2003 Marzocchi Bomber Super T Fork
This is the latest model of the Super T fork from Marzocchi. This is a dual-crown 7" travel conventional fork with 20mm QR20 dropouts, 32mm stanchions, and the ability to accept a direct mount stem.
I was lucky enough to see (and ride, briefly) the very early prototype Super T forks in June 2000 while on a visit to BC. These were handmade 6" travel dual crown forks with through-axles and CNC machined parts.
A year later, the production 6" Super T came stock on my 2001 Kona Stab. I liked the smooth action and relatively light weight of these forks, but after a couple of road trips to Mt. Ste. Anne and Bromont, I wanted a bit more beef and a bit more travel.
In 2002, Marzocchi came out with a new Super T with similar legs but 1" more travel to 7" (actually, the original rating was 150mm, which is just under 6", and the new rating was 170mm, which is about 6.75"). Unfortunately, the newer fork's internals would not fit in the older fork to give folks with a 6" travel Super T's the upgrade to 7".
This year, for 2003, Marzocchi came out with a new Super T with larger legs (32mm vs. 30mm), a new crown system, and new internals with 7"/170mm travel. This new fork also has a new version of the QR20 axle system, which when used with a QR20 hub equipped with the quick release skewer, is a true "tool-less" system. The combination of more travel and beefier legs brings the Super T up to the level of spec of forks like the Boxxer and Stratos S7, where previously the Super T might have been considered a lesser fork to these competitors.
I've just installed these forks last week, and I've only had one mild urban ride on them so far, so a complete report will come after some more riding.
First impressions, however, go something like this:
The longer travel has raked out the geometry of the Stab a bit, but riding it does not reveal any bad handling traits so far. The Stab's geometry was not terribly raked out to begin with, so the new geometry should not be an issue. In fact, it may help out a bit with stability in fast sections.
If you want to use the direct mount stem, you either have to cut the steerer tube way down to the point that you will not be able to mount a conventional stem in the future (without getting the cryofit steerer tube replaced), or you keep the steerer tube long and have a deadly protrusion sticking out of your upper crown right where your forehead would hit in a crash. Yes, your stem would be in the same spot, too, but I think the exposed steerer tube (with spacers and a top cap, obviously) would be able to sneak in a bit more damage to your face than a stem and top cap. Maybe a ball frog (padded stem cover) would help over the exposed steerer, and I might try this in the future, but for now I am just running my old Funn conventional stem.
Tire clearance is tighter than on the 2001 (and presumably the 2002) model. I am still running the Intense DH 2.7 tire on the front, but the space between the tire's knobs and the sides of the legs is very minimal. In fact, when I first mounted the tire, the carcass was a bit wobbly, and the tire would rub the sides of the fork when rolling. With the very stiff sidewalls of the Intense DH tire, I was not able to work the wobble out by hand, so instead I pumped the tire up to about 60psi and left it for a while. When I went to go for a ride, I deflated the tire down to about 30psi, and the wobble was gone, and so was the rubbing. Tire clearance above the tire with the Intense DH 2.7 is fine, but side to side is quite tight.
Marzocchi's instructions say to install the front wheel with the axle quick release or bolt, then compress the fork a few times before fastening and tightening the two quick release mechanisms on the bottom of the dropouts. This is to seat the axle in the dropouts, and if you do not do this, the axle will become seated after you tighten the two bottom quick releases, which will then become loose. How do I know this? When I removed the front wheel to install the Intense tires, I did not perform this "seating" step, but instead just skipped to tightening the bottom quick releases. Then I took a ride around my basement, compressing the fork as one does when one gets a new fork. I then propped the bike up to take the picture shown above right (click on it to see the larger version). Only later did I see that the two bottom quick releases had come loose enough to fall completely open, due to the fact that I did not correctly seat the axle by compressing the fork before tightening the bottom quick releases. I am lucky that I figured this out in the comfort of my basement and not when lofting the front wheel just before going off a drop to flat on concrete.
It may sound like there are several issues with this fork even before I have had a good ride on them, but they are really just nitpicks and observations more than anything. Overall, the feel of the fork is much more like the "endless travel" feel of a Shiver, whereas the earlier 6" version did not have this feel. I've had very few problems with Marzocchi forks, and what problems I did have were taken care of under warranty quickly and with no hassle. If past experiences with quality and reliability are any indication, Marzocchi now has a worthy competitor to other freeride and downhill race forks on the market, and a great alternative to the Shiver and Monster T.
Update 03/09/30
I have now had the chance to ride this fork at Blue Mountain, Bromont, Whistler, and on a heli-drop above Pemberton, and I can say that I am very happy that I purchased this fork. Previous to purchasing this fork, I was considering buying a new downhill frame because I felt that the Stab was beginning to feel a bit low on travel at places like Bromont. But with the addition of this new front end, the whole setup now feels more capable of covering up my mistakes and remaining composed through the rough stuff.
I swapped to the direct mount stem, and immediately noticed a difference in steering precision. Are conventionally mounted stems really that flexy? I really can't say, except that the direct mount definitely feels stiffer. It also felt wrong, fit-wise, at first because I had mounted it in the shorter position, but the quick swap to the long position solved that feeling. I did not cut the steerer down, so I now have that aforementioned deadly protrusion sticking out. Maybe I should cut that steerer.
The ride of this fork is a big step up from my old Super T. The "endless travel" feeling is still there after riding it hard, although I have bottomed the fork's travel out on a few occasions on big-ish drops (my first time off the big GLC drop, for example). I do not find this a problem - there is a school of thought for DH bikes that says if you are not bottoming out your suspension once in a while you are running too stiff a spring rate. Damping feels spot on, although the fork is a bit more noisy than I am used to - it gives a bit of that "screen door damper hiss" as it cycles through it's travel. Not a problem (I hope!), just an observation.
My biggest gripe with this fork is that a few weeks after purchasing it Marzocchi came out with their 2004 lineup, and it included an upgraded Super T with more tire clearance, which is one of the only gripes I have with this model. The new version also has bolt-on triple clamps, whereas mine has a cryofit lower triple-clamp. Many other riders have complained about the cryofit lower clamp, but I don't really see it as an issue. The arrival of the 888 is also good/bad news. Good news because it is apparently an amazing fork. Bad news because if I hand known about it I might have put up the extra $$ to buy one instead of the Super T. However, chances are I would still be waiting for it right now if I wanted one. But, any good company progresses its product, and I am very happy with this Super T even without the extra tire clearance and bolt-on lower crown.
)
First impressions, however, go something like this:)