[BLUR'b]

Hi guys

Just wondering if i could take your opinion (and anyone elses for that matter) on a fork and shock matter.

I'm running my Nomad C with a 2009 Lyrik coil u turn (with new MiCo damper just fitted under warranty) and a Fox RP23 on the rear. I'm about 200lb all kitted up adn ride over here in the UK, mainly on technical rocky trails. Over the past few weeks or so I've noticed the performance of my fork beginning to drop off (feels sluggish, like there's too much stiction / overly dampened on the compression cycle). I've sent the fork off to TF Tuned (renouned UK tuners of forks and shocks) and have spoken with them a great length today. They are claiming to have made the fork much more plush, so i'm looking forward to trying that tomorrow when i get it back, but interestingly they reckon that the geo of the frame is adversly affecting the performance of the fork. Basically, the problem as they see it is that with a slack head angle you unintensionally increase the internal loadings on the forks inner surfaces and that with a RP23 out back the rear is more complient than the front and in effect the bike then tries to pivot around the front whell axle!! I know, it confussed the hell out of me, but after a while i could see where they were coming from.

To remedy the above TF Tuned are suggesting that i swap out the RP23 in favour of an RC4 or even a Cane Creak Double Barrel (that they are retailing for £480 ($775) to increase the mid stroke support and thus steepen the head angle, therefore improving the performance of the fork.

Do you guys see a coil on the Nomad C as being the way forward? They can do me a Van R coil for way less $$ and the double barrel and RC4 are almost the same in price. I'd welcome your thoughts.

Thanks

 

[gticlay]

The first thing you should do is ride it post PUSH tune and see if you like how it rides now.

 

[TNC]

I'd definitely agree with Clay on trying the modded fork setup for a bit to see how things work out before perhaps spending money needlesly. I would have been interested to hear specifically what they did to the fork to obtain the plushness they claim they achieved. I'm not doubting that they probably improved some aspect of the fork and/or damper, but it would be nice to know the specifics.

No disrespect to TF, but I don't buy that geometry assessment they're alluding to. Yes, there is a mechanical influence to some degree with a more slack head angle as it pertains to stiction and bushing drag, but that influence is usually only somewhat of an issue in trying to set sag. Good bushing design with good stanchion coatings and proper lubrication will cause this to just about be a non-issue when under actual operation.

Plus, think about this. Your fork worked better when new when the bushing interface was less smooth than later when the bushing interface should be truly "broken in". Unless your stanchion/bushing lube was almost non-existent, your fork's problem sounds like it was damper related, and TF probably modded the damper in some fashion that yields more plushness to its performance.

On the coil vs air rear shock debate, I'm no help. My Nomad is the older version, and it seems to work well with any coil shock and quite well with the right air shock...like an ISX-6. Now on the gen 2 Nomads we've sold through the shop, they had the RP23. I think they feel harsh and unresponsive in stock setup. However, as I've said several times on this forum, this can be very preferential. I have a 6.5" travel bike to have some plushness "and" big hit capability. Other people want more efficiency over plushness. Different folks and strokes.

 

[mullet dew]

Total BS on the head angle inducing fork problems, Nomad has 67 degree HA, most new DH bikes have 63-64 degree HA. I have never heard of slack head angles causing fork bushing problems.