Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
Cancel
Create thread New Forums

Thunderbolt Suspension Modifications

Jump to Latest
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
G

Gski

· Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
Discussion starter · #1 ·
There have been quite a few threads about this general topic, but I would to restart the conversation now that we have had more time with this frame.

Nsmb.com has posted what is effectively a review of 'up-forking' to 140mm: Rocky Mountain Thunderbolt: Reviewed - NSMB.com

I find that my stock 2016 Fox 32 120 balances very nicely with the stock fox shock. NSMB found that a dramatic change in fork required a change to the shock, which according to my engineering past is no surprise. When I demo'd the 2015 770, I used the shock adjuster almost continuously, but with my newer model I only adjust it when I am bored on long road climbs and have no one to talk to.

For 2017, RMB has gone 130mm for all tbolts, and some have the evol shock to match.

What do you think of NSMB's suspension ideas? What are you running, and how does it work for your trails?
 
#2 · (Edited)
I run my Thunderbolt, which for me is a trail bike, much the same as NSMB and French pro Tito Tomasi:

  • Fork: Manitou Mattoc @135 mm. 135 simply because all I had lying around were 1x15 and 1x10 mm spacers. 25% sag.
  • Shock: '15 Fox Float w/ Vorsprung Corset. Stock volume spacer + remote lockout removed. 27-30% sag.
  • Ride9: Setting #3 (heavy rider + next-to-slackest angles)

I started out with the fork @130, the shock in stock mode and riding in Ride9 #2 (slackest). The suspension itself felt a bit too 'XC' for me, skipping over the rough stuff a bit too much. Also, in slackest mode the BB is lowest leading to rock strikes.

Terrain here is really mixed from nasty, slippery rock gardens with quite some small drops, to high-speed, loose-over-hardpack. I think the slightly higher/slacker/initially plusher setup I have works better for the rocky stuff, while the suspension on both ends feels relatively bottomless.
 
#3 ·
Eric, I thought the 9,3, and 2 settings were the slacker settings? But you said it felt too xc, wouldn't that be the efficient settings of 5,6, and 7? I thought towards the right was the aggressive/slacker settings and towards the left were the efficient/ xc settings?

On a side note, I'm 220lbs all geared up and ride mostly xc. I have it in the 5 setting, which is the heavier/efficient setting. But I get a tremendous amount of pedal strikes. I thought that setting will raise the bb in comparison to the slacker settings towards the 2/3/9 side.......
 
#4 ·
There's 20.5mm of BB height range between the 6 and the 2 position. 6 is the highest BB position, the 5 position will drop the BB about 5mm and the 4 position is about a 10mm BB drop.

I've been running in the 5 position as well, I run about 10psi more than my body weight (well, that is likely body weight with a loaded Camelback) and haven't had more than a couple of pedal strikes, but that's running 2.4 Mountain Kings which are a big volume tire. An extra 5mm of tire height definitely helps.
 

Attachments

#5 ·
Great, thx Rocky uphill. I attributed the pedal strikes to perhaps the bike sitting deep in its travel; as I've heard the thunderbolt does......which would keep my BB a little lower than normal. Maybe I dont have enough psi in the shock. I'll have to check that, although I don't think I'm bottoming out. The 10 psi above body weight, is that a general rule or just something that works for you? We do have some really rocky trails here in NY/NJ, so maybe it's a function of that. I have ridiculously thin pedals, so pedal thickness is clearly not an issue.........
 
#7 ·
oobaa47 said:
Eric, I thought the 9,3, and 2 settings were the slacker settings? But you said it felt too xc, wouldn't that be the efficient settings of 5,6, and 7? I thought towards the right was the aggressive/slacker settings and towards the left were the efficient/ xc settings?
Click to expand...
You're absolutely right in terms of angles. I meant 'too XC' regarding suspension. I've edited the post to clarify & for others' reference.

The stock setting + Ride9 #2 was just way too progressive, so yes, as lot of sag. Combined with the low(est) BB setting I was bashing my pedals way too often. To be honest it's fine everywhere except my local trails ;)

Can I ask how much sag you're currently running?
 
#8 ·
I sent my shock out for service, but I think it was around 25-30%. I remember reading somewhere that this bike needed to sit a little deeper in its travel than most and that it ramped up very swiftly in terms of progressiveness. With my dh bike I was real anal about my sag and settings but for whatever reason I haven't been with this bike. Maybe I need more psi in it. How much do you weigh relative to your pressure in your shock?
 
#10 ·
So if I understand this correctly, even as a lighter rider (160ish geared up), I can take advantage of the less progressive but higher bb height of the bottom Ride9 positions? I'm in Utah where it's all rock. I get a good amount of pedal strikes while in position 9 and would love a more plush bottomless feel while not smashing the snot out of my pedals/cranks.

If I were to go to position 3 do you think i'd notice the difference? I'm not hitting anything over 2-3 ft drops and still do a decent amount of climbing.

edit: i'm on a '15 BC edition T-bolt and thought of going 140mm on the Pike to raise the bb height as well
 
#11 ·
I'm ~170 and use #3. It's just progressive enough that I don't bottom on hard landings. Note there was a small volume spacer in the air can originally. I removed it.

If you're looking for a tad more BB height I'd try #1 first, maybe #4 even.
 
#12 ·
ok, it looks like I have about 170 psi in my rear shock but I tip the scales at 220lbs. I guess that may be why I'm having so many pedal strikes. I'll pump some psi into it and see what happens. It looks like I'm still around 25-30% sag though. Will putting another 50 psi into the shock reduce the amount of sag I currently have?
 
#13 ·
oobaa47 said:
ok, it looks like I have about 170 psi in my rear shock but I tip the scales at 220lbs. I guess that may be why I'm having so many pedal strikes. I'll pump some psi into it and see what happens. It looks like I'm still around 25-30% sag though. Will putting another 50 psi into the shock reduce the amount of sag I currently have?
Click to expand...
Yes, it should effect the amount of sag you have when changing air pressure that much
 
#14 ·
Not really sure if this counts as a suspension modification, but I read another poster on this board installed a rear bearing kit in the back of his t-bolt - he said it was unbelievable how smooth the travel was - or words to that effect.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#15 ·
Yeah, that looks like a cool upgrade to perform. I'm gonna pull mine apart and give it a good cleaning and see how the grease it doing in the pipelock before I make the decision to change to the bearings. Also thinking I'll do a 140mm conversion to the Pike
 
#16 ·
thanks rhale, I'll pump so more air in it. For what it's worth, I never greased the bushings on my 'bolt after a year of riding (didn't ride a whole lot). Thought I would go for the bearing kit, but my lbs said the bushings were fine and just needed some grease.
 
#17 ·
Has anyone compared a Monarch with a DPS or a McLeod on the T-Bolt?
I shimmed my Monarch as googd as it gets (of cours I tried the stock Monarch setting first!), but I still have trouble with the progressivness of the linkage.
Would be interesting if someone tried the bike with both shocks or has upgraded to either one. I think the bike needs a bit more support in midstroke and a more linear feel at the end. But which shock does provide that....?
Can anyone help with this topic?
 
#18 ·
The Float DPS makes a night and day difference over the CTD on the Thunderbolt, it is much better supported mid-stroke, the bike feels really lively and snappy on technical trails where you are on and off the saddle and have to pop it over trail obstacles. It's a great feel on seated technical climbing where it doesn't feel like having the weight shifted to the back wheel is a compromise in suspension feel. Still has great small bump response, but seems to be more immune to pedal strike in the same Ride9 position on rollers.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
About this Discussion
21 Replies
9 Participants
Last post:
afreak
Mountain Bike Reviews Forum
posts
16M
members
534K
Since
1990
A forum community dedicated to Mountain Bike owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about bike parts, components, deals, performance, modifications, classifieds, trails, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
General Discussion Downhill - Freeride California - Norcal Shocks and Suspension Passion