Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 49 Posts

· Giant Robot
Joined
·
185 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Would it be possible to drop an HSCV cartridge in a 2005 AM-1? My AM-1 feels pretty good, but it's still not as plush as my 2004 Z-1 FR. I pretty much never use the various settings on the TST cartridge, as mostly just leave it in the most plush compression mode. Would it be possible to take the cartridge from the 04 Z-1 and put it in the AM-1? Would this affect travel (since Z-1 is 130mm and AM-1 is set at 150mm)? Thanks for any advice.
 

· mtbr platinum member
Joined
·
1,426 Posts
How old is the AM1? Have you checked the oil bath oil to see if it's nasty or the volume is inadequate?

It's very possible to make the swap. In fact, the 2005 Z1's are 150mm HSCV's, so if you want to stay at 150mm then you could buy a cartridge from Zoke (for an arm and a leg).

In terms of performance, IMHO, I think that you're making a lateral swap though, or even a downgrade. I've tried my buddy's Marathon XC versus my Marathon S (hscv) and I thought that my fork feels like his fork with one or two clicks of TST added (firmer than the DS setting).
 

· noMAD man
Joined
·
12,164 Posts
You'd do better...

Dr Thunder said:
Would it be possible to drop an HSCV cartridge in a 2005 AM-1? My AM-1 feels pretty good, but it's still not as plush as my 2004 Z-1 FR. I pretty much never use the various settings on the TST cartridge, as mostly just leave it in the most plush compression mode. Would it be possible to take the cartridge from the 04 Z-1 and put it in the AM-1? Would this affect travel (since Z-1 is 130mm and AM-1 is set at 150mm)? Thanks for any advice.
Selling that AM1 and getting a Z1FR1 (or whatever they're calling it for '06). You get great damping, 150mm of travel, and a 20mm axle. Your experience with the AM1, however, doesn't sound normal. Most people with that fork have been totally satisfied. Bikerx40 may be right about you possibly having a setup problem or even a malfunction in that fork...just doesn't sound right.
 

· customized
Joined
·
3,119 Posts
The 2004 Z150 HSCV cart will go in a 150mm All Mountain 1. The 2005 HSCV cart is much more expensive than the 2004. You will also need a 2004 top cap. The foot nuts are the same. The uppers on the 2004 forks are identical to the 2005.

If I remember right the 2004 Z150 cart was like $90 from Marzocchi. I think the 2005 Z1FR1 cart was about $130.

I upgraded my 2004 Z1FR to 150mm by buying a 2004 Z150 ETA and HSCV cart. I had to buy 2005 Z1FR1 springs so they would fit. The Z150 springs are too wide. I just used the caps I already had.
 

· noMAD man
Joined
·
12,164 Posts
Yeah, remember?

Severum said:
The 2004 Z150 HSCV cart will go in a 150mm All Mountain 1. The 2005 HSCV cart is much more expensive than the 2004. You will also need a 2004 top cap. The foot nuts are the same. The uppers on the 2004 forks are identical to the 2005.

If I remember right the 2004 Z150 cart was like $90 from Marzocchi. I think the 2005 Z1FR1 cart was about $130.

I upgraded my 2004 Z1FR to 150mm by buying a 2004 Z150 ETA and HSCV cart. I had to buy 2005 Z1FR1 springs so they would fit. The Z150 springs are too wide. I just used the caps I already had.
LOL!...We talked about this a good while back on the two Z150SLs that I modified. Is yours still doing the job? My two are still at work and performing great. I still wonder about the original poster's setup. The AM1 is an excellent fork. We just put one on a riding buddy's bike, and it's an impressive fork.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,663 Posts
Make sure you check you change your oil and check your air pressure in your AM1 before that swap. If you haven't changed the oil in your AM1 after the initial 10-20 hours of use then I'm sure this would make a big improvement, and make sure you fill it back with the right amount, just a bit too much and you loose some travel. I'm really surprised that your AM1 could feel less plush then a 2004 Z-1.

Dr Thunder said:
Would it be possible to drop an HSCV cartridge in a 2005 AM-1? My AM-1 feels pretty good, but it's still not as plush as my 2004 Z-1 FR. I pretty much never use the various settings on the TST cartridge, as mostly just leave it in the most plush compression mode. Would it be possible to take the cartridge from the 04 Z-1 and put it in the AM-1? Would this affect travel (since Z-1 is 130mm and AM-1 is set at 150mm)? Thanks for any advice.
 

· customized
Joined
·
3,119 Posts
TNC said:
LOL!...We talked about this a good while back on the two Z150SLs that I modified. Is yours still doing the job? My two are still at work and performing great. I still wonder about the original poster's setup. The AM1 is an excellent fork. We just put one on a riding buddy's bike, and it's an impressive fork.
The fork rides better than it did at 130mm. I got the fork in trade in a while back from Marzocchi. So with the added $200 I still was no where near retail. I used the other carts on some dirt jumpers to make Z1s. I love Marzocchi.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
710 Posts
I've always noticed Marzocchi forks that require air preload are not as smooth or plush on the small stuff as the pure coil forks with no preload.

I don't think it has anything to do with the damping.


Even Zoke dual coil forks get a little initial stiction when you add air to preload them. This does go away somwhat over time though...
 

· "El Whatever"
Joined
·
18,874 Posts
Robot Chicken said:
I've always noticed Marzocchi forks that require air preload are not as smooth or plush on the small stuff as the pure coil forks with no preload.

I don't think it has anything to do with the damping.

Even Zoke dual coil forks get a little initial stiction when you add air to preload them. This does go away somwhat over time though...
Not damping bro... lots of people have noticed that air assist makes this. Probably stiction for the "air ready" seals or just the spring rate of the air.
 

· carpe mañana
Joined
·
7,319 Posts
I switched from a 2004 Z1 FR to an AM1 (kept Z1 lowers) and the AM1 felt better from the get go (I got a slightly used one, so it was already broken in, and I also kept my broken in sliders). As Banzai suggested, you probably haven't changed your oil since you got the fork? It makes an amazing amount of difference. I am certain that just about any Z1 owner would be happy to swap the TST cart for their HSCV, as it is a significant downgrade for you and upgrade for them.

_MK
 

· customized
Joined
·
3,119 Posts
MK_ said:
I switched from a 2004 Z1 FR to an AM1 (kept Z1 lowers) and the AM1 felt better from the get go (I got a slightly used one, so it was already broken in, and I also kept my broken in sliders). As Banzai suggested, you probably haven't changed your oil since you got the fork? It makes an amazing amount of difference. I am certain that just about any Z1 owner would be happy to swap the TST cart for their HSCV, as it is a significant downgrade for you and upgrade for them._MK
I agree... the oil should be changed before the thought of changing the internals.

As for the TST vs HSCV arguement... I can't 100% agree. I am blown away by the TSTs adjustability... but don't think they feel better travel wise at speed then any fairly current zoke I have ridden with HSCV. For trail riding, the TST with it's platform like ability is the way to go.

I am led to believe that the TST effects the slow speed compression and the high speed dampening is very much like the straight hscv cart. I am willing to be informed otherwise though.
 

· Elitest thrill junkie
Joined
·
41,645 Posts
Severum said:
I agree... the oil should be changed before the thought of changing the internals.

As for the TST vs HSCV arguement... I can't 100% agree. I am blown away by the TSTs adjustability... but don't think they feel better travel wise at speed then any fairly current zoke I have ridden with HSCV. For trail riding, the TST with it's platform like ability is the way to go.

I am led to believe that the TST effects the slow speed compression and the high speed dampening is very much like the straight hscv cart. I am willing to be informed otherwise though.
They way that TST works is not like HSCV. HSCV has a piston with shims and the shims flex and oil is forced past them. TST has an orofice and the amount of compression damping is varied by the expansion of the bladder.
 

· "El Whatever"
Joined
·
18,874 Posts
Jayem said:
They way that TST works is not like HSCV. HSCV has a piston with shims and the shims flex and oil is forced past them. TST has an orofice and the amount of compression damping is varied by the expansion of the bladder.
That and simple blow-off valves and orifices....

Check the other thread about "TST Revealed"...
 

· customized
Joined
·
3,119 Posts
Jayem said:
They way that TST works is not like HSCV. HSCV has a piston with shims and the shims flex and oil is forced past them. TST has an orofice and the amount of compression damping is varied by the expansion of the bladder.
ok, inside the fork there is a difference in operation at high speeds, but outside the fork, it sounds like they act very alike. My intention was to describe how the fork felt to me on the trail, not how it worked inside. Gotta work on making sense.

I just read most of the revealed post... very interesting. Makes me spend less time pondering when the questions are already answered.
 

· "El Whatever"
Joined
·
18,874 Posts
Severum said:
ok, inside the fork there is a difference in operation at high speeds, but outside the fork, it sounds like they act very alike. My intention was to describe how the fork felt to me on the trail, not how it worked inside. Gotta work on making sense.

I just read most of the revealed post... very interesting. Makes me spend less time pondering when the questions are already answered.
You just said it very eloquently actually...

TST is tuned for trail job.

HSCV may be the best all-arounder.

Some TST with HSCV shims would be my wet-dreams come true. Zoke is not that far from getting it done. But it's gonna be expensive...

Basically... Fox and Manitou did it right the way they made their damper/cartrigde. Putting the compression damper on top and the rebound one below. Now Marzocchi followed. Manitou lawyers haven't realized about it, but it's pretty close to infringe Manitou TPC design... but as Angry Asian said... in patents, you just need things to be different enough, not completely different.
 

· Elitest thrill junkie
Joined
·
41,645 Posts
Warp2003 said:
Basically... Fox and Manitou did it right the way they made their damper/cartrigde. Putting the compression damper on top and the rebound one below. Now Marzocchi followed. Manitou lawyers haven't realized about it, but it's pretty close to infringe Manitou TPC design... but as Angry Asian said... in patents, you just need things to be different enough, not completely different.
No, if you've taken apart a TPC damper, you'd know that the TST is nothing like it. The principle of operation and how it works is obviously different.

You might be referring to the fact that there's a shaft with a piston, but if that's the criteria you are using, then every damper around is violating the Marzocchi XC-series forks and rockshox Mag-series, the first forks to use open-bath damping with pistons and shims.

The TPC system allowed for a fairly high oil volume compared to smaller sealed cartridges, allowed for the compression piston to be on top and attached to the top cap via a rod, and the bottom piston to be attached to the lowers via a foot nut, this is a good arrangement, and provides very good damping. The only fault is lubrication, and the fact that the TPC catridge has to be sealed inside of the fork. Other than that, TPC is a darn good system, and TPC+ just builds on it, and TPC+ takes it further in the same direction, which is away from TST and the bladder controlled compression.

But, I will have a direct HSCV/TST comparission. I just ordered an HSCV cartridge for my ZAM1 hybrid. I never use the AM or CL settings, and I prioritize high speed performance, and generally suspension performance (in contrast to pedaling performance). I've had good results with the HSCV catridges before, and I'm curious as to if I am getting any spiking at higher speeds with the TST, and I'll soon know for sure.
 

· Elitest thrill junkie
Joined
·
41,645 Posts
Warp2003 said:
Some TST with HSCV shims would be my wet-dreams come true. Zoke is not that far from getting it done. But it's gonna be expensive...
I agree. This is sort of where motorcycle forks have gone recently, and getting it all tuned right has caused some problems in the Mx world, but the 2nd generation and later "bladder" systems seem to have fixed the first problems that were incurred.

This type of system could truely offer great low speed and high speed performance. Not that there isn't this already in some respects, but IMO it can only get better, and this may be a way to do that.
 

· "El Whatever"
Joined
·
18,874 Posts
Jayem said:
No, if you've taken apart a TPC damper, you'd know that the TST is nothing like it. The principle of operation and how it works is obviously different.

You might be referring to the fact that there's a shaft with a piston, but if that's the criteria you are using, then every damper around is violating the Marzocchi XC-series forks and rockshox Mag-series, the first forks to use open-bath damping with pistons and shims.

The TPC system allowed for a fairly high oil volume compared to smaller sealed cartridges, allowed for the compression piston to be on top and attached to the top cap via a rod, and the bottom piston to be attached to the lowers via a foot nut, this is a good arrangement, and provides very good damping. The only fault is lubrication, and the fact that the TPC catridge has to be sealed inside of the fork. Other than that, TPC is a darn good system, and TPC+ just builds on it, and TPC+ takes it further in the same direction, which is away from TST and the bladder controlled compression.

But, I will have a direct HSCV/TST comparission. I just ordered an HSCV cartridge for my ZAM1 hybrid. I never use the AM or CL settings, and I prioritize high speed performance, and generally suspension performance (in contrast to pedaling performance). I've had good results with the HSCV catridges before, and I'm curious as to if I am getting any spiking at higher speeds with the TST, and I'll soon know for sure.
I know all of that... that's what I referred to with "in patents things just have to be different enough"... I know Manitou actually patented the TPC... not sure about the older Zokes and RS's.

If lubrication is a fault of TPC... why Marzocchi went that way with TST?? They also called Manitou crazy about their Post mounts for brakes...

OTOH, I'm happy to see some standarization.
 

· noMAD man
Joined
·
12,164 Posts
Damn tinkeritis!

Jayem said:
No, if you've taken apart a TPC damper, you'd know that the TST is nothing like it. The principle of operation and how it works is obviously different.

You might be referring to the fact that there's a shaft with a piston, but if that's the criteria you are using, then every damper around is violating the Marzocchi XC-series forks and rockshox Mag-series, the first forks to use open-bath damping with pistons and shims.

The TPC system allowed for a fairly high oil volume compared to smaller sealed cartridges, allowed for the compression piston to be on top and attached to the top cap via a rod, and the bottom piston to be attached to the lowers via a foot nut, this is a good arrangement, and provides very good damping. The only fault is lubrication, and the fact that the TPC catridge has to be sealed inside of the fork. Other than that, TPC is a darn good system, and TPC+ just builds on it, and TPC+ takes it further in the same direction, which is away from TST and the bladder controlled compression.

But, I will have a direct HSCV/TST comparission. I just ordered an HSCV cartridge for my ZAM1 hybrid. I never use the AM or CL settings, and I prioritize high speed performance, and generally suspension performance (in contrast to pedaling performance). I've had good results with the HSCV catridges before, and I'm curious as to if I am getting any spiking at higher speeds with the TST, and I'll soon know for sure.
Well Jayem...there you go again...LOL! That will be interesting to see any notable differences in the damping quality. Obviously I've had lots of riding time on various HSCV forks, but I've been wanting to test out that AM1 on one of our riding buddy's bikes that we installed recently...but the joker won't come out and ride with us lately. It's hard for me to believe that in those high speed, rocky sections that the AM1 is going to be notably better than a good, properly tuned HSCV fork...but I'm willing to be convinced. Let us know how this turns out.
 

· Elitest thrill junkie
Joined
·
41,645 Posts
Warp2003 said:
I know all of that... that's what I referred to with "in patents things just have to be different enough"... I know Manitou actually patented the TPC... not sure about the older Zokes and RS's.

If lubrication is a fault of TPC... why Marzocchi went that way with TST?? They also called Manitou crazy about their Post mounts for brakes...

OTOH, I'm happy to see some standarization.
Simple, manitou never really embraced "open bath" damping, and the most they ever got was a little oil sloshing down in there in the most recent models, and whether or not it really gets up on the legs I have to wonder about. Marzocchi on the other hand has had open bath damping and the legs get constant lube, which is the same with the AM1, the 40cc of oil in the TST leg lube the legs and bushings, but the real thing here is that marzocchi has been using seals that KEEP oil IN the fork, even under extreme pressures. This is where the other companies have not really been able to compete, and why the "air assist" effect of the marzocchis is such a good thing.

The "lubrication" fault of the TPC was that it had to be "microgreased" with the grease ports, and once the grease made it's way away from the surface it was trying to protect, it would just pack up somewhere in the fork and become inneffective. The "evil genius" seals came a little later, and that was a step in the right direction, but for the longest time they didn't run any oil for lube, relied on grease, and that grease system did not constantly slosh oil on the tubes as marzocchis "open bath" did.

The benefit (as you pointed out somewhere else I believe) is that the oil remains much more cleaner. When I changed the oil in my X-vert it was green, so it looked brand new after about a year of use. TPC also combined this with a pretty large oil volume (at least for a closed damper).

The other thing about open bath though is cooling, and more circulation should lead to more cooling and keeping certain parts from overheating, it may not be a huge concern, but it kind of works like the oil in our airplanes, it circulates to not only lubricate, but to cool and suspend particulates, so it serves a bunch of purposes.

This isn't supposed to be a marzocchi-love-fest post, but TPC+ did a lot of things right, Good volume of oil, the floating piston made it very supple initially (like a marzocchi) and it had a shimmed-piston setup (like the cartridge marzocchis, but just with a different arrangement). The only places where it lacked was in the usage of materials (plastic) and lubrication.

If you want to break down TPC even further, it's just a different arrangement of pistons as compared to a normal cartridge-fork, and cartridge forks were around for a long time before TPC, so TPC simply "arranged" the pistons differently, wasn't really working any differently, just looked different and arranged different.
 
1 - 20 of 49 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