BOS S**toy review
- Thread starter Steve M
- Start date
- Status
You can go pretty far with a custom tuned DHX. Apples to apples. Custom is custom and stock is stock.
Thanks for the review. I thought it was solid.
To JM: is your AVY expertise limited to the 5 year old trail bike pictured?
Thanks for the review. I thought it was solid.
To JM: is your AVY expertise limited to the 5 year old trail bike pictured?
Ive read all the posts in this thread. Socket is a pretty smart guy and usually knows his **** about stuff. Great review socket. The bos is a piece of work and Ill probably never ride one but I can dream. So from what Ive gathered, this shock will blow the doors off my vanilla r.
I'd probably say the same thing as you if I was sponsored by fox.
Nope, cracked that bike. I have a much newer trailbike now.
Yeah I agree with that... If JM bothered to read the review, he'd notice that Socket suggests that the BOS is realistically a ~5% improvement on a DHX, which in my opinion is understandable as the DHX is a pretty decent shock. Most people just like to slag it because they are snobs and don't realise what a correctly tuned one is capable of. See buckoW's post - he knows a thing or two about fox's capabilities. I also think it's pretty funny how everyone regurgitates that it has oil flow problems, have you ever pulled one apart and looked at the size of the compression/rebound holes in the piston? They're not spiking in a hurry.
My thoughts on the Avy are the same as a few others' that have actually ridden most of the other shocks out there (I think I have, for now anyway). It's nothing special, and is currently a fair bit heavier than the competition... I wouldn't drop a DHX for one in a hurry.
The BOS on the other hand, well it's like S. said... the first thing I noticed was it had less stiction than the competition (less than CCDB/Avy as well as the bigger brands) and there was something quite smooth about how it changed direction as well.
I think you'd be stupid to think the difference was night and day though, it's a small improvement for a lot of cash... and for some people, that'll still be worth it.
2 questions:
1. what style shock of the BOS? De Carbon or is it something new?
2. Of those that ran the CCDB did you tune it beyond the stock settings?
I was exposed to a CCDB on a Morewood demo bike back in 2005 and was blown away with its performance. I bought one for myself in 2006 and while it felt great out of the box it took me close to a month to get it tuned to what I would call optimal settings. Lots of trial and error adjustments on a single track over and over. I would say it took me 20 hrs of riding to get it "dialed".
Of course you can rely on someone's experience (i.e Push, Craig, etc.) or for some they can take the time and do it themselves. I will admit that while it was rewarding to tune the CCDB myself, at times it would have been easier to ask someone else.
I personally believe that the mechanics of the Ohilns twin tube is superior, however I don't knock that other shocks can be tuned to be superior shocks for some and in limited conditions. For example a slow tech course can require a different tune than a super high frequency wide open course. Most racers don't have techs at their disposal to re-tune their shocks as course conditions and tracks change. But then again, most racers couldn't tell the difference either.
I think most people don't realize that the Double Barrel's adjusters aren't so much fine tuning adjusters as they are a total tune adjustment. Its like getting a shock with multiple shims that they can change out. Tuning it can be daunting and of course you can make it perform poorly. But with the right knowledge it can be an excellent shock and IMO is heads above the current crop of dampers. I can't speak specifically to the BOS though. I have seen and held one but never run one.
It would be nice to see a knowledge base for the CCDB develop that could help folks get started on tuning.
1. what style shock of the BOS? De Carbon or is it something new?
2. Of those that ran the CCDB did you tune it beyond the stock settings?
I was exposed to a CCDB on a Morewood demo bike back in 2005 and was blown away with its performance. I bought one for myself in 2006 and while it felt great out of the box it took me close to a month to get it tuned to what I would call optimal settings. Lots of trial and error adjustments on a single track over and over. I would say it took me 20 hrs of riding to get it "dialed".
Of course you can rely on someone's experience (i.e Push, Craig, etc.) or for some they can take the time and do it themselves. I will admit that while it was rewarding to tune the CCDB myself, at times it would have been easier to ask someone else.
I personally believe that the mechanics of the Ohilns twin tube is superior, however I don't knock that other shocks can be tuned to be superior shocks for some and in limited conditions. For example a slow tech course can require a different tune than a super high frequency wide open course. Most racers don't have techs at their disposal to re-tune their shocks as course conditions and tracks change. But then again, most racers couldn't tell the difference either.
I think most people don't realize that the Double Barrel's adjusters aren't so much fine tuning adjusters as they are a total tune adjustment. Its like getting a shock with multiple shims that they can change out. Tuning it can be daunting and of course you can make it perform poorly. But with the right knowledge it can be an excellent shock and IMO is heads above the current crop of dampers. I can't speak specifically to the BOS though. I have seen and held one but never run one.
It would be nice to see a knowledge base for the CCDB develop that could help folks get started on tuning.
not entirely. It still operates within a given range of adjustment based on the configuration of the shim stack and the porting of the piston; the external adjusters simply modify this baseline. hence the reason it still doesn't work on a Sunday. In comparison with the BOS, the achilles heal of the CCDB might just be the fact that there isn't any sort of custom tuning available for the small number of people who might need it (or be able to appreciate it). it is very much a high end shock built for the masses, which frankly I don't consider to be a bad thing at all. we should consider ourselves lucky to have so many options.
All the debate about what shock is better is a case of the dog chasing its tail. there are so many high quality dampers to choose from, many coming as stock stock equpment, that you really can't go wrong with any of them. you hit the nail on the head though when you said it takes a bit of time, trial, and error to get your suspension set up. and this goes for any shock on the market. I can't tell you how many people i know who complain about their suspension but still can't figure out how to choose the correct spring rate let alone understand how preload, air pressure, volume adjustment, pro-pedal, and rebound all interact on the 'industry standard' dhx; and it's been around for 5 years now. heck, many people still can't dial in tire pressure.
Last edited:
True.
The current wide range of adjustments doesn't not work well (or at all) with the Sunday. But Cane Creek R&D are constantly working on optimizing and I would say that with the industry moving to lower leverage ratios you'll probably see the CCDB baseline move to match it.
that's what we've been hearing for the past 3 years. Somehow Fox and Rock Shox figured out how to do it in a lot less time than that. I'm still of the opinion that, given the price and pedigree, the CCDB should have more service/tuning options available. It's not 2005 anymore, time to step it up.
You're basically adjusting the preload on the poppet valves (controlled by springs) on the CCDB.
One thing that intrests me is how much "work" the shim-stack does on the main piston. Supposedly it's very "heavy" (lots of shims) and doesn't blow off under normal conditions. What I'm interested in is how it compares to the motorcycle stuff (ohlins) that uses a similer design. Is it working in the same way, is the main piston set the same way? Even if it's designed to blow off under "extreme" conditions, that criteria (force) would be different for a different weight/style of rider, so one-size-fits-all is still a hard cup to fill. Supposedly Push is working on being able to modify the CCDB in this way (rearrange the shims).
I also gotta say (not related to the ccdb) if the BOS is only around 5% better than a DHX in terms of performance, that's a crapload of money for a pretty marginal performance increase. I'd say my avalanche kills the DHX in every situation, and while I wouldn't go so far as to say something rediculous like 200% better, it's way more than 5% IMO, with the high/low adjusters that actually do something related to that type of action. Perhaps there's the ability to get more performance out of it and tune it even better (obviously with custom tuning like avalanche). The point is that avalanche has been doing this for a while, with lots of features far beyond what you get in a DHX, and while the BOS could be great, it's definitely not "alone" in terms of it's class/etc.
Have you ever taken apart a moto shock?
There is a secondary piston "floating" on the shaft as well. It has ports and shimstacks as well. It does more work in terms of chassis control that smaller higher speed hits. It's not entirely necessary on a bike because of the large weight difference and more widely varying rider input. It could be beneficial for a MTB shock, but the chassis sizes we've come to accept simply do not accomodate for the extra valving on the shaft. It would also cost significantly more across the board for marginal added benefit (and also just greatly complicate things).
I THINK Avy had a few proto shocks kicking around with this implemented, maybe it was Stratos though...
Because they're nothing special. Serious answer.
Because as someone else mentioned, it's basically impossible to actually get the shock tuned the way YOU want it, vs the way Avalanche wants it. That, and they feel no different from an inexpensive DHX 5.
Good info, it just seems that "closing down" the main piston on the CCDB doesn't really have a hugely positive effect, maybe negative.
This is the big difference between the CCDB and other designs. The shims on the main stack aren't the same as the shims in a traditional shock.
Check these out...
Cane Creek website
Ohlins website
Check these out...
Cane Creek website
Ohlins website
Care to quantify that statement?
Tell me how a tuned shim stack, increased fluid volume, increased piston diameter, and tuned high/low speed flow wouldn't feel different?
Oh wait, I know, "it just does" right? LOL. I may be an avalanche whore, but I ride fox stuff too (did a nice 6000+ descent on sunday on the highline with the dhx, not bad, but I was wishing it had an avalanche. Not so much because I know what an avalanche feels like, but on the highline the 888 RC3 WC blows the DHX away). I won't flat out say the DHX is bad, it's not, but you are one biased Mofo to be calling anyone else biased.
I would not buy a shock that I could not get serviced in the UK by a bicycle suspension tuner.
If I buy a fox/marz/bos/dt swiss/rock shox/5th/manitou I can easily get the repaired. I could not be arsed with the hassle of finding a moto shop somewhere in the country that can possibly fix it. Sounds like too much time off the bike to me.
I would not buy a cane creek for the same reason though...
If I buy a fox/marz/bos/dt swiss/rock shox/5th/manitou I can easily get the repaired. I could not be arsed with the hassle of finding a moto shop somewhere in the country that can possibly fix it. Sounds like too much time off the bike to me.
I would not buy a cane creek for the same reason though...
The diagram shows it pretty well on the CC website. The shims are there (and probably set up extra heavy) in order to force more oil through the adjusters and give them better range. Look close and they even show in the diagram that the shims deflect on the high speed comp/rebound and not the low speed.
The nice part about the rebound on the DB is that the main piston movement (read: shaft, spring) is what forces the oil through the rebound valves instead of just the really high pressure of the compensator piston that is found in most shocks. Also, since it it using positive pressure to backflow instead of negative you have a lot less cavitation effect.
I wonder if the lower pressured system can accept fork oil instead of RSF?
The nice part about the rebound on the DB is that the main piston movement (read: shaft, spring) is what forces the oil through the rebound valves instead of just the really high pressure of the compensator piston that is found in most shocks. Also, since it it using positive pressure to backflow instead of negative you have a lot less cavitation effect.
I wonder if the lower pressured system can accept fork oil instead of RSF?
The DHX has a spv-type valve with air pressure pushing against the valve, not nearly as bad as the 5th element type shocks, but nonetheless it can't flow enough oil on some high speed hits. I also find that you get a much more detrimental effect on the performance if you increase the boost pressure much. Sure, it reduces the "wallow", makes the G-outs a little less swoopy and whatever, but it also kills the high-speed damping more and makes it run a little more like a jackhammer. I like to set up my stuff so it sucks up bumps as well as possible, it means it simply has to have the right damping, not necessarily very little damping or a lot of one kind. In any case, if you then go with a lot less boost pressure you bring back some high speed performance, but it bobs a lot, wallows, and so forth, so in the end less control.
The 888RC3 damper seems to have a lot better control of low and high speed without a big tradeoff either way. This has been marzocchis problem for a while, but the RC3 does a very nice job of controlling both while retaining great travel. The DHX is more of a compramise in the way it's set up, but the bottom line is that the DHX can't flow enough oil in some high speed impacts.
Again, the DHX is not bad, miles better than the 5ths that were of the same era, but the Avy is still far above in terms of features and construction. It's simply got a bigger piston, more fluid, and is tuned specifically. The 888RC3 seems to have a lot of the better control that is possible with something like the Avy.
Just because something is "sophisticated" or not doesn't really mean it even works. Look at the 5th element and the curnut shocks. That was total crap, and it was more "sophisticated". Heck, you'd think that beacuse the curnut is huge it would flow a lot of oil and have amazing sensitivity and damping..but nope. So it doesn't really mean much, but yeah the RC3 is far more advanced than the stuff that marzocchi was making a few years ago.
I think companies like fox and such err on the side of caution with their shim stacks, so it's fairly usual that they can't flow enough oil on some impacts, in this case the spv type valve limits it further.
Last edited:
Right, and mechanically how does the 888 achieve that god-like feel? How does it control low and high speed without a tradeoff?
woah woah woah.....that's just not true......it's not impossible to tune the way you want.....you can change the shims yourself if you want...plenty of people in the moto world do that.....
and it feel so different from a DHX it isn't even funny....i've owned a few DHX's, and I've owned a few avalanches and i can say in SO many ways they are worlds apart both internally and on the trail......
Agreed. They're very different and their a step above in terms of chassis quality and damping CAPABILITY.
The issue usually lies in the tuner behind the job. Having to ship it multiple times and having to b*tch and argue to get it done the way you initially want is not worth the extra dollar you have to put down for them.
Finding a Chubie with the Hi/Lo adjuster cheap and used would be a great find if you know how to rebuild them yourself.
despite the e-hate and e-chest thumping, the correct answer is
there are no sponsorships with avalanche. It's pretty much a one-man show and I think if he had the money for sponsorships he'd produce a more modern product (fork). there were a few sponsorships with shocks and forks in the late 90s early 2000s when his products were over 9000 times better than the competitions' (at that point, you have to admit, they were)...They were all east coast guys and I think they raced lower levels at eastern series only.
As for no avys in euro-land, avy is a very small company and I think their main focus is Moto suspension...I don't think MTB is where the majority of his business comes from....so there are no distributors and you have to send your shock directly to craig in CT. Obviously that's a pain, but it's the same reason you don't see a lot of Hope products or other Euro based brands on this side of the pond.
As far as this debate goes:
Because of the weight, avy products are more suited to freeriding than they are for racing. I don't think they necessarily do anything differently, they just do it very very well for longer. I also (still) like that my shock doesn't go far for service. I'd love to spend more time on other shocks, but I'm frame limited and won't get a chance until maybe next year. The DHXs I've felt were far more "nothing special" than the DHS. The BOS is baffling to me as if it's a negligible upgrade, why does it cost so much...and with service on the other side of the world from US riders...no thanks.
Ok wieners, continue!
Of course, you can re-shim any shock if you do it yourself. I was referring to getting the so called "custom tune" from the factory. And as mentioned, the build is very, very good; there is no question there.
At least with crappy reviews I don't want to spend money.
Guys like JM are among the the reasons i will never own an Avalanche shock. What's up with the inferiority complex of some of their owners (but, but what about an Avy . . . pay attention to me)? It just isn't my thing.
and i'd argue the whole "custom tuned to your weight, style, bike, etc." is a load of nonsense, or at least a bit misleading. At most i bet Avy has 2, maybe 3 standard settings they apply to a shock based on a predetermined set of parameters (much like TF's spring calculator). That's not really true custom; more like generic custom. And before the Avy militia gets all upset, BOS does the exact same thing (pg. 4): http://www.bos-engineering.com/pdf/noticeStoyEN.pdf
And how exactly is Avy getting up-to-date feedback without any top-level (read: fast) riders on their program, and a one man r&d show? yeah, yeah, they have a moto background, so what? moto isn't dh racing and it never will be. the suspension needs of each sport is entirely different.
JM, i'm glad you like your Avy (in a way that borers on unhealthy). but the rest of us don't need to hear about it anymore. You really like Avy shocks. we get it.
and i'd argue the whole "custom tuned to your weight, style, bike, etc." is a load of nonsense, or at least a bit misleading. At most i bet Avy has 2, maybe 3 standard settings they apply to a shock based on a predetermined set of parameters (much like TF's spring calculator). That's not really true custom; more like generic custom. And before the Avy militia gets all upset, BOS does the exact same thing (pg. 4): http://www.bos-engineering.com/pdf/noticeStoyEN.pdf
And how exactly is Avy getting up-to-date feedback without any top-level (read: fast) riders on their program, and a one man r&d show? yeah, yeah, they have a moto background, so what? moto isn't dh racing and it never will be. the suspension needs of each sport is entirely different.
JM, i'm glad you like your Avy (in a way that borers on unhealthy). but the rest of us don't need to hear about it anymore. You really like Avy shocks. we get it.
Saying the DHX can't compare to the Avy is ridiculous. Fox is building shocks for a mass market, while avy is building them one at at time. You get a guy that can tune a shock both externally and internally, and I bet that Fox surprises you with how good it really is.
The avy i had was great, as it all but destroyed the trail in front of you. But it was also harder to jump the bike, and it made things feel much more, i dunno, wallowy I guess. Its much more sensitive to small stuff, and because of that you also lose a bit of trail feel.
I wish it were easier to determine how much of the "speed" gained by riders on fancier shocks is from the mental edge alone.
The avy i had was great, as it all but destroyed the trail in front of you. But it was also harder to jump the bike, and it made things feel much more, i dunno, wallowy I guess. Its much more sensitive to small stuff, and because of that you also lose a bit of trail feel.
I wish it were easier to determine how much of the "speed" gained by riders on fancier shocks is from the mental edge alone.
"at most i bet"?.....aren't you a teacher?
so what you're really saying is you're guessing, right?....cute......nice to see you're educating the youth of america.....
well, you're wrong...... i've been to avalanche on a few occasions and when i was there craig had a wall full of literally hundreds of bins with countless DIFFERENT shims....FOX and rock shox don't do anything like this so there is no sense in even comparing the two.....FOX gives you a worthless boost valve with no real low speed compression adjustment(even you managed to figure that out) and rock shox has 3 tunes for thousands of setups.....
alot more time and effort goes into the avalanche tunes than you think, but then again, i expect nothing less.....you're really just guessing, and then babbling about something you know nothing about with an air of absolute conviction......not out of the ordinary
have you ever ridden an avalanche shock on your bike?....taken your DHX or VIVID off and put an avalanche on to compare?.....didn't think so....well, I have, so at least i have a leg to stand on when comparing the dampers.....
based on your vague and minimal knowledge of suspension i would spend more time trying to learn, and ride as many different setups as you can rather than preaching about what you don't like(and have hardly ever ridden).....
also, saying you would never own an avalanche shock because of the people that ride them shows serious close mindedness and immaturity on your part....its also a dead giveaway that you could never ride one and give it some sort of unbiased testing/review.....your opinion is a joke.....
edit: i'm not putting avalanche on a pedestal...there are things i do and don't like about them....i'm just pointing out that you don't have a leg to stand on, you know very little about suspension in the grand scheme of things and, you don't have any idea how avalanche tunes their shocks, nor will you find out due to your close mindedness.....
Last edited:
hahahaha I can't believe some of the s**t you talk. First, you accuse me of slagging Avalanche, which I didn't. Then you accuse me of "hyping up the product", which I clearly didn't, yet you are the only person in this thread to claim that any shock is "on another planet" from the DHX. Saying something is 5% better is:
a) an admitted completely arbitrary judgment on my part, where it's pretty clearly difficult to assign a numerical value to the "feel" of something
b) a pretty huge elimination of the last few percent of performance characteristics (ie deviation from "ideal") that you can get out of a DHX. If a DHX allows you something that's 90% of "ideal", the BOS is closer again, and I couldn't fault the damping in any way. There aren't huge gains left to be made, the BOS simply makes the gains that ARE left to be made
c) clearly NOT hype! If I wanted to make out that the BOS is this huge difference, like YOU are trying to make out despite its physical impossibility, I would have written things a lot differently.
If you can actually find a shock that will get you down the hill measurably FASTER than a well-set-up DHX, it's a pretty high class unit. But the fact is, that unlike the HYPE that YOU are trying to generate about Avalanche - hype that a lot of people, including me, believe is largely undeserved - there simply isn't that huge a gain to be made anymore over mass-market shocks. No shocks are "on another planet" compared to a DHX, you're delusional and only hearing what you want to hear if you believe that. But we already knew that from back in the "rockshox has no compression damping" days, which is pretty funny from someone who owns/owned a Monster T, but anyway.
In conclusion: stop talking s**t, take your avalanche love-fest and start a new thread with it, keep it out of mine. And start using DH shocks on real DH bikes. Riding "DH" on a trail bike isn't the same as riding it on a racebike.
Last edited:
As does fox. Any consumer can request one of 3 different "custom" tunes when they get the shock rebuilt.
Yeah it's a De Carbon shock, standard fare thing that is referred to as "twin tube" by most of the automotive industry (not to be confused with the two concentric tubes in a DB or Romic). In actual fact, I think there is absolutely nothing that's new about the BOS platform, it's simply extremely refined (eg the needle bearing eyelets, super low seal drag, damping curve/adjustment range).
I don't think it's a negligible upgrade. If you're a serious racer, or even just a gear nut with plenty of money, it's pretty close to "perfect" (as in, close enough that I personally am unable to say what could be improved), but what I was trying to get across is that it's not going to make the average punter any better a rider. More traction will only help you go faster if you're at or near the limit for starters, more stability is only any help if you've exceeded the limits of what another shock can do for you. The reality is that most riders (arguably including myself as a mid-pack Elite rider) aren't doing that. Less force transmission to the rider over harsh stutter bumps is always welcome but if that's your #1 priority above all else, you can simply back the damping on a DHX or whatever right off and get something super smooth (that will pitch around more, kick more off lips etc).
As I said, if you're a serious racer, you will appreciate what the shock can do to help you. If you're just someone who loves riding their bike on the weekends with their mates, and couldn't really care less about their run times, it's an expensive bit of kit for something that just "feels nicer".
On the same frame I have ridden , from Fox: DHX, Vanilla Rc, Vanilla Dh and a few whackjob protos. Also ridden 5th element, Manitou & avalanche. The avalanche was setup for someone of my weight on the exact same frame (145lbs, Orange 222 with floater at the time).
My shock experience with avalanche was based on this ride and it felt incredibly overdamped. The rider who owned the shock told me it was on it's 3rd or 4th (can't remember exactly) trip back to Avalanche to be re-shimmed. Mr. Seekins had told him at length that it "wasn't supposed to be setup" the way the rider wanted it, and sent it back with another tune.
Take from this what you will, but I have heard racers on many different bikes and of different weights give me the same feedback. I have never heard a hucker complain about it as most of them prefer a lot more damping for obvious reasons.
Last edited:
Agreed. Looking at another season out of my roco i think . . .I don't have those sort of problems.
Agreed. Whooooole different ballgame, especially taking things at real race speeds.
At those speeds, bump absorbtion becomes less and less important as holding the bike STABLE through chop and keeping a steady attitude becomes paramount. At a certain speed the chatter doesn't even matter anymore because you're only going to be hitting every 3rd or 5th bump, but you don't want those bumps to be "kicking" you.
A trail bike has to be set up for way slower speeds and just absorbing bumps really. I'd call that the equivalent of a "woods" tuning vs. a "desert" tuning on a moto damper, if that makes any sense at all to anyone.
- Status