Downcountry Fork Review: Öhlins RXF34 m.2 vs Fox 34
After Mike Levy single-handedly invented the short-travel trail bike (also known as the long-travel XC bike), every brand has been racing to release products for this exciting new "downcountry" discipline. Recently Öhlins released their first downcountry fork, the RXF34 m.2. While it shares the first part of its name with the original RXF34, which has been around since 2016, it's a completely different fork inside and out.
WIth 120 or 130 mm of travel only, it's designed to be as light as possible, and at 1,725 grams it's nearly 600 grams lighter than the original RXF34, slotting in between the 2022 Fox 34 and RockShox SID in the weight wars. Admittedly, it's much closer to the Fox 34 (1,791 g) than the SID (1,537 g).
Öhlins RXF 34 M.2 Details
• Intended use: downcountry / trail
• Travel: 120 or 130mm
• 29" and 44 mm offset only
• Air spring with volume spacers
• Single-tube damper with Low-speed compression, High-speed compression/climb mode and rebound adjust
• 160mm brake mount, max 203mm
• Weight: 1,725 g as tested, 1,698 g claimed
• MSRP: $1,180 USD / €1,294 / £1,185 (Inc. VAT, apart from USD)
• Öhlins.com
• Intended use: downcountry / trail
• Travel: 120 or 130mm
• 29" and 44 mm offset only
• Air spring with volume spacers
• Single-tube damper with Low-speed compression, High-speed compression/climb mode and rebound adjust
• 160mm brake mount, max 203mm
• Weight: 1,725 g as tested, 1,698 g claimed
• MSRP: $1,180 USD / €1,294 / £1,185 (Inc. VAT, apart from USD)
• Öhlins.com
Öhlins sent me this YT Izzo to test the fork, fitted with a 130mm travel RXF 34 m.2, paired with a TTX1 air shock.
To achieve this weight saving, Öhlins gave up a lot of their trademark design features. They ditched their twin-tube damper for a lighter single-tube design and traded their usual three-chamber air spring for a more conventional layout with volume spacers. They also re-worked the chassis to minimise weight, helping them just undercut the Fox 34 on the scales. For more depth on the design of the RXF34 m.2, check out the First Look article. This article is all about how the fork rides. Now that I've put some proper time on the fork and compared it back-to-back against its closest rival from Fox, I'm ready to go into how it compares and whether the performance justifies the steep price tag.
Setup
Öhlins provide a handy setup chart on the air leg with recommended air pressures by rider weight. Öhlins also has an online setup tool that recommends more precise spring settings based on rider weight and bike model. For the Izzo and my kitted-up weight (about 88 kg), it recommends 87 psi. It doesn't say anything about volume spacers or damping settings. Personally, though, I found this setup far too soft - it was possible to bottom it out in the parking-lot test - so I increased the pressure to 100 psi to get enough support. This made the fork stiff and insensitive near the start of the travel, so I added a volume spacer, bringing the total up to four, and dropped the pressure back down to 94 psi. This allowed me to use 124mm of travel when bouncing on the fork as hard as I could in the "parking lot bounce test" (which is a surprisingly useful and repeatable way to gauge bottom-out resistance), leaving a few mm in reserve for bigger impacts.
Damping wise, the fork offers 15 clicks of low-speed rebound and low-speed compression damping, plus a dial that offers two high-speed compression settings and a third setting that closes off the compression circuits for a firm climb mode. The range of settings is well-judged too: fully closed and fully open aren't ridiculous, yet there should be enough of a range to suit most people. If you're a particularly light rider it's possible to get a lighter tune through Ohins' settings bank and one of their partnered service centres.
Performance
The first couple of rides on the RXF34 m.2 I struggled to get the setup right. It initially felt a bit too harsh off the top in some situations, but also used its travel and bottomed out too readily. But after adding a volume spacer and using some low-speed compression for steeper tracks, I felt happy with how the fork was performing and was impressed by how much comfort and control Öhlins has squeezed out of a 130mm fork. I have no complaints about stiffness either, even though I'm most often riding bikes with 38mm stanchions these days, I didn't notice any jarring binding or flex on the kind of terrain it was designed for, which included some chunky root sections and big compressions.
But it was only once I did some back-to-back testing against a Fox 34 on the same tracks and on the same day that I got a good handle on how it measures up.
How does it compare?
The Fox 34 is the obvious rival for the RXF34 m.2, not just because they share a stanchion diameter, but the weight and intended use put them both in the same little niche, in-between the SID and Pike from RockShox. Mike Kazimer described it as a standout option in his recent review, so it's the obvious benchmark. Fox sent me a 34 in 130mm travel with the FIt4 damper so I could compare it to the new kid on the block. While the GRIP2 damper is arguably a better comparison as it offers high-speed compression adjustment to match the RXF34 (as well as high-speed rebound), the Fit4 has a lockout, like the RXF34, which the GRIP2 lacks.
Prices and options
The price will obviously vary depending on where you live, but here in the UK, the Öhlins fork goes for £1,185 while the Fit4 34 costs £1,059. That's not leagues apart, but it's worth noting that Fox offer cheaper options too, including Performance Elite (which lacks Kashima stanchions) and Performance, which uses the cheaper, but in my opinion highly-underrated, GRIP damper.
The RXF 34 is available in 120 and 130mm travel only, while the Fox 34 comes in 130 or 140mm with shorter air springs available aftermarket. I asked Öhlins if they might offer a longer travel spring in the future, but the chassis can only accommodate 130mm. That makes the Fox 34 a bit more versatile if you want to bump up the travel.
Weight
My Fox 34 weighs 1,791g with a QR axle, while the Öhlins, with the same steerer length, weighs 1,725g. That's a 66g win to Öhlins. But the Fox was fitted with a QR axle, so fitting a hex key version would save a few grams. Similarly, the Fox has a 180mm post mount while the Öhlins uses a 160mm brake mount, so a 20mm larger adapter will narrow the gap even more - by about 25 g or so.
Setup
Based on the setup chart, Fox recommends about 98 psi for my weight. As with the Öhlins, I found this too soft but more because the fork sat too deep in its travel rather than bottoming out too much. I settled on 105 psi but found I could remove one volume spacer (leaving me with one) while having similar bottom-out resistance to the Öhlins fitted with four. WIth both forks, I was getting about 122mm of travel in the ultra-scientific parking-lot-bounce-test and I used all the travel once or twice on the trail, but only in big compressions and neither bottomed out harshly.
I preferred eight clicks of rebound on the 34, which is a click or two faster than recommended, but I must give credit to Fox for printing rebound recommendations on the fork leg. I ran the compression fully open unless tackling particularly steep tracks.
Performance
Switching from Öhlins to Fox, even with over 10 psi more pressure in the Fox, its softer initial travel is immediately noticeable. When first getting on the bike it feels too soft, and eases into its stroke more like an enduro fork, while the Öhlins offers a slightly firmer first touch, more like a traditional XC air spring. But on the trail, the Fox 34 wasn't too soft; in fact, I was consistently surprised by how little travel it used. The O-ring told me I was using similar amounts of travel with both forks and I never got too close to bottom-out unless something unplanned happened.
I rode the same two trails three times in the morning on the Öhlins, then swapped to the Fox and did the same thing in the afternoon. The Fox tracked the ground noticeably better, with less skipping off the ground and less harshness over spiderwebs of roots. It took the sting out of bigger bumps more effectively too. And at the same time, it felt if anything slightly more composed, predictable and supportive when faced with big compressions and corners.
While the Öhlins had initially impressed me with how much a modern 130mm fork was capable of, the latest version of the Fox 34 took that to another level. It's noticeably suppler, with less harshness and more grip, without sacrificing support. I also noticed the rear suspension felt harsher by comparison when riding the Fox compared to the Öhlins. I know it's a cliche, but I'd echo a line from Kazimer's review when he said the 34 rides like a longer-travel fork. The suppleness at the start of the stroke is closer to what you'd get from an enduro fork and the extra grip, predictability and control this offers can't be ignored.
Could it be that the Öhlins fork just wasn't set up optimally? That's a question that should always be front of mind when testing suspension. But I spent several rides trying different pressure, volume spacer and damping settings to optimise it for me, whereas with the Fox 34 I only did a basic parking lot set-up before starting the back-to-back tests. The differences in the spring curves can't be entirely overcome with setup.
While the RXF34 is an impressive fork, the latest update to the Fox 34 has put it one step ahead.
Pros
+ Impressive performance for the travel and weight
+ Well-judged range of adjustments
+ (Slightly) lighter than a Fox 34
Cons
- Can't match the suppleness and predictability of the latest Fox 34
- Expensive
Pinkbike's Take
 | The RXF34 m.2 is an impressive downcountry debut. It's light, has a good range of damping adjustments and performs well on the trails it's designed for. But at this price it needs to be the best, and in that sense it falls short. The 2022 Fox 34 may be fractionally heavier, but it simply performs better on the trail. It offers more suppleness, grip and predictability, putting it one step ahead of the Swedes for now. |
Author Info:
Must Read This Week
[UPDATED] Final Elite XC Results & Overall Standings from the Mairiporã XC World Cup 2024
42309 views
42309 views
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup
For the next review
All just a single Haiku
Concise yet awful
Fit4 has lockout, but it’s the only advantage over Grip.
The "lower end" grip based 34 is simply a better performing fork.
Either this Ohlins is actually an awful fork, or something is really, really wrong if it is being outclassed by a Fox 34 with the FiT4.
We are silly animals, for some reason wanting to have what we perceive to be “the best” then standing firm to that notion regardless of the facts.
I’ve had many friends go out of their way to buy forks with Grip2 dampers and then never fiddle with a damn thing.
Have yet to get on a friends bike and feel that their fork was set up optimally for them, 9.9 times out of 10, its a set and forget, and usually set poorly.
I’ve ridden and fettled with the Fit4 damper, and thought it was great, nothing is perfect all the time, and there can always be improvements.
It sounded overly harsh, I honestly didn’t mean anything by it, and it wasn’t exactly directed at you…or anyone in particular
Apologies
I got along with the "low end" GRIP almost immediately and really have enjoyed it on the rentals Ive tried with it. I like the Fox 36 that came with my newest bike but if it had a Lyrik I suspect Id be just as happy (had no issue with the Pike in the past.
You know, because you’re a short track pro who might actually benefit from a locked fork.
My old Pikes with the Charger dampers were much, much better. The DVO D1 (Sapphire and Diamond) stuff that I've been riding the last few seasons are amazing forks.
DVO stuff isn't going to win any weight weenie awards, but holy crap, the stuff just works. Plus, it's all easily serviced at home and tons of tunability options that you can do at home.
Here is what I was going in.
Grip damper-on performance level fox forks, sweeping blue dial which adjusts compression on top of right leg. Open, mid, firm, but can be adjusted in between, essentially locked out when in firm position. Essentially the best damper for 98% of riders, it we are strange animals and think we want….well more.
Grip 2 damper-performance elite, factory forks, adjustable HSC, LSC, HSR, LSR. universally loved, but the most time consuming to set up properly.
Fit4-The ugly duckling of Fox’s dampers, factory and performance elite, as far a I can tell, and based solely on personal experience the most misunderstood. Most riders feel this is inferior to both of the Grip dampers…
The post I originally replied to from @wyorider made comment that the Grip damper was better, but did not lockout
I've often thought the Select+ forks from RS perform as well if not better than Ultimate level. Similar to GRIP vs GRIP2, there's a value sweet spot a notch or two down from the top tier I think.
To be honest, I'd stick with the Pike anyway for budgetary reasons, I'm just looking for the warm glow of satisfaction that only comes from a bike part I already own being declared superior in a review.
I agree and even the grip2 is really easy to service as there is no bladder neither but a compensator spring and a blowhole
This myth that RockShox stuff is easier to work on needs to die. The only thing it remotely applies to is Fox shocks that still need a nitrogen charge, but that's not all of them: just the inline ones, and piggy-backs before X2 and Float X (and DPX2 can be converted to air fill); and everything except the charge can be done at home.
The differences are so slight that if if you need someone on the internet to tell you what you need it doesn't matter. And you ESPECIALLY don't need to worry about it if your bike came with a 35 and you like it.
The upgrade ability is what stood out to me when I was looking at bikes. A Yari is one of the most flexible platforms around. You can do a charger, avalanche or push damper and the coil kits all support it as well. Yet it’s a very reasonable price point to get into. 35 is a dead end with built in compromises. Still, once you already have one that’s not a good reason to upgrade to a Yari unless you notice the drawbacks.
@Blackhat: you are totally correct - my application is a trail bike. I used to have enduro and I find it kinda like multitool... yeah it can do a lot of things but doesn't really shine in anything specific. So I got myself trail bike for regular riding and DH with 8 inch in my rear
The part about possible upgrades totally makes sense. Pretty cool from DYI home mechanic perspective. I guess there is no point in advertising it to average Joe as it is too complicated.
Also where I am from biking is a huge thing so it is pretty easy to sell used parts in good condition locally which makes me think just replacing the fork is still easier and makes more sense than upgrading ( selling cartridge on its own... good luck with that
In your situation it doesn’t matter because you already have a 35. If you decide to upgrade, a Pike or Lyric makes the most sense. But for someone choosing among $600 forks, the upgradable forks offer a better chassis and a lot more flexibility going forward for not much more money right now.
Also, that 400 figure is off. The top end RC2 is more like 330 most places I’ve found them.
As for the stanchion question, tapered wall aluminum means that the inside of the tubes is machined to better diffuse heat and the points of highest friction (midstroke being higher heat, breakaway and bottom out lower) which leads to longer seal life, and reduce weight. In order to be able to do this extremely fine machining, the aluminum has to be higher quality, likely 7000 series alloy, and is more expensive. When you aren't as concerned about heat management, for example, in a product that might not be used quite as often, or by a consumer who might not test the limits of the product (ie OEM spec or lower-end forks), you can use a non-machined tube of lower end aluminum that achieves the same tensile strength by virtue of its increased thickness. The tradeoff is less efficient heat dissipation, and increased weight.
And yeah 35 is good enough for me... Maybe it is just my experience or the place where I live but getting a new complete bike rather than building it makes more sense money-wise. Also selling a few years old bike is very easy too and getting the freshest tech by getting a brand new bike. Upgrades down the road just do not make sense unless you are keeping a bike for like... I do not know... 10 years
Having had a lot of the suspension components from the bigger brands, I feel the Ohlins (and also the Mezzer) are better than anything Fox or RS puts out, but both are more finicky when it comes to setting it up and setting it up wrong can mean it feels worse than a RS or Fox product setup incorrectly. If you aren't willing to experiment or work on dialing it in, then it's going to feel worse than a RS or Fox product you do the same thing with.
Whether the Ohlins products are worth it over the Mezzer is a different discussion, I like them both a lot, but the Mezzer is so close to to the RXF36 m.2 for me that I'm not sure it's worth the higher pricetag esp considering reduced user maintenance capability. I haven't ridden the 34 that is subject of this review, but that's my experience with the 36 and similar forks.
That being said, if your suspension requires telemetry and a dedicated mechanic to get set up properly, its probalby not the best choice for enthusiast riders.
By far the biggest issue is the rebound tune is overdamped IMO. At ~200-210lbs (being real here, COVID pushing me to that upper point), I'm nearly wide open on the rebound adjuster, as are most riders I know on the RXF36 m.2, air or coil. The nice part about Ohlins is that they have other tunes you can request or specify, but IMO it's a little overdamped for most riders especially on the lighter side. It rides great for me where I have it set (and I have used telemetry on it to help dial it in), but I would like to see a little more usable adjuster range.
I've also heard some folks complain about noise with the RXF coil, but I haven't had that issue. I also think for the price point, they should include several coils with the fork.
So they made a more expensive and very slightly lighter clone of a Fox 34, with a less controlled damper and fickle air spring. Sounds like a winner... in the silly weight wars only.
Please please tell me the world is not already swinging back towards gram counting over actual performance.
Unfortunately that leads to crap products built for light users or non users. They just want to lift a new bike in the bike shop and be impressed at how light it is.
Unless you’re at under 10% body fat and you are able to hold 5 watts/kg of power output for 15 minutes or more, a light bike is a waste of money.
Not down with the broped. Totally down for long rides with a lot of climbing. Not down pushing a broken bike out.
inserts are for people who dont understand tire pressure, casings are for people who have bad line choice and run into rocks, steep seat angles are for people with weak knees, slack head angles are for people with bad body position, shorts stems are for short peopole buying bikes that are too big, and big bars are for people that think they have more muslces than they do.
you dont need anything on your bike. you dont even NEED a bike. you may tell your mom that you "need a mew fwowk wit gwip two dwampews" just like you need a glass of choco milk. but really it doesnt matter. just ride your dang bike
/s
FIT4 is the perfect match. LSR, LCS, 2 trail modes and "lock-out"/firm. Sure, Ohlins labels their 3 positions HSC and lock-out , but I'm pretty sure the FIT4 3-pos knob changes the entire damping circuit (HS and LS), so pretty much the same adjustments in practice. And adding HSR could definitely change the feel from deep in the travel, which is probably common on a down-country bike, and especially if the rider is outside or near the edge of the "ideal" range of a fixed HSR system.
It's too bad there just isn't a market for them/cannondale cant make competitive dampers like the big boys.
Is it the travel that's important or the slacker head angle and height of the front end that makes the real difference.
Speaking of, with the Zeb and Lyrik above it, and the Fox 34 crushing all contenders, the Pike line is probably due for a shorter travel and lighter weight overhaul. Similar to how Fox lowered the max travel options and reduced weight on 36, 34, and 32 when the 38 came into the picture.
As in “My downcountry bike weighs 32 pounds but the travel is ONLY 130/120 so I won’t ride that trail/send that feature”
But more expensive? WTH - get the damn thing into the market for 10% to secure exposure–the hapless consumer can beta test too.
More expensive and more frequent maintenance needed= faster fading of the performance plus the extra$
The service intervals don't bother me, I think they are on par with what I would realistically do with other brands anyway. I haven't had many other coil forks, so it's not a super fair comparison, but I like the RXF better than the Mezzer by a slight margin and than all the others by a wide margin. I won't own another RS or Fox fork, I've never had good experiences with either brand, both the Mezzer and the RXF perform better than any RS or Fox fork I've owned (Lyrik, Pike, 36, 34)
For an XC bike, you want firm suspension, these guys just seem to like the rough and gnarly feel of their mini enduro XC bike lol
If I was younger, thinner, and had fewer back issues, I would go all the way and ride a hard tail or even total rigid again. Maximum fun value, but with a price.
That isn't how you compare forks especially when the current grip 2 dampers offer a tiny range of adjustment.
Currently it reads like you went by Ohlins suggested settings, decided they were too easy to bottom out, and so added pressure to reduce bottom outs, but then decided the fork felt too harsh and are blaming that on the fork and not the settings...
I know sag isn't the be all and end all, but neither is bottom out control. Without being told what sag your pressures gave you, its impossible to draw any real conclusions about how the air spring is actually performing for you.
The oil in the RFX34 is just their No.5 motorbike suspension fluid which is about £25 - £35 per litre and its viscosity is 19 cST @ 40 deg C.
If you want to play with oil viscosity just find a suspension fluid with a higher or lower cST.
Combination of a dh bike and a xc bike equals enduro bike , no
( asking for a friend )
dh bike + pedaling = enduro bike
xc bike + descending = downcountry bike
pedalling + descending = trail
I own one. it is a trail bike
Best forks are RockShox with a Charger damper. They have had bushing issues with a few batches, but the ride quality via good, they’re easy to tune, and they can be fully rebuilt by a home mechanic.
For “downcountry” I guess you’d be between a SID and a Pike. I’d go Pike.
I think the Charger is worse than Fit4 and Grip and especially Grip2. They're as easy to tune as any other air spring and other dampers with the same settings. But none of the Chargers have all the adjustments of a Grip2, and that can be huge if your weight or ride style is out of range of the presets on a less adjustable damper, even just for comfort and not necessarily trying to push race pace.
All Fox fork dampers and springs can also be fully rebuilt at home. You need some special-ish tools for any brand: shaft clamps, crows foot, etc, but there isn't anything really different between rebuilding a Fit4 or Charger RC3, and all the Grip dampers are even easier because the bleed process is cake without the bladder involved.
I'd go Fox 34 all day for light trail: I hated my Pike RC, with both B1 and C1 springs, compared to my Fox 36 Grip2. Maybe if you're heavy and _had_ to choose between only 34 and Pike, maybe go Pike for stiffness, but add a Luftkappe.
Fox does indeed a have broader tune range, which can work better for some riders.