Lots of products get launched at or around Crankworx, and this year is no exception. The new Boxxer has been seen on SRAM's sponsored riders bikes for a long time and I thought it could be worth seeing exactly what was going on inside this new fork. For full disclosure, I haven't ridden this fork yet and I'm purely asking questions about SRAM's design and engineering within this fork, as well as their claims about the performance it can offer. We are working on a full review though and you can expect that shortly.
For the next ask the marketing guy: If you had to choose between using a part with an existing standard for the new fork that every shop already has or using a new part with no measurable benefit which would you choose?
They say its about simplicity. I think it comes down cost. Plastic tokens are cheap. Less parts to manufacture/inventory. Less time developing the extra chamber. Maybe patent infringement or other factors I am not sure.
IFP was the way to go, though. Simple and effective. Predictable and easy to rebuild/service. Old "sealed" bladder setup would just ingest oil/air and bladder would become bloated and you would run into problems quick. Hopefully this IFP setup and its ability to purge ingested oil out the back will mostly eliminate that issue.
Pressure in the 2nd positive chamber dictates mid stroke support more than bottom out. Once the piston in the 2nd chamber goes full travel, bottom out support (or lack of) remains constant.
This comes from pulling apart and extensively tweaking an ohlins 3 chamber air spring.
I will take a well balanced 2 chamber spring & tokens over a 3 chamber air spring any day.
Higher rate in the middle of the stroke was noticeable, and I was still able to use full travel.
I wonder how many part numbers they will have for this "New" technology.
Also, no tune info? Shim stack measurements? Dyno graphs comparison vs. the previous damper? This article has potential but missing the real nerdy info!
HBO both front & back I beg to differ, esp.
on flat drops and overshots...
Do not trust new bikes out of the box,it worth a check to the suspension too.
I want to see the 'silencer' on the rebound piston that was talked uo in the ZEB Ultimate press release. (This looks like jist an alu nut...)
They said it was a 'silencing cone' or some such back then.
Now it is 'maxima oil engineered for quieter operation' and no mention of the silencer.
That being said the process is not truly adiabatic and you will get some heat transfer to the cylinder. The smaller air cylinders means less surface area (and so less heat transfer for a given cycle) BUT the air cylinder is now internal to the stanchion and does not get active cooling from airflow. Net result is *probably* a slight increase in temperature but I would guess it is probably not a noticeable effect.
Smaller diameter seals are generally lower friction so you might see some benefits there.
Fox does the same thing with the 38, uses a small piston from a 34 in a tube in the leg.