Somebody know this Bomber Tube Type?

[wesmamyke]

I would guess just a regular old Z-2, an early one '97 maybe. The one early Z-2 I handled had that same smooth transition from the dropout.

Most of the Z-2 atom bomb forks I've seen have a distinctive step in the tube at the dropout where the tube was presumably machined down to make it lighter.

Should be a casting date on the inside of the dropout.

 

[drcarlos]

I would guess just a regular old Z-2, an early one '97 maybe. The one early Z-2 I handled had that same smooth transition from the dropout.

Most of the Z-2 atom bomb forks I've seen have a distinctive step in the tube at the dropout where the tube was presumably machined down to make it lighter.

Should be a casting date on the inside of the dropout.

For 1 year, the first year of production 1997 all bombers had a straight leg with no step they also had red round knurled adjusters and a brace different to subsequent years. The z1 was the same, see the earlier pic. 1998 on changed and all legs were stepped and the adjusters became ovalised and blue, the brace was machined out. Z1 and normal z2 had disc brakes but atoms never had a disc so I would surmise these are an early atom leg.

This is the 1997 z2 manual and it show clearly the legs with no step

http://my-sport.spb.ru/manual_1/1997%20z2.pdf

The same site has the later manuals too where differences can be clearly seen.

Carl

 

[wesmamyke]

Not to thread derail but what made an atom bomb different than a regular Z-2 if not for the lighter lowers?

Have you ever come across any catalogs or brochures for those first couple years instead of just the repair manuals?

I feel like I've seen every combination of lower/arch/uppers at this point and it's hard to tell how they originally came. For example I bought an original Z-1 with dual disc mounts from someone on this site, but it has the later adjusters and the fully machined out arch and crown with pressed in steerer

 

[drcarlos]

Not to thread derail but what made an atom bomb different than a regular Z-2 if not for the lighter lowers?

Have you ever come across any catalogs or brochures for those first couple years instead of just the repair manuals?

I feel like I've seen every combination of lower/arch/uppers at this point and it's hard to tell how they originally came. For example I bought an original Z-1 with dual disc mounts from someone on this site, but it has the later adjusters and the fully machined out arch and crown with pressed in steerer

I believe it was slightly shorter travel, lack of disc mounts and alloy steerer that were Atom bomb features. Adjusters are often lost so replacement wouldn't surprise me as I think you could buy them individually from windwave that later ones were on some forks sold now. I guess you could buy the arch too, after all it's a simple change and looks so much nicer that the early one.

Carl.

Carl.

 

[FluffyChicken]

Re:

Original 1997 Z1 pics, cats etc here
http://dansbikestuff.blogspot.co.uk/201 ... r.html?m=1

Lack of anything after is because they are all post 1998 so I never put or look for anything on them. I have seen pictures of the catalogues, but at the time few were interested.

 

[FluffyChicken]

Not to thread derail but what made an atom bomb different than a regular Z-2 if not for the lighter lowers?

Have you ever come across any catalogs or brochures for those first couple years instead of just the repair manuals?

I feel like I've seen every combination of lower/arch/uppers at this point and it's hard to tell how they originally came. For example I bought an original Z-1 with dual disc mounts from someone on this site, but it has the later adjusters and the fully machined out arch and crown with pressed in steerer

I believe it was slightly shorter travel, lack of disc mounts and alloy steerer that were Atom bomb features. Adjusters are often lost so replacement wouldn't surprise me as I think you could buy them individually from windwave that later ones were on some forks sold now. I guess you could buy the arch too, after all it's a simple change and looks so much nicer that the early one.

Carl.

Carl.

No all three Z2 had the same travel and same features, you moved up to Z1 for the travel, Z1 being the 105mm and Z2 being 70mm
Z3s altered the damping setup.

Edit as forgot to add.
Atom Bomb had the new lower legs

BAM was the disc version of the lower legs

Alloy used the old 1997 lowers discussed here, but dual tabs as per the previous Z1 and not the Z2/3 but technically the same bar the tabs.

 

[Dr-Zocchi]

Re:

Hi buddies!

thanks for all the postings so far and the the ones which might arrive!
I realy appreciate it!! :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

 

[drcarlos]

Not to thread derail but what made an atom bomb different than a regular Z-2 if not for the lighter lowers?

Have you ever come across any catalogs or brochures for those first couple years instead of just the repair manuals?

I feel like I've seen every combination of lower/arch/uppers at this point and it's hard to tell how they originally came. For example I bought an original Z-1 with dual disc mounts from someone on this site, but it has the later adjusters and the fully machined out arch and crown with pressed in steerer

I believe it was slightly shorter travel, lack of disc mounts and alloy steerer that were Atom bomb features. Adjusters are often lost so replacement wouldn't surprise me as I think you could buy them individually from windwave that later ones were on some forks sold now. I guess you could buy the arch too, after all it's a simple change and looks so much nicer that the early one.

Carl.

Carl.

No all three Z2 had the same travel and same features, you moved up to Z1 for the travel, Z1 being the 105mm and Z2 being 70mm
Z3s altered the damping setup.

http://www.enduroforkseals.com/sitebuil ... z2_bam.pdf

Not according to the 99 manual. The alloy and atom bomb were 65mm and bam 80mm. My atoms certainly aren't 80mm travel.

Carl

 

[FluffyChicken]

Re:

We're talking 1998 here?

Other years are different as they moved into many many more different ways to repackage them.

1999 BAM where 80 mm as you say, the other three where classes as 70mm but marzocchi sometimes had it shorter, it depend iirc if and when they included the negative spring.
Hence pressure or spring rate would slightly altered it.

 

[drcarlos]

Re: Re:

We're talking 1998 here?

Other years are different as they moved into many many more different ways to repackage them.

The original question didn't mention year. It was a generic question answered with information that was at one time correct.

As you are well aware the bomber range transcends accepted retro and new skool with evolution of the original design rather than revolution. At one point in its life shorter travel was a feature of the atom bomb.

Carl.