Quantcast

CCDB Set-Up Tips?

ianjenn

Turbo Monkey
Sep 12, 2006
3,003
707
SLO
Okay I know this will be hard or next to impossible. But I typically like the rebound somewhat fats and to use as little Compression ADJ as possible. Problem is now I have 2 rebounds to tweak. So I am thinking FAST LS and SLOW HS rebound and maybe just a touch of LSC on it. Right now shock is straight out of box it feels slow in Rebound so may speed up some. Once bikes start moving through travel does it feel very different than when messing around on the street? I am getting more sag with same weight spring used on the Fox shock this sound normal?
 

Optimax150

Monkey
Aug 1, 2008
208
0
Japan
You need to tune it on the trail, not a parking lot test. Do a trial and error with the shock. It will take some time for you to get it dialed.
 

staike

Monkey
May 19, 2011
247
0
Norway
Fox sring ratings are often very wrong. What you thought was a 350 spring could have been a 390, 320 etc.
 

Udi

RM Chief Ornithologist
Mar 14, 2005
4,917
1,211
I can give a few pointers that might help - most things you've suggested are indeed correct.

1. The CCDB needs a harder spring than a Fox shock (especially if you're coming off an RC4), ignore those that try to tell you otherwise.

Why? much smaller shaft, lower pressure = less air spring effect on spring rate, in fact theoretically the lowest of any shock out there. Thus your effective spring rate is lower. Assuming you had correct sag on the Fox shock, I would be running a spring rate at LEAST 25lbs heavier on the CCDB, more likely 50lbs in most cases. If you don't do this, you will forever be compensating for an incorrect spring rate with excess damping.

2. The CCDB has a lot of damping range, so if you want to have a lively feel (your preference for fast rebound and low compression suggest this) then you can make it do that if you know what you are doing with the adjusters - most don't. You're got the right idea with the fast LS and slow HS.

If you share your frame / leverage ratio and current spring rate / sag percentage, it might help give more accurate suggestions, but as a baseline, more on the HS adjusters and less on the LS works very well to give a good level of support without killing the pop/sensitivity.

My personal (fairly generic, but following the above) starter settings are 2 full turns in on both HS adjusters, and 2 clicks in on both LS adjusters. From there you can use the HSR to get your rebound correct (if it's kicking too much off lips, run more), and increase compression (both HS/LS to taste) if you need more support for hard corners / g-outs etc. If it feels harsh you can run less compression (HS).

If it's on a V10/C the leverage ratio will be higher thus you'll want to run moar of virtually everything I've suggested.
 

HAB

Chelsea from Seattle
Apr 28, 2007
11,583
2,013
Seattle
What Udi said is spot on. Only thing I'd add is that since it's so adjustable just diving in and turning knobs is just going to get you confused. To get yourself a good baseline setting, do each adjuster one at a time until the characteristics that it controls feel good and then move forward. Start with the rebound settings, low speed first, then high speed, then move into compression in the same order. Doing it like that won't necessarily get you bang on the ideal setup but it'll be close, and once you've done that for all 4, proceed fine tuning.
 

mtg

Green with Envy
Sep 21, 2009
1,862
1,604
Denver, CO
I've been on an RC4 for the past two years, and just got a CCDB. When I was talking to the awesome folks at Cane Creek, I mentioned that my setup on the Fox had evolved to running very fast rebound damping for cornering grip in the chunder (I optimize for racing). However, that setup that produced a lot of wallowing, despite the grip.
The suggested setup on the CCDB from CC was to run fast HS rebound for grip in chunder, yet slow LS rebound to calm the wallowing. They said that's a hot setup they've been suggesting lately, and it worked for me.

As far as spring rate, assuming the numbers printed on the spring are correct, I would guess from my butt dyno that an equivalent wheel rate would require about 25 lb/in higher with the CCDB, as Udi mentioned.
 

ianjenn

Turbo Monkey
Sep 12, 2006
3,003
707
SLO
Okay so I went with a #50 heavier spring. All other settings were stock from CCDB. THE BIKE FELT INSANE. There are just 2 possible reasons for this.
A. The custom tuned CCDB worked awesome on the Zerode.
B. I had a good ride.
I am thinking it was sort of a mix. The trail has rock from golf ball to knee high in size. The bike stuck like a sponge over everything and I took some random lines just to see. I will tweak shock some but rebound seems about where I like.....

THANKS
 

tabletop84

Monkey
Nov 12, 2011
891
15
1. The CCDB needs a harder spring than a Fox shock (especially if you're coming off an RC4), ignore those that try to tell you otherwise.

Why? much smaller shaft, lower pressure = less air spring effect on spring rate, in fact theoretically the lowest of any shock out there. Thus your effective spring rate is lower. Assuming you had correct sag on the Fox shock, I would be running a spring rate at LEAST 25lbs heavier on the CCDB, more likely 50lbs in most cases. If you don't do this, you will forever be compensating for an incorrect spring rate with excess damping.
Does anyone have confirmation from CC about this?

The TF-Tuned Spring-Calculator says otherwise: http://www.tftunedshox.com/info/spring_calculator.aspx
 

Udi

RM Chief Ornithologist
Mar 14, 2005
4,917
1,211
Ianjenn -
Good to hear it's working out!

MTG -
Generally, compression damping would be used to control wallowing - because if you use LSR as you've described, you are going to stabilise the shock at a deeper point in the stroke rather than at an earlier point (that compression damping would result in) - thus encourage packing down. Personally I'd be using compression damping to control dive vs. bump performance.

If it works for you then by all means stick with it, but the idea with the faster LSR is so that the shock can respond quickly through bumps without packing, while the HSR (which is essentially deep-stroke rebound) will tame the bike off lips and the like, to stop it kicking / bucking you. I think this is a better setup for traction than the opposite.

Does anyone have confirmation from CC about this?
The TF-Tuned Spring-Calculator says otherwise: http://www.tftunedshox.com/info/spring_calculator.aspx
I think they are very much incorrect in grouping that shock with the CVT/SPV shocks - they are entirely different animals. The CVT shocks have platform valving, larger shafts, higher chamber pressure, and position sensitive compression damping - all of which point to a lower spring rate.

The CCDB has none of that, and it has a much smaller shaft than even the "equivalent" shim-only shocks (Vivid, BOS, Roco). Thus the correct spring rate for the CC will be at most the same as those shocks, and actually slightly lower to get a similar wheel rate.

As a rough guide, for a CCDB I'd run a 50lb higher rate coming from an RC4/5th/Swinger at correct sag, and a 25lb higher rate coming from a Vivid/BOS/Roco at correct sag. Those numbers won't be exact, but coil spring rates can only be so accurate anyway.
 

Optimax150

Monkey
Aug 1, 2008
208
0
Japan
I
Ianjenn -
Good to hear it's working out!

MTG -
Generally, compression damping would be used to control wallowing - because if you use LSR as you've described, you are going to stabilise the shock at a deeper point in the stroke rather than at an earlier point (that compression damping would result in) - thus encourage packing down. Personally I'd be using compression damping to control dive vs. bump performance.

If it works for you then by all means stick with it, but the idea with the faster LSR is so that the shock can respiond quickly through bumps without packing, while the HSR (which is essentially deep-stroke rebound) will tame the bike off lips and the like, to stop it kicking / bucking you. I think this is a better setup for traction than the opposite.



I think they are very much incorrect in grouping that shock with the CVT/SPV shocks - they are entirely different animals. The CVT shocks have platform valving, larger shafts, higher chamber pressure, and position sensitive compression damping - all of which point to a lower spring rate.

The CCDB has none of that, and it has a much smaller shaft than even the "equivalent" shim-only shocks (Vivid, BOS, Roco). Thus the correct spring rate for the CC will be at most the same as those shocks, and actually slightly lower to get a similar wheel rate.

As a rough guide, for a CCDB I'd run a 50lb higher rate coming from an RC4/5th/Swinger at correct sag, and a 25lb higher rate coming from a Vivid/BOS/Roco at correct sag. Those numbers won't be exact, but coil spring rates can only be so accurate anyway.
So in stupid terms, the DB has a smaller diameter shaft than other shocks, particular the Roco. I knew about the larger than normal shaft of the RC4. That's good to know about the DB, thanks.
 

jrewing

Monkey
Aug 22, 2010
347
247
Maydena Oz
my ccdb 400 pd spring was progressive when tested..

Also the 3 ti springs ive had never were as stated on the spring..

I went up roughly 25lb a while back on my ccdb and found it better
 

tabletop84

Monkey
Nov 12, 2011
891
15
I think they are very much incorrect in grouping that shock with the CVT/SPV shocks - they are entirely different animals. The CVT shocks have platform valving, larger shafts, higher chamber pressure, and position sensitive compression damping - all of which point to a lower spring rate.

The CCDB has none of that, and it has a much smaller shaft than even the "equivalent" shim-only shocks (Vivid, BOS, Roco). Thus the correct spring rate for the CC will be at most the same as those shocks, and actually slightly lower to get a similar wheel rate.

As a rough guide, for a CCDB I'd run a 50lb higher rate coming from an RC4/5th/Swinger at correct sag, and a 25lb higher rate coming from a Vivid/BOS/Roco at correct sag. Those numbers won't be exact, but coil spring rates can only be so accurate anyway.
I have ordered a yt industries tues ltd. and they provided a chart were you could choose the corredt spring-rate by ready-to-ride rider-weight and the numbers were almost identical to the tf-tuned-calculator. Let's hope my spring is not too soft.
 

Greg

Chimp
Apr 27, 2011
22
0
Norway
Don't use tf-tuned calculator for CCDB. I have CCDB on my Intense Uzzi Vp with Ti spring(DSP) and calculated spring rate would give me to much sag. And if i'm not wrong, Ti springs are quite accurate.
 

tabletop84

Monkey
Nov 12, 2011
891
15
Aw **** if yt industries used the calculator for their spring-rate-chart there will be a few hundred people with way too soft springs in april, including me :(
 

bizutch

Delicate CUSTOM flower
Dec 11, 2001
15,929
24
Over your shoulder whispering
CCDB tends to use a softer spring than Fox and you need to learn to dial in the dampers to do the rest.

Not once have I ever had Cane Creek recommend a higher spring rate.

Ian, you're old school and not a douche. You've been around long enough to know what's what, but I REALLY think you need to talk to Malcolm about your spring setup and tuning options.

Your setup sounds like you're just relying on the spring to do the work and not letting the DB do the job.

My 2 cents. Cash 'em in. ;)
 

Pslide

Turbo Monkey
CCDB tends to use a softer spring than Fox and you need to learn to dial in the dampers to do the rest.

Not once have I ever had Cane Creek recommend a higher spring rate.

Ian, you're old school and not a douche. You've been around long enough to know what's what, but I REALLY think you need to talk to Malcolm about your spring setup and tuning options.

Your setup sounds like you're just relying on the spring to do the work and not letting the DB do the job.

My 2 cents. Cash 'em in. ;)
In my experience, CC recommends a pretty highly damped setup. With a lot of LS damping you can get away with a slightly softer spring (although still 50 lbs up from Fox RC4 in my experience). And yeah, it can feel pretty amazing...BUT, it's not to everyone's taste. I think a lot of us prefer a lively bike underneath, which we can get by backing off on CC recommended settings. The CCDB is such a fine damper than you can run a pretty stiff spring and still get good small bump absorption (to a degree). With a firmer spring, you can get a really lively ride and a bike that rides higher in its travel, dialing in just enough damping to suit.

It's horses for courses, whatever you like, the CCDB seems to be able to accomodate!
 

Udi

RM Chief Ornithologist
Mar 14, 2005
4,917
1,211
CCDB tends to use a softer spring than Fox and you need to learn to dial in the dampers to do the rest. Not once have I ever had Cane Creek recommend a higher spring rate.

Ian, you're old school and not a douche. You've been around long enough to know what's what, but I REALLY think you need to talk to Malcolm about your spring setup and tuning options. Your setup sounds like you're just relying on the spring to do the work and not letting the DB do the job.
I disagree.
A suspension damper is not some kind of black art, and a CCDB is no different to any other shock when it comes to the correct/ideal levels of spring rate and damping - don't let the twin tube layout confuse you. If you go from a correct-sag setup on virtually any other shock to a CCDB and use a lighter spring (or even the same spring), your effective spring rate will be lower. If you have a lower spring rate at the shock (all spring factors considered, not just the spring itself), you are going to have a lower spring rate at the wheel.

The result will be a web of compensation and a less-than-ideal setup. You'll start off with excess sag, and wind up with any combination of the following as a result:
- Unintended dynamic/sagged geometry
- Reduction in available positive travel
- Excess compression damping to control wallow
- Excess compression damping to control bottom out

See above posts for a detailed explanation (which coincides with my personal experience on the shock) - if you disagree, by all means provide evidence to refute the points rather than "Malcolm said so". He is a great guy and provides *incredible* service to backup the product, but at the end of the day, numbers don't lie.

Some simple air preload calculations below to prove my point. Please correct me if there are errors, this is not my background and it's late here. :)

Some specs first.
CCDB: 8mm shaft, ~87psi average (spec is 5-7 bar)
RC4: 15.87mm shaft, ~150psi average (spec is 125-200 psi)

Force (lbs) = Pressure (psi) x Area (in^2)

CCDB
0.1575in shaft radius
0.0779in^2 shaft surface area
F = 87*0.0779
F = 6.78 lbs

RC4
0.3125in shaft radius
0.3068in^2 shaft surface area
F = 150*0.3068
F = 46.02 lbs

As you can see, the RC4 has an extra ~40lbs worth of air preload effect adding to the spring rate, and that's not even considering any spring rate progression due to IFP chamber volume decrease. If someone has the correct spring rate giving the correct sag on their RC4, I don't think there should be any dispute that they need a higher rate spring on a CCDB.

Thus I stand by my earlier suggestions quoted below.
As a rough guide, for a CCDB I'd run a 50lb higher rate coming from an RC4/5th/Swinger at correct sag, and a 25lb higher rate coming from a Vivid/BOS/Roco at correct sag. Those numbers won't be exact, but coil spring rates can only be so accurate anyway.
 

nybike1971

Chimp
Nov 16, 2006
67
0
Niskayuna, NY
I completely agree with Udi and Pslide, however Cane Creek in general tends to recommend higher damping and lower spring rates with significant preload to drive the LS rebound circuit. It comes down to their philosophy of shock actuation. I had a conversation with Malcolm when I was struggling to tune a CCDB for a Yeti 303 RDH because of the linear linkage of the bike and mentioned I was reading the Racetech book and his comment was "definitely a different philosophy to shock tuning".

Basically, if you look at bump response you can achieve almost identical response in terms of displacement of the shock shaft for a given bump varying damping and spring rate. You can use lighter damping and a heavier spring rate or viceversa. The difference is not in the amount of displacement but in the time it takes to get there. If you want the most reactive shock possible (shortest time to achieve a certain bump response), you want the highest spring rate and lowest damping that allows you to use full travel. Simple damped oscillator calculation.

This is Racetech's approach which can result in an extremely responsive but possibly nervous ride. Cane Creek takes a different approach to tuning and recommends lower spring rates and more damping for a more controlled ride. When I mentioned to Malcolm that with his recommendations the rear end of the bike felt dead, his reply was "it's called traction".

Personally, I prefer a livelier tuning with higher spring rate approach and the beauty of the 2nd generation CCDB is that it provides the damping range to achieve that. I wish Cane Creek was willing to customize the IFP pressure/depth to make the shock slightly more progressive when the linkage of the bike calls for it, but I don't know if that would cause other issues like heating and fading.
 

Pslide

Turbo Monkey
Personally, I prefer a livelier tuning with higher spring rate approach and the beauty of the 2nd generation CCDB is that it provides the damping range to achieve that. I wish Cane Creek was willing to customize the IFP pressure/depth to make the shock slightly more progressive when the linkage of the bike calls for it, but I don't know if that would cause other issues like heating and fading.
How do you know my exact thoughts? Get out of my head!!! :D
 

ultraNoob

Yoshinoya Destroyer
Jan 20, 2007
4,504
1
Hills of Paradise
Intense M9 with CCDB: 450# Ti spring, set at 8.5" travel

LSC = full open (-)
HSC = full open (-)
LSR = 5 clicks (+) from midpoint
HSR = midpoint
 

jrewing

Monkey
Aug 22, 2010
347
247
Maydena Oz
Pslide, Udi and Mybike i'm with you guys...

i like to ride a bit higher in the travel

Malcolm's traction is fine...but try to 'pop' gaps with that set-up and you will only abosrb the lip and land in the face of the gap.
i find it better to use my legs as a bit of suspension on a higher sprung set-up, rather than try to boost gaps on the low spring/ high lsc setting set-up.
 

IH8Rice

I'm Mr. Negative! I Fail!
Aug 2, 2008
24,524
494
Im over here now
Intense M9 with CCDB: 450# Ti spring, set at 8.5" travel

LSC = full open (-)
HSC = full open (-)
LSR = 5 clicks (+) from midpoint
HSR = midpoint
how do you like running the compression wide open on your m9? when i get my shock back from service, i want to try new settings from what i was running
 

baca262

Monkey
Aug 16, 2011
392
0
i've been reading this thread and after nybike1971's post it occurred to me that you would generally want a firm spring/less damping in the bikepark and a soft spring/more damping on pure dh rockgarden gnar trails.

on the other hand, i believe there are people who prefer one of the extremes in both scenarios and people who are somewhere in between.
 

bizutch

Delicate CUSTOM flower
Dec 11, 2001
15,929
24
Over your shoulder whispering
...
Malcolm's traction is fine...but try to 'pop' gaps with that set-up and you will only abosrb the lip and land in the face of the gap.
...
Riding park on a CCDB when set up to Ohlins way of thinking is tough for sure. I say Ohlins b/c their guys spent a great deal of time working with Cane Creek to get base recommendations set when it first came out. They worked with Herndon to dial it in based off the original Demo 8 platform, circa 2006. There have been any number of applications of the original concepts that the damper was developed for use with all the different leverage ratios we have now.

One of the more difficult things to deal with is that "dead" feeling so many riders describe. On a Double Barrel, you don't tend to have that much feedback from chatter, roots, rocks, etc when you're headed down the hill.

Leaning into a turn feels "dead" b/c of the lack of excessive feedback from the trail chunder. It's a hard thing to get used to, but when you find the tune you like, you can start trusting it to follow a line you might not always feel.

Ian shot me an email and said got some good feedback from Cane Creek. I recommended he chat them up b/c going to the source is useful when weighing suggestions from all us e-heros. ;)

Udi,

Do you write owners manuals for a living?
 

S.K.C.

Turbo Monkey
Feb 28, 2005
4,096
25
Pa. / North Jersey
I disagree.
A suspension damper is not some kind of black art, and a CCDB is no different to any other shock when it comes to the correct/ideal levels of spring rate and damping - don't let the twin tube layout confuse you. If you go from a correct-sag setup on virtually any other shock to a CCDB and use a lighter spring (or even the same spring), your effective spring rate will be lower. If you have a lower spring rate at the shock (all spring factors considered, not just the spring itself), you are going to have a lower spring rate at the wheel.

The result will be a web of compensation and a less-than-ideal setup. You'll start off with excess sag, and wind up with any combination of the following as a result:
- Unintended dynamic/sagged geometry
- Reduction in available positive travel
- Excess compression damping to control wallow
- Excess compression damping to control bottom out

See above posts for a detailed explanation (which coincides with my personal experience on the shock) - if you disagree, by all means provide evidence to refute the points rather than "Malcolm said so". He is a great guy and provides *incredible* service to backup the product, but at the end of the day, numbers don't lie.

Some simple air preload calculations below to prove my point. Please correct me if there are errors, this is not my background and it's late here. :)

Some specs first.
CCDB: 8mm shaft, ~87psi average (spec is 5-7 bar)
RC4: 15.87mm shaft, ~150psi average (spec is 125-200 psi)

Force (lbs) = Pressure (psi) x Area (in^2)

CCDB
0.1575in shaft radius
0.0779in^2 shaft surface area
F = 87*0.0779
F = 6.78 lbs

RC4
0.3125in shaft radius
0.3068in^2 shaft surface area
F = 150*0.3068
F = 46.02 lbs

As you can see, the RC4 has an extra ~40lbs worth of air preload effect adding to the spring rate, and that's not even considering any spring rate progression due to IFP chamber volume decrease. If someone has the correct spring rate giving the correct sag on their RC4, I don't think there should be any dispute that they need a higher rate spring on a CCDB.

Thus I stand by my earlier suggestions quoted below.
This is probably the most mature, rational, and well spoken responses to a topic of debate I've seen on here in a LONG time.

Well said Udi, and as usual, impeccable. :)
 

Steve M

Turbo Monkey
Mar 3, 2007
1,991
45
Whistler
I completely agree with Udi and Pslide, however Cane Creek in general tends to recommend higher damping and lower spring rates with significant preload to drive the LS rebound circuit. It comes down to their philosophy of shock actuation. I had a conversation with Malcolm when I was struggling to tune a CCDB for a Yeti 303 RDH because of the linear linkage of the bike and mentioned I was reading the Racetech book and his comment was "definitely a different philosophy to shock tuning".

Basically, if you look at bump response you can achieve almost identical response in terms of displacement of the shock shaft for a given bump varying damping and spring rate. You can use lighter damping and a heavier spring rate or viceversa. The difference is not in the amount of displacement but in the time it takes to get there. If you want the most reactive shock possible (shortest time to achieve a certain bump response), you want the highest spring rate and lowest damping that allows you to use full travel. Simple damped oscillator calculation.

This is Racetech's approach which can result in an extremely responsive but possibly nervous ride. Cane Creek takes a different approach to tuning and recommends lower spring rates and more damping for a more controlled ride. When I mentioned to Malcolm that with his recommendations the rear end of the bike felt dead, his reply was "it's called traction".

Personally, I prefer a livelier tuning with higher spring rate approach and the beauty of the 2nd generation CCDB is that it provides the damping range to achieve that. I wish Cane Creek was willing to customize the IFP pressure/depth to make the shock slightly more progressive when the linkage of the bike calls for it, but I don't know if that would cause other issues like heating and fading.
Yeah, I think the whole "lower spring rate" thing that has been pushed for almost a decade now can be traced back to the old Vanilla RC, which had so little compression damping and such heavy rebound shimming with stock valving that you pretty much just had a spring and almost a ported rebound damper. The DHX5 had some similar issues with hard-to-use compression damping because of the stickiness caused by cranking the air pressure or the propedal up, but it was still significantly better than the old RC in terms of having SOME usable compression damping.

Since then, we've seen the Vivid, RC4, CCDB, BOS, Avalanche etc etc come along with way more usable compression damping that means you can actually run a reasonable spring rate and not have serious control issues. However, in the same way that frame leverage ratios have gotten lower and lower over time well beyond the point where reliability was increased (the original point of lower ratios) and into the somewhat ridiculous where the shock weighs a ton and is almost impossible to valve lightly enough, some people have pushed the soft spring/heavy damping thing to extremes or never moved on from the idea that we need more damping and less spring.

I also disagree somewhat with the notion that traction means a dead ride - you can have a dead feeling with amazing grip, a lively feeling with amazing grip, or a dead or lively feeling with poor grip. Elka and BOS have characteristics that are good examples of this in my opinion, and the CCDB's adjustability makes it pretty versatile too. The RC4 takes a bit of massaging to get a particularly lively feel out of, but it can be done, especially if it's revalved.

Also, you couldn't safely close the chamber size of the CCDB down enough to provide any significant air spring progression, the shaft is way too small to achieve that at any reasonable pressure. This makes it extremely linear throughout its stroke, which is exceptionally well suited to some bikes but not so good on others - in the same way that the RC4 has the opposite characteristic.
 
Last edited:

Orangesicle

Chimp
Feb 16, 2011
32
0
This thread is awesome. Thank y'all.

I just put a new fork on m9, 2012 boxxer wc air, and i think it is way more damped on the rebound at full out than the 2010 I had before.
I'm 180lbs, 400lb spring and full progressive setting on the M9. I just backed off the 9 1/2" setting to 9" and noticed an improved ride feel just with 1 run on it that way.
Buuut, I hit a moderate jump too big, overshot and got bucked over the front.
Ultra tomahawk through the creosote bushes...
I'm guessing that the CDDB needs to be adjusted to match the new fork. Duh.

My question is this:
If I dial in more HSR for the big landings that seem to be happening the faster I go, how will the shock be affected in terms of packing up? Won't this squish my ride height?
Or will the runout most big hits have be ample time for full recovery of the slowed rebound?
What will happen in super bumpy rutted corners and berms at speed? Will the back end pack up progressively through the turn or ratchet its way ever downward?
But will this help nail those cool wheelies the pros do out of every bermed corner?

Also, does anyone really run much mid to full stroke rebound in the front end?
 

ultraNoob

Yoshinoya Destroyer
Jan 20, 2007
4,504
1
Hills of Paradise
Intense M9 with CCDB: 450# Ti spring, set at 8.5" travel

LSC = full open (-)
HSC = full open (-)
LSR = 5 clicks (+) from midpoint
HSR = midpoint
how do you like running the compression wide open on your m9? when i get my shock back from service, i want to try new settings from what i was running
I'm a hack when riding DH... might as well call me Mr. Plow. Don't pop things too much, but I will if I have to.

The square edge hits are barely felt and the tire stays glued even when blasting braking bumps. Haven't had a chance to take her to the bike park, but I think all I'd have to do to get her Northstar ready slow down the HSR a few clicks.

Current setup, she feels very neutral and linear. Very little pedal feedback unlike when I had the LSC and HSC a few clicks south of midpoint. With the settings like they are, it feels as close to the Revox and DSP shocks which have always been perfect on the M series bikes.

I'd actually still be running my DSP had the eyelet bushings not worn out.
 

nybike1971

Chimp
Nov 16, 2006
67
0
Niskayuna, NY
I also disagree somewhat with the notion that traction means a dead ride - you can have a dead feeling with amazing grip, a lively feeling with amazing grip, or a dead or lively feeling with poor grip. Elka and BOS have characteristics that are good examples of this in my opinion, and the CCDB's adjustability makes it pretty versatile too. The RC4 takes a bit of massaging to get a particularly lively feel out of, but it can be done, especially if it's revalved.
I agree, that's why I put Malcolm's words in quotes. I don't necessarily think that the CCDB achieves better traction than any other shock on the market. One thing that I really like about the CCDB is how sensitive it is, which to me is the main reason for that quiet feel of the rear end of the bike.

I tried a CCDB on a Yeti 303 RDH last season but ultimately gave up because the linkage of the bike is too linear and I couldn't find a tune that allowed the shock to move fast enough in the rough and control bottom out on harsh hits. I used too much travel all the time if I wanted the shock to work well at high shaft speed. On my frame I tested a Fox RC4, which was pretty nice if run with a low enough pressure in the reservoir (it was a 2011 of a DW DHR, so with a pretty light tune), and an Elka Stage 5 tuned a bit stiffer than recommended by Elka (20/20 instead of 10/20).

I found the Elka to offer the best compromise on my frame between the three shocks: it doesn't ramp up as much as the RC4 and is quite a bit more sensitive (even though not as much as the CCDB). The high speed circuit works quite well and the progressive rebound damping makes for a very lively feel without giving up control.

Since then, I have built a suspension data acquisition system and plan on putting the three shocks back on the bike next season to quantify differences in how travel is used by these high-end shocks.
 

Kanye West

220# bag of hacktastic
Aug 31, 2006
3,746
478
I have been down the road of trying to tune and properly spring a CCDB a few times now. All I have to say is, that you MUST MEASURE your sag. Do not go off what Malcolm or people on the internet tell you. Get 1, preferably 2 friends to help you, and measure your sagged i2i length a bunch of times and take the average.

I for one was not able to get the shock to work exactly right being oversprung, undersprung, or dead-nuts properly sprung. It was always sacrificing somewhere, but I will say it was easiest to get working acceptably well on really progressive frames. It was just about impossible to get the control that I wanted on linear frames with that shock. I eventually settled on an Elka, and only got to ride it a few times before my bike got jacked, but that shock impressed me more than anything else on the market. The RC4 was also super easy to get a good, consistent feel out of, and be able to ride hard as hell without it getting wacky.
 

eater

Monkey
Nov 25, 2005
476
20
Switzerland
Intense M9 with CCDB: 500# CC steel spring, set at 9.5" travel 210lbs

wich ground setting i need?
thanks for any help!
 

chup29

Chimp
Sep 9, 2009
70
3
Ashland
im running a ccdb in my m9, 9.0 inches of travel, middle G3 dropout, middle progression, head angle slacked out to 63.3 before sag. My bb is like 13.5 ish... I just know it rails turns like no other. I'm 195 and i run a 500# spring but i like my bike to be pretty stiff

in terms of setting the cane creek up, read the manual that comes with it and then sit with your little ccdb tool next to your bike and come up with a base setting, then write it down (turns from fully open or fully closed) - this base setting probably took me like 30-45 minutes before i got it feeling how i liked it. from there, go riding... seriously, youll notice changes as you ride and hit stuff, i went hucking for a day and got the high speed rebound and compression fully dialed. Havent touched them since. Noticed last week that my bike was bobbing a tiny tiny bit under power so i put a half turn of low speed compression, then i noticed it wasnt tracking as well so i backed off a quarter turn. The key to that shock is understanding it and realizing that setting it up is a loooooooong process but incredibly rewarding in the end...
 

Kntr

Turbo Monkey
Jan 25, 2003
7,526
21
Montana
I am having a hell of a time tuning the CCDB on my new Zerode. Any Zerode guys have suggestions?