Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 52 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,663 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Wasn't sure where to post this, it's more linkage related than shock but I guess the experts all lurk here so... I currently have a Devinci Banzai, it’s a “horst link/ICT” type frame with 5.75” of rear suspension and a 7.875x2.00 shock.

I’ve read all sorts of things about compression ratio, rising, falling rate, length of the rocker, axle path, etc. Unfortunately my technical knowledge and capacity to understand the technical stuff is quite limited, I guess my IQ is not that great or I'm too old! Hahaha

From what I understand, my frame has a relatively medium to low compression ratio. The main pivot on my bike is right above the crank like Turner’s and Ellsworth’s but I have a short rocker link compared to Ellsworth’s bikes.

Now, you are probably asking, what the heck does he want.

Well, I’ve been thru 3 different air shocks on this bike, the latest being a Push’d RP3 custom for me which is supposed to be one of the best. I’m still unsatisfied with the performance of my rear suspension when going downhill, especially on small bumps but a bit also on medium to large stuff. Basically I have no experience with bikes aside from my old Giant NRS and my friend’s Giant VT. We can skip immediately the NRS but as far as the VT is concerned, it’s the version with the Swinger 4way and it is really quite a bit nicer then mine when going downhill. It feels much plusher, especially on small bumps.

So I am trying to understand my suspension design to see if it could be the culprit or if it is the shock, or even the geometry. It’s definitely not my bearings; those are awesome needle bearings that feel like running on butter when I take off the shock. Also my suspension action is awesome for going uphill, no bobbing at all but it absorbs everything, never looses traction.

Do you guys think that with a rocker link like mine, this could lead to a “stiffer” suspension movement then if it had been conceived with a long rocker link like Ellsworth’s? Is it the geometry since the seat tube places me relatively over the crank compared to the VT so the weight transfer is not as much on the rear? Is it because that type of suspension would perform better with a non platform shock? Or is it just because that type of suspension will never provide the bump absorption smoothness you get from a single pivot linkage like the VT? Would a VPP design be plusher then horst link/ICT designs by nature?

Sorry if this is a long post. Hope some of you can share your thoughts or theories on how my suspension should in theory be performing.

Thanks much.
 

Attachments

·
Elitest thrill junkie
Joined
·
39,186 Posts
BanzaiRider said:
Wasn't sure where to post this, it's more linkage related than shock but I guess the experts all lurk here so... I currently have a Devinci Banzai, it's a "horst link/ICT" type frame with 5.75" of rear suspension and a 7.875x2.00 shock.

I've read all sorts of things about compression ratio, rising, falling rate, length of the rocker, axle path, etc. Unfortunately my technical knowledge and capacity to understand the technical stuff is quite limited, I guess my IQ is not that great or I'm too old! Hahaha

From what I understand, my frame has a relatively medium to low compression ratio. The main pivot on my bike is right above the crank like Turner's and Ellsworth's but I have a short rocker link compared to Ellsworth's bikes.

Now, you are probably asking, what the heck does he want.

Well, I've been thru 3 different air shocks on this bike, the latest being a Push'd RP3 custom for me which is supposed to be one of the best. I'm still unsatisfied with the performance of my rear suspension when going downhill, especially on small bumps but a bit also on medium to large stuff. Basically I have no experience with bikes aside from my old Giant NRS and my friend's Giant VT. We can skip immediately the NRS but as far as the VT is concerned, it's the version with the Swinger 4way and it is really quite a bit nicer then mine when going downhill. It feels much plusher, especially on small bumps.

So I am trying to understand my suspension design to see if it could be the culprit or if it is the shock, or even the geometry. It's definitely not my bearings; those are awesome needle bearings that feel like running on butter when I take off the shock. Also my suspension action is awesome for going uphill, no bobbing at all but it absorbs everything, never looses traction.

Do you guys think that with a rocker link like mine, this could lead to a "stiffer" suspension movement then if it had been conceived with a long rocker link like Ellsworth's? Is it the geometry since the seat tube places me relatively over the crank compared to the VT so the weight transfer is not as much on the rear? Is it because that type of suspension would perform better with a non platform shock? Or is it just because that type of suspension will never provide the bump absorption smoothness you get from a single pivot linkage like the VT? Would a VPP design be plusher then horst link/ICT designs by nature?

Sorry if this is a long post. Hope some of you can share your thoughts or theories on how my suspension should in theory be performing.

Thanks much.
There's nothing that is going to make a VPP design plusher by nature, there is just no variable that will make it feel better.

Traditionally, low pivot bikes (FSRs and the "faux bar" bikes like ventanas) feel "plusher' than high pivot bikes like many cannondales and santa cruz bikes. This is due to the fact that when you are pedaling the high pivot bike, the torque from your pedaling fights the suspension, making it feel choppy and harsh (add the bad braking effects of a single pivot and it can feel even worse on certain terrain).

On the other hand, the higher pivot bikes tended to do a little better on bigger hits (when you're not pedaling) due to a more rearward axle path. This is not cut and dry though, as many of these single pivot bikes had falling rate designs and without a linkage to make them progressive, they may or may not have fared any better in this particular situation. These days the shock technology makes up for this a little bit, but it doesn't address the first paragraph at all, so you'll still get some "choppy" and harsh feel in the suspension on high pivot bikes, shocks can't help with this.

So what you are describing is almost to the opposite of the "general" rules, but these do not always apply on a case by case basis.

First of all, the rate of your bike could be to blame. There's a wide variety of shocks out right now, and out of all the ones that I've tried, the fox DHX-Air, DHX-Coil and RP3 are worth talking about. The different sizes of air chambers and other factors will make these shocks perform differently on different bikes. So a bike may have a suspension rate that is "tuned" to work with a pretty linear shock. In other words, the bike is progressive, and adding a small-volume air shock like an RP3 may be overkill for progressiveness, making the bike feel very harsh at speed. On the other hand, a bike designed for a progressive shock like the santa cruz bullit, will feel like crap if you put a linear coil shock on it. The original bullits had the fox RC shocks, and you had to run a very high spring weight to keep from bottoming the falling-rate design, and this caused the low speed performance to be crappy, and while the excessively high spring rate would keep it from botting, it simply caused it to ride like crap in all other areas.

So, if you have a bike that "can accept" a coil or air shock, it doesn't mean that both will work equally well, the "rate" of your bike may work better with a more progressive shock, or a less progressive one, and if you use the wrong one, it will feel like crap.

The reason why the rate and amount of progressiveness is important is that a progressive bike will be able to run more sag, get much better low speed performance, and still be able to resist the big hits due to the progressiveness. This kind of bike will usually ride more into it's travel, and that fact allows it to feel very plush on the small stuff, even at high speed. This can go both ways though, as I have described above. I've ridden them all, and I feel a good progressive design really leads to a compliant feeling bike, but you can get "fooled" by a falling rate design as long as you don't hit a big enough bump or jump it too high, because the falling rate really allows it to go into the travel and eat up medium sized bumps, so just because one bike feels better at slow speed may not tell the entire story.

I've tried 2 air shocks on my Turner 6pack. One was the RP3 and the other was the Fox DHX-Air. These shocks were extremely different, and on different ends of the spectrum. The RP3 was very harsh overall, in my opinion it is overdamped. This makes it pedal pretty well, because the damping resists motion, but it makes it ride harsh over all sorts of bumps, and the progressiveness of this air shock (a smaller air volume=more progressive) coupled with the progressiveness of my bike simply makes it ride like crap. It's too progressive, and there's too much damping. If you want a firm and "snappy" feeling bike, the RP3 does deliver on this, and it doesn't bob much, especially in the "more compression damping" settings. Good for race-type bikes, bad for my trail/freeride bike.

The DHX-Air on the other hand was on the other extreme, too linear IMO. The air chamber is bigger (which means less progressive) and the damping at certain times feels like it is too light. This causes the DHX-A to feel excessively "plush" on certain mid-sized bumps. It has a hint of harshness on extremely small bumps just because it is an air shock, but this effect is hardly noticable. I'm extremely picky about my suspension, and I believe that this should NOT be a factor to consider when thinking about this shock. The low speed performance of the DHX-A is excellent overall, so while I can detect the slightest amount of stiction, I do not believe it is a detriment here. The excessively low amount of damping though allows the shock to blow through the travel on medium sized bumps, and while it feels very plush at a certain speed, if I go faster it seems to blow through the travel too fast, and at the end of the travel it "ramps up", so going fast over medium-sized bumps makes it feel pretty crappy, because it's trying to use up too much travel on one bump, and there isn't enough travel left over for the next bump. I tried the DHX-A with the same settings and sag that I use with the DHX-C, and from there I tried different settings, but the key is that with the SAME settings, the DHX-A did not ride the same. If you don't ride extremely fast at mach9, the DHX-A might be for you, especially if you like a real plush low speed and medium speed feeling.

The DHX-C was just right, in between the above two shocks, but that doesn't mean it's perfect. At speed it seems to get a little harsh on some impacts, a little "spikey". Better than progressive/manitou SPV stuff, and better than the curnut that I ran on my foes. I think that it can be better though, I want to try the marzocchi Rocco and the Ohlins rear shock. I simply want my rear suspension to work as well as possible, and I don't give a damn how bad it pedals.

What I really think is to blame is the current focus on "pedaling platforms" and "compression damping" that acheives better pedaling. What we are basically talking about here is low speed compression damping. Sometimes with a blowoff, and sometimes with a "threshold" in the case of SPV. What low speed compression does though is that it KILLS the ability of the bike to absorb small ripples and bumps, and it just makes it ride like crap through this stuff. A lot of people are ok with sacrificing some of the suspension to get better pedaling, but make no mistake; An increase in the compression damping, or a "platform" WILL sacrifice some suspension ability. There is no way around it. Most bikes will bob with the amount of compression damping that is required for maximum suspension performance. The DHX-C/A do a very good job of providing a decent tradeoff, and more in the direction of compliant suspension IMO than the SPV type stuff, but it's not quite far enough for my likings (then again, I'm never really satisfied!). This craze may be finally blowing over with stuff like the new Marzocchi Rocco, which is supposed to have very minimal compression damping. Also keep in mind that air shocks (on the most part, except for the DHX-A) are intended for XC bikes, so the compression damping and platform can be generally higher or more extensive than with a coil shock that is intended for freeride/DH. So that's why the RP3 has way more compression damping than many coil shocks.

I'd advise you to try a decent coil shock, DHX-C, Marzocchi Rocco, Avalanche, not romic, not a progressive, not a manitou swinger. The last three have an exceptionally high amount of compression damping that may not improve your ride at all.

Another thing that is worth noting; If you get a "pushed" shock, it depends on what you tell them, as to what the outcome is going to be. If you tell them you want to improve the pedaling, they will increase the low speed compression, and they use some very good parts, pistons, blowoffs, etc, but in the end, better pedaling is more low speed compression, and you can get the "overdamped" effect still. The other way to go about this is to tell push that you want the plushest and most compliant suspension, and you don't give a damn about pedaling. They can set it up to have much more minimal compression damping, and increase the oil flow. When dealing with Push, these two different approaches will mean an extremely different riding shock.

Although it's hard to tell if the rate of your bike is conflicting with the shock, another thing that will make a bike feel like crap is misaligned suspension, either at the shock or somewhere else where something is binding. It's rare, but it happens.
 

·
Elitest thrill junkie
Joined
·
39,186 Posts
damion said:
p.s. Where did that TE quote come from? What a riot.
Go to the website, look at the Moment bike, click on all the videos on the left. It is an exact quote.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,663 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Wow Jayem, thanks for all this info, quite a post!

I'm not worried about anything being misaligned on my suspension. As I said, it runs like butter without a shock and I already repacked the needle bearings on all pivots with grease.

Also, my current RP3 has been Push'd with instructions to minimise the platform and make it as plush as possible. I'm sure it is the best it can be, the shock/linkage works great on absorbing any type of bumps going uphill.

Thanks for your suggestion, I guess I really need to take a risk and order a 4th shock for this bike, this time a coil without platform. I hope it is the solution.

I'm still a bit curious about understanding how my specific linkage can be compared to others. You say that traditionally low pivot feel plusher than high pivot when pedalling. That I think is a given and on my frame, when pedalling, there is absolutely nothing left to be desired. I think the Giant VT is a low single pivot type but not horst link like mine so when going down and not pedalling, in theory, it should feel very similar to mine as far as bump absorption.

The way I interpret your text, with the right type of shock, my linkage, when not pedalling, should be absorbing bumps the same way as any other linkage, or am I completely out to lunch? For example, the longer rocker length that Ellsworth uses, does that influence only the behaviour of the suspension when pedalling?
How do you determine the rate of the suspension? I'm a bit surprised that the designers of my frame have designed a frame that would be "tuned" for a linear shock when no shocks like that was proposed at the time they came up with it on the market (2004, a Fox Talas Propedal or Manitou 3way coil were the shock options).

Anyway, thanks again for this discussion. I appreciate your comments.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,071 Posts
Also check that your pivots aren't too tight. My friend's DeVinci Wilson with a Fox DHX 5.0 felt like absolute crap, we figured out that a couple of the pivots were so tight that it was making the travel too "sticky". Loosened and properly re-tightened the pivots, and the bike felt great.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,663 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Thanks for the advise but no problem there either. I keep the pivot bolts "almost" loose to make sure it is butter smooth.

watermoccasin said:
Also check that your pivots aren't too tight. My friend's DeVinci Wilson with a Fox DHX 5.0 felt like absolute crap, we figured out that a couple of the pivots were so tight that it was making the travel too "sticky". Loosened and properly re-tightened the pivots, and the bike felt great.
 

·
Amphibious Technologies
Joined
·
3,472 Posts
BanzaiRider said:
Thanks for the advise but no problem there either. I keep the pivot bolts "almost" loose to make sure it is butter smooth.
BR,

Before you get a new shock, I suggest talking to Jimmy or Darren at PUSH to see if they can revalve the RP3 to your liking. I think they can make it work better if they get some feedback from you.

SP
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,898 Posts
could it be in the wheels and tires? saddle/seatpost? flex in the vt's rear triangle?

the linkage setup on your bike looks like it requires more force at the wheel to turn the pivot than on the vt where the linkage is near tangent to the path of rotation.
 

·
carpe mañana
Joined
·
7,308 Posts
Maybe before you go out and shell out your money on another shock, you ought to download a piece of software called linkage. You'll need to take a photo of your frame from a side and then you mark the pivots with markers and the sofware calculates the linkage rate, wheel path, etc. You'll have a good idea of what type of shock will work the best. Also, air shocks have an inherent problem of having little mid stroke support. They aren't too linear, as implied above, they simply have a flat section of force vs. stroke curve in the middle. What it translates to is that it takes some force to get it to initiate, then it takes very little to make it go deep into the stroke, before it begins to ramp up, like all single chamber air springs do. The end result is a super plush ride at a cost of low rear end/bottom bracket. This is particualarly true of large air volume shocks like the DHX air. A standard RP3, having a small air chamber, ramps up a lot quicker than the DHX air. Both are very hard to bottom out. This is surprising, given how much stroke they eat up on medium size bumps, but the ramping air spring assists the bottom out. DHXair has added benefit of having the remote reservoir with additional bottom out control which offsets the lesser ramp up of the air spring. It also results in more controlled rebound as the air spring being less ramped up doesn't shoot the rear wheel back out with nearly as much force as the RP3. Coil shocks are very linear, therefore in order to provide the same bottoming resistance of the spring as air shocks there is a small tradeoff in small bump performance. Air shocks also take the cake in medium size impacts due to the flat section of the spring curve. Coilovers do offer a lot more mid stroke support, so you ride higher in the rear. DHX coil BO control helps a lot with bottoming, but overall, my DHXair rides a lot plusher than my DHX coil did. I am running an air shock in the front, so the lack of mid stroke support is pretty equal on both ends, which makes for a super plush ride, however, on big step downs, rollers, etc. I wish I was on a coil fork.

_MK
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,663 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
MK_ said:
Maybe before you go out and shell out your money on another shock, you ought to download a piece of software called linkage. You'll need to take a photo of your frame from a side and then you mark the pivots with markers and the sofware calculates the linkage rate, wheel path, etc. You'll have a good idea of what type of shock will work the best. Also, air shocks have an inherent problem of having little mid stroke support. They aren't too linear, as implied above, they simply have a flat section of force vs. stroke curve in the middle. What it translates to is that it takes some force to get it to initiate, then it takes very little to make it go deep into the stroke, before it begins to ramp up, like all single chamber air springs do. The end result is a super plush ride at a cost of low rear end/bottom bracket. This is particualarly true of large air volume shocks like the DHX air. A standard RP3, having a small air chamber, ramps up a lot quicker than the DHX air. Both are very hard to bottom out. This is surprising, given how much stroke they eat up on medium size bumps, but the ramping air spring assists the bottom out. DHXair has added benefit of having the remote reservoir with additional bottom out control which offsets the lesser ramp up of the air spring. It also results in more controlled rebound as the air spring being less ramped up doesn't shoot the rear wheel back out with nearly as much force as the RP3. Coil shocks are very linear, therefore in order to provide the same bottoming resistance of the spring as air shocks there is a small tradeoff in small bump performance. Air shocks also take the cake in medium size impacts due to the flat section of the spring curve. Coilovers do offer a lot more mid stroke support, so you ride higher in the rear. DHX coil BO control helps a lot with bottoming, but overall, my DHXair rides a lot plusher than my DHX coil did. I am running an air shock in the front, so the lack of mid stroke support is pretty equal on both ends, which makes for a super plush ride, however, on big step downs, rollers, etc. I wish I was on a coil fork.

_MK
Good info MK_ and your analogy with forks makes me think about something also.

I used to run a Talas up front and basically I found it's behaviour in a sense similar to how I find my rear now and the way you describe it. The Talas was a great fork but somehow it left something to be desired as far as bump absorption, it was a bit choppy on small hits and did blow through it's mid travel pretty fast. When I changed it for the Marzo AllMountain1 I was surprised by how much better the coil fork felt on the downhill to my taste.

Being an old guy, my first cars were those old Buicks with coil spring that always felt butter smooth. That's how my Marzo feels upfront but the rear feels a bit more like my current Honda CRV, efficient but choppy! haha

I'll try to download that linkage program when I have time.
 

·
carpe mañana
Joined
·
7,308 Posts
BanzaiRider said:
I used to run a Talas up front and basically I found it's behaviour in a sense similar to how I find my rear now and the way you describe it. The Talas was a great fork but somehow it left something to be desired as far as bump absorption, it was a bit choppy on small hits and did blow through it's mid travel pretty fast. When I changed it for the Marzo AllMountain1 I was surprised by how much better the coil fork felt on the downhill to my taste.
There's something else at play here as the concept behind the TALAS is to make it perform like a coil shock. The issue with the talas is that it never ramps up, so you either have to set it up firm to resist bottoming or plush and you can't get rough with it or it will bottom out. AM1 is a mix of coil and air, so it is has all the benefits of coil, yet it ramps up like an air shock at the bottom of the stroke. AM1 has much better compression damping characteristics as well. Your TALAS experience much be based on improper setup, wrong oil levels, or something different entirely.

_MK
 

·
Elitest thrill junkie
Joined
·
39,186 Posts
BanzaiRider said:
Wow Jayem, thanks for all this info, quite a post!

I'm not worried about anything being misaligned on my suspension. As I said, it runs like butter without a shock and I already repacked the needle bearings on all pivots with grease.

Also, my current RP3 has been Push'd with instructions to minimise the platform and make it as plush as possible. I'm sure it is the best it can be, the shock/linkage works great on absorbing any type of bumps going uphill.

Thanks for your suggestion, I guess I really need to take a risk and order a 4th shock for this bike, this time a coil without platform. I hope it is the solution.

I'm still a bit curious about understanding how my specific linkage can be compared to others. You say that traditionally low pivot feel plusher than high pivot when pedalling. That I think is a given and on my frame, when pedalling, there is absolutely nothing left to be desired. I think the Giant VT is a low single pivot type but not horst link like mine so when going down and not pedalling, in theory, it should feel very similar to mine as far as bump absorption.

The way I interpret your text, with the right type of shock, my linkage, when not pedalling, should be absorbing bumps the same way as any other linkage, or am I completely out to lunch? For example, the longer rocker length that Ellsworth uses, does that influence only the behaviour of the suspension when pedalling?
How do you determine the rate of the suspension? I'm a bit surprised that the designers of my frame have designed a frame that would be "tuned" for a linear shock when no shocks like that was proposed at the time they came up with it on the market (2004, a Fox Talas Propedal or Manitou 3way coil were the shock options).

Anyway, thanks again for this discussion. I appreciate your comments.
Well, yes, with the right type of shock, you should be able to get the bike to perform to your liking, but the problem is that you don't know the actual amount of "progression" that the suspension has. It could be linear, falling rate, or progressive. The only real way to know is to plug it into that linkage program, which will give you an idea as far as that is concerned. Sometimes you can "eyeball" whether or not a bike is progressive, but you have to have a good idea of what is going on with suspension designs. I don't recommend "eyeballing" it.

The longer rocker arm should have no impact on bump absorption.

The point of my post was to point out most of the variables at play. I can't tell you whether your bike is progressive or linear, but I did lay out a lot of general rules and characteristics.

On the subject of the talas, it pretty much abides by the same criterial that I used to describe the DHX-Air. It blows through it's travel rather fast, feels nice on some smaller sized bumps due to this fact, but blows through the travel easy on the steeps, and at high speed the excessive amount of travel used can make it feel crappy due to not enough travel for the next bump being available. If you set up the talas with enough air-spring force to not dive, it rides much harsher due to being excessively sprung. The talas is amazingly plush in some situations, but it's always seemed like fox went way too far in the direction of "linear action" with the talas.
 

·
noMAD man
Joined
·
12,227 Posts
Your air/coil comments.

MK_ said:
There's something else at play here as the concept behind the TALAS is to make it perform like a coil shock. The issue with the talas is that it never ramps up, so you either have to set it up firm to resist bottoming or plush and you can't get rough with it or it will bottom out. AM1 is a mix of coil and air, so it is has all the benefits of coil, yet it ramps up like an air shock at the bottom of the stroke. AM1 has much better compression damping characteristics as well. Your TALAS experience much be based on improper setup, wrong oil levels, or something different entirely.

_MK
MK, you have some great observations there on the air/coil issue. On rear shocks, I always thought the Stratos Helix series was on to something with an oil damped shock suspended by a coil spring with an added air chamber. The coil handled all of the first 2/3 of the stroke, and the air chamber had a huge influence on the last 1/3 of the travel. Obviously the bottomout control was pretty awesome, and the rest of the shock worked fairly well. I would have loved to see Fox or one of the other biggies take this idea to the extreme with their technology.

On front forks I have long thought the same principle of air/coil hybrids should apply. A couple of '04 Z150SLs that I have were turned into this type of fork. I used a Z1FR1 coil spring and a Z150 HSCV cartridge in each fork and kept the Doppio leg intact. The characteristics are as you described...the best of the both worlds of coil and air. It's plush without blowing the through the travel and has outstanding bottomout qualities. I don't find it surprising that more of these hybrid type forks are appearing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,663 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Jayem said:
Well, yes, with the right type of shock, you should be able to get the bike to perform to your liking, but the problem is that you don't know the actual amount of "progression" that the suspension has. It could be linear, falling rate, or progressive. The only real way to know is to plug it into that linkage program, which will give you an idea as far as that is concerned. Sometimes you can "eyeball" whether or not a bike is progressive, but you have to have a good idea of what is going on with suspension designs. I don't recommend "eyeballing" it.

The longer rocker arm should have no impact on bump absorption.
OK great. I took a picture tonight so tomorrow I should have time to check out this linkage software. Hope you don't need an engineering degree to use it! haha
 

Attachments

·
Elitest thrill junkie
Joined
·
39,186 Posts
TNC said:
MK, you have some great observations there on the air/coil issue. On rear shocks, I always thought the Stratos Helix series was on to something with an oil damped shock suspended by a coil spring with an added air chamber. The coil handled all of the first 2/3 of the stroke, and the air chamber had a huge influence on the last 1/3 of the travel. Obviously the bottomout control was pretty awesome, and the rest of the shock worked fairly well. I would have loved to see Fox or one of the other biggies take this idea to the extreme with their technology.
It was good for some situations.

I used the helix pro on some of my linkage bikes, and holy cow it felt like crap, way too progressive. First of all, there was a progressively wound spring, secondly the progressive air assist shock that needed a certain psi or the oil would seep into the chamber and you'd loose damping, combine these with a progressive bike and you get a hell of a lot of progressiveness. On the other hand, if you wanted a coil shock for your trek Y bike or other falling-rate single pivot, they were the only logical choice for the longest time.

Not a bad shock, but only worked for certain bikes IMO. Outlasted my romic easily, I used it on the same bike that the romic came standard on, and due to how much the romic was back at the factory getting fixed, the stratos spent a lot more time on that bike.
 

·
Elitest thrill junkie
Joined
·
39,186 Posts
BanzaiRider said:
OK great. I took a picture tonight so tomorrow I should have time to check out this linkage software. Hope you don't need an engineering degree to use it! haha
Personally, I'd put a decent coil shock on there. I have a friend with a PUSHed RP3 on a 5" ventana, and I still spank him on the downhills because my 6" bike is so much plusher on the small ripples and stutter bumps at speed. Our bikes have low-pivots, both have a rocker-linkage like your bike, and there really shouldn't be that much difference in the stutter-bump performance between a 5" bike and a 6" bike, but because he's running an RP3 and I'm running a DHX coil, there's a pretty significant difference in how both ride on small bumps.

I think a marzocchi rocco, avalanche, ohlins, or the DHX-coil would make the most difference in this respect, but I'd say the first 3 would probably be the biggest difference. A lower cost option would be to find an old vanilla RC, and send it to Push and have them install their piston and set it up for you, that would be the most cost efficiant most likely.

As I said before, the only air shock that I've ridden that didn't feel like it was orientated for XC and was pretty darn push overall was the DHX-A, except that it seemed to go a little too far in this direction and sacrificed some other aspects of the ride.
 

·
noMAD man
Joined
·
12,227 Posts
That's why...

Jayem said:
It was good for some situations.

I used the helix pro on some of my linkage bikes, and holy cow it felt like crap, way too progressive. First of all, there was a progressively wound spring, secondly the progressive air assist shock that needed a certain psi or the oil would seep into the chamber and you'd loose damping, combine these with a progressive bike and you get a hell of a lot of progressiveness. On the other hand, if you wanted a coil shock for your trek Y bike or other falling-rate single pivot, they were the only logical choice for the longest time.

Not a bad shock, but only worked for certain bikes IMO. Outlasted my romic easily, I used it on the same bike that the romic came standard on, and due to how much the romic was back at the factory getting fixed, the stratos spent a lot more time on that bike.
I said it would be interesting to see Fox and some others give a new twist to the concept. I think it's the concept that has some merit. I just think the air and coil combination that makes your AM1 work so well could be applied to rear shocks...though I guess that Fox and others are heading in that direction with the boost chamber and SPV technology. Funny you mention an old Y-bike. I had that shock on one, and it was a good combo. It also worked quite well on an MRP equipped FSR Enduro which didn't make as much sense...what with the more progressive rate on the Enduro.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,663 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
Jayem said:
I think a marzocchi rocco, avalanche, ohlins, or the DHX-coil would make the most difference in this respect, but I'd say the first 3 would probably be the biggest difference. A lower cost option would be to find an old vanilla RC, and send it to Push and have them install their piston and set it up for you, that would be the most cost efficiant most likely.
From another post, it seems like Marzo has the 2nd edition of the Rocco to come out soon and that version will have the TST. If it works like the fork version then it's perfect...
 

·
Elitest thrill junkie
Joined
·
39,186 Posts
BanzaiRider said:
From another post, it seems like Marzo has the 2nd edition of the Rocco to come out soon and that version will have the TST. If it works like the fork version then it's perfect...
No, if you are going for maximum plushness I'd pass up the TST and go with the standard rocco. More chance of making your bike better IMO.
 
1 - 20 of 52 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