2016 Rockshox Yari long travel enduro and freeride suspension fork on a budget

Ever since the beginning of mountain bike suspension, RockShox has been a household name. Over the years the company has introduced a number of suspension products that for one reason or another had great influence on the industry. In our opinion, the current version of the RockShox Pike is one of those products. At a time when Fox Racing Shox had a sizeable hold on the suspension game, the Pike reinvigorated the RockShox lineage with its supremely plush and controlled ride for trail and enduro machines.

Seemingly capturing lightning in a bottle, it should come as no surprise the very things that made the Pike special are making their way to other forks. Even though the 160-180mm travel market isn’t as vast as it used to be, there is a still a need for burly, light weight forks that can take a beating. Born from the Pike, the updated RockShox Lyrik and all-new Yari answer that call…


While the Pike tops out at 160mm, the new Lyrik and Yari step in with versions that include 180mm of travel. In order to stretch the current 35mm chassis to handle 20mm more travel, both forks use tapered legs along with a taller and stiffer brace to make the fork as stiff as possible.

Previously available only in 26″ compatible forks, an obvious change to the Lyrik is the new 27.5″ size in 160-180mm travel options and the 29er (and 29/27.5+ in Boost spacing) which offers 150-160mm of travel. Developing a smoother initial stroke thanks to a newly tuned Solo Air spring with more volume for the negative air portion, the Lyrik is also able to run RockShox’ Bottomless Tokens for easy tuning. Better still, the Bottomless Tokens are now compatible with both the Solo Air and Dual Position Air springs.

Further improvements to the plushness of the fork come from SKF low friction wiper seals and a cartridge seal for the Charger damper – upgrades that’ll find their way across the RockShox line. Rebound damping can be controlled through the basic knob on the outside of the fork, but the Lryik also offers internal tuning through shims like those found on the Boxxer.

RockShox lyric spec

Sold with Charger RCT3 (Rebound, Compression, 3 position Threshold) dampers aftermarket for $1,030 (Solo Air) and $1,110 (Dual Position Air), there will also be a Charger RC fork that will be OEM only.



the new Lyrik may be the headliner, but the Yari is the sleeper. It gets the same 35mm chassis with Fast Black upper tubes and seems to us like a budget Pike that’ll cover a wide range of bikes with 120-180mm of travel. Available in 27.5″ in 120-180mm, and 29 and Boost 29/27.5+ with 120-160mm of travel. What will set the Yari apart from the Pike? Aside from the option for longer travel and a heavier overall weight, the Yari makes use of a new and improved Motion Control damper rather than the sealed Charger unit from the Pike. But, the new Motion Control stack now includes a Rapid Recovery rebound tune and has been retuned to emulate the Charger damper for high speed hits.

Receiving all of the updates as the Lyrik, the Yari runs the new improved Solo Air spring or Dual Position Air with Bottomless Token tuning, SKF wiper seals, and standard or Boost compatible 15mm Maxle dropouts.

Rockshox lyric yari spec

Ready for the best part? The Yari which isn’t that far off from the Lyrik will retail for just $700 in the RC Solo Air trim for all wheel sizes and travel settings. Interestingly, the Dual Position Air model will only be available on complete bikes.

Rockshox torque cap

Both forks are also RockShox Torque Cap compatible, meaning they have a larger dropout flange for increased stiffness when combined with a SRAM Torque Cap hub. Any fork that is capable of running Torque Cap hubs is also able to run any standard hub in the same spacing, but not the other way around – the smaller standard end caps will fit in a larger dropout flange, but the Torque end caps need a properly sized flange. Both the 15×100 and 15×110 Boost Yari and Lyrik forks are Torque Cap compatible and will benefit most from SRAM Rise XX/60, Roam 30/40, and Rail 40 wheels as well as X0 hubs. Moving forward, all Boost compatible RockShox forks include the Torque Cap addition.

RockShox product spectrum RockShox product spectrum 27

RockShox product spectrum 29RockShox product spectrum 27 plus

Curious how all of the forks fit into the hierarchy of wheel sizes and intended use? RockShox breaks it down by wheel size starting with the top left for 26″ wheels, then 27.5″, 29/27.5+, and 29″ moving clockwise around the charts. The chart on the bottom right shows all of the Boost 15×110 forks available in 29″ sizes, and all 29er Boost forks are approved for 27.5 x 3.0″ tires. Also known as 27.5+.

We know what you’re thinking – yes, the Pike will be getting the same upgrades since the DPair system was previously not compatible with Bottomless Tokens. Along with the Boost compatibility, the Pike will now be offered with Bottomless Token tuning for both Solo and Dual Position Air, a new SKF cartridge seal for the Charger damper for less friction and better life, SKF low friction wiper seals, and user tuneable shim stack rebound damping. Along those same lines the Boxxer World Cup and Team models equipped with the Charger Damper also get SKF cartridge seals and SKF wiper seals.

Finally, if you’re still rocking a 26″ Lyrik and don’t plan on changing wheel size any time soon, you can give your fork some new life with a Charger upgrade kit. Made for all 26″ Lyriks up to 170mm travel, the kit includes the complete internal assembly for the right side of the fork as well as a bleed kit for $330.

Everything above will be available this October.



  1. The ‘trail’ part of the chart looks mighty empty……..New revelation?? (or have Rockshox dropped out of the trail market ;0)….)

  2. sf- the new Yamaha YZ250FX has 22mm front axle.
    Sure its supported by a big fat moto fork but its also holding the weight and force of a dirt bike
    I am not an engineer so I cant dismiss axle diameters but it is easy to draw comparisons.
    And road bikes are moving to 12mm thru-axles.
    I dont think its a diameter issue as much as it is a packaging and ultimate yield issue

  3. I didn’t mind the 180mm fork and 15mm axle combination, until I realized that the RC model is only OEM. That’s like Fox being a complete derp by putting their FIT4 CTD bs on their 36 Float 180mm……………………

  4. An higher diameter axle is not always heavier as the thickness can be reduced. But the stiffness is considerably increased, very useful with long travel forks.
    The main problem with RS/SRAM is the creation of new useless standards for commercial reasons and not for the benefit of consumers.

  5. That’s a crowded Enduro category. “We have three forks that do the same thing! Good luck deciding which you should get….”

  6. Please stop your whining! SRAM makes components for frames. So if bicycle companies say that Boost is the new black…well fill in the blanks

  7. lyrik was a mush-fest with foamy damping. Goodbye!!! Stoked on the new one.

    Also who gives a (deleted) about axles.

  8. I’ve been patiently waiting on this fork since the Charger damper came out, and while the lack of 20mm options is disappointing, these new fork chassis are stiffer than they used to be. Naturally, SRAM chose to work the marketing angle with Boost than to offer a fork that’s better for the end user.

  9. Has nobody noticed that every other fork maker is doing 15×110 also? That’s a heck of a marketing gimmic from RS to force Fox, Manitou, Lauf, etc to all switch to a new axle standard.

    Oh yeah, and if you don’t like it, they still offer 15×100. As for 20×110, meh. It’s dead for all but full on DH. 15×110 has wider flange spacing anyway, so you can get a stiff wheel with 15×110 than 20×110.

  10. Attaboy, Mateo. Spot on. Not to mention there seven (!) different brands trying 7 different things to increase wheels stiffness. Don’t like one new standard? How would you have liked that? Jeez, even Shimano is on board with Boost.

  11. Funny how they have to increase flange spacing to stiffen up 15mm…..this was one of the weight saving benefits that was supposed to make 15mm superior to 20

  12. Serious void in the trail category for sure! I could only wish for a new and improved (sitffer and actually reliable) Revelation… Maybe I’ll have to settle for a Fox 34…

  13. @mateo wheel stiffness is a different metric than chassis stiffness. I can easily feel the lowers flexing on many older 15mm forks, regardless of what wheel is in there. A stiffer wheel will actually exasperate that issue. Looking at World Cup downhillers, aka the bleeding edge of the sport, a lot of riders are actually looking for less stiffness from their wheels. No worries however, as I imagine Boxxer lowers could yield the axle interface that’s most appropriate for this fork.

  14. The “torque cap” is just a way to have the same surface than a 20mm axle, so this 15mm axle is exactly working as a 20mm axle. They just ad a new useless standard, I guess that there is no weight gain as the surface on the chassis has to be large for the “torque cap”

  15. It’s not a standard, @sf! If you’ve got compatible hubs, run ’em. If you don’t, run those. Nobody’s forcing anything here.

  16. @MtbRider “Funny how they have to increase flange spacing to stiffen up 15mm…..this was one of the weight saving benefits that was supposed to make 15mm superior to 20”

    As Eric E. Strava said, wheel stiffness is different than chassis stiffness.

    @ SF
    I haven’t bothered measuring the axle on my bike but some quick calculations show that a 20mm axle with 2.5mm wall thickness and 150mm total length weighs 55.6 grams. A 15mm axle of the same stiffness (18,000 GPA) would need to be 4.45mm thick and would weigh 59.74 grams. I’m guessing that a 4 gram weight savings on the axle is negligible here. As no axle is made of solid rod we can assume that adequate stiffness can be provided by either axle diameter. Once component interface and locking mechanism is taken into account, I can see why there is no need for 20mm axles to exist in the future, even on a DH fork (except that no brand wants to be the first to change the DH fork axle size due to market perception of what is “better”).

    Perhaps fork brands could offer a standard axle, and a thicker wall, stiffer axle as an aftermarket purchase. Or just make all thru axles 9 grams heavier then they would be twice as stiff as they are now. 9 grams for twice as much axle stiffness, that’s insane! Oh no, but now the locking mechanism needs to apply more tension to actually use the extra stiffness. But then you get into the flex going into the wheels which creates a whole other issue. Man, being a forum engineer is a tough job….I might just stick with what they feed me…

  17. Why exactly is 15mm now rockshox’ fault? Does nobody remember that it was a standard pushed by shimano and fox to force rockshox to play “catch up?” If you subscribe to the whole “Stan is the evil black sheep of the industry” philosophy, be aware that you come across as a total dingaling.

  18. @boover
    > (sitffer and actually reliable) Revelation

    They already have that, it’s called the Pike and can be run down to 120mm.

    @minsta, the RCT has all the same adjustments as the RC, you’re not losing anything.

  19. Interesting that they opted to do a Lyrik which is only marginally burlier than the Pike. I wonder how it compared in testing to something like a Totem which would have better split the difference between the Pike and the Boxxer.

    Not that I mind. I love my Pike and always wanted a tiny bit more beef but never expected that to really be an option. So thanks.

COMMENT HERE: (For best results, log in through Wordpress or your social media account. Anonymous/fake email comments may be unapproved or deleted. ALL first-time commenter's posts are held for moderation. Check our Comment Policy for full details.)

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.