Bombers

Captain Stupido

Senior Retro Guru
Feedback
View
I’ve never had a set of Bombers. Range is quite confusing (i.e. lots and lots of variations). I found a very detailed pdf on here which explains technical differences but I’m a bit lost on what it all means in the real world.

My 2 98 clockworks both have Pace RC36 forks at the moment, I wouldn’t mind changing one for a different flavour. Also I I’m building up a P7, 2000ish (disc and v mounts) which I’d planned to put some rigid on-one forks on. But I could maybe go with a set of later Bombers on that.

There is a set of Z2 atoms for sale on here... they got me thinking. On eBay are some z4 fly light airs... similar sort of money.

What’s what?

FWIW I am a fairly light and fairly cowardly rider of fairly gentle trails. At the moment I’m travelling by road to check out local green lanes. Actually some of these are pretty gnarly. At which point I often get off and push it... I wouldn’t mind if the forks made me a bit braver... but by the same token I fancied trying the rigid forks to hopefully make the bike better at road climbs...
 
Re:

To answer the question.
Z1 at the top, sort of a long travel Downhill version of the general top of the range Z2 (think XC)
then the Z3, Z4 etc are the Z2s with bits missing.

there are two other forks, the Superfly/Xfly Z2s that was a lightweight air fork.

though the cheaper air forks are probably just as good and simpler. (these simpler air forks are just the springs fork with the spring removed and a better top cap with valve out in it.)
At least from the early 90s ones i've worked on and fixed.


and of course it's never quite that simple as there are versions in each range.
 
Re: Re:

FluffyChicken":pmvdbd04 said:
To answer the question.
Z1 at the top, sort of a long travel Downhill version of the general top of the range Z2 (think XC)
then the Z3, Z4 etc are the Z2s with bits missing.

there are two other forks, the Superfly/Xfly Z2s that was a lightweight air fork.

though the cheaper air forks are probably just as good and simpler. (these simpler air forks are just the springs fork with the spring removed and a better top cap with valve out in it.)
At least from the early 90s ones i've worked on and fixed.


and of course it's never quite that simple as there are versions in each range.

Thanks!
 
I'd agree with that, I had a set of late 90s Z5 air forks, and had a very nice and supple 80mm travel. Servicing was unbelievably easy (not that you'd have to do it often as they were a full oil bath).

Downsides; the damping was a little basic (not really a big problem with only 80mm travel) and they were a bit heavy, but I reckon they were a fork for the apocalypse.

:)
 
Re:

Cool... do people think the cheaper simpler air forks are actually more rugged than z1 or z2s then? Or is it more of a case of not much in it?

Feel a bit guilty about all the mud and weather the paces see... the p7 is definitely destined to be the bike I use in wet weather, especially as I can put discs on it.
 
Re:

I don't think you can go wrong with the old coil/oil Z forks, they'll take a beating and keep on working. And are remarkably simple to wotk on too.
 
Re:

I love my 96 and 97 Z1 and Z2 forks,but keep in mind pre 2000 Bombers run the infuriating I.S. caliper mounts so running discs will be nigh on impossible.
 
Re: Re:

Captain Stupido":yo2gadaq said:
Cool... do people think the cheaper simpler air forks are actually more rugged than z1 or z2s then? Or is it more of a case of not much in it?

Feel a bit guilty about all the mud and weather the paces see... the p7 is definitely destined to be the bike I use in wet weather, especially as I can put discs on it.

They (for the ones I've serviced, other than the Superfly/Xfly) really are just the same inside.
the Air is just the springs taken out.
lower models just have less twidly bits in them, but the twidly bits are strong.

they all used the same bushings, seals , legs, steerers (sort of)
 
Back
Top