Review: Formula Belva Dual-Crown Enduro Fork

Mar 26, 2024
by Seb Stott  


Formula have been teasing their dual crown enduro fork for years now, and Joe Connell raced it at EWS in La Thuille, 2021. Now it's finally ready for release. It's based on the Selva enduro fork but with new upper tubes and crowns to improve stiffness, adjustability and travel for modern enduro and e-bike use.

Formula haven't started from scratch with this project. The lower legs, air spring, axle and damper are all virtually identical to the single-crown Selva S fork. They've just extended the damper shaft and fitted a spacer in the air side to make it work with the longer upper tubes. So, unlike a downhill fork, there's a 15 mm axle, tapered steerer and 43 mm offset, making it a drop-in replacement for a single crown enduro fork.
Formula Belva Specs

• Intended use: enduro, e-bike, park, freeride
• Travel: 170-180mm (internally adjustable)
• Wheel size/offset: 29"/43mm
• Adjustments: Positive air pressure, Compression, Rebound, Interchangeable CTS compression valves, Neopos volume spacers
• 35mm stanchions
• Brake mount: 180mm
• Weight: 2,456 grams (actual)
• MSRP: from €1850, $2150 CA (ex tax), £1590 GBP, USA TBC
rideformula.com

The main advantages promised are improved fore-aft stiffness, less chance of crown creaking, potentially more travel for a given axle to crown length and adjustable axle to crown length, which can be used to alter a bike's geometry.

Back in 2021, Formula claimed their early prototype was 2,300 g with a target weight of 2,270 g. However, the fork they sent me to test weighs 2,456 g with fork bumpers - 93 g more than a Fox 38. Formula say they strengthened the stanchions to prevent ham-fisted mechanics from damaging them while tightening the crowns. The other obvious downside is the steering lock, which makes it hard to get around very tight corners.

To see how it stacks up, Formula invited me to their factory in Prato, Italy to test it on their local rocky test tracks, To their great credit, they asked me to bring my favourite single-crown fork to benchmark against. They also let me take it home to test on familiar trails.


photo

photo
photo

Technology & Features

Like the Selva S, the Belva uses a coil negative spring below the piston with an adjustable air chamber above. The negative spring (which counteracts the force from the positive air pressure at the start of the travel, making it easier to enter into the travel) is composed of three coil springs, which together get stiffer as you move towards full extension. This helps prevent top-out, but the negative spring is non-adjustable, so the shape of the spring curve and the available travel will depend on the rider's weight and therefore air pressure. With the minimum recommended air pressure (50 psi), I measured 175 mm usable travel and a buttery smooth beginning stroke; with 75 psi, the travel increased to 184 mm and the beginning stroke was noticeably stiffer (even relative to the rest of the travel), and at the maximum of 85 psi, it tops out harshly like a coil spring with way too much preload.

photo
The extended damper cartridge (top), Neopos spacer (bottom left) and air piston assembly with a triple coil negative spring.

Formula makes a Selva R fork with a dual air spring (both positive and negative chambers are adjustable to suit different rider weights) but that spring is not available on the Belva.

The Belva uses Formula's Neopos spacers, which shrink with increasing air pressure, thereby boosting mid-stroke support relative to the end-stroke, so it's easier to access full travel. In other words, they make the spring force more linear throughout the travel.

photo
The CTS compression valves all use the same single shim, but different ports to achieve a different damping curve.
photo
The air piston sits on a ball joint, which Formula say reduces friction when the fork is flexing.

On the damper side, the interchangeable CTS valves make it possible to radically alter the compression damping characteristics, from highly digressive (lots of low-speed damping) to progressive (lots of high-speed damping) to linear (somewhere in between). This is in addition to a low-speed compression dial that adjusts a parallel oil flow path and makes a considerable difference to the overall damping behaviour in its own right, without the need to change the valve. There's a lockout lever too (mostly to make it easier to change the CTS valves) and a rebound dial. There are no bleed buttons.

The air shaft connects to the air spring piston - which slides inside the upper tube - via a ball joint. Formula says this reduces side-loading and therefore friction in the piston while the fork is bending due to a heavy impact or braking (all forks bend back and forth during normal riding). Formula call this IFT (Internal Floating Technology).


photo
photo

The Test

With the help of Formula's engineers (and even the CEO), we got the fork set up on my Privateer 161 long-term test bike, ensuring identical axle-to-crown and bar height measurements as the stock Fox 38. We then shuttled four laps of a rocky three-minute track, tweaking the setup until I was happy with it. Then I swapped to the Fox 38 with my regular settings for two full runs, before swapping back for another two on the Belva. This allowed me to feel the differences between the forks in both directions.


photo
photo

Setup

Based on the chart printed on the lower leg I started with 70 psi, but found this too soft so stepped up to 75 psi. Any more than this and the touchdown feel at the start of the stroke became too firm. I added a second Neopos spacer and wound on compression damping to around the halfway mark to add support without adding more air. I ran the rebound fully open. To match the axle to crown height of the 170 mm Fox 38 (590 mm), I ran it with the crowns at the full height and with the spring at 180 mm travel - the Privateer test bike's massive 145 mm head tube reduces the scope to extend the axle to crown length. It wasn't my intention to compare the 170 mm Fox 38 to the Belva set to 180 mm, but if the fork length is the same you may as well make use of more travel.

I compared the Belva to the Fox 38 that came with the Privateer. I've done a load of winner-stays-on comparison tests over the years and the Fox 38 is still the benchmark in my book. I don't think the black Performance Elite version performs differently from the golden Factory version. My settings are: 100 psi, 1 spacer, HSR 1 from open, LSR 5 from open, LSC 4 from open, and HSC 4 from open. (Yes, I know it's conventional to count clicks from closed but when you're closer to open it's easier this way.)


photo

Performance

Formula has done a good job with friction reduction and bushing sizing. The Belva bobs when pedalling smoothly and moves for the smallest bumps in the trail. The spring is frustratingly firm at the very start of the travel, making it feel like breaking through the surface of a crème brûlée when the wheel touches down, before sinking into the silky travel thereafter. Most of the time, the fork is in that 10-100% travel range and here it feels superb. Everything from small sticks to big boulders are dealt with in a smooth and controlled way.

photo
photo

Compared to the Fox 38, the Belva was more damped and less lively. This is probably because, once you get past that initial sticking point at the start of the travel, the Belva has a softer spring rate in the rest of the stroke. I also needed more compression damping on the Belva to make up for the softer mid-stroke, and the rebound wasn't super fast even fully open. The result was a calmer feel, especially in the big, low-frequency rock gardens in Italy.

The Fox 38 felt more predictable in a sense due to its relatively consistent spring rate throughout the stroke, so the fork stayed closer to sag with less pitching. The firmer spring and lighter damping made for a livelier ride in the big chunks, but not to the point that it was hard to manage. It was more supportive and quicker to recover, making it feel more eager and less lazy. But the downside is a less soothing feel through the rocks, especially toward the end of the descent.

On the biggest frontal impacts, I did find the Belva more composed, which could be down to the additional fore-aft stiffness or the different spring and damper characteristics. Perhaps Formula's IFT internals help here too.

Back home in the Tweed Valley, I was less impressed. In colder temperatures the rebound was a little too slow for my liking, making the fork feel lethargic and slow to respond over high-frequency roots. While I never found the steering lock to be an issue while descending, it can be annoying during slow-speed climbing, when doing a U-turn on the wrong trail, or when track-standing. I did find it useful to play around with the fork length for steeper or flatter trails, though.

photo



Pros

+ Very calm and composed during big head-on impacts
+ Wide range of compression damping options
+ Dual crown design allows for more geometry adjustments

Cons

- Initial portion of travel can feel too firm due to coil negative spring
- Steering lock during climbing is a downside compared to a single crown fork



Pinkbike's Take
bigquotesA dual-crown enduro fork was always going to be a niche market, especially considering that modern single-crown forks are generally stiff enough. For the most part, Formula did a good job with the Belva. It's smooth and sensitive once into the travel, the compression damping adjustability is intuitive and effective even without playing around with the CTS valves, and it deals with all sizes of bumps with sensitivity and composure. But the coil negative spring lets it down. For heavier riders like me, the extra air pressure creates an abrupt feel on touchdown, forcing me to compromise on support. For lighter riders, the spring should work well, but then the rebound could become too slow. If Formula could install their dual-air spring from the Selva R (or redesign it to make use of the longer leg) and recalibrate the rebound range, they could be onto something.
Seb Stott




Author Info:
seb-stott avatar

Member since Dec 29, 2014
297 articles

257 Comments
  • 199 8
 This is one horrible looking bike... For some reason it reminds me of Gonzo from Sesame Street.
Just to stay on topic: I love my Selva and I can't imagine needing anything stiffer, but then again - I'm shit at riding, so there's that
  • 27 5
 To get back to your topic, the bike is what you get when you try to meet the requirements of everyone. I personally like to have a lot of room over the top tube and they're doing great there. Others want enough room for a big bottle so that's why they bent the downtube. To make the headtube area strong enough (to deal with the intended riding and the leverage of the big front wheel and long travel fork) they need that bent top tube. Sure looks are up there on the wishlist too and I'd happily lose the bottle for a straight downtube as much as someone else might happily raise the top tube as long as it remains straight. But as for the riding bit, this is the bike that's going to keep most people happy.
  • 23 1
 It looks slightly less gopping with the dual crown. But is still a big miss from the V1 privateer which hit the nail on the head for looks.
  • 23 0
 I must agree… It looks like someone slammed that bike head-on into a wall…
  • 9 0
 Looked at the Privateer site and the bikes shown have a tad better silhouette. Guess this one is an XL or bigger.
For an alloy frame I will rather go RAAW Madonna, Knolly, or Pyga Slakline / Slakline HP4
  • 7 0
 @vinay: I guess there's a place in the market for a bike that meets every possible requirement, except for the looks. If it rides well, I'm sure there will be a lot of interest regardless of the looks.
If I'm honest I've got a Bird AM9 and its looks can also be divisive
  • 6 0
 @pooceq:
AM9 looks proper and balanced .... most of Birds bikes look proper. Just more people need to know they exist since they are in theory the ultimate pinkbike bike (external routing etc).
  • 4 1
 @norcohavocdirtjumper: True, I love mine, especially its raw frame.
Saying that, I've heard some opinions that their bikes look agricultural. I personally don't think is a negative, but it looks like not everyone likes them.

As for the ultimate Pinkbike bike - maybe not so much AM9, as there's no sensible room for bottle with a piggyback, even with offset adapter, The Aether 9 on the other hand, looks like the real deal - internal or external routing, room for a bottle, good geometry and a straight seat tube.
On top of that, they do have amazing customer service, like nothing I have ever experience anywhere. I could speak for hours about my experiences with Bird.
  • 7 1
 Yep. Damn shame what they did to this bike in the name of a slightly larger water bottle.
  • 13 1
 FYI: Gonzo was in the Muppet Show.

How dare you compare Jim Henson's the Muppet Show to Sesame Street!?!?
  • 2 0
 If you squint your eyes and pretend the shock is a second water bottle it looks like a cool looking hardtail.
  • 4 5
 I like it. Looks aggressive. I'd like it a little more if the rear triangle lined up a little better, but that would affect performance of course.
  • 6 0
 @AppleJack76: Oh the shame - you are absolutely right and I'm a fool. In my defence I haven't seen either in ages and neither was very popular where and when I grew up. We did get some soviet cartoons instead, which are as fun as you can imagine
  • 5 0
 @pooceq: Sesame Street were Jim Henson’s Muppets, and The Muppet Show was Jim Henson’s Muppets. These MFs knew what you meant. You’re good.
  • 2 0
 @pooceq: 2018 Aeris AM9, Problem solvers bottle cage height adapter lets me mount a 600ml Fidlock with a piggyback shock. Install is fiddly though.
  • 3 0
 @AppleJack76: I mean, Jim Henson was responsible for essentially all the "muppets" on Sesame Street

Also, Muppet, might be my favorite term for some people,

Absolute muppet...
  • 4 0
 @vinay: The kink in the top tube should not help structural integrtity. I guess it's only for design purposes.
  • 1 0
 @vinay: The bent downtube is more likely shaped to allow fork crown clearance as well as tire clearance at bottom out, not to fit a water bottle.
  • 2 2
 @norcohavocdirtjumper: would be if the stock geo wasn't total garbage, and inaccurate.

They are cheap frames cheaply made, and I do own (a heavily modified) one.
  • 4 0
 @vinay: you forgot that one of the requirements (and not the least) is a good look…
  • 1 1
 @powpowpow: No I didn't. One but last sentence in that post.
  • 1 0
 @pooceq: I was able to mount a larger bottle on my AM9 by using the bird angled adapter, plus the 76projects water bottle spacemaker. I had to cut down some of the scews because they were too long, and 76 doesn't seem to make the product anymore sadly

us.76projects.com/products/water-bottle-space-saver
  • 1 0
 @TheR: why wouldn’t they just drop the bottle mounts lower down the down tube to give more clearance. Plenty of room.
  • 1 0
 the S-L actually looks fine. its only the XL that looks horrible
  • 1 0
 @vinay: right sorry.
  • 3 0
 @BrianColes: Don’t ask me. I made a comment about how awful the bike looked in the “First Ride” Review article. Privateer came on here themselves and said it was for the sake of a bigger water bottle. I don’t know why they went the route they did — just the reason they gave me. Also, you could fit a water bottle in the old frame. How big do you need it. All I know is, sales will suffer because of this decision and resulting monstrosity.
  • 3 0
 @BrianColes: Here was their response: “ Hi @TheR: Thanks for the comment. Our purpose was to create the fastest Enduro race bike for the Privateer. As part of this, Increasing space for a larger water bottle and tool storage was high on our athletes and riders wish list for Gen 2. Thanks, Andrew - Privateer Bikes”

So water bottle AND tool storage. Guess they never heard of OneUp?
  • 1 3
 @TheR: If the previous model was adequate, you mean to say their athletes hadn't heard of OneUp or just that even with OneUp components they're calling for more storage room? Their bike to ride, their call. Who are we to judge? Not that long ago we had this discussion on this very website with people claiming you need a big pickup truck when you go camping with the family or otherwise you can't bring what's needed.

@powpowpow : Cheers!
  • 4 2
 @vinay: Who are we to judge? The consumers who might potentially buy their bikes. And I can tell you — I will not be buying this ugly ass bike. Maybe I’m wrong, but I think lots of other potential consumers agree based on the fact that the original comment in this thread has 175+ upvotes. And, I’ll point out, this comment isn’t even about the product reviewed in this article — it’s a side comment on how ugly the frame is that the fork is attached to.

You’re absolutely right about one thing, though — in the end, it’s their call. Totally their priority. They made the decision to build this thing. Now they have to stand by it and reap the consequences, good or bad. I don’t have a dog in the fight, really, but in this case I just don’t see it going well.

I won’t even address your comment about the trucks. Complete non sequitur and false equivalency.
  • 8 1
 @vinay: Hi Vinay, happy to see we're on the same page with our approach to Gen 2. We've designed, engineered and built a bike aimed at racers and riders who just want to get on their bike and for it to work no matter what it has been put through and at the same time, be as hassle-free as possible, hence all that room for a water bottle and tool while retaining a low standover, 42mm bearings, external cable routing etc. You're also spot on about the top tube, the design isn't just to increase room for the bottle and tool but to increase strength and increase the welding area around the head tube. We appreciate the design isn't to everyone's taste, and that's fine we're not trying to appeal to everyone, but those who are after a highly durable bike that will last season upon season of hard riding, with proven race-winning geometry and kinematics should find Gen 2 right up their street Big Grin Cheers
  • 2 1
 @zyoungson: We think it looks amazing with a dual crown Big Grin just wait and see what Joe Connell has been testing for us Wink
  • 3 1
 @pooceq: Gen 2 rides really well! We can't wait for the rest of the bikes to land. We're really confident once you're ridden one you'll be blown away Big Grin
  • 2 1
 @TheR: Not just the space for a water bottle, but the tool, the increased standover and to boost the strength around the headtube so riders can run dual crowns if they want. It would be interesting to hear which size bike you would ride? Check out the website, all of the photos we feature are P2 and P3.
  • 4 1
 @TheR: Yup, we worked with Joe Connell, Katy Curd and Fergus Ryan on the Gen 2, and room for a bottle and tool mount was high on their priority, but this isn't the only reason for the design of the bike. With the top tube angled the way it is, we're able to ensure a larger welding area and increase the strength of the bike. This is partly so riders can run dual crown forks, but also to ensure the Gen 2 will keep on going no matter what you throw at it. We really believe riders should spend as much time riding as possible, so we build our frames to last and to reduce maintenance time. With the testing, we've put Gen 2, though; we know these frames are going to last and be able to take a proper hammering, so you guys can focus on having fun on the trail rather than spend too much time in the workshop.
  • 5 0
 Late to this party but as a first gen 161 rider I will say I murdered a couple water bottles (death by piggyback) before figuring out a precise combination of cage, bottle, and placement that would actually fit in the p3 tri, so I sort of understand the functional improvement.

That being said, if you're into industrial looks the gen 1 is in my opinion one of very few near aesthetically perfect enduro machines that have been made. Its a killer bike and I'm very happy to own one as there's no level of offsetting performance that could lift hard earned bike bucks out of my wallet for the gen 2!
  • 2 0
 @PrivateerBikes: I appreciate your reply and that you made a product that stand by. I was a big fan of Gen 1. Hope this next iteration is successful for you and you sell lots.

But I do gotta ask one thing — after coming up with the design and maybe seeing the initial prototypes, was there anyone who acknowledged the bike’s looks? Someone who said something along the lines of, “Yeah, the way that bike looks won’t be for everyone…”

Anyway, for what it’s worth, I’d really lean into it. Market it like, “Yeah, we know it looks like a beast, but that’s the way it performs and holds up to the abuse you’ll give it.”

As for my size, I’m not familiar with your sizing, but I’m typically on a large, with a 470-480 reach. I’ll check it out.
  • 1 2
 @TheR: Your bent on bikes with a bend in the top tube is weirdly obsessive. Tons of riders have zero issues with it.
  • 2 0
 @rrolly: Yeah, a comment on the ugliness of this bike is the top comment (on an article about a dual crown fork) because “tons of riders have zero issues with it.” I’m the only one.
  • 1 0
 Looks better when ridden hard Smile youtu.be/tfRhCk6F9qY
  • 82 0
 Is the reason of going for 180mm brake mounts just the the fact of industry can't decide if the right size 200 or 203mm?
Can't really imagine a rider who needs dual crown because of stiffness and not needing bigger rotors
  • 50 2
 404mm disc for the ultimate endo machine please. (405 would be stupid though.)
  • 16 0
 @bigtim: It's the same lower leg as the Selva single crown fork.
  • 4 0
 @seb-stott: the selva has pm6 mount
  • 4 19
flag vinay FL (Mar 26, 2024 at 2:50) (Below Threshold)
 From what I understand from the article, the dual crown version particularly shines in rough rocky sections. Big brake rotors give you better heat dissipation and more brake force. The heat dissipation is great for extended braking and more brake force is great for faster sections linked with technical (or just weird) slow sections. I think the subset of customers who successfully ride rough rocky sections whilst dragging their front brake a lot and/or brake really hard there is slim. Those who do can always install the big rotor using an adaptor but others may prefer the better modulation of the smaller front rotor. So yeah, I think it is good to have the options Smile .
  • 132 0
 As @seb-stott says, the lower is the same as our Selva forks, which use a PM6 mount. As that fork can be run at 130mm having the option to run 180mm rotors makes sense.
It would be great to have custom lowers for each model but that would be a half million euro set up cost every time, so in reality it's not feasible.
  • 66 0
 @rideformula: that is a refreshingly honest answer, “we’d love to, but it would cost too much”!
  • 2 6
flag HardtailHerold (Mar 26, 2024 at 4:24) (Below Threshold)
 I have a Magura brake, a Magura 180 to 203 post mount adapter and a Magura 203 disc. The fit was so bad the wheel wouldn't turn. I had to add 3mm of washes to make it work. I think you might be right!
  • 2 0
 @rideformula: Thanks for the insight!
  • 4 1
 @rideformula: and why the tapered steerer? It would be cool to mount a reach adjust headset with this one (e.g. on a Raaw v3), but now you can't.
  • 65 0
 @lkubica: The Belva is an alternative to a long travel single-crown enduro fork. The vast majority of these come with a tapered steerer. So, if you're after what the Belva delivers it's a simple swap from one to the other.

If we did offer it with a straight steerer for reach adjust headset compatibility (which is pretty niche) we'd have comments that it was just a DH fork. We can't win 'em all. And we're okay with that.
  • 3 0
 @rideformula: well done it's an amazing job, looking forward to testing one soon. Did you use ergal for the crown?
  • 4 15
flag lkubica (Mar 26, 2024 at 6:19) (Below Threshold)
 @rideformula: true, but it's still niche as hell, especially now in the era od 38's single crowns. It might be more popular on e-bike though and I understand this. Just wondering if a simple crown race adapter is not possible to mount 1 1/8 on a tapered headset? Changing the lower headset is not the end f the world either.
  • 2 0
 @rideformula: why not offer it as an optional kit?
  • 22 0
 @hivaru: If there’s something we do well, it’s options. The skill is to offer options that are useful to enough people to make it worthwhile designing, testing, producing, stocking and marketing them.

Right now, the straight steerer option doesn’t meet the threshold. That doesn’t mean we’d rule it out though. If enough Belva owners ask for it we’ll look into it. Otherwise the risk is we end up with a product that ties up money, time and R&D opportunities.
  • 13 0
 @HardtailHerold: You should only have to add 1.5mm of washers to convert a 200mm mount to work with a 203mm rotor, because you're accounting for the radius not the diameter.
  • 5 0
 @nickfranko: That is genuinely the first bit of useful advice anyone has ever given me on Pinkbike. Thank You! I ordered the wrong PM adapter and I'm off by 1.5mm it makes totally sense!
  • 3 1
 One good side-affect is that the 180 post-mount is good for those with Maven brakes.
  • 1 0
 @HardtailHerold: glad it’s helpful!
  • 1 1
 @rideformula: Couldn't this niche set of riders just use zero-offset, straight steerer 35mm crowns from another fork anyway? Or are the formula crowns not zero offset?
  • 3 2
 @rideformula: tons of people want to run angle sets or reach adjust, helps with in between sizing, they may even buy your fork just to allow them to ride a frame they wouldnt otherwise want. should have straight steerer default, with an adapter to tapered.
  • 75 17
 Can seb be banned from talking about the fox 38?
  • 67 10
 Back in 2019 to 2021 when RockShox had the B1 air spring I was often accused of comparing everything (unfavourably) to the Lyrik and being a RockShox fanboy. I'm sure sooner or later someone will come out with something better than the 38 that I can benchmark against.
  • 19 3
 He doesn't mention how many CSU's he's gone through!!
  • 33 16
 @seb-stott: I like your rigour and consistency Seb. You're the best MTB reviewer out there, and it's great that your opinions are clear.
If someone else wants to compare all the forks with such a high level of attention to detail and publish a review then I will be delighted to read this too. Until then I'm happy to accept Seb's expert opinion.
  • 5 17
flag lkubica (Mar 26, 2024 at 5:35) (Below Threshold)
 @sir-hc: This is a thing of the past, Fox now has ovalised steerers. But of course you are welcome to hate Fox for you entire life, you can always tell it to your grand children in 2050 - Fox is sh*t cause they used to have creaking CSUs in early 2020s
  • 8 3
 @lkubica: Its never been fixed and will continue to be an issue until they improve the design, tighten up manufacturing and glue the CSU assembly.
  • 37 3
 Translation: "Seb, please pander to readers instead of having an opinion." Crazy to think the top pf the range Fox enduro fork could be the best on the market, it just doesn't make any sense. It has to be the Zeb because I own one.
  • 5 0
 @ruckuswithani: It would help if people said which fork they think is better. I have the current Zeb and it's very good, but I doubt it's the best. I imagine many of the whingers here would claim it's the Mezzer (also a fine fork, but with a rather over-enthusiastic fan club)
  • 13 0
 @lkubica: Is it a thing of the past? I have gone through two CSU's due to creaking on my 2023 38 and I am a mere 150 lbs. Also needed the lowers warrantied for such atrocious bushing fitment.
Meanwhile my Lyric from 2020 is still going strong with no repairs needed aside from servicing.
  • 10 0
 @lkubica: It is NOT a thing of the past. Fox has made "efforts" to fix the creaking between steerer crown interface, but they have done nothing to fix the stanchion crown interface. Been through 2 Fox CSU's myself in the past 6 months (I'm only 65kg).
  • 10 23
flag rojo-1 (Mar 26, 2024 at 9:30) (Below Threshold)
 Wow, 8 people downvoted my praise for Seb. What's wrong with you ungrateful people that want free content AND the right to complain about it Big Grin
  • 6 15
flag notsosikmik (Mar 26, 2024 at 16:16) (Below Threshold)
 He should be banned from reviewing suspension entirely. He has no clue what he is talking about about.
  • 3 0
 @seb-stott: I have a basic 38.
It's terrible compared to a basic zeb.
Different folk like different things though.
  • 3 4
 @betsie: Honestly, testing suspension is very hard. One simply cannot assume that a random dude on the internet can properly set it up, and it also means balancing fork and shock. This is the reason I personally trust seb 100x more than you (and myself also, no offence) cause probability that he can set up the bike properly is much much greater. There is such thing as preference but it comes after you have spent lots of time setting things up. I suspect that most people like the suspension which happens to work best after just setting sag and randomly twisting a few dials, which of course is also important.
  • 11 1
 @lkubica: Its great that you trust Seb 100x more than me, you dont know me, you dont know Seb and neither of us know you.
I have 51 DH podiums, 6 years Scottish vets champion and 2x national champion for my age category (currently hold them both, but now a grand vet!!).
I have only raced against Seb twice a long time ago where I was 9.4% then 16.8% faster, one in Dh and the other in Enduro.
Have I tested suspension.... lots, many times, many many hours of testing and base my preference on performance against the clock (thats a racer thing), not just feel (although I do like feel too for my trail bike). I am a design engineer, so love some performance testing, I once wrote numbers on my dials in gold paint and a reference dot so I could check my settings before every race run!!!

I have the basic 38 and it feels terrible compared to a Zeb, different folk like different things though.
  • 3 1
 @seb-stott: Why, if something better than the Fox38 comes around, you'll use that as a benchmark? Pick a benchmark and stick with it. Much easier to compare the many forks you're going to test against a single benchmark. Just like Steve Jones had the 1:04 track (on which his own personal record was 1:04 and on which many a WC racer have had a go (some of them featured on Earthed 3 iirc, could also have been Earthed 5). Just because someone does better didn't mean he had to shift the benchmark.
  • 4 0
 @betsie: I don't disagree with your experience, I too run a basic Zeb (smashpot coil) and find it sensational. I also thought my Lyrik was better than my 36. Never tried a 38 though...
Maybe you could write a blog post or youtube video about it, as it would help to share your experience on the product.
The reason I value Seb's work is because he publishes it. Doesn't mean someone else's opinion isn't equally valid, it's just that without a balanced supporting article it's hard to weight the importance of your preference.
  • 3 0
 @rojo-1: The biggest issue with testing and publishing is the variable of the rider!
Seb might ride my bike and think its terrible and go slow on it and vice versa.

The best advice for people is to test things themselves against a benchmark and draw conclusions that fit themselves, their needs, riding style and desires.

Personally I would change handlebar shape before a fork as it has a large "feel" bias on riding, maybe not as much performance difference in my experience of testing different bars, but feeling comfortable is important too.
I have lots of data but its data, so not that interesting and relevant to me, my riding style and body kinematics.

I would like to try the high end Fox, but knowing how good the standard Zeb is its hard to justify the expense to try something like a high end Fox.
  • 1 0
 @betsie: Some good points raised there. Would love to test top level 38 Vs Zeb but it's hard to justify the time/money, which is why I rely on expert opinions from multiple people who have tried them.
  • 38 0
 The extra travel for the same axle to crown cannot be hyped up enough, especially for riders wanting to over fork a little without the adverse affects of the front being too high and raising the BB, then being able to adjust this quickly if riding somewhere steeper or more tame is brilliant.
  • 15 13
 For sure it's a nice feature to have, but I'm not sure how often people will use this, and personally, I don't think it compensates for the steering lock downsides.
  • 23 0
 @seb-stott: The main benefit is the lower height with bigger travel rather than being able to adjust a2c at will, 38mm single crowns have got way too tall for thier travel, my example is i have a bike designed around a 160mm Fox 36 (570 a2c) and i wanted to bump it up to 170mm which would be 580mm, i also tried a 170mm Zeb but this measured 590mm, the added 20mm just felt too tall (also pushed the BB up around 7mm) but with the Belva according to Formula the a2c can be as little as 575 with 170mm travel meaning i can gain 10mm travel without pushing beyond my frames design and geometry.
You say yourself you never found an issue with lock while descending and i care alot less about it when climbing, you can plan or manage for that so the A2C benefits far outway it in my eyes.
  • 7 0
 @seb-stott: underrated positive of this I don't see mentioned often is not ripping brake hoses out in a crash though.
  • 1 0
 @maglor: The Selva also has a really low a2c at 575 with 170mm stroke.
  • 2 0
 @seb-stott: my gut reaction is to agree with this statement, but it would be interesting to objectively test this theory by riding this fork through all of the stages on several EWS rounds. How often does the steering lock create a negative outcome.

It certainly does seem like a niche product maybe better suited for racing an enduro bike rather than a daily driver which you might use for all purpose riding.
  • 1 0
 That's why I run 27" front wheels. I get another 40mm travel for the same axle-crown height!
  • 1 0
 @jaytdubs: Tight hairpin turns found on EDR stages and on french/swiss singletrack are done with nose turns so having a dual crown isn't a problem.
  • 3 0
 @seb-stott: steering lock downsides? I’ve been riding a Formula Nero R on a Geometron G16 for the best part of three years now and the only time I’ve had steering lock issues is clowning around in the car park.
What issues with steering lock do you have on trail?
  • 36 1
 That fork is certainly nice but jeeez, the silhouette of that privateer frame is just a pain to the eye.
  • 24 0
 That's one fugly bike
  • 19 0
 You missed a big plus point: they come in purple.
  • 11 3
 So does spray paint
  • 16 1
 How does that Privateer manage to get more and more hideous with every photo.
  • 4 0
 Should've gotten the old 161 before it all went downhill (pun unintended)
  • 1 2
 Have you been to our website and checked out the other sizes? Seb is riding our largest bike, the P4. Our P2 ,P3s (medium and large) look quite different.
  • 9 0
 Are most enduro bikes now certified for use with a dual crown fork? I thought that was an important issue keeping people from installing a lowered dual crown fork.

Other than that, props to Formula for offering Seb the opportunity and support (with mechanics etc) to test their fork back to back with his own favorite fork both near Formula as well as on his home trails. How many other brands do this?
  • 4 0
 More and more are becoming certified, it's a bit of chicken and egg though, more enduro dual crown options like this will make it more likely frame makers will add compatability.
  • 2 0
 @maglor: Some are going away from it. The Megatower v1 was dual crown certified, the new Megatower (and Nomad) are not.
  • 2 0
 Lots have. For example the carbon Capra has since 2015, but not some aluminum versions. One reality it that DC forks turn like an oil tanker. It takes some getting used to if you trail-ride them.
  • 2 1
 @suspended-flesh: Dual crown forks turn better than single crown forks because they are stiffer and thus more precise.
  • 2 0
 Let's define: "better turning".
  • 1 0
 @tralebuilder: Range of turn angle is limited compared to an SC fork but you can get used to it.
  • 1 0
 @suspended-flesh: It is on paper but if you need to turn to the point of the crowns touching the frame then you are slow tight stuff which can be better served by using a nose turn technique.
  • 1 0
 @tralebuilder: I've raced a DH bike in enduro races due to a mechanical on my SC bike and steering was awkward to say the least. Even getting to the start line.......
  • 2 0
 The Gen 2 161 was designed for a dual crown fork, but not really with enduro dual crown forks in mind, but rather to give riders the opportunity to run longer forks and over stroke the rear travel (you can get 174mm from a 65mm stroke) and run it as a park/downhill bike if you fancy. We've also been playing around with other links which Joe Connell has been testing for us Wink
  • 7 0
 I'm all for Dual Crown options for Enduro bikes, but I don't understand why they had to do the coil negative spring. I've owned a DVO with their *adjustable* coil negative spring (OTT), and even that has its limits once you get towards the end of the adjustment range. Negative coil without any preload adjustment is obviously limiting - could they at least offer different springs to drop in?
  • 8 1
 "The other obvious downside is the steering lock, which makes it hard to get around very tight corners."

Would love to see some data on this. Set up a steering angle data-aq input, go ride some tight trails, see if you ever actually do turn a single-crown further than a dual-crown would allow. I have a feeling this is an overestimated issue re: corners. The place it might be an issue though is slow approaches to something steep: sometimes you're basically in a track stand while trying to line up for a sniper line, and _that_ might need a bar input further than the dual-crown allows.
  • 1 0
 Data could also be simply a comparison between other dual crowns and their respective stanchion (or whatever they call it on a usd fork, chassis?) spacing and diameter. Does this fork have a larger or smaller max steering angle compared to others as defined by this geometric constraint? Whether it's a problem while riding is subjective and boils down to the actual track and rider tackling it, their skills and attitude etc.
  • 2 0
 You just need to do a nose turn to over come steerer lock. I've been running a dual crown for trail riding for over a decade with no issues.
  • 6 0
 If my head tube is 60mm diameter and my fork stanchions are 150mm apart, 40mm diameter and 20mm infront of the steering axis what’s my maximum steer angle? If I made the crowns 10mm wider, how much more steer angle do I get? xkcd.com/356
  • 1 0
 150mm centre to centre or 150mm between the stanchions? What geometry of the top and down tubes? Which bump stops are you using? Where?

Loads of missing info.

Also, basic Trig mental maths, not a lot for 10mm. More offset would have a greater effect initially.
  • 1 0
 Legit I knew a physics prof that saw that comic, knew it was a joke, and proceeded to try to calculate a solution for about a week. Theory, simulations, and even some experiments, the whole lot. Love your work Brendan. Also was a mad good cook.
  • 1 0
 Depends on where the dual crowns have offset or not. Plus you can always do a nose turn to overcome steerer lock
  • 6 0
 I've been waiting for dual crown enduro forks to become a thing. I was hoping ebikes would speed up the process. I've been running a travel reduced Fox 40 with a MORC crown on my 'enduro' bike and that's been fantastic. With a set up like this you soon realise how must fore-and-aft flex there is in a single crown fork.
  • 2 0
 I too have been waiting for this to become the norm. I had hoped the 38 forks would have come out as dual crowns.
  • 7 1
 I know why this didn't happen here (same lowers as the normal Selva).

But especially for enduro bikes which are designed around reduced offset forks, I feel like the smart play is to build the offset into the crowns, rather than the lowers (the axle is in front of the lowers). Putting the offset in the crowns would push the fork stanchions forward, giving you more steering range.
  • 2 0
 Yep, just like my Stratos MX-6 from 24 years ago.
  • 1 0
 @Rageingdh: I had an FR4 bumped up to an FR5! God those things were unrefined, but the support guy on the forums was a hoot! I feel like something terrible ended up happening to him, but I could be mistaken. I sent mine back to Santa Barbara a few times. STRATOS - MADE IN USA
  • 4 0
 I'm riding the Selva S and I love it. I'm pretty light though (70kg) so in my case, with ±62PSI, the fork is super plush. The negative Air Spring really sucks it into travel, which is great for plushness and I never had a problem with progressiveness but it's a few mm less travel, as mentioned. It's also really important to test the CTS thoroughly, which I kinda hard for the end consumer. You get some, but not all, when buying the fork and they cost around 50€, I bought it second hand and only had one. But once you change them around and maybe trade with people also riding a Formula fork its really interesting and eye opening. It's one of the only forks where people say it doesn't really profit from a personalized tuning and I agree.
Interesting to see that they stick to the negative coil, seen as they sell the Selva R as a development on the S with the independent negative air spring. Both systems have their benefits I guess and I wouldn't be surprised to see an upgrade kit at some point. But still, why not put the R Airshaft in, you can still dial it in so that the negative spring is stronger than the positive and it performs like the S for lighter Persons.
  • 7 0
 I'm going to take a guess there will be a Belva S and a Belva R in the future.
  • 8 0
 Hopefully they do not forget the Belva C.
  • 1 0
 @maglor: I agree, they just could've just put the aforementioned spacer on the R-Spring and also the Coil Spring, I can't imagine it being too expensive or anything. And imagine the adjustability from the get go.
  • 6 0
 I absolutely adore my Selva C, the coil is insanely good. I'd be curious to try this DC enduro fork but I really want them to release a full coil version of it!
  • 1 0
 on which spring and how much weight?
Mine was horrible...sold it after a couple of weeks.
  • 1 0
 @jzPV: Very surprised you thought it was horrible. I run a medium spring with gold CTS at 80kg. It's buttery smooth and supple.
  • 1 0
 @Aphex-:I love formula forks but also could not get my selva c to really work well, It was too firm with the medium spring and too divy withe soft. Tried a couple of CTS and would not work. i bought a Nero R and traveled it to 180 mm -so much better. I am probably not the coil guy i thought, turns out i am more of a 3 chamber air guy (mattocs are great too)
  • 1 0
 @Aphex-: at 70 kg with a soft spring I could barely use 150 mm of travel with huck to flats on purpose. Some said the o ring in the coil chamber gives it a natural air progression by the trapped air, if that's the case this unadjustable progression does not work at all with the soft spring. I also tried removing the o ring to little effect. It felt like the progression set it just before half way of the travel. If I buy a coil fork, I explicitly don't want as much progression, and it was a lot more than a stock Lyrik with Tokens.

Combined with the large amount of high speed compression on all valves which you can't decrease it was almost unusable and I never had as much front wheel slip and as much arm pump (which I usually don't have). Tried the blue, gold and silver CTS. At the end I tested them all fully open. The rebound was also noticeably worse than any fork I had before, never being able to find a balance between suppleness with traction and sucking up big hits.

Sent it in and aparently the bushings were too tight and adjusted but it only increased the suppleness a bit and did not fix my problems. If I road over a square edge hit like a curbstone, the fork almost did not move at all (around 20 mm).
  • 4 0
 This is the only bit I can see relating to the specific benefits of a DC fork: "On the biggest frontal impacts, I did find the Belva more composed, which could be down to the additional fore-aft stiffness "

Would be nice to hear a bit more about general steering precision and composure, compared to an SC fork.
  • 2 0
 Also more travel for a given a2c
  • 1 0
 @russthedog: Yes, that's a valuable side effect. However I thought the main point of people wanting DC forks for enduro was steering precision/confidence and eliminating some of the binding and whatnot that SC forks theoretically experience.
  • 1 0
 @chakaping: I've had a few selvas and I find they dont suffer binding at all - its one if the things I like about the fork. I think it's that air piston on the end of the ball joint
  • 6 0
 Are you ok? The bike looks like you ran straight into a tree, at apparently very high speed...

Love formula purple, though.
  • 3 0
 I like the idea of a DC Enduro Fork! A lot of things seem very well executed with the Belva although they seemed to put to much attention to the weight in my opinion. I guess people who are looking at DC forks for their Enduro Rig most likely want the benefits of a DH fork on a slightly lighter package plus not investing in to travel adjustments. I was really hoping to see the cartridges from the Nero in this fork. Anything below 2500g would be amazing in a DC Enduro fork and travel options between 170mm and 190mm. SC forks are amazingly good these days so I would say the targeted group most likely is looking for the adjustability of the overall height and the enlarged airchamber. I wonder why not more brands consider the bandit design from Intend.
  • 4 1
 MRP Bartlett fits all your requirements. I have mine set to 190, but it ranges from 170 to 190 and weighs 2490g.
  • 1 0
 @bhuff: I don't know if the air spring and damper have been significantly improved, but I was unimpressed by the Ribbon I rode a few years ago.
  • 1 0
 @bhuff: Bartlett is 51mm offset, 2595g (according to MRP) and $1500
  • 1 0
 You can travel the Nero R to 190 or 180mm. It weights 2700g and comes with 20mm axle and 50mm offset. If you ignore weight its a monster of a fork. I run it in 180mm on my 165mm enduro and its the best. Because aof the low ac it also does not mess up the geo. (50mm offset also means no turnblock)
  • 1 0
 edit HP says 2.620 g
  • 2 0
 @Lostrodamus: Everyone has their own opinions and preferences when it comes to suspension and MRP forks get mixed reviews, but I can confidently say that it is the best feeling fork I've ridden. As for the weight discrepancy, mine is 27.5 so it weighs a bit less. The point is, I believe there is a market for DC enduro forks because they do provide tangible benefits.
  • 2 0
 @bhuff: Good to hear that it's working well for you- it's too bad there's not a lot of them out there to try, and pretty much zero reviews.

I like MRP as a company, appreciate what they're doing, and definitely understand that the Ribbon I rode was a while ago and was a sample size of one.
  • 3 0
 @rideformula are you planning on providing different spring options in the future? A coil version would be awesome.
I currently own a Morc 36 which has a Formula S air spring in it. The fork is great but a coil version would be even better.
  • 1 0
 I meant it uses the Formula R dual air.
  • 2 0
 @dick-pound: Same here but I installed a Diaz Runt in mine and never tried it stock with the single + air chamber. Running good for 2 seasons.
  • 3 0
 No plans as of right now. We'll never say never, though.
  • 1 0
 @Staktup: Interesting. I was thinking of installing an AWK cause the mid stroke support is quite poor due to the large positive. Now I have it filled with 7 or 8 spacers but not a fan of the huge ramp either, still better than stock.
  • 6 0
 @rideformula: As the Nero R is available with 180mm of travel isn't it possible to use its air spring in the Belva?
  • 2 0
 @mouks: Good question!
  • 3 0
 @rideformula (probably, i dont know your username) you do such a great job with compression tuning, do the same with rebound and negative springs, its necessary for exactly the same reasons all your CTS valves are necessary.
  • 9 1
 This is something our engineers talk about a lot. It's a balance between giving riders tuning options and making sure they don't get confused and end up with a badly set up fork. The balance is always changing though, which is why we're always talking about it.
  • 3 0
 @rideformula: if you're going to go all the way with compression, why not go the whole hog? full arse it, in for a penny in for a pound.

sounds like it would be a pretty magic product without the things seb struggled with
  • 2 0
 I like that this is an option, especially considering EVERY sc fork I have ever owned has had creaking CSU issues (I'm 215lbs). There's a market for the old style boxxer to be re branded as an enduro fork too. It's a niche market but to supplement a two bike garage whereby you could have a long travel enduro for winch and plummet trails and park, then a short travel trail bike for flatter stuff...this would be amazing. I could see this strapped on to a G1 for the ultimate climable dh bike.
  • 1 0
 This thing's only 100g lighter than the old 35mm Boxxer, and I presume it'd be easy enough to drill a smaller hole for a 15mm axle for compatibility. But I guess they'd argue the Zeb is sufficient
  • 2 0
 I currently have a Selva S on my enduro bike, a Nero R on my DH and a Fox 36 on my shorter travel trail bike. I've had plenty of RS and Fox products in the past and the Formula stuff has by far been my favorite. I think if people are open to trying something different, the Formula stuff is a great option.
  • 2 0
 You can travel the Nero R (50 dffset) to 180mm, thats what i did on my enduro. It still weights 2700g but its the best fork ive ever had. Maybe give it a try. The necessary spacers also were in the box so its no big deal.
  • 3 1
 Seb's rebound settings are insane for 100 PSI in a 38. I don't understand how he could possibly keep the wheel on the ground above 15 mph. IMO the key with Grip2 is more HSR, less LSR. Keep it light and fast when in the slower speed jank, but have it be more stable/composed when shit gets rowdy.
  • 4 0
 just when you thought the privateer couldnt get any heavier hahahah all joking aside though, it does lookl rad with the dual crown fork
  • 2 0
 Yeah, it looks mint with a dual crown. Keep an eye out for more Wink
  • 8 2
 Give us a Dorado review you sponsored cowards
  • 6 0
 They did an initial review when it came out. But never followed up with the promised long term one.
  • 1 0
 I know I know lol. Just being salty because I was really keen to hear how it stacks up against 40s/Boxxers/Ohlins etc.
  • 1 0
 @phastlikedatnascar: yeah I have also been waiting on that review comparison. I wonder if Dan Roberts is still working for pinkbike.
  • 3 0
 Am I the only one that would like the reviewer to post their weight, so that I have a point of referenece when they're talking about heavier and lighter riders?
  • 8 0
 Seb Stott
Location: Tweed Valley, Scotland
Age: 31
Height: 6'3" / 191cm
Inseam: 37" / 93cm
Weight: 187 lbs / 85 kg, kitted

They typically post it when reviewing bikes. This was taken from a Whyte bike review.
  • 2 0
 @vinay: thanks dude Smile
  • 4 0
 Given the resources he has available, you have to admire the rigour of a Seb Stott test.
  • 7 3
 I haven’t read the review yet, but I have a hunch Seb will say it’s excellent, but not as good as the Fox 38.
  • 5 0
 Yo dawg, we heard you didn't like kinks, so we put kinks in your kinks!
  • 5 0
 I want to put one on a Chromag Doctahawk cause make sense.
  • 4 0
 Bring back the dual crown hardtail!
  • 3 0
 @b-mack: I have a 200mm Dual crown hardtail Smile
  • 2 0
 @Phaethon85: I do too. its a marzocchi shiver so really 190mm but same difference. What frame and fork combo are you using?
  • 1 0
 @mior: Custom Marino made with Reynolds 853/725 and a Formula Nero C. I'll bring it out to Ted's sometime.
  • 8 2
 Cons - Not a 38
  • 6 0
 pros-- rides better than a 38
  • 3 0
 honestly though... for what EWS rides, why wouldn't a ZEB/38 come with a dual-crown option? Its just a crown and a few more grams?
  • 1 0
 The new boxxer is the zeb dual crown. I doubt rockshox would let their enduro athletes run that if they claim it's only for dh bikes.
  • 5 4
 @seb-stott Wazzap with all you «expert riders» preferring oversprung underdamped forks?
I get that fox and rs makes pogo-sticks, and you can get accustomed to a «lively feel» by excessive weightshifting and throwing the bike about, but how does this give you more control?

A fork with a triple negative spring cannot have a harsh break-in force, being close to max spring rate with dual neopos should mean more rebound, not fully open. This doesn’ t make sense.

Fork set-up 101:
1) Adjust spring to 25(xc) - 33%(dh) static sag in attack position.
2) Adjust rebound from fully open to achieve a controlled ride without wallowing and being thrown up after compression at your typical speed and terrain
3) Add LSC for chassis control, especially to avoid excessive brake dive
4) Add a hint of HSC for «pop», and maybe go back a tad on the LSC if too harsh a result
  • 3 0
 It is obviously the case of not having enough negative spring .... you can have exactly the same effect with an adjustable air spring if do not put enough air pressure.
  • 2 0
 33% sag on a fork??? 20-25% at most works best. I do agree that more damping is better than more air pressure or more tokens.
  • 2 1
 One wonders what is the point of reading about these "tests" made by one person. Competent as Seb Scott may be, it is still one person opinion. And sure enough Bikerumor magazine does not find any trace of the "harsh brake in", Something must have been was wrong with the set up used here.
  • 1 0
 Bikerumor author doesn't even state his air pressure. He is probably inside the range that suits the coil negative spring.
  • 1 0
 double post
  • 2 0
 Do we have the next PFG (Pinkbike Fork Gate)?
#mezzer
  • 4 0
 Specialized tried this 17 years ago. FutureShock e150 from the 2007 Enduro anyone?
  • 2 0
 Shame they did a poor job with it. We could have avoided going through the CSU creaking era.
  • 1 0
 The formula has been an excellent fork for me, and maybe the best i had. Still having one on my 27.5 hardtail with all the CTS valves which are really the shit on this system for personal tuning your fork. Makes a steel hardtail feels like fs bike on my occasions Smile )
I don’t recall having felt better on either Fox36/38, RS ZEB which i rode since transitioned to 29” for my enduro ride, the only thing i’d say in the negatives (not really a negative but) it’s the time you need to spend to fine tune for your bike and riding location, i have extensive list of all the test i’ve done with the different combinations air/CTS/Vol spacers/compression and rebound as they are hardly a limits with that many variables. But once you get to know it, really this is the best fork to date i’ve ridden.
  • 4 0
 Return of the Kona Stinky
  • 2 0
 I really wanted to want this, but air spring set up doesn’t sound like it would work for me. Perhaps an updated version in the future would.
  • 2 0
 @seb-stott A coil negative does not in itself mean firm off the top. It's the way this particular system is designed unfortunately. Looks cool still
  • 2 0
 I was thinking about that as well and there is a situation in which this could be the case. If the negative coil is too soft to the point that it could be fully compressed by the positive chamber at top out it would basically not be doing what it is intended to do and have a very harsh initial stroke. This aligns with Seb noticing that it started to occur at a pretty specific amount of pressure being added.
  • 1 0
 @notsosikmik: exactly correct. I have an older Durolux with coil negative. As soon as you add enough air to overpower it, things get harsh. SR Suntour sold a couple different spring weights for that reason. Be nice if Formula offered the same.
  • 1 0
 @notsosikmik: Yeah, unfortunately in this instance the negative coil will have a small window that's optimized. It'll be very sensitive to pressure. There are plenty of negative coil spring/hybrid setups in MTB suspension and other industries that aren't as sensitive though and work phenomenally well.
  • 4 4
 We waited with bated breath for three years, it's overweight and not cheap, but it sports a 15mm TA, and it comes in purple, hmmm .... The question I gotta' ask is whether it's worth twice as much as a contemporary single crown. If it was lighter, light as Formula originally suggested, then maybe, but at nearly 2500gms, that's not a lightweight fork. I can get a top end single crown, install a Smashpot coil and weigh less and cost less.
  • 3 0
 Kinda where I'm at with this one. It's close enough to a regular DC fork weight that you might as well go all in.
  • 7 0
 I run used Boxxers - gotta get to the laundromat soon
  • 7 0
 My factory 36 170 w/ 50 #smashpot conversion weighs 2.62kg. My factory 38 w/ 50#coil weighs 3kg. Marzo bomber Z1 160 coil is 2.5kg. Factory 36 w/ PUSH coil conversion & 45# coil weighs 2.55kg. My MORC 36 DC fork set to 170mm weighs 2.7kg. I’ll take 2.5kg air or 3kg coil for enduro forks either way.
  • 1 0
 Stiffness and precision is more important than a few extra grams for some of us. I won't be going back to single crown forks anytime soon.
  • 3 1
 I just ordered a Mezzer Pro 29 180mm for $700 USD delivered.

At 2000gms it's just as capable as the Belva, has a better damper, and I can set it up with a coil, and it'll still weigh less than the Formula Belva.

If Formula can get the weight down and improve the air spring, say 2250gm, this fork would be worth considering.
  • 1 1
 @sanchofula: Yeah sure! Looks like you haven't compared a single to dual crown in a long time.
Also, like 100g weight difference is going to make any difference. If you're so bothered by a couple grams, then you chose the wrong MTB category bike.
  • 1 0
 @dick-pound: No, I'm not bothered by a few hundred grams of weight. I'm "bothered" by paying over 2k USD for a fork that has issues and is heavy. If you read my comments, Dick, you'd understand that.
  • 2 1
 @sanchofula: Problem is that you say heavy, which is like 90g more than a SC 38 fork. Roughly the same amount of weight you loose after peeing for 6 seconds.
Unless you're somebody with a 7% body fat and fighting for the podium at the TDF, those 90g are not going to make any difference whatsoever.
The RRP seems to be in line with the other 38 SC contenders and you still need to see what it will be the actual selling price once broadly available in retailers.
Regarding the issue with the negative spring, I would like to get that addressed by Formula, but I've seen that for the Selva they offer a version for lighter riders, I can only assume it's also compatible with the Belva. Maybe they should also offer another version for heavier riders, or better, US riders.
  • 2 1
 @dick-pound: Compared to a Mezzer the Belva is over a pound heavier and the relative improvement in stiffness is debatable. I've ridden formula forks, had a Selva C for a while, it's not a bad fork, but it's not on par with a Mezzer.

Can Formula make it better? Perhaps, but at that weight and price, I'd be more likely to choose a truly quality product like the Push fork which is coil, custom build in CAN, and is likely a better product overall.

Who'd drop over 2k USD on a DC fork by Formula when you could pay less and get a Dorado Pro which weighs the same as the Belva?

This ^ is really the competition, not a Fox 38.
  • 1 1
 @sanchofula: great points made; plus the ability to use both 27.5/29 wheel with the Dorado
  • 1 0
 @sanchofula: Just to be fair, the Belva is listed at $2150 CAD, not USD. US pricing isn't official, but at current exchange rates that would put it at around $1500 USD. I guess we'll have to wait to see what BTI puts their pricing at in the US.

That being said, it's still a chunk more (in both weight and $) than Formula had set out to achieve. Coupled with the single air spring only, I'm not very tempted by the Belva- but I am now considering a Mezzer for the sale prices...
  • 4 0
 @sanchofula: You're completely off track. First you claim that the Belva is heavy which is basically the same weight as it contenders (Fox 38 / RS Zeb) and less then some (DVO Onyx 38 ). Then you state that a Dorado pro, which is 500g heavier and a proper DH fork is the direct competition, which is completely off. Formula made this fork as a DC alternative to the big SC contenders (38 & Zeb), clearly visible by the design choices such as tapered ST, 43mm OS, 15 x 110 axle, etc.
Then you claim that the stiffness difference between a DC and a Mezzer is 'debatable' (yeah right). You're peeing all over the place a making ridiculous claims to the point that I'm thinking you must be a bot.
  • 3 1
 About time people realize that duel crowns are not just for dh sleds , predictable steering, less otb , just safer!
  • 1 2
 For anyone else interested in DCs specifically for their reduced axle to crown length, here's what Formual states on their site:

575mm-585mm at 170mm of travel
585mm-595mm at 180mm of travel

www.rideformula.com/products/mtb-forks/belva

Based on the shape of the lower crown, I assume the range is for different wheel sizes... which means this thing has the same fixed AtC length as the 38. This seems like a missed opportunity. There are people out there that want more travel, but don't want to raise the front end. DHs DCs offer this adjustment flexibility, why not this one?
  • 2 0
 Nope, the range is for the adjustment you can have so it can be 10-15mm shorter than a 38 or Zeb in the same travel, seb even says in the article he was able to run the Belva at 180 with the same a2c as the 170 38. The fork is designed for 29 only so that is what the a2c is for, you could run a 27.5 i guess but the tyre wouldn't be the problem as the crowns would hit the seals first.
  • 2 1
 @maglor: Oh, that's dope. I should read the article.
  • 1 0
 Turning radius is the problem with modern dual crown forks. Just take an old Monster T and modernize it, they can turn 90 degrees on an ebike!
  • 2 0
 That's one beautiful bike, especially in that appropriate 'Puke Green' color!
  • 4 0
 Um…Mulva?
  • 3 4
 I think for race days it's likely a great option, stick the burlier fork on and hit the trails between the tape. Maybe even uplift days... but for day to day, i think you'd want a single-crown mostly.
  • 2 0
 I’m happy with Selva S, amazing fork.
  • 2 2
 We are lookers, right? We like looking at nice things. While with single crown fork that bike is quite lookable, with Bella it's ... well ... not lookable.
  • 3 0
 I think thats down to the 2 photos used, the Belva photo the headtube area is highlighted by the brighter background which draws you attention more to that horrible top tube kink.
  • 5 5
 Eh formula is a bit cheap with the adverts on pinkbike. If they paid more it would have been an amazing review! Like RockShox reviews! Then they would be onto something.
  • 2 0
 Downduro/Xtreme Enduro/DHLite coming next
  • 3 1
 This ugly frame is the Pontiac Aztek of mountain bikes LMAO.
  • 1 0
 #AZTEK reference +1
  • 1 0
 It would be nice if Formula offered a kit to convert existing formula single crown into this beauty.
  • 1 0
 Formula are all about modularity... so if the demand is there, maybe that comes ...
  • 1 0
 Now just bring back EWS so there is a place to use the fork
  • 1 0
 @rideformula: does belva's crowns fit to Nero C?
  • 2 4
 I know you could put an adapter on it. But why in the hell would you make a DC fork with a 180mm brake mount?!?! You know there isn't anyone running less than 200mm rotors on this thing!
  • 1 0
 They did it to save money by being able to use the same lowers as the selva. What is ridiculous is that their DH fork doesn't come with a 200mm post mount standard!
  • 1 0
 nothing for the 27"er's out here
  • 1 0
 Belva? That’s Jerry’s girlfriend right?
  • 2 3
 People knock the KnockBlock, but not dual crown forks for Non DH Bikes? I'm confused... Give me Knockblock & a single crown all day long for Enduro / Trail Bikes
  • 1 0
 They sure know how to choose cool names for they products.
  • 1 0
 *their
  • 6 8
 So the cons are basically the same cons you’d get from putting a DH fork on an enduro bike, I’ll stick with the single crown thanks
  • 6 1
 Not really. With a DH fork if your front hub does not use big enough bearings for a 20mm axle, you need a new wheel. With the formula you only need to buy a DM stem and most probably an adapter for 203/220 rotors.
On top of that, none of the DH forks available have an offset lower than 46 (inc. 27.5). Changing the fork DH crown is extremely expensive considering also how much a DH fork costs.
Travel wise, not all of them can be lowered to 170/180. Fox 40 won't go lower than 190 unless it's modified which is not something most people can do.
Weight being the least important in my list for a MTB, you would also carry an extra 400g with a DH fork.
  • 6 1
 @dick-pound: Seb wrote a whole article and didn’t explain it half as well.
  • 4 0
 @dick-pound: Dorado can be lowered to 180, you can get a 20 to 15mm axle adaptor from Forkmods, and if your headtube+headset is less than about 120mm (iirc), you can run the flat 27.5 crown with 48 offset. Not perfect, but it's a pretty sick option for dual crown rated enduro bikes. I've got one on my Knolly Chilcotin and love it.
  • 3 0
 @scotteh: Don't run a Dorado with a 15mm axle. It's got the 20mm for very good reasons.

But you can shorten a Dorado as much as you want temporarily with a pump or with clip in spacers. 10mm each.
  • 3 0
 @scotteh: I wouldn't recommend using axle adaptors. They create additional stress points where they are not needed.
However, the story is always the same. All of the pure DH forks require a 20mm axle. I've always bought hubs that are compatible with them on purpose but a lot of modern hubs in order to be as light as possible are not.
Ohlins DH38 and Manitou Dorado offer internal travel adjustment, however, with the Manitou the shortest offset is 47 and that's with a head tube shorter than 121mm (inc. headset cups), which is basically only on S and M 29er frames.
If you want a 47 OS with the Dorado you would need to buy a custom upper crown from Rulezman which is freaking expensive. On top of that if you want to get it to a normal 44 OS, you'd also need to buy a Virtual Pivot Headset. If you start adding up all the extra cost and the +3kg of a Dorado, then you can see that it will steer away most riders.
Same for Ohlins, their DH fork comes without crowns. The cost of an Ohlins + crowns is €1K more than the Formula, that's considering you don't need to replace your front wheel.
If we look at Fox 40, there's a 190mm kit option but it costs around €150. Add an offset reducer crown like a Morc 40 or a virtual pivot headset and the costs are going to be considerably higher.
As I wrote above, the Formula Belva only requires a DM stem purchase and depending on your rotors size maybe an adapter. Both of which can be found in any MTB shop with an expense lower than €100.
It also comes standard with a 1.5 headtube, so no headset reducer is needed, it's a simple fork replacement.
  • 1 0
 @dick-pound: You can run a Nero R in 180mm (hope hub adapter 20€, hope headset reducer 15€). 2620g with 3 chamber air -hard to beat.
  • 1 0
 @Vinnijussi: Nero's shortest offset is 50mm, so add a virtual pivot headset to reduce to 46mm and that's another €150.
  • 1 0
 @Dougal-SC: Yup, that's the conclusion I've arrived at...15mm adaptor is no bueno, too much flex. Going to get a wheelset with a proper 20mm axle before the park opens.

@dickpound: My large Chilcotin has a silly short headtube (106mm), so I was just able to fit the 27.5 flat crown, no need for an aftermarket crown to get the short offset. I don't feel the need for a VP headset, because the slight increase in rake is offset by the slightly slacker headangle from the longer a2c.
  • 1 0
 @dick-pound: i could barely feel the difference between 47 and 51 mm offset. So you dont need to change the nero r s 50mm offset in either direction. In my opinion you could spend 150 € way better, but I am the last man stopping someone who wants something to be the best option. I ve done that multiple times. (for most people, including me, a 150mm mattoc pro set up propperly is more than enough. It weights 1.7 kg and is sub 1k on the streets, 3 airchambers, hbo, pressure relief, tried and true)
  • 1 0
 Mr. Belvedere approved.
  • 1 0
 Meh not for me.
  • 2 3
 with all those wonky tubes and skinny looking dual crown fork it just needs a front derailleur to really finish it off
  • 1 1
 I'd buy one but it's not converted to USD and I can't math
  • 2 5
 Add weight at the front? I do not want....
  • 4 1
 like you feel 100g
  • 8 1
 It's less than 100g more than a 38... That's less significant than changing tire brands in many cases.
  • 6 0
 For an enduro....You are right...I didn't think about it Smile
Below threshold threads are hidden







Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.056181
Mobile Version of Website