The Auron shown here is 565.5mm at 160mm travel. It's called the 27+ version and while it will clear a decent sized 29'er tire it's listed clearance is 27x2.8".
A 29'er Auron 35 is listed at 580mm at 160mm travel - based on my Durolux their numbers are accurate assuming the proper negative spring for a rider's weight - which makes it about 1cm taller than the equivalent Fox fork (Fox lists A-to-C of a 29'er 36 at 160mm travel as 567.1mm). I'd suggest the lions share of that difference is taken up with steerer-tube/crown overlap at the pressfit which is possibly justified from a chassis longevity perspective.
.
As an aside, based on your measurements of a 2014 Fox 34 I'd think you have a 140mm travel fork with an extended negative spring (mine would always stretch within a year of use).
Fox lists the A-to-C of a 29'er 34 as 550mm at 140mm travel. Fox forks always show an extra ~1cm of stanchion more than the travel they have (bottom out is 1cm from crown/seal contact).
Jan. 15, 2019, 10:02 a.m. - Andrew Major
The Auron shown here is 565.5mm at 160mm travel. It's called the 27+ version and while it will clear a decent sized 29'er tire it's listed clearance is 27x2.8". A 29'er Auron 35 is listed at 580mm at 160mm travel - based on my Durolux their numbers are accurate assuming the proper negative spring for a rider's weight - which makes it about 1cm taller than the equivalent Fox fork (Fox lists A-to-C of a 29'er 36 at 160mm travel as 567.1mm). I'd suggest the lions share of that difference is taken up with steerer-tube/crown overlap at the pressfit which is possibly justified from a chassis longevity perspective. . As an aside, based on your measurements of a 2014 Fox 34 I'd think you have a 140mm travel fork with an extended negative spring (mine would always stretch within a year of use). Fox lists the A-to-C of a 29'er 34 as 550mm at 140mm travel. Fox forks always show an extra ~1cm of stanchion more than the travel they have (bottom out is 1cm from crown/seal contact).