Just reread your post here and then looked at the FF piston kit. I noticed that you said all tuning via the base valve, which I...
Just reread your post here and then looked at the FF piston kit. I noticed that you said all tuning via the base valve, which I wasn't sure if that was a joke. On their site on picture looks like they're using a belleville washer on the main piston. Is this correct? Is most of the valving changes at the base valve? I got a Ohlins tuned through them and they actually told me they removed the belleville washer in favor of a traditional shim stack. I know that architecture is different between the shocks but I was surprised to see they may have gone this direction but maybe its easier for at home tuners to only build a single stack and not have any issues balance between mid and base valves.
No, definitely not just tuning via the base valve. But it is modified from stock for all the options being tested. The stock base valve setup on...
No, definitely not just tuning via the base valve. But it is modified from stock for all the options being tested.
The stock base valve setup on the Bomber CR/Fox Van is quite stiff and uses belleville washers. All three tuning options (Avalanche Racing, Fluid Focus, and Shockcraft) remove the belleville washers and convert the base valve to a more traditional shim stack. All three use different base valve tunes, and Avalanche uses a different needle for the bleed (LSC clicker) as well.
Fluid Focus and Shockcraft both use a different main piston, while Avalanche uses the stock main piston. All three use different compression and rebound shim stacks that correspond to the base valve tune they spec. They all use standard shims, no belleville washers anywhere.
Just about ready to start testing shocks. The Vorsprung Telum was run to get a DAQ baseline and as a means of getting the fork setup dialed. This test bike is currently working quite well, the plan is to just swap in each of the three different shocks and keep the fork in it's current state. Also added a shorter track to the test procedure capable of 10+ runs/day. More data, more better!
What a thorough testing protocol!
I'm on Avy front and rear and really pleased with the service and performance so will be sticking with it; but will acknowledge that I don't have the time & $ to test all of these options. Not many people do, so we have to rely on various online comparisons/ opinion/ reviews/ etc.
The MY26 DHX2 is fundamentally a good design, but it will also need tinkering to work properly. The compression adjuster has next to no effect. See e.g. Fluid Focuses video where they have a MY26 DHX2 on the dyno.
I think if you are expected to land in the 300-500lbs/in range, the Shockcraft kit is going to be your best bet. Single grade tunes, no tune swapping for each ~75lbs/in increment.
I like my Shockcraft Van. Guess it depends on what you expect of a shock, but as far as I am concerned, it doesn't feel "magic" in compression, rather very controlled or "muted". I love the rebound. Absolutely predictable, no kicking. Running it with a 500lbs/in coil in my DH bike.
The MY26 DHX2 is fundamentally a good design, but it will also need tinkering to work properly. The compression adjuster has next to no effect. See...
The MY26 DHX2 is fundamentally a good design, but it will also need tinkering to work properly. The compression adjuster has next to no effect. See e.g. Fluid Focuses video where they have a MY26 DHX2 on the dyno.
I think if you are expected to land in the 300-500lbs/in range, the Shockcraft kit is going to be your best bet. Single grade tunes, no tune swapping for each ~75lbs/in increment.
I like my Shockcraft Van. Guess it depends on what you expect of a shock, but as far as I am concerned, it doesn't feel "magic" in compression, rather very controlled or "muted". I love the rebound. Absolutely predictable, no kicking. Running it with a 500lbs/in coil in my DH bike.
If this is true, then the MY26 DHX2 might have the same dad as my old GRIP2 Fox 40 that has those highly decorative compression adjusters. I'm getting a feeling that every year, the only flow Fox products actually have takes them further away from the customer.
Have you ridden the Shockcraft kit yet? How does it compare to the FF?
Deciding between these two options currently or just going with a 26 DHX2
Agreed that the Shockcraft Bomber CR kit is more plug and play if you are in the spring rate range (300#-500#). In general terms the feel is more controlled and muted compared to the FF kit. Still very sensitive, but just less "free" feeling. Possibly the result of it being fully checked where the FF kit still has a bleed.
The Fluid Focus kit includes a range of compression and rebound tunes, and is great if you want to experiment with tuning and open the shock up multiple times. In regards to rebound, I have tried to eliminate the top out clunk in this shock (205x65) as well as a 250x75 Bomber CR multiple times with no success. Fluid Focus suggests adding face shims until the top out is gone, I have added shims to the point where the rebound clicker was almost fully open and the clunk was still there. It's not horrible, similar to Ohlins coil shocks that don't have the newer hydraulic top out. Bit I know some people can't stand it.
PSA for the current Fox DHX2, there have been multiple cases of the damper body coming loose on the trunnion version of these. There was one at a race just last weekend. Possibly an issue with production as they are typically thread locked and have a high torque spec. Just a heads up if you have one. It can present initially as a clunk, like a loose shock bolt.
This spring/early summer has been much busier than anticipated, but I have been pecking away as I can with the coil comparison. The local lift just started running this week and will help greatly with timing runs.
The MY26 DHX2 is fundamentally a good design, but it will also need tinkering to work properly. The compression adjuster has next to no effect. See...
The MY26 DHX2 is fundamentally a good design, but it will also need tinkering to work properly. The compression adjuster has next to no effect. See e.g. Fluid Focuses video where they have a MY26 DHX2 on the dyno.
I think if you are expected to land in the 300-500lbs/in range, the Shockcraft kit is going to be your best bet. Single grade tunes, no tune swapping for each ~75lbs/in increment.
I like my Shockcraft Van. Guess it depends on what you expect of a shock, but as far as I am concerned, it doesn't feel "magic" in compression, rather very controlled or "muted". I love the rebound. Absolutely predictable, no kicking. Running it with a 500lbs/in coil in my DH bike.
If this is true, then the MY26 DHX2 might have the same dad as my old GRIP2 Fox 40 that has those highly decorative compression adjusters...
If this is true, then the MY26 DHX2 might have the same dad as my old GRIP2 Fox 40 that has those highly decorative compression adjusters. I'm getting a feeling that every year, the only flow Fox products actually have takes them further away from the customer.
I think it's just a byproduct of going to a monotube with a shimmed base valve, less adjustment range than a twin-tube. The base valve needs to be matched properly with the main piston tunes. New aftermarket 26/27 DHX2 comes with CL70 compression tune, which is middle of the road. Most of the factory OE tunes I have seen seem to be softer. You can definitely feel more oil moving through the system, than the older twin tube DHX2.
Agreed that the Shockcraft Bomber CR kit is more plug and play if you are in the spring rate range (300#-500#). In general terms the feel...
Agreed that the Shockcraft Bomber CR kit is more plug and play if you are in the spring rate range (300#-500#). In general terms the feel is more controlled and muted compared to the FF kit. Still very sensitive, but just less "free" feeling. Possibly the result of it being fully checked where the FF kit still has a bleed.
The Fluid Focus kit includes a range of compression and rebound tunes, and is great if you want to experiment with tuning and open the shock up multiple times. In regards to rebound, I have tried to eliminate the top out clunk in this shock (205x65) as well as a 250x75 Bomber CR multiple times with no success. Fluid Focus suggests adding face shims until the top out is gone, I have added shims to the point where the rebound clicker was almost fully open and the clunk was still there. It's not horrible, similar to Ohlins coil shocks that don't have the newer hydraulic top out. Bit I know some people can't stand it.
PSA for the current Fox DHX2, there have been multiple cases of the damper body coming loose on the trunnion version of these. There was one at a race just last weekend. Possibly an issue with production as they are typically thread locked and have a high torque spec. Just a heads up if you have one. It can present initially as a clunk, like a loose shock bolt.
This spring/early summer has been much busier than anticipated, but I have been pecking away as I can with the coil comparison. The local lift just started running this week and will help greatly with timing runs.
Trunnion shocks unscrewing is normally a misaligned frame - its possible they werent quite torqued enough, but that seems pretty rare these days and I know Fox revised their torque figures and loctite spec a few years ago for that specific reason.
Also with the top out issues can you tell if the conpression shims are sitting flat on yhe piston face? That kind of thing often comes from the clamp shim being to small for the port design and the shims pinch upwards when torqued down, effectively disabling the hydraulic top out
The MY26 DHX2 is fundamentally a good design, but it will also need tinkering to work properly. The compression adjuster has next to no effect. See...
The MY26 DHX2 is fundamentally a good design, but it will also need tinkering to work properly. The compression adjuster has next to no effect. See e.g. Fluid Focuses video where they have a MY26 DHX2 on the dyno.
I think if you are expected to land in the 300-500lbs/in range, the Shockcraft kit is going to be your best bet. Single grade tunes, no tune swapping for each ~75lbs/in increment.
I like my Shockcraft Van. Guess it depends on what you expect of a shock, but as far as I am concerned, it doesn't feel "magic" in compression, rather very controlled or "muted". I love the rebound. Absolutely predictable, no kicking. Running it with a 500lbs/in coil in my DH bike.
If this is true, then the MY26 DHX2 might have the same dad as my old GRIP2 Fox 40 that has those highly decorative compression adjusters...
If this is true, then the MY26 DHX2 might have the same dad as my old GRIP2 Fox 40 that has those highly decorative compression adjusters. I'm getting a feeling that every year, the only flow Fox products actually have takes them further away from the customer.
I think it's just a byproduct of going to a monotube with a shimmed base valve, less adjustment range than a twin-tube. The base valve needs...
I think it's just a byproduct of going to a monotube with a shimmed base valve, less adjustment range than a twin-tube. The base valve needs to be matched properly with the main piston tunes. New aftermarket 26/27 DHX2 comes with CL70 compression tune, which is middle of the road. Most of the factory OE tunes I have seen seem to be softer. You can definitely feel more oil moving through the system, than the older twin tube DHX2.
Yeah its another weird tuning choice from Fox, they're a big deal about "pressure blanced" tuning this generation, but the tunes mostly have zero adjustment range which makes that all kind of pointless.....
If this is true, then the MY26 DHX2 might have the same dad as my old GRIP2 Fox 40 that has those highly decorative compression adjusters...
If this is true, then the MY26 DHX2 might have the same dad as my old GRIP2 Fox 40 that has those highly decorative compression adjusters. I'm getting a feeling that every year, the only flow Fox products actually have takes them further away from the customer.
I think it's just a byproduct of going to a monotube with a shimmed base valve, less adjustment range than a twin-tube. The base valve needs...
I think it's just a byproduct of going to a monotube with a shimmed base valve, less adjustment range than a twin-tube. The base valve needs to be matched properly with the main piston tunes. New aftermarket 26/27 DHX2 comes with CL70 compression tune, which is middle of the road. Most of the factory OE tunes I have seen seem to be softer. You can definitely feel more oil moving through the system, than the older twin tube DHX2.
Yeah its another weird tuning choice from Fox, they're a big deal about "pressure blanced" tuning this generation, but the tunes mostly have zero adjustment range...
Yeah its another weird tuning choice from Fox, they're a big deal about "pressure blanced" tuning this generation, but the tunes mostly have zero adjustment range which makes that all kind of pointless.....
My thesis is the vast majority are going to be OE sales, where bike company chooses a specific tune for the model. Vast majority of customers will decide to buy based on "aspirational" features like HSC and LSC adjust, but won't actually use those adjustments or will use recommended settings. My guess is aftermarket and riders that will tune/adjust are in the small minority. Correct if I am wrong here, but it looks like the current DHX2/X2 is a good tuning platform.
Also I think the whole pressure balanced thing is marketing just taking a basic concept and selling it as a feature.
My thesis is the vast majority are going to be OE sales, where bike company chooses a specific tune for the model. Vast majority of customers...
My thesis is the vast majority are going to be OE sales, where bike company chooses a specific tune for the model. Vast majority of customers will decide to buy based on "aspirational" features like HSC and LSC adjust, but won't actually use those adjustments or will use recommended settings. My guess is aftermarket and riders that will tune/adjust are in the small minority. Correct if I am wrong here, but it looks like the current DHX2/X2 is a good tuning platform.
Also I think the whole pressure balanced thing is marketing just taking a basic concept and selling it as a feature.
The stock base valve assemblies simply don't do much. It would seem the issue wasn't with the stacks themselves but with the adjuster assembly. As per part list, the base valve stacks are regular tapered stacks. For example, WPS replace the HSC clamping plate.
I think it's just a byproduct of going to a monotube with a shimmed base valve, less adjustment range than a twin-tube. The base valve needs...
I think it's just a byproduct of going to a monotube with a shimmed base valve, less adjustment range than a twin-tube. The base valve needs to be matched properly with the main piston tunes. New aftermarket 26/27 DHX2 comes with CL70 compression tune, which is middle of the road. Most of the factory OE tunes I have seen seem to be softer. You can definitely feel more oil moving through the system, than the older twin tube DHX2.
Yeah its another weird tuning choice from Fox, they're a big deal about "pressure blanced" tuning this generation, but the tunes mostly have zero adjustment range...
Yeah its another weird tuning choice from Fox, they're a big deal about "pressure blanced" tuning this generation, but the tunes mostly have zero adjustment range which makes that all kind of pointless.....
My thesis is the vast majority are going to be OE sales, where bike company chooses a specific tune for the model. Vast majority of customers...
My thesis is the vast majority are going to be OE sales, where bike company chooses a specific tune for the model. Vast majority of customers will decide to buy based on "aspirational" features like HSC and LSC adjust, but won't actually use those adjustments or will use recommended settings. My guess is aftermarket and riders that will tune/adjust are in the small minority. Correct if I am wrong here, but it looks like the current DHX2/X2 is a good tuning platform.
Also I think the whole pressure balanced thing is marketing just taking a basic concept and selling it as a feature.
Yup, at this stage I feel like Fox adds HSC & HSR just to add a couple more lines to the spec sheet - the HSC effectively does nothing and while the HSR technically works, they are extremely sensitive to assembly tolerances, and IMO is not needed because a) LSR adjusters usually have a wide range anyway and b) rebound shim stacks are probably the single easiest valving option you can give to bike companies/service centres to cover rider weights outside of the stock tune. eg 1 tune could quite serviceably cover 150-280 psi or 300-550lb (as a general example) and you have options for outside that. Much easier and more consistent than relying on an HSR adjuster (which still has several valving options anyway??!!) It's not perfect but neither is a non-functional HSC adjuster!
And yes, pressure balancing is a well understood concept in damper design - it's nothing new but often if you wanted at least the option of opening the compression right out for a plush feel you needed high reservoir pressure. Or the alternative was excessively stiff base valves like the old X2 shock. I think the new X2's look like a better tuning platform - I haven't really explored them too much yet but it looks like the only drawback is the HSC adjuster clamp is too small to have much effect. Otherwise the basic architecture looks pretty solid
They do do lots of different rebound tunes and compression tunes for the midvalve with the current Float X and DHX. In the current market, they are pretty solid recommendations imho. Quite happy with my MY25 DHX. And even the older Float X and DHX feel pretty okay once the base valve is no longer absurdly hard.
Maybe at some point they figure out the HSC adjusters. If one can do without the HSR, there is the performance spec for that. Would gladly get one of those MY26+ DHX2/Float X2 Performance.
Yeah its another weird tuning choice from Fox, they're a big deal about "pressure blanced" tuning this generation, but the tunes mostly have zero adjustment range...
Yeah its another weird tuning choice from Fox, they're a big deal about "pressure blanced" tuning this generation, but the tunes mostly have zero adjustment range which makes that all kind of pointless.....
My thesis is the vast majority are going to be OE sales, where bike company chooses a specific tune for the model. Vast majority of customers...
My thesis is the vast majority are going to be OE sales, where bike company chooses a specific tune for the model. Vast majority of customers will decide to buy based on "aspirational" features like HSC and LSC adjust, but won't actually use those adjustments or will use recommended settings. My guess is aftermarket and riders that will tune/adjust are in the small minority. Correct if I am wrong here, but it looks like the current DHX2/X2 is a good tuning platform.
Also I think the whole pressure balanced thing is marketing just taking a basic concept and selling it as a feature.
Yup, at this stage I feel like Fox adds HSC & HSR just to add a couple more lines to the spec sheet - the HSC...
Yup, at this stage I feel like Fox adds HSC & HSR just to add a couple more lines to the spec sheet - the HSC effectively does nothing and while the HSR technically works, they are extremely sensitive to assembly tolerances, and IMO is not needed because a) LSR adjusters usually have a wide range anyway and b) rebound shim stacks are probably the single easiest valving option you can give to bike companies/service centres to cover rider weights outside of the stock tune. eg 1 tune could quite serviceably cover 150-280 psi or 300-550lb (as a general example) and you have options for outside that. Much easier and more consistent than relying on an HSR adjuster (which still has several valving options anyway??!!) It's not perfect but neither is a non-functional HSC adjuster!
And yes, pressure balancing is a well understood concept in damper design - it's nothing new but often if you wanted at least the option of opening the compression right out for a plush feel you needed high reservoir pressure. Or the alternative was excessively stiff base valves like the old X2 shock. I think the new X2's look like a better tuning platform - I haven't really explored them too much yet but it looks like the only drawback is the HSC adjuster clamp is too small to have much effect. Otherwise the basic architecture looks pretty solid
Interesting tidbit. I ran into the Norco boys doing some testing, the engineer that handles a lot of the data acquisition said that LSR doesn't show in the data and its rider preference. Apparently HSR tune is the most critical.
Agreed, that seems incorrect. When I ran a Motion Instruments system, just changing LSR would make noticeable differences in things like dynamic sag.
Yeah it sounds a little mixed up - HSR is fairly important but its probably the easiest to set IMO since it mostly correlates to spring rate, and is maybe the one metric is more consistent to measure with data since peak speeds have limit because the spring is the only thing extending the wheel. So thats pretty easy to see in data, but also the easiest to calculate in advance.
I would agree the LSR is more determined by the rider preference but that doesn't mean you can't see it in the data, its just the peak/average values are going to vary a lot more between rider and frame.
Yeah it sounds a little mixed up - HSR is fairly important but its probably the easiest to set IMO since it mostly correlates to spring...
Yeah it sounds a little mixed up - HSR is fairly important but its probably the easiest to set IMO since it mostly correlates to spring rate, and is maybe the one metric is more consistent to measure with data since peak speeds have limit because the spring is the only thing extending the wheel. So thats pretty easy to see in data, but also the easiest to calculate in advance.
I would agree the LSR is more determined by the rider preference but that doesn't mean you can't see it in the data, its just the peak/average values are going to vary a lot more between rider and frame.
So I might be too binary in my language, but he was very clear that HSR was the more important variable. Norco is one of the few teams that is serious with data acquisition, they run a their own software stack and this year they have a full-time data person on the team.
If you watch the PB La Thuile interview with Jordi. His opinion is that most teams can’t use data acquisition effectively and it’s a distraction for a lot of the riders. So what chance do most of us laymen have with it.
Apparently teams like Frameworks are running crazy fast rebound. I am seeing faster tunes on the labels. I am sure you can choke your rebound with too much LSR, like Dak was claiming, and cause too much dynamic sag.
When I spent some time running MI on a couple of my bikes a couple years ago, I found it helpful to get in tune with what adjustments produced what feeling on the bike. I think there's value to that for technically-minded everyday riders, and teams who've got someone (mechanic or rider) to look at the data and see if it matches what the rider is saying.
I think one thing that Jordi is missing is that a lot of these teams don't have notebooks full of settings that they've used on each track over the years. Those that do could likely reduce the amount of data watching. But younger teams and/or younger riders are at a disadvantage in that regard, and data can help level the field in that regard. Especially when their suspension sponsor updates the product or they change brands, it can be used to re-establish a baseline setting.
Yeah it sounds a little mixed up - HSR is fairly important but its probably the easiest to set IMO since it mostly correlates to spring...
Yeah it sounds a little mixed up - HSR is fairly important but its probably the easiest to set IMO since it mostly correlates to spring rate, and is maybe the one metric is more consistent to measure with data since peak speeds have limit because the spring is the only thing extending the wheel. So thats pretty easy to see in data, but also the easiest to calculate in advance.
I would agree the LSR is more determined by the rider preference but that doesn't mean you can't see it in the data, its just the peak/average values are going to vary a lot more between rider and frame.
So I might be too binary in my language, but he was very clear that HSR was the more important variable. Norco is one of the...
So I might be too binary in my language, but he was very clear that HSR was the more important variable. Norco is one of the few teams that is serious with data acquisition, they run a their own software stack and this year they have a full-time data person on the team.
If you watch the PB La Thuile interview with Jordi. His opinion is that most teams can’t use data acquisition effectively and it’s a distraction for a lot of the riders. So what chance do most of us laymen have with it.
Apparently teams like Frameworks are running crazy fast rebound. I am seeing faster tunes on the labels. I am sure you can choke your rebound with too much LSR, like Dak was claiming, and cause too much dynamic sag.
So a few things:
First off, I feel like any intermediate or above mountain biker could benefit from data as I do believe there's just basic performance numbers that are decent enough targets that are worth aiming for. Even just getting the front and the rear to behave in a "mostly" balanced way would benefit so many riders. Putting data on and targeting numbers can be eye opening to riders who have never ever felt what good suspension is capable of, I've slapped an old MI kit on various peoples bikes and after a run or two they are in a much closer wheelhouse then they could have ever gotten to without it.
Second, rebound is odd. There appears to be this performance troth between slow and controlled and then fast enough to be comfortable again, and getting people through that zone without data is extremely hard. It's like there's this magical window around 2 m/s at the axle where things feel controlled again, but between 1.5 m/s and 2 m/s everything feels TERRIBLE. So whatever it takes (HSC or LSC) to get to that number consistently throughout the stroke is going to be the most important adjuster. The "important" adjuster is going to depend fairly heavily on overall spring/frame progression.
Third, over analysis paralysis is a real thing. This is probably the biggest drawback to data and relying on it too much, as the suspension data is only one part of an overall complex and chaotic dynamic that is the sprung mass meat based pilot on top of everything. I think people want data to be a panacea, but at the end of the day the data is retrospective to how something got ridden and not how it will ride. For instance, I had a day on a BYB kit and at a certain point in time the changes we started making stopped really showing up in the data as my riding/position on the bike started driving how the suspension was interacting. We got to a fantastic place, and the bike feels dramatically better than it did when we started, but data wise the actual values (dynamic sag, shaft speeds, ect) were pretty close to where we started the day. We started needing to go on feel and just checked the data to see if anything seemed off.
Yes, it is an Edge running at 160mm.
Short review of my DVO Jade X Prime with Sprindex coil: immaculate.
The suspense is unbearable ☔️
What a thorough testing protocol!
I'm on Avy front and rear and really pleased with the service and performance so will be sticking with it; but will acknowledge that I don't have the time & $ to test all of these options. Not many people do, so we have to rely on various online comparisons/ opinion/ reviews/ etc.
Thanks for doing it!
Shockcraft Bomber CR kit teaser.
Converts all shims to 8mm ID with a new piston bolt for the base valve as well.
Have you ridden the Shockcraft kit yet? How does it compare to the FF?
Deciding between these two options currently or just going with a 26 DHX2
The MY26 DHX2 is fundamentally a good design, but it will also need tinkering to work properly. The compression adjuster has next to no effect. See e.g. Fluid Focuses video where they have a MY26 DHX2 on the dyno.
I think if you are expected to land in the 300-500lbs/in range, the Shockcraft kit is going to be your best bet. Single grade tunes, no tune swapping for each ~75lbs/in increment.
I like my Shockcraft Van. Guess it depends on what you expect of a shock, but as far as I am concerned, it doesn't feel "magic" in compression, rather very controlled or "muted". I love the rebound. Absolutely predictable, no kicking. Running it with a 500lbs/in coil in my DH bike.
If this is true, then the MY26 DHX2 might have the same dad as my old GRIP2 Fox 40 that has those highly decorative compression adjusters. I'm getting a feeling that every year, the only flow Fox products actually have takes them further away from the customer.
Agreed that the Shockcraft Bomber CR kit is more plug and play if you are in the spring rate range (300#-500#). In general terms the feel is more controlled and muted compared to the FF kit. Still very sensitive, but just less "free" feeling. Possibly the result of it being fully checked where the FF kit still has a bleed.
The Fluid Focus kit includes a range of compression and rebound tunes, and is great if you want to experiment with tuning and open the shock up multiple times. In regards to rebound, I have tried to eliminate the top out clunk in this shock (205x65) as well as a 250x75 Bomber CR multiple times with no success. Fluid Focus suggests adding face shims until the top out is gone, I have added shims to the point where the rebound clicker was almost fully open and the clunk was still there. It's not horrible, similar to Ohlins coil shocks that don't have the newer hydraulic top out. Bit I know some people can't stand it.
PSA for the current Fox DHX2, there have been multiple cases of the damper body coming loose on the trunnion version of these. There was one at a race just last weekend. Possibly an issue with production as they are typically thread locked and have a high torque spec. Just a heads up if you have one. It can present initially as a clunk, like a loose shock bolt.
This spring/early summer has been much busier than anticipated, but I have been pecking away as I can with the coil comparison. The local lift just started running this week and will help greatly with timing runs.
I think it's just a byproduct of going to a monotube with a shimmed base valve, less adjustment range than a twin-tube. The base valve needs to be matched properly with the main piston tunes. New aftermarket 26/27 DHX2 comes with CL70 compression tune, which is middle of the road. Most of the factory OE tunes I have seen seem to be softer. You can definitely feel more oil moving through the system, than the older twin tube DHX2.
Trunnion shocks unscrewing is normally a misaligned frame - its possible they werent quite torqued enough, but that seems pretty rare these days and I know Fox revised their torque figures and loctite spec a few years ago for that specific reason.
Also with the top out issues can you tell if the conpression shims are sitting flat on yhe piston face? That kind of thing often comes from the clamp shim being to small for the port design and the shims pinch upwards when torqued down, effectively disabling the hydraulic top out
Yeah its another weird tuning choice from Fox, they're a big deal about "pressure blanced" tuning this generation, but the tunes mostly have zero adjustment range which makes that all kind of pointless.....
My thesis is the vast majority are going to be OE sales, where bike company chooses a specific tune for the model. Vast majority of customers will decide to buy based on "aspirational" features like HSC and LSC adjust, but won't actually use those adjustments or will use recommended settings. My guess is aftermarket and riders that will tune/adjust are in the small minority. Correct if I am wrong here, but it looks like the current DHX2/X2 is a good tuning platform.
Also I think the whole pressure balanced thing is marketing just taking a basic concept and selling it as a feature.
The stock base valve assemblies simply don't do much. It would seem the issue wasn't with the stacks themselves but with the adjuster assembly. As per part list, the base valve stacks are regular tapered stacks. For example, WPS replace the HSC clamping plate.
Yup, at this stage I feel like Fox adds HSC & HSR just to add a couple more lines to the spec sheet - the HSC effectively does nothing and while the HSR technically works, they are extremely sensitive to assembly tolerances, and IMO is not needed because a) LSR adjusters usually have a wide range anyway and b) rebound shim stacks are probably the single easiest valving option you can give to bike companies/service centres to cover rider weights outside of the stock tune. eg 1 tune could quite serviceably cover 150-280 psi or 300-550lb (as a general example) and you have options for outside that. Much easier and more consistent than relying on an HSR adjuster (which still has several valving options anyway??!!) It's not perfect but neither is a non-functional HSC adjuster!
And yes, pressure balancing is a well understood concept in damper design - it's nothing new but often if you wanted at least the option of opening the compression right out for a plush feel you needed high reservoir pressure. Or the alternative was excessively stiff base valves like the old X2 shock. I think the new X2's look like a better tuning platform - I haven't really explored them too much yet but it looks like the only drawback is the HSC adjuster clamp is too small to have much effect. Otherwise the basic architecture looks pretty solid
They do do lots of different rebound tunes and compression tunes for the midvalve with the current Float X and DHX. In the current market, they are pretty solid recommendations imho. Quite happy with my MY25 DHX. And even the older Float X and DHX feel pretty okay once the base valve is no longer absurdly hard.
Maybe at some point they figure out the HSC adjusters. If one can do without the HSR, there is the performance spec for that. Would gladly get one of those MY26+ DHX2/Float X2 Performance.
Interesting tidbit. I ran into the Norco boys doing some testing, the engineer that handles a lot of the data acquisition said that LSR doesn't show in the data and its rider preference. Apparently HSR tune is the most critical.
LSR doesn't show in the data? Are you sure you remember that correctly?
Agreed, that seems incorrect. When I ran a Motion Instruments system, just changing LSR would make noticeable differences in things like dynamic sag.
Yeah it sounds a little mixed up - HSR is fairly important but its probably the easiest to set IMO since it mostly correlates to spring rate, and is maybe the one metric is more consistent to measure with data since peak speeds have limit because the spring is the only thing extending the wheel. So thats pretty easy to see in data, but also the easiest to calculate in advance.
I would agree the LSR is more determined by the rider preference but that doesn't mean you can't see it in the data, its just the peak/average values are going to vary a lot more between rider and frame.
So I might be too binary in my language, but he was very clear that HSR was the more important variable. Norco is one of the few teams that is serious with data acquisition, they run a their own software stack and this year they have a full-time data person on the team.
If you watch the PB La Thuile interview with Jordi. His opinion is that most teams can’t use data acquisition effectively and it’s a distraction for a lot of the riders. So what chance do most of us laymen have with it.
Apparently teams like Frameworks are running crazy fast rebound. I am seeing faster tunes on the labels. I am sure you can choke your rebound with too much LSR, like Dak was claiming, and cause too much dynamic sag.
When I spent some time running MI on a couple of my bikes a couple years ago, I found it helpful to get in tune with what adjustments produced what feeling on the bike. I think there's value to that for technically-minded everyday riders, and teams who've got someone (mechanic or rider) to look at the data and see if it matches what the rider is saying.
I think one thing that Jordi is missing is that a lot of these teams don't have notebooks full of settings that they've used on each track over the years. Those that do could likely reduce the amount of data watching. But younger teams and/or younger riders are at a disadvantage in that regard, and data can help level the field in that regard. Especially when their suspension sponsor updates the product or they change brands, it can be used to re-establish a baseline setting.
So a few things:
First off, I feel like any intermediate or above mountain biker could benefit from data as I do believe there's just basic performance numbers that are decent enough targets that are worth aiming for. Even just getting the front and the rear to behave in a "mostly" balanced way would benefit so many riders. Putting data on and targeting numbers can be eye opening to riders who have never ever felt what good suspension is capable of, I've slapped an old MI kit on various peoples bikes and after a run or two they are in a much closer wheelhouse then they could have ever gotten to without it.
Second, rebound is odd. There appears to be this performance troth between slow and controlled and then fast enough to be comfortable again, and getting people through that zone without data is extremely hard. It's like there's this magical window around 2 m/s at the axle where things feel controlled again, but between 1.5 m/s and 2 m/s everything feels TERRIBLE. So whatever it takes (HSC or LSC) to get to that number consistently throughout the stroke is going to be the most important adjuster. The "important" adjuster is going to depend fairly heavily on overall spring/frame progression.
Third, over analysis paralysis is a real thing. This is probably the biggest drawback to data and relying on it too much, as the suspension data is only one part of an overall complex and chaotic dynamic that is the sprung mass meat based pilot on top of everything. I think people want data to be a panacea, but at the end of the day the data is retrospective to how something got ridden and not how it will ride. For instance, I had a day on a BYB kit and at a certain point in time the changes we started making stopped really showing up in the data as my riding/position on the bike started driving how the suspension was interacting. We got to a fantastic place, and the bike feels dramatically better than it did when we started, but data wise the actual values (dynamic sag, shaft speeds, ect) were pretty close to where we started the day. We started needing to go on feel and just checked the data to see if anything seemed off.
Post a reply to: Coil Shock Shootout