Below are my 'running thoughts' about about my 2003 Marzocchi Marathon S. Newest thoughts are up top:
February 10, 2004 - Misc Ramblings:
It seems that the recent fad (er, trend), in suspension design/tuning is platform damping. Platform damping is simply firmer damping during slow movements of the suspension, like you would create by moving your weight around in the saddle, or pedaling 'choppy'. When the suspension encounters a quick movement, like a bump, the suspension reacts quickly to the movement and soaks it up.
Manufacturers such as Fox, Progressive, Manitou, and Romic have proven that there are several ways to achieve this new suspension nirvana. Progressive released their series of 5th Element shocks which use an adjustable pneumatic control valve to create their platform damping. Fox and Romic have chosen a slightly more traditional path to create their suspension platforms, using variations of digressive piston and shim-stacks.
So, where am I going with this? Well, Marzocchi has yet to jump into the platform damping craze. Despite my efforts to break into Marzocchi's sealed damping cartridge to modify it, ultimately I have been unsuccessful. I don't exactly want to ruin my expensive fork! However, I am still left wanting to tinker with the damping to 'update' it's damping and mimic platform damping.
There are some basic changes that I'd like to make to my fork. I have been pretty happy so far with the suspension performance, but that doesn't mean that I want to stop tinkering with the performance! High-speed compression damping is pretty good. However, there seems to be a lot of excessive movement during low-speed compression, like I experience during long fire-road climbs.
I would like to try the 'new-school' digressive damping on my Marathon fork and Fox Vanilla RC rear shock. Digressive damping is the opposite of previous suspension tuning theory. In the past, shim-stacks were set up in a conical shape. The conical shape resulted in more compression damping, the faster the damping piston moved through the oil (high-speed damping). In other words, as the shaft velocity increases, the damping forces increases at a linear rate (or close to linear). On the contrary, digressive damping is the opposite of progressive damping. As shaft speed increases, the damping forces increase at a decreasing rate. Digressive damping provides firmer low-speed damping control, without being unreasonably harsh on rough sections (high-speed damping).
The one thing that I really miss about my old Manitou SX-Carbon, was the easily accessible compression and rebound pistons/shim stacks. For those who actually care, it allows you to easily change the damping characteristics of the fork. If you've done some homework, you could end up with digressive damping by dishing the piston slightly and changing the shims a bit.
So, Marzocchi, if you are listening here's my wish list: 32mm stanchions, digressive compression damping, user tunable pistons/shims for compression and rebound, weight closer to the 4.0 pound mark, and keep the ETA.
January 29, 2004 - My product review posted on Mtbr.com:
| Submitted
by bikerx40
a Cross Country Rider from Boise, ID Date Reviewed: 1/29/2004 11:08:37 AM |
|
| Favorite Trail: | Hard Guy |
| Duration Product Used: | 6 months |
| Price Paid: | $300 |
| Strengths: | Smooth consistent damping, ETA is great for super steep climbs or road climbs, Reliable design, HSCV is nice on bigger hits. |
| Weaknesses: | ETA knob broke (I replaced with a modified chain link), Poor instruction manual doesn't include rebuild instructions or other critical info., Wish that the cartridge was user serviceable / tunable (I'd like to adjust the shim stacks like Manitou TPC style), Disc tabs could be better formed - less paint and less interference with Avid Mech adaptors (doesn't sit flush without a little work with a file). |
| Similar Products Tried: | Scott
Unishock, Manitou 1, 1994 Cannondale Headshock,97 Rock Shox Judy XC,95-97
Rock Shox Judy SL Noleen Expert Aluminum (Girvin Style), White Brothers SC-70UL, Marzocchi Z-1 BAM, Manitou SX-Carbon |
| Bike Setup: | Turner XCE - Vanilla RC Rear Shock - Marzocchi Marathon S fork - Avid discs -WTB Lazerdisc Lite Hubs - Mavic 317 rims - Ritchey WCS Stem - Raceface LoRise Bars - Thompson post - XT Drivetrain - Speedplay Pedals - Panaracer Fire XC 2.1 tires. |
| Bottom Line: | I
really am impressed with my '03 Marzocchi Marathon S. I've owned quite a
few suspension forks over the years, but this one tops them all. The
damping performance is one of the best I've come across, right up there
with the Fox Forx Vanilla series. That being said, it doesn't have the
same stiffness as the Fox Forx due to the Marzocchi's smaller 30mm
stanchions. The only time that I even notice any deflection is during hard
braking (I have discs) on pavement I can see just the slightest movement
backwards- but it's very slight. If you're a bigger rider, then you might
opt for either the Fox Forx Vanilla or a Marzocchi Z-1 SL or something. I was pretty bummed by the lack of descent information about this fork. Marzocchi doesn't have an instruction manual for rebuilding the fork or doing routine maintenance. I would up making my own web site with oil-change instructions and FAQ's to help out other riders who have encountered this lack of info. I'm not promoting or selling anything, just an enthusiast who appreciates nice equipment. For my tuning information, check out: http://myweb.cableone.net/rkindig/marz_marathon_s.html I wasn't getting full travel from my fork out of the box. Apparently, Marzocchi Marathons now come with Heavy weight springs for riders in the 180-220 range. I only weigh around 165, so I wound up buying the Medium springs. The fork is far more responsive now, and I am getting all of the travel. I'm a bit disappointed that Marzocchi doesn't allow access into their cartridges. I'd like to mess around with the damper's shim stacks inside to better match the damping to my rear suspension. My wish list would be to have user-serviceable shim stacks like my Manitou TPC fork had. I recommend this fork for aggressive trail riders needing a reliable coil-sprung fork. However, Riders over 200 pounds might opt for a Marzocchi Z1 SL (same weight). |
| Value Rating: 5 Chilies Overall Rating: 5 Chilies | |
Full travel out of my '03 Marzocchi Marathon S? Could it possibly be? Well, pretty darn close- 95mm on my last ride. I bought the fork used about 2 months ago, and I had only been getting around 78-82mm out of the 105mm. I had tried nearly ever possible oil height. I called Marzocchi and they said 45-55mm was the correct height. I had tried all of the way down to 62mm without any success (even with 5w oil).
So, yesterday I tore down the fork completely. I removed both the ETA and rebound cartridges, dropped the stanchions off, and cleaned everything. I pumped the dirty oil out of both cartridges and cycled some fresh oil through them. Before putting the lower legs back on, I gooped a bunch of Slick Honey in and around the upper seals. When the stanchions were back on, I filled the stanchions 3/4 with oil and cycled both cartridges until they were full of oil (turned the rebound side to full slow and ETA lever to 'compress' mode). At first, the cartridges were very sticky as they cycled through their travel, but as they took in more oil they began to get much smoother. I filled both stanchions with 5w oil (I weigh 160 lbs) to a height of 60mm and then put the stock springs back in. When putting the springs back in, be sure that you put the correct length spring back into the appropriate side. On my fork, there was a red spring and a black spring. The red spring was the shorter one, and it went on the ETA side and the black spring went on the rebound side. The black PVC spacers that go on top of the springs are two different lengths. The spacer/spring combo should 'add up' to the same height for each stanchion. (It's possible that they weren't installed correctly in my fork when I received it causing more 'preload' on one of the springs, contributing to my travel problem)
Anyway, I put the rest of the fork back together and I was shocked by the difference in feel. Before the rebuild, I was only able to achieve around 16-18mm of sag with the stock springs with zero preload. Now, I am at 24-26mm easily! The fork takes hits soooo smoothly. Dare I say that the fork can now keep up with the rear suspension on my XCE? I didn't realize what I was missing out on!
The trail that I use to test my set-ups is around 10-12 miles. The trail climbs on the road about 2 miles before switching to a narrow and rocky double track. The descent is all fast double track that’s full of braking bumps, water bars, and rocks. The final 4 miles are tight single-track with exposed rocky sections everywhere. During the road climb, the first thing that I noticed was how much more active the fork was. I could tell that the fork was bobbing under my weight much more than before, but once I engaged the ETA, the suspension settled into it's travel and the bob was reduced to around an inch (but without any rebound damping). Once I hit the double track, the stream crossings and rockier sections were absorbed in a very controlled manner- it didn't blow through all of its travel. A glance down at the zip-tie on my stanchion revealed that I was using about 75-80% of the total travel. The real difference came when the trail turned downward. The first few miles of trail are typically very worn this time of year and the braking bumps are very rough. At the bottom of the first section of braking bumps, my impression was that the bike finally felt balanced front to rear. The final section of single-track is usually extremely rough. This time I felt like I was floating across rock-garden sections with ease. The first few turns, I came in much faster than normal and nearly overshot my lines. Braking into extremely rough and rocky sections revealed that I had far greater traction despite more brake dive. At the end of my ride, the zip-tie on the stanchion showed 95mm of travel.
Considering that the stock springs are supposed to be for 180-220 pound rider, and that Marz tech has suggested the Medium springs (or at least trying one medium and one stock spring), I am happy to get nearly full travel. The tech said that the final few millimeters of travel should ramp up considerably due to the very high spring rate of the bottom-out spring. Due to another poster's recent success with the Medium weight springs, I think that I'll still be ordering those (and possibly bump the oil height to around 55mm).
Just thought I'd pass on the info.
Standard Disclaimer: This site describes my experiences tuning and maintaining my suspension fork and this information is not an instruction manual. As always, use this information at your own risk. I am not in any way responsible for typos, misinformation, or any of your actions or results. Results may vary.