Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hi all

I'm not much of a suspension boffin to be honest, but I am terribly keen on running the Fox DH40's on the upcoming M3. Question is, is the RC option a whole lot more than the "privateer", slightly cheaper option?

I'm no tuner myself, I'd probably end up setting the weight/ sag and pretty much leavin it as it is. Will the RC option end up being THAT worth the money? How complicated will it get?

Kindly help a suspension rookie out, PLEASE! :D


Raj
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,027 Posts
Slayer77 said:
Get the RC option dude... I really makes a difference to be able to tune your fork on the fly for different courses. Having high and low speed compression adjustments can make a huge difference in your ride.

Thanks
On the fly? You can adjust the compression adjustments while barreling down a hill? Or does the DH 40 have some sort of XCremote adjuster crap? :D
 

·
Light, Strong and Long
Joined
·
194 Posts
Rc

Get the RC version, it really isn't that hard to set up compression. If you feel like the fork dives on high speed hits, like rocks, roots, big dips in the trail, small animals, add a little high speed compression to it to slow the fork down so it makes the bike ride stable. If the fork moves exeively on slight dips in the trail, or up and downs like woops, add a little low speed compression. Thats all there really is to it. The good thing is is that there is a very large tuning range on the 40 so you'll always be able to find a setting that works for the way you ride.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23,381 Posts
Completely Disaggree w/ everyone here

I totally disaggree with everyone here. Up until now, the Vanilla R was the best feeling fork that Fox made. The lockout and bells and whistles on the RLC model degraded the feel of the fork under compression, particularly after several high speed full travel hits. While the 40 uses a superior expansion bladder equipped moto-style closed cartridge damper, I will still contend that the basic R version, whose damping oil flows through fewer circuits and does not have to pass through any bleeder type valves will feel better. Look to moto, their technology is always about 20 years ahead of ours. What do they use for damping? Shim stacks, not valves. What does a basic R version fork from fox (Vanilla, 36, 40, whatever) use? Pure shim stacks. Save the money and know, not think, that you are getting a better fork with less compression spike.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Hmmmm

Ah.... It's quite interesting really with the new generation of hi tech forks that do seem to lack to so called feel. I've got a Reba Race on the Intense Tazer Hardtail at the moment, and I've gotta say that it's nowhere close to the Vanilla's (Not so much the RLT's), at the same weight!

Or it must be me not able to get the most out of it. They say a lousy carpenter blames his tools? :rolleyes: Hardware nowadays sure need Shimming/ Valving Pros to get it working right, at a price too! :D

Thanks a million fellas, I'm glad I've got some response over the matter. The issue is Fox is out of stock of the RC version (for the next 3-4 WEEKS!!!! ARGGHH) , and have the R's at rather limited quantities. Can't wait to ride the new bike, but, I wonder if it's worth the wait for the RC versions....

This might sound really stupid, but are the difference between the two lie merely in the cartiges?? Is there an option to so call upgrade from the R to the RC?
 

·
Innovate or die!
Joined
·
702 Posts
hehe

yeah but the cool thing about the 40 is boost valcing like the DHX. At no adjustments, it is fully open and just as plush as the R. When you turn them all the way in, the valving gets very progessive, and whith full high speed compression, I can't compress the fork more than 3 inches. Talk about instant bottom out control. It all depends if you can REALLY afford 300 more bucks. Also depends on how long your gonna keep that biotch.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
434 Posts
Freeride

What's the verdict for freeriding with the RC2? Ridden one and love it, and gonna get one some time soon, and wondering how well it will hold up to freeriding. I assume that it is fine, but just wanna hear it from yous guyz. Thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
160 Posts
Kracker said:
I totally disaggree with everyone here. Up until now, the Vanilla R was the best feeling fork that Fox made. The lockout and bells and whistles on the RLC model degraded the feel of the fork under compression, particularly after several high speed full travel hits. While the 40 uses a superior expansion bladder equipped moto-style closed cartridge damper, I will still contend that the basic R version, whose damping oil flows through fewer circuits and does not have to pass through any bleeder type valves will feel better. Look to moto, their technology is always about 20 years ahead of ours. What do they use for damping? Shim stacks, not valves. What does a basic R version fork from fox (Vanilla, 36, 40, whatever) use? Pure shim stacks. Save the money and know, not think, that you are getting a better fork with less compression spike.
And I totally disagree with this.
For once and forever we should stop comparing to MX. We're a different sport, with totally diffferent requirements from our suspension. We need to look at our needs, not MX needs.
MX bikes have following fundamental differences:
-weight is not so much of an issue
-they don't have pedal bob
the influence of the rider weight is much bigger on a 20 kilo bike than on a 90 kilo bike. So weight shifts, and setup play a far bigger role.
-we ride different tracks, at different speeds than MX.

If you wanna stick to MX tech: go ahead, I'll go for the VPP with Spv damping please. I know from experience it's faster.
My 99 M1 had the fox Vanilla RC shim stack you worship. Mechanically the suspension was very similar to MX: single pivot beam, with linkages to the suspension. Believe me: the M3 is a MUCH faster bike. and that's down to vpp and suspension progression.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23,381 Posts
DeJean said:
And I totally disagree with this.
For once and forever we should stop comparing to MX. We're a different sport, with totally diffferent requirements from our suspension. We need to look at our needs, not MX needs.
MX bikes have following fundamental differences:
-weight is not so much of an issue
-they don't have pedal bob
the influence of the rider weight is much bigger on a 20 kilo bike than on a 90 kilo bike. So weight shifts, and setup play a far bigger role.
-we ride different tracks, at different speeds than MX.

If you wanna stick to MX tech: go ahead, I'll go for the VPP with Spv damping please. I know from experience it's faster.
My 99 M1 had the fox Vanilla RC shim stack you worship. Mechanically the suspension was very similar to MX: single pivot beam, with linkages to the suspension. Believe me: the M3 is a MUCH faster bike. and that's down to vpp and suspension progression.
The reason I make the MX comparison is that generally, the trends we undergo happened in that world years ago, and while you're correct, we do not practice the same sport, we can learn a lot from what they do. Generally the amount of $$ and technology being put into developing mountain bike racing technology is a drop in the bucket next to say ... Honda's R&D budget. Mtbikes are stone age vehicles next to that kind of technology. Why else would it be that so many MTB shocks use a floating piston to compensate for fluid displacement caused by the damper shaft? The better, lower tech, lower FRICTION way to do it is with an expansion bladder. This is one of the reasons why the Fox 40 is such an advancement, is that is uses a sealed, bladder equipped, moto-style cartridge damper. Trickle down moto technology.

Your argument that we cannot learn anything from the MX set also falls flat on a few other points. For example, you mention pedal bob, and I'm assuming you are referencing attempts by shock manufacturers to filter out pedal bob. The term you're really looking for is "low speed compression damping", which is an attempt to resist low shaft speed suspension inputs. MX and other forms of motorized racing are exactly where we should look for this technology. Performance auto shocks have a lot of low speed compression damping in an attempt to combat body roll under hard cornering. Why should we reinvent the wheel just because our reason for resisting low shaft speed inputs is different? The same technology will work for both, and the stuff borrowed from MX etc. is much more developed than our archaic bicycle technology. We just have to adapt it, much as Fox is doing with their new lineup.

Talk to anybody who races both, and ask them how their MTB compares to their moto. See what they say.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,348 Posts
Kracker said:
The reason I make the MX comparison is that generally, the trends we undergo happened in that world years ago, and while you're correct, we do not practice the same sport, we can learn a lot from what they do. Generally the amount of $$ and technology being put into developing mountain bike racing technology is a drop in the bucket next to say ... Honda's R&D budget. Mtbikes are stone age vehicles next to that kind of technology. Why else would it be that so many MTB shocks use a floating piston to compensate for fluid displacement caused by the damper shaft? The better, lower tech, lower FRICTION way to do it is with an expansion bladder. This is one of the reasons why the Fox 40 is such an advancement, is that is uses a sealed, bladder equipped, moto-style cartridge damper. Trickle down moto technology.

Your argument that we cannot learn anything from the MX set also falls flat on a few other points. For example, you mention pedal bob, and I'm assuming you are referencing attempts by shock manufacturers to filter out pedal bob. The term you're really looking for is "low speed compression damping", which is an attempt to resist low shaft speed suspension inputs. MX and other forms of motorized racing are exactly where we should look for this technology. Performance auto shocks have a lot of low speed compression damping in an attempt to combat body roll under hard cornering. Why should we reinvent the wheel just because our reason for resisting low shaft speed inputs is different? The same technology will work for both, and the stuff borrowed from MX etc. is much more developed than our archaic bicycle technology. We just have to adapt it, much as Fox is doing with their new lineup.

Talk to anybody who races both, and ask them how their MTB compares to their moto. See what they say.
I agree with you that MX is where cutting edge two wheeled suspension is being developed. However, MX suspension doesn't work so good off-road. Desert racing is a lot closer to DH suspension. In the Desert most guys are still using more basic damping systems with good valving. That doesn't mean that the latest suspension tech can't be modified for off-road racing, it just hasn't come about yet. As far as bladder forks go, they are already old-school in MX. The best stuff out now is twin-chamber Showas, that Kayaba has started to copy. I guess Fox has to start over. :D
 
1 - 16 of 16 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