Can anybody explain these two dampers ? differences ? One better than the other ? Thanx
Marzocchi's RC2 vs. HSCV ?
keen
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Joined
·
12,164 Posts
I can almost swear that Jayem had said he cut an HSCV damper open a good while back...but I'm old and may have just dreamed it...LOL!
Well, there's obviously one element where the RC2 is somewhat superior to the HSCV cart...external compression damping...but I think you probably already knew that. I swear and I'd bet that if you talked to two different people at Marz tech, you'd get two different answers. keen, I really like the HSCV carts overall for the Marz coil forks I've had/have. I don't think they were valved that well for air forks. The 66SL is the only RC2 fork I've had any time on, and it performs quite similarly to the way the HSCV carts did in my coil forks. The 66SL RC2 damper is very progressive and reponds strongly to compression and rebound adjustments. Jayem probably has a good deal of time on some coil models with RC2.
Well, there's obviously one element where the RC2 is somewhat superior to the HSCV cart...external compression damping...but I think you probably already knew that. I swear and I'd bet that if you talked to two different people at Marz tech, you'd get two different answers. keen, I really like the HSCV carts overall for the Marz coil forks I've had/have. I don't think they were valved that well for air forks. The 66SL is the only RC2 fork I've had any time on, and it performs quite similarly to the way the HSCV carts did in my coil forks. The 66SL RC2 damper is very progressive and reponds strongly to compression and rebound adjustments. Jayem probably has a good deal of time on some coil models with RC2.
Joined
·
7,324 Posts
I can't explain the nuances of the dampers all that well. One thing I can tell you, however, is that some time ago I upgraded from HSCV damped Z1 (04) to TST damped AM1 (05) and felt little in terms of damping improvement, aside from external compression adjustment. I then got the 66SL with RC2 on loan and although it felt good, I didn't appreciate it all that much until I was forced to go back to AM1 and the fork felt terribly underdamped in contrast.
_MK
_MK
Joined
·
12,164 Posts
That's interesting MK. I don't have any time on an AM1. My HSCV damped forks in recent years are/were the two coil modified '04 Z150SLs, an '02 Monster T, and an '02 Super T. The HSCV damping in those forks is very impressive IMO. The Monster T and Super T were beautifully linear, but not too soft, with that nice oil level ramp up right at the end of travel. I have no real knowledge of how good a TST damper is in a real trail test. Is it basically an HSCV style cart? Again, I'll mention how disappointing I thought HSCV damping was in an all air fork.
Joined
·
7,324 Posts
There was a long and drawn out discussion about the TST damper long ago. It explains the differences far better than I could without referencing that thread. The whole bladder enclosure is very discouraging from me ever purchasing another fork with one as it complicates the oil change process by adding the bladder bleeding to the task.TNC said:
On a different note, after bleeding the 4-pot XT brakes I got recently and really loving the simlicity, it discourages me from bleeding my Maguras ever again.
_MK
Joined
·
10,130 Posts
_MK your posts have been hitting the ball out of the park lately.:thumbsup:MK_ said:
I went from a '03Z1FR1 to an AM1 (Z1am frankenfork) and really did not notice an improvement in damping apart from the adjustability. Some aspects I liked less as it was rather divy. The RC2 is a vast improvement for my tastes.
The other issue is the bladder style damping of the TST. While I think it's a interesting design (I read the descriptions) The bladder in the AM1 I have tends to require bleeding after a prolonged useage. Bleeding in itself is not terribly difficult but it is a nusance compared to simply dumping the oil out of the fork legs.
Bleeding the TST requires removing the cartridge, removing the cap. Draining it, filling it, priming it, squeezing all the air out of the bladder, closing the cartridge, pumping the cart, reopening it, topping it off and reclosing it....THEN you can finish rebuilding the rest of the fork.
The RC2 in my 66SL works in an open system so you don't need to do any of that.
IIRC, my understanding of how the bladder operates is greater compression force causes the bladder to strech and expand which exposes additonal ports on the inside of the damper that would otherwise have been covered by the bladder walls. The bladder strech is controlled by the amount of oil and pressure outside the damper in the fork legs. The problem with this is that over time, the repeated streching introduces air into the cartridge and that makes the damping notchy.
Oh yeah, and I think the process for bleeding my 2-pot XTR brakes is pretty darned simple.
Joined
·
1,462 Posts
well being a long time marz rider from basic cardridge to hscv to now tst-5 I can say they all do feel fairly similar but is it really that surprising I mean I keep using it because in the end I know and love that feel so it works. I think in tech terms the reg cardridge got improved bottom out resistance going to hscv (I didnt bottom as much with that) and now tst-5 just added a little more anti break dive and external comp adjustement (I can feel it has slightly less dive than my old fork but still feels smooth), unfortunatly I only have one bike and dont have a big enough beast to need the 66sl or else I could comment on the rc2 also.
also bleeding the tst can be a pita but its not needed all that often if good fluid is used and you get it really airless the 1st time.
also bleeding the tst can be a pita but its not needed all that often if good fluid is used and you get it really airless the 1st time.
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
