[gonzostrike]

Never said you were...wasn't critiquing you, just saying that some people DO ride hard with air suspension.

You were implying that air suspension wasn't appropriate for people who ride hard, just the "Harvey Pinner" described in your post.

MD

sorry, but you INFERRED that, I did not imply anything. the reader INFERS, the writer IMPLIES. the writer knows what he/she implies, but cannot know what the reader will infer.

as to you not critiquing me, stop lying you twat. you said "as badass as you apparently are," which is a critique flat-out. okay?

hope that straightens things out properly.

 

[MikeD]

those of us who USE our suspension travel in the way most designers intend - not just as a talking point when you're BSing with your MTB buddies, or for posing on the bike resting atop of your car.

...

I pop off stuff and land with the intent of gaining some speed as I manage the suspension's action... I'm not just Harvey Pinner riding at a slow crawl "using" my suspension to "take the edge off".

Nope, you never implied *anything* about your own riding skills, and I'm just an ignorant inference-drawing twat who doesn't know the definitions of these words. Yup.

Your intellect is as towering as your riding skills, and I bow deeply to both.

MD

 

[kidwoo]

Nope, you never implied *anything* about your own riding skills, and I'm just an ignorant inference-drawing twat who doesn't know the definitions of these words. Yup.

Your intellect is as towering as your riding skills, and I bow deeply to both.

MD

Ignore him. He's a somewhat reasonable person with good communication skills only until he percieves any sort of objection to what he believes. Then he turns into a frothing maniac who launches into some of the most childish and abusive personal attacks I've ever seen from someone his age.

Be glad he lives in Montana where fewer people have to deal with him. I am.

 

[MikeD]

Ignore him.

I can't. I'm crying too hard for that.

 

[OGRipper]

sorry, but you INFERRED that, I did not imply anything. the reader INFERS, the writer IMPLIES. the writer knows what he/she implies, but cannot know what the reader will infer.

as to you not critiquing me, stop lying you twat. you said "as badass as you apparently are," which is a critique flat-out. okay?

hope that straightens things out properly.

Wheee this is fun!!

A writer can imply something intentionally or not. For example, you might take this post as an implication that you are a childish brat. Oh wait, bad example.

 

[MikeD]

Back to the topic, I think it's odd that the critiques of air suspension I used to see criticized it for being too inherently progressive, whereas the TALAS system is criticized for being too linear.

Now, TALAS is claimed to be a linear system (the "L" in TALAS), but I thought that it was designed this way in order to address people's dislike of air-spring progression.

All in all, I think it just goes to show that individual systems can be designed in many different ways...it's just like generalizations about steel and aluminum frames. Materials have inherent characteristics, sure, but the user encounters a finished system or product, not a raw material. The design of something may capitalize on, exaggerate, alter, eliminate, or invert what are normally thought of as the inherent characteristics of a given material.

To expand on what DHtahoe said, it's about choosing the right gear for you, knowing it thoroughly, and having it set up optimally for you and your uses.

MD

Edit: I've found that my TALAS RLC 135 feels, under aggressive use, like some 36 detractors have described...too linear, unless it's pumped up too much. And though that makes me wonder if the 36 isn't the same way, I don't take it for granted that it is.

I've never touched one, aside from a bounce on a showroom floor, so I won't speculate or extend my experiences with another TALAS fork to this one.

 

[OGRipper]

Back to the topic, I think it's odd that the critiques of air suspension I used to see criticized it for being too inherently progressive, whereas the TALAS system is criticized for being too linear. QUOTE]

I agree, think I mentioned this earlier when I talked about fox yanking their hair out...for years people said they would love an air fork with a linear rate like a coil, so fox delivers and now people complain it's too linear. Guess you can't please everyone unless you provide a product with enough adjustability to provide different rate curves for different riding styles and desires. Ig guess what I'd really like is a fork with TALAS travel adjust and all the other adjustments of a DHX Air...!

 

[MikeD]

I agree, think I mentioned this earlier when I talked about fox yanking their hair out...

Yeah, you did. Sorry I missed your post. I was confused and distracted by all the implications and inferences and such that were floating around the thread...I'm not too smart and am easily befuddled.

 

[LOOnatic]

Back to the topic, I think it's odd that the critiques of air suspension I used to see criticized it for being too inherently progressive, whereas the TALAS system is criticized for being too linear.

Now, TALAS is claimed to be a linear system (the "L" in TALAS), but I thought that it was designed this way in order to address people's dislike of air-spring progression.

All in all, I think it just goes to show that individual systems can be designed in many different ways...it's just like generalizations about steel and aluminum frames. Materials have inherent characteristics, sure, but the user encounters a finished system or product, not a raw material. The design of something may capitalize on, exaggerate, alter, eliminate, or invert what are normally thought of as the inherent characteristics of a given material.

To expand on what DHtahoe said, it's about choosing the right gear for you, knowing it thoroughly, and having it set up optimally for you and your uses.

MD

Edit: I've found that my TALAS RLC 135 feels, under aggressive use, like some 36 detractors have described...too linear, unless it's pumped up too much. And though that makes me wonder if the 36 isn't the same way, I don't take it for granted that it is.

I've never touched one, aside from a bounce on a showroom floor, so I won't speculate or extend my experiences with another TALAS fork to this one.

Okay for the record i would lke to point out that all the linear issues with the 36 thus far are in regard to the 05 air-coil unit.

Myself am looking at the VanRc pure coil 06 version which i hope is not in the same boat.

 

[MikeD]

Okay for the record i would lke to point out that all the linear issues with the 36 thus far are in regard to the 05 air-coil unit.

Myself am looking at the VanRc pure coil 06 version which i hope is not in the same boat.

I don't think there's a coil in the 05 at all, is there, Loo? Again, the irony of a coil spring being used to make an air fork more progressive comes to the fore.

That full-coil 36 must be tipping 6 lbs, no? Looks like it might be good competition for the Marzo 66.

MD

 

[leprechaun]

the van36 we recieved were 5lbs 9oz,vs 5lb 1oz of the 36 air.

the z1 fr1 was also 5lb 9 oz.... wierd eh?

 

[frorider]

not being critical here, but i think some of you are confusing spring rate with damping.

'standard' air chambers are definitely non-linear in terms of spring rate. PV=nRT explains why. 'nuff said on that

'other' air chamber designs can address this non-linear spring rate issue. negative coil spring, fer example. this is why fox air forks aren't particularly light. meanwhile, my 'doppio' air marzocchi was light but sucked azz in terms of feel.

another method is reducing the ratio of swept volume to total initial volume. P1V1 = P2V2 for my my fellow engineering homies.

damping is a different but related discussion. we don't need to rehash what's been talked about on this forum before on this topic. bottom line tho is that a good fork has enough damping adjustment that most riders can get the 'end of stroke' damping feel that they want.

many of us remember the early daze of FR when the solution to bottoming was 'stiffer spring'. now we've become spoiled and like to have a relatively plush initial stroke and a moderate spring force, and (personally) I like to have a strongly progressive damping resistance near the bottom of the stroke, but not a hugh spike that comes outta nowhere just a few mm above total bottom-out.

some people whose opinions i respect have said that the 36 doesn't quite achieve this progressive damping feel. OTOH, PASean is an example of someone who apparently knows how to ride and knows gear and likes his 36.

i've owned or tried many air forks over the years but have yet to find one that felt as good as coil. on the other hand, on a linkage bike i've had many air shocks (e.g. my push'd float on my XC bike) that felt damn good.

 

[MikeD]

not being critical here, but i think some of you are confusing spring rate with damping.

True enough...guilty as charged. But you do underscore my point re: looking at how a particular suspension system (spring, damper, and whatever else is involved) acts in use instead of just thinking about whether it's air or coil.

 

[Eno]

Punkassean is exactly right. If you have an RC2 unit, you can tune the thing from full linear all the way to feeling pretty progressive. Especially as the HSV is turned close to the limit. A lot of times, i see criticisms on suspension when it looks like it's not being set to the rider's preference. This same issue of the fork bottoming out too easily came up with the Fox 40 fork when it came out... It's just a simple matter of playing with the low and high speed settings. That's what makes the RC2 worth so much more. Things like brake dive can be tuned out with the low speed compression. The fork is so tuneable i found myself making adjustments to maximise fork performance to suit each individual course. So guys, learn to set up your suspension properly, especially since you spent so much money on it already.

 

[OGRipper]

Eno and frorider death match!!! No seriously, although you can crank up the HSC to give something of a progressive feel, it's not quite the same as bottoming resistence you can tune with air or oil level, and it effects HSC in other parts of the stroke. I don't have much time on these forks but have ridden a couple and my pals that own them say the only thing lacking is teh ability to tune in progressiveness independent of the HSC. Still great forks...

 

[Eno]

Hi Ogripper,

A talas system can be made more progressive in 2 ways. 1) increasing the IFP pressure. 2) Decreasing the IFP volume (by putting in more float fluid in it). Either way's pretty troublesome though and can only be done by Fox service centres...

 

[OGRipper]

Hi Ogripper,

A talas system can be made more progressive in 2 ways. 1) increasing the IFP pressure. 2) Decreasing the IFP volume (by putting in more float fluid in it). Either way's pretty troublesome though and can only be done by Fox service centres...

Hello...well I was not aware TALAS has an internal floating piston (??) but that's good to know, if you are right that might help solve the one complaint some of my bros have with the forks.

But even if that's true you and I probably agree that the rider's ability to tune in progressiveness is really the point, particularly since many riders set things up differently for different rides and conditions. It's not a fatal flaw or anything, still great product.

 

[go-ride.com]

Here's what I've experienced.

1. The '05 Talas RLC 130 is the best air fork I have every ridden (first one I even liked) and rivals the best 5" coil sprung forks.

2. The '05 36 RC does not feel the same as the 130. More directly put it does not have the position sensitive progression of the 130.

3. The difference, I believe, is that the 130 uses an open bath damper that gets a lot of position progression from the build up of air pressure against the adjustable oil height.

Overall, I'd still like a 36 RC or 36 Van RC for just about any aggressive trail riding and some dh or dj.

 

[ioscope]

What is more progressive: More oil or less oil?

 

[OGRipper]

What is more progressive: More oil or less oil?

It's not that simple because there are many different systems, but in most open baths, more oil creates bottoming resistence and more progression. So for example with my 888, when I first got it, it didn't have enough oil, so it would bottom out easily and had almost no progression. So I put too much oil in, and it had BR and progression to the point that I didn't get full travel. After a little trial and error I've got it dialed so that it ramps up nicely toward the end of the stroke and I get full travel on only the hardest hits. But progression and bottoming resistence are not really the same thing - the fox forks have a built in cone that provides bottoming resistence but that only works at the very end of the stroke.

 

[frorider]

Punkassean is exactly right. If you have an RC2 unit, you can tune the thing from full linear all the way to feeling pretty progressive. Especially as the HSV is turned close to the limit. A lot of times, i see criticisms on suspension when it looks like it's not being set to the rider's preference. This same issue of the fork bottoming out too easily came up with the Fox 40 fork when it came out... It's just a simple matter of playing with the low and high speed settings. That's what makes the RC2 worth so much more. Things like brake dive can be tuned out with the low speed compression. The fork is so tuneable i found myself making adjustments to maximise fork performance to suit each individual course. So guys, learn to set up your suspension properly, especially since you spent so much money on it already.

Usually when I hear complaints about a highly tunable shock or fork not having the right 'feel', i chalk it up to the user not understanding how to set up that fork or shock. however the point that so many people were making in this thread--i assume you read the whole thread -- was that in some cases even people who know what they're doing when it comes to tuning equipment were finding it hard to get the progressive feeling they were looking for from this fork.

Knowing Fox they're already working on tweaking the internals...

 

[Dirtbike]

Hello...well I was not aware TALAS has an internal floating piston (??) but that's good to know, if you are right that might help solve the one complaint some of my bros have with the forks.

But even if that's true you and I probably agree that the rider's ability to tune in progressiveness is really the point, particularly since many riders set things up differently for different rides and conditions. It's not a fatal flaw or anything, still great product.

I believe it is similar to this...

The reason its so linear is because of the swept volume ratio as frorider mentioned. The reason it stays soft at reduced travel is because the Swept volume reduces, but the initial volume stays about the same.

another method is reducing the ratio of swept volume to total initial volume. P1V1 = P2V2

Adding oil behind the IFP would reduce the initial air volume, increasing progressiveness...

Im not a fox expert, so correct me if Im wrong with anything.

 

[Jm_]

Punkassean is exactly right. If you have an RC2 unit, you can tune the thing from full linear all the way to feeling pretty progressive. .

Increasing compression damping does not make something more progressive, it may keep it from bottoming, but it's not making it more progressive. More compression damping makes it more harsh and keeps the suspension from working effecively. A small amount of compression damping may be needed for heavier riders, but it's not about progressiveness.

 

[Eno]

In the case of the RC2 units, the feel when you run light to heavy high speed compression is almost like increasing progressive feel. It might not be that, but it sure does feel like it... And you dont feel any harshness at all running very heavy high speed compression damping in the RC2. In fact, the feeling gets more and more plush or non-linearish. Note that I'm referring to "feel". The high speed compression kicks in seamlessly on the bigger hits when you would be normally bottoming the fork.

Anyway, the points about progressivity of Fox forks is good feedback for Fox. Maybe they'd take note, or maybe not. From what I know, some of the pros running Fox forks run stock forks.