching properly as well...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:36 am 
Old School Grand Master
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 1:10 am
Posts: 4756
Location: Heathfield, East Sussex
Probably a little unfair to compare any suspension fork to a rigid don't you think?

For years I put P2's on all my bikes because they are still my favourite fork of all time; these days though I have become a convert to comfort over out-and-out performance...

...I started with Judys, albeit with a gas-ram/spring conversion, tried some Z1's, but have now become a big fan of Mozo Pro's. They are a decent fork which was well-regarded BiTD, easy to work on MCU sprung, with air dampers that work. Several different travel versions were available so you can swap the stanchions around to custom fit them to whichever bike they are to go on.

They are certainly all the fork I need, and perform far better than I ever will... :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:04 am 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 1:14 am
Posts: 1871
Location: Kuranda DH circa 1991
yeah its not a fair fight, but swapping between the two today, really highlighted the differnces. back in the day i went rigid : MAG 21 : marzocchi Z1 : marzocchi Z2 : SID and on and on from there...

i never thought my MAG 21 were particularly bad (steering wise), but they did flex a lot. i never rode The judy range in the day


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:39 am 
Old School Grand Master
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 9:55 am
Posts: 7058
Location: The land of Lea & Perrins
I always found that Judys handled really well. As cce said, they were one of the first forks which started to perform 'properly' with regards to tracking and stiffness. Of course that all changed when Marzocchi introduced the Bomber which basically wiped the floor with everything and set the standard for what we use today.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:16 am 
King of the Skip Monkeys
King of the Skip Monkeys
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2007 4:34 pm
Posts: 26146
Location: Moomin Valley
Make sure that hey are in good condition first - no cracks or loose threaded bolts.

Judy was a big improvement over MAG20/21 series. My joke is always that you had to book any turns well in advance they were so slack.

I personally found forks got better as one piece lowers appeared but have gone back to rigid anyway


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:37 am 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 1:14 am
Posts: 1871
Location: Kuranda DH circa 1991
maybe its just me :D yeah they are in tip top shape, just judy buttered them again tonight. no wear or loose anything.

tyre pressures were quite low today, thats also going to adversely affect things. more pressure tonight, i will see how it feels tomorrow on my ride to work, should be better


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:41 am 
King of the Skip Monkeys
King of the Skip Monkeys
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2007 4:34 pm
Posts: 26146
Location: Moomin Valley
80 psi in the tyres or you're not doing it properly! :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 11:57 am 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 1:14 am
Posts: 1871
Location: Kuranda DH circa 1991
legrandefromage wrote:
80 psi in the tyres or you're not doing it properly! :)



BOOM! :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2013 1:23 pm 
Retro Guru

Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 3:20 am
Posts: 271
Location: Pacific Northwest USA
I have the same Zaskar and a Manitou 3 yielded the same results. The GT 3D fork goes from apr. 42mm rake to around 51MM with 395mm atoc. Not sure on Judy specifications but the Manitou was 38mm rake and long enough to change the HA a degree. The 92 Zaskar is a NON suspension frame , I think 94 was the first year Zaskars came with suspension?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 17 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: catf, longun and 28 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

About Us

Follow Retrobike

Other cool stuff

All content © 2005-2015 Retrobike unless otherwise stated.
Cookies Policy.
bikedeals - the best bike deals in one place
FatCOGS - Fat Chance Owner's Group

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group