[crank-87]

Could someone verify the shock length for my used 5.5 that I just bought? I was told it was 7.5" eye to eye, but when I measure it, it measures slightly longer. It's a Swinger, and I want to upgrade to an RP3, so I need to know what length I need to get. Also, has anyone used a Float 130 on the 5.5??

 

[CoyoteRun]

Could someone verify the shock length for my used 5.5 that I just bought? I was told it was 7.5" eye to eye, but when I measure it, it measures slightly longer. It's a Swinger, and I want to upgrade to an RP3, so I need to know what length I need to get. Also, has anyone used a Float 130 on the 5.5??

7.5 x 2.0. Measure it from the middle of the Bushing to the MIddle Bushing.

You can find the numbers from Progressive.

http://progressivesuspension.com/5th-element-apps.html

Ran Talas 125. 36 now, and I got a Float 130 new to find time to put it on.

CoyoCoyo

 

[dreicha]

Put in fox shock eye to eye 7.875" (200mm) & Stroke 2.25" (57.2mm) for more rear travel (up to 6")

 

[Ole]

Don't.

Put in fox shock eye to eye 7.875" (200mm) & Stroke 2.25" (57.2mm) for more rear travel (up to 6")

If you do, you'll end up with the VPP-specific sag point at about 50% sag. Not good. Don't do it, get a 6.6 if you want more travel.

Ole.

 

[PizzaMan]

If you do, you'll end up with the VPP-specific sag point at about 50% sag. Not good. Don't do it, get a 6.6 if you want more travel.

Ole.

It sounds like a good idea to me. This would give the ultra low BB a good raise, would steepen the head angle (and so enable the option of running longer fork without messing withe the HA too much, and while were at it raise the BB even some more ), and , as a bonus, squeeze some more tavel from the bike.
I cant really see how the VPP sag is so specific. On the swinger the recommended sag is 25-35%.This is not so specific range. Running a longer shock with 35% sag would be fine I guess. Since I have a fox shock like that running around at home, I think maybe I'll give this a try

edited : on second thought, If I remmember correctly from the 4.5" famous threads, the frame itself cant handle more the 5.5" travel - the swingarm reaches the seat tube. Guess I'll try the longer shock anyway.

 

[Ole]

Think!

It sounds like a good idea to me. This would give the ultra low BB a good raise, would steepen the head angle (and so enable the option of running longer fork without messing withe the HA too much, and while were at it raise the BB even some more ), and , as a bonus, squeeze some more tavel from the bike.
I cant really see how the VPP sag is so specific. On the swinger the recommended sag is 25-35%.This is not so specific range. Running a longer shock with 35% sag would be fine I guess. Since I have a fox shock like that running around at home, I think maybe I'll give this a try

edited : on second thought, If I remmember correctly from the 4.5" famous threads, the frame itself cant handle more the 5.5" travel - the swingarm reaches the seat tube. Guess I'll try the longer shock anyway.

The 5.5 has a VPP rear end. VPP relies upon a specific sag range to give you the benefits of firmer pedaling when you need it. Since the shock is longer, you'll need to sag it a lot more to get to this sag point, I guess around 50% sag. Forget about the recommended sag printed on the shock, the shock manufacturer don't know diddy about what sag the 5.5 needs to function the best, it's just a guideline.

I run the 5.5 with a 150mm Pace fork, and it's perfect for agressive trail riding. The BB height makes the bike handle great, especially when drifting in rooty curves. No problem riding very rooty and rocky trails without clipping the pedals. Also great for going up or down steep stuff, you're more between the wheels than perched on top. Wouldn't want the BB any taller.

Ole.