Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
16,457 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I know what each did, and I know the HSCV's internal construction and purpose, but I saw around 2002 marz began replacing the hscv carts with ECC for rebound. Lockdown aside, was the ECC cart inferior, equal, or superior to the HSCV? Was it an HSCV with a lockdown?
 

·
Just another FOC'er
Joined
·
2,222 Posts
ECC = Extension Control Cartridge.

I thought Marz stopped using those in 2002 and switched over to ETA? I've got ECC on my 2002 Z1 FR, it only does lockdown and nothing else.

Maybe you mean SSV or SSVF? I believe both of those are ported dampers and not at the level of HSCV.
 

·
noMAD man
Joined
·
12,220 Posts
Good question.

Jerk_Chicken said:
I know what each did, and I know the HSCV's internal construction and purpose, but I saw around 2002 marz began replacing the hscv carts with ECC for rebound. Lockdown aside, was the ECC cart inferior, equal, or superior to the HSCV? Was it an HSCV with a lockdown?
I haven't seen this addressed either. I have a somewhat direct comparison in that Z150SL conversion that I did. I say "somewhat" because my conversion involved removing the ECC cart in an air leg and replacing it with a Z150 cart and Z1FR1 coil spring. Now that ECC cart may be the exact same damping as what's in a coil fork that had ECC...but maybe not. Also the deal of going from an all air fork to an air/coil hybrid fork may skew the results. The fork worked quite well as an all air fork, and damping seemed on par with other quality HSCV forks I've owned, but overall this hybrid fork works noticeably better than the original Z150SL that it morphed from. So am I noticing the improvement because of a better HSCV damper, or is it from the air/coil nature of the setup now? Since I don't have an exact comparison, it's hard to say.

I notice when you look at Marz specs for the two dampers my fork was/is using, they classify the damping for the '04 Z150SL as a hydraulic damper, while the '04 Z150 cart I used is classified as an HSCV hydraulic damper. Other fork dampers in the same year that are clearly SSV orifice style are referred to as "pumping rod" dampers. Either there are 3 completely different style dampers in these 3 listings or Marz is just getting creative in their semantics. Good question.
 

·
"El Whatever"
Joined
·
18,889 Posts
Jerk_Chicken said:
I know what each did, and I know the HSCV's internal construction and purpose, but I saw around 2002 marz began replacing the hscv carts with ECC for rebound. Lockdown aside, was the ECC cart inferior, equal, or superior to the HSCV? Was it an HSCV with a lockdown?
I had the cance to take a look at some Zoke's carts (Marathon S) and I'm left with the impression that all the damping in a Zoke comes from the right leg unless you run SSV/SSVF/HSCV cartridges on both legs.

Why it shouldn't be like that?? All other brands do it alike.

From what I saw from the ETA, I believe it's just a piston with a huge free area and some system that makes it a check valve. So you can sink it, but you can't extend it. The free travel you get at the end of the travel definitively comes from the action of the negative spring which apparently has some kind of damper (with its own shaft - look closely at the bottom spring on your ETA's). You can see the cart has two set of orifices, both separated by 15mm. Otherwise, the ETA should do nothing for damping.

To me, the HSCV does all the damping in a Zoke.

The ECC surely had some damping. This is why it was regulable in rebound. Probably it was a simple blow-off / orifice damper for rebound as TST is for compression now.

ETA is more like an on-off switch and definitively it's cheaper than a ECC cartridge, more useful and this is why Zoke uses more the ETA.
 

·
Elitest thrill junkie
Joined
·
38,852 Posts
Jerk_Chicken said:
I know what each did, and I know the HSCV's internal construction and purpose, but I saw around 2002 marz began replacing the hscv carts with ECC for rebound. Lockdown aside, was the ECC cart inferior, equal, or superior to the HSCV? Was it an HSCV with a lockdown?
ECC in 2001 was the "lock down" cartridge, locked the fork down with NO additional travel. A "hard" lockout.

ECC in the air-forks was the damping cartridge AND it was the lock down cartridge. It was basically an HSCV cartridge with 5 rebound positions, and the last position completeld locked the rebound, meaning the fork would not extend. So, it was still basically HSCV, but much less tunable for the rebound.

ECC is not a "damping cartridge" in itself though, it's just the description of how the cartridge locks down. ECC in the air forks with the 5-position adjuster was the HSCV damper as well. ECC in the left left and HSCV in the right leg is what the non-air forks had in 2001.

The wording here is bad, and not necessarily inherant, but due to the fact that were spanning a couple years and the names mean different things in the different years.

For an air fork, ECC is the HSCV damping cartridge, and it provides the ECC functions.

For the coil forks, the ECC catridge only provides the lock-down, and does not do any damping.
 

·
noMAD man
Joined
·
12,220 Posts
Well that explains it.

Jayem said:
ECC in 2001 was the "lock down" cartridge, locked the fork down with NO additional travel. A "hard" lockout.

ECC in the air-forks was the damping cartridge AND it was the lock down cartridge. It was basically an HSCV cartridge with 5 rebound positions, and the last position completeld locked the rebound, meaning the fork would not extend. So, it was still basically HSCV, but much less tunable for the rebound.

ECC is not a "damping cartridge" in itself though, it's just the description of how the cartridge locks down. ECC in the air forks with the 5-position adjuster was the HSCV damper as well. ECC in the left left and HSCV in the right leg is what the non-air forks had in 2001.

The wording here is bad, and not necessarily inherant, but due to the fact that were spanning a couple years and the names mean different things in the different years.

For an air fork, ECC is the HSCV damping cartridge, and it provides the ECC functions.

For the coil forks, the ECC catridge only provides the lock-down, and does not do any damping.
As I mentioned, the damping felt pretty good when it was a 100% air fork with the ECC cart installed. I guess now that means I have a couple of 6" '04 HSCV air carts to play with. I figured you'd chime in, Jayem.
 

·
"El Whatever"
Joined
·
18,889 Posts
So... for an air fork, what's on the right leg?? HSCV?

Then the cartridge for an air damper should have less compression/rebound damping than the HSCV cartridge on a coil fork.
 

·
Elitest thrill junkie
Joined
·
38,852 Posts
Warp2003 said:
So... for an air fork, what's on the right leg?? HSCV?

Then the cartridge for an air damper should have less compression/rebound damping than the HSCV cartridge on a coil fork.
Why would you say that?

What do you mean by "less"?

One leg gets the cartridge and air, and I think the other leg gets positive and negative air, this is why there's a piston in the other leg.
 

·
noMAD man
Joined
·
12,220 Posts
Interesting, but...

Warp2003 said:
So... for an air fork, what's on the right leg?? HSCV?

Then the cartridge for an air damper should have less compression/rebound damping than the HSCV cartridge on a coil fork.
how are you making that assessment? I mean, I think I understand that you're saying that the damping characteristics of a Marz air damper vs. a coil damper would have to have different characteristics, but do they really? At least in the case of my '04 Z150SL hybrid, I don't think I notice any dramatic damping shift between the before and after condition of the fork, but I think the improvement is in the action of the fork which I attribute to a coil "and" air influence...best of both worlds kinda thing. Tuning of sag and bottomout is almost infinite.

I was running the same 5wt. oil with all-air as I do on the coil/air setup. I still use a fairly light rebound setting. And as far as rebound goes, it's so dramatically tuneable either with the ECC air cart or the Z150 HSCV cart that I don't think it would require any major design difference...other than the ECC giving a more dramatic "hold down" effect for obvious reasons. The compression circuit, being a fixed entity not having an external adjuster, seems pretty similar between the two carts. All this said, there may still be some differences in the two carts damping qualities more because the two forks are slightly different in their use category. By that I mean that the Z150 is definitely a strong FR fork while the Z150SL may be more of a crossover fork from all mountain to light FR, which would logically mean the Z150 cart might have more compression damping built in...perhaps. Like I said though, I think both forks feel pretty close in damping characteristics but more different in the coil influence and tuneability.

Another thing that comes to mind is the fact that a good fork should perform in a certain way as far as its damping characteristics are concerned, so I wonder just how dramatically different air and coil dampers really are. They both run in oil to control a fork's movement, and though there are slight differences in an air spring and coil spring, are they that much different? I'm talking forks here, not rear shocks. Also in my two Marz Z150SL forks, both legs are full air designs which means a very large air volume, which minimizes some of the negative effects of an air fork. Also any fork is a sum of all its parts to produce a finished result, so some of this is hard to qualify with great certainty.

Warp, you asked about what's on the right of a Marz air fork...or were you asking about what's on the right leg of my fork? The "drive side" of my fork had the ECC leg/cart, which we're pretty sure is an HSCV system. I replaced it with an HSCV Z150 cart and coil spring. So apparently both were/are HSCV. The left (non-drive) fork leg contains the Doppio dual air system that I certainly didn't want to replace. This offers some awesome tuning capability.
 

·
"El Whatever"
Joined
·
18,889 Posts
Jayem said:
Why would you say that?

What do you mean by "less"?

One leg gets the cartridge and air, and I think the other leg gets positive and negative air, this is why there's a piston in the other leg.
I didn't know for fact. That's why I was speculating.

If it's a cartridge + an air piston with no damper then it's just like any other fork.

See... in a fork, the total spring rate and damping rate is the sum of what's on both legs. I can't remember if it sums like in series or parallel, but definitively if you put two hscv cartidges in a fork, you'll have probably more damping than you need. Rebound is not an issue as it's adjustable and you can adjust on one or two (if possible) cartridges the rebound damping. But on a non RC2 or TST cartridges (that's HSCV - supposing you're running a fork with two of those cartridges) it can be an issue. This can get sorted by using lower viscosity oil or maybe a non-issue if you're jumping the stuff or either going very fast.

With less, I meant just that. A lower damping rate at the full speed range. But I see it's not the case. A Zoke Air fork is just like a coil one but with air as psring instead of coils. I don't know from memory all zoke models and for an instant I thought air ones used dampers in both legs. I see it's not the case.
 

·
"El Whatever"
Joined
·
18,889 Posts
TNC said:
Warp, you asked about what's on the right of a Marz air fork...or were you asking about what's on the right leg of my fork? The "drive side" of my fork had the ECC leg/cart, which we're pretty sure is an HSCV system. I replaced it with an HSCV Z150 cart and coil spring. So apparently both were/are HSCV. The left (non-drive) fork leg contains the Doppio dual air system that I certainly didn't want to replace. This offers some awesome tuning capability.
Read my response to Jayem... it explains it all. I was just confused. Your hybrid works better due the spring characteristics of the coils.

That said, a Zoke coil fork is a hydrid air/coil from the get-go.
 

·
noMAD man
Joined
·
12,220 Posts
Yeah, simultaneous typing.

Warp2003 said:
Read my response to Jayem... it explains it all. I was just confused. Your hybrid works better due the spring characteristics of the coils.

That said, a Zoke coil fork is a hydrid air/coil from the get-go.
Yeah, I was typing my long, wind-bagged speech while you and Jayem were already talking...LOL! Uhhh...I'm not clear on what you mean here about a Marz coil fork being a hybrid fork from the get-go. Are you talking generally or specifically here? Obviously there's an air medium in all forks just by the nature of design, but I guess I'd classify a true hybrid fork as one in which the "major" components of spring medium are somewhat equally divided between air and coil duties.
 

·
"El Whatever"
Joined
·
18,889 Posts
TNC said:
Yeah, I was typing my long, wind-bagged speech while you and Jayem were already talking...LOL! Uhhh...I'm not clear on what you mean here about a Marz coil fork being a hybrid fork from the get-go. Are you talking generally or specifically here? Obviously there's an air medium in all forks just by the nature of design, but I guess I'd classify a true hybrid fork as one in which the "major" components of spring medium are somewhat equally divided between air and coil duties.
Yeah, my statement was a bit of a stretch, but the thing is that air plays a major role on a Zoke... or should you call it oil height. The variation of the air chamber size and volume on a Zoke plays a big role, mainly at bottom-out, being it air or coil sprung.

But you're probably right. To avoid confusion let's call hybrids to those ones with coils and air springs (that's either simple air assist or a proper air piston like Doppio Air or RS's Solo and Dual Air).
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top