What were the first suspension forks that actually worked?

[nimbus]

Doubtless this has been asked before, but my trawling of old threads has so far failed to yield an answer:

What were the first suspension forks that actually worked, i.e. provided a useful amount of travel, with reasonable stiffness for not too much extra weight?

Highly subjective I know, but I'm interested to hear what people think.

Pace RC35? Mag 20/21? SIDs? Marzocchi Bombers? WHY???

 

[tuercas]

That would be the original Rockshox design that had the Bontrager crown, I never had one, but they were widely used and approved by the pro´s in cross country and downhill, pretty good field testing.

 

[Pickle]

Mag21's IMO.

Great looking forks, reasonably light, quite advanced for their time too.

 

[Dave_H]

Whilst the majority of early forks 'worked', I'd say the biggest change in suspension forks which made the really usable and reliable was the early Bomber range. Sensible weight, reliable, barely any stiction, good range of travel.

Blew everything before it out of the water IMO - a real step change in suspension technology.

 

[fingers]

totally agree, 1997 bomber z1/z2 (the z3 had some old tech that year).

 

[Retroms68]

Mag 21s id say

 

[drystonepaul]

I'd go with Bombers too. Good plush, tuneable action, AND laterally stiff enough to still be able to steer properly, unlike pre Judy Rock Shox.

 

[crud]

when did bombers come out?

in my opinion, Judys, 95/96 SL's. Light, stiff and smooth.

i know the dh's wernet much cop againt the competition, but i think the judy sl's were a turning point for xc forks.

mag 21's were great, but just a little too much flex and brake rub.

did all bombers run springs? wernt they quite heavy?

 

[longun]

pace rc 36

 

[mattbrown]

bombers, certainly blew the restall away, turned the light to the point of flimsy on its head, and said im big bad and beefy, great forks, very simple internals as well