Marazoochi vs WP

[Wild Willie]

I have been looking at a 99 ktm which has the Marazoochi forks and a 00 that has the upside down WP's. Is there any greater advantage with one vs the other? Do you get any better ride/control out either of these forks. Am I just splitting hairs when dealing with a minor difference here?

Thanks for the info.

 

[Eric Gorr]

The two different manufacturers have very different designs. Besides one being conventional and the other being upsidedown, the Marzochi forks use a design whereby one leg handles compression damping and the other handles the rebound damping. Whereas WP forks are traditional in that each leg is identical and contains both compression and rebound valving.
The major difference is in lateral stiffness of the forks and unsprung weight. I think thats a rider preference issue. I have Marzochis on my KTM and I'm pretty happy with them. They're easy to adjust a make a significant difference. And my bike weighs 360lbs. is suspension is paramount.
Overall Marzochis ae considered to be less reliable than WP forks.

BTW KTM owns WP and they use Marzochi as a secondary source for suspension components.

 

[Jeremy Wilkey]

The WP's are far beter forks.. Perfromance potential and longevity. In tight nasty Trails the Zokes work better for reasons mentioned by Eric, but they are less than stellar anywhere else.
Regards,
Jer

 

[bud]

Originally posted by Eric Gorr:
Marzochi forks use a design whereby one leg handles compression damping and the other handles the rebound damping.

That doesn't seem to be the case with the marzochi's on my husky. I haven't had them apart, but each leg has compression and rebound adjusters. Wouldn't there only be one adjuster on each fork leg if it was like Eric says?

Btw, is prounounced mar-zock-e or mar-zoke-e?

 

[IDkTm]

Actually I believe that a '99 KTM has WP 50mm conventional forks while the 00 has 43mm inverted WP's. With the 99, I believe, each leg should only have one adjuster. i have been happy with my 00 KTM with the inverted forks while my friend loves his conventional forks on his 99. I believe that it is just a matter of personal choice and you probably can't really go wrong either way.

 

[davidladd]

I Don't know the technicals as well as others already in this thread, but I do know that many many people have complained about leaking seals and short seal life on the Marzochi forks. That and the need for funny looking fork boots was enough for me to choose the USD WP's :-)

With a quality revalve for your riding style etc., either will perform excellently.

later,
david.

 

[mountainrider]

Originally posted by IDkTm:
Actually I believe that a '99 KTM has WP 50mm conventional forks while the 00 has 43mm inverted WP's.

Unless it is a 200. They kept the marzochi's until 2000.

[This message has been edited by mountainrider (edited 01-09-2001).]

 

[Eric Gorr]

Uh-OH! I better get out my manual and Austrian-English dictionary. I adjusted my fork clickers like they were separate compression and rebound. Oddly enough it made a big difference in the handling. Thats really scarey!

 

[IDkTm]

Sorry thanks mountainrider, you're right the 200 did carry the Marzochi forks into 99. I guess I forgot. Did the 125exc have WP's or Marzochi's in 99?

 

[mountainrider]

IDkTm, I'm not sure what fork the 125exc had in 99. I think the sx had wp and the bike that Shane Watts rode had wp and it was suppose to be a exc, but if you ride like him you can use whatever fork you want.

 

[Lemming]

I have the zokes on my EC200 and really like them for tight enduro riding. When I got my GG I was really confused by the fact that each fork handled a different aspect (comp vs. rebound).

Someone told me that you can have the zokes hard anodized and that helps with the seal problems. Is this true, and if so, what is the cost?



------------------
Tim
'99EC200
'00KLX300R (For sale)
Faster when being chased!

 

[TexKDX]

Lemming, the gg zoke AND WPs are different from the KTMs. gasgasman found this out the hard way - they use different length springs (gg zokes). I found it out too when trying to track down some WP parts for my KTM. I don't think the GGs ever used the WP50s.

Yes, the 125e&m had zokes in '98 and '99.

FWIW, Dick Burleson still rides a '99 200MXC with EXC lights and '99 250/300/380 WP50 clamps and forks - plus an oversize rotor off a late RXC - as his personal bike. This was confirmed in the Speedvision show a few weeks ago where all the guys were together for some trail ride. He's still on it.

Yup, I got to take his bike for a spin about a year ago. He likes the MXC tranny with the 200 motor, but has made the bike street legal for eastern events and dual sport rides. You ought to see him ride - MISTER SMOOTH! He is faster riding off to the side of the trail with a broken collarbone than I am on the trail healthy!

 

[GlennP]

Lemming,

Call Jim at Smackover. He is looking for people who want there Zokes anodized so he can get a cheaper batch price.

Tex,

The '99 GasGas XC250 had WP50s, but I'm not sure if the length was the same as the KTM WPs.

Glenn
'00 GasGas XC250

 

[longtime]

i have a '98 ktm tew hunnert with the 45 mm 'zoke & a '00 with the wp. i also have a '97 ktm 250 with the 50mm 'zoke. both sets of 'zokes are frequent leakers. the 45mm fork, which has been revalved & uses big boy springs, feels smoother on little trail junk than the wp, which also has heavy springs & was revalved by jeremy. the wp feels better everywheree else. there is an expensive fix for the valving on the 'zoke to make it speed-sensitive, sold by malcolm smith & c cycle & prob others, but i've never tried it. the wp feels just a little harsher on little stuff & makes a kind of a clunk when it tops out, but the steering is much more precise due to the increased stiffness. you can also feel its lighter weight in the steering. all in all, i prefer the wp as modified by jeremy. stock, i didn't care for it much, esp on sharp hits (see related post by someone else). jeremy fixed 'em up. a few hot shots, such as db & darryl moody, put the 50mm on the '98 & '99 ktm 200s for the increased stiffness. i don't think the anodizing has to do with the seal life, i think it is supposed to add to the life of the insides of the fork legs, which stock are soft aluminum. my '98 needs this too, so i think i'll call jim & see if he'll let me in on his deal.