DW has said himself that on his own bike he runs a CCDB and he likes that best.I would just run the RC4, I'm pretty sure DW tested several shocks and the fox worked out the best, he designed the frame and that specific shock to work together.
Then I stand corrected!DW has said himself that on his own bike he runs a CCDB and he likes that best.
Ian_Collins on this forum runs an Elka on his DHR. I'm sure he'll chime in when he sees this.
i think some of what you're feeling is just the nature of those frames and how they contrast one another...I tested the ELKA on my sunday for long time this year
it is really amazing
but the sunday is bottoming too much with it, so now I run the RC4 on my sunday
last weekend I took my friends new DHR for some runs (withe the stock RC4)
the bike feels really a lot like my sunday (HA and all)
but the rear end just feel more relaxed (I cant describe it ...)
the sunday rear end feels like it tracks the ground, but feels more bouncy
the DHR just feel less bumpy ...
I really want to check this bike with the ELKA. as I know the ELKA will make it even better...
IAN.
can you share you experience with the DHR & ELKA?
thanks
well, in terms of fading, it could also be due to the fact that the reservoir uses air, where both the Elka and Vivid run on nitrogen, it can be a slight hassle to recharge here and there but it helps performance so it's worth it.i would take the rc4 off for sure...rode 3 weeks with a friend on a brand new one in morzine and he certainly wasnt impressed, his theory was the shaft was too big whic caused it to heat up very quickly which led to the shock's rebound becoming significantly quicker....this was experienced around 2 mins into a 5 min run which wasnt ideal..quiete a change from his old dhr...said it let the bike down
id go with the elka or the vivid which was in agreement with my firend...
does the nitrogen make thaaat much difference? I run my RC4 with really slow rebound because I know that by the time Im on my second run it'll be heated up and run slightly faster.
What he saidNitrogen pressure is far more consistent for several reasons:
It maintains more consistent pressure because pure nitrogen is far less sensitive to temperature changes.
It doesn't have the water vapor content of air, and the presence of water makes the air even more sensitive to changes in temp.
Nitrogen does not leak out of the system as easily so your pressure holds far longer than an air system that needs to be checked frequently.
I already knew those things... let me refrase, does it FEEL that more different? I remember when I had my avy charged with Nitrogen and then rode it with air, couldnt feel the difference. Does it really feel that much different? I get it for other industries (moto, car, etc)What he said
i weight about 180 +-5 lbs depending on if i'm drinking beer or actually hitting the gym....Ian.
talked with Erik.
I can probably order the DHR with the ELKA and his tuning
how much do you weight?
what are your setting on the shock?
thanks
realistically you probably won't feel a difference unless you're on a 8+ minute run and your shock heats up and fades...that has happened with me before on a shock that ran on air, and has never happened with shocks that ran on nitrogenI already knew those things... let me refrase, does it FEEL that more different? I remember when I had my avy charged with Nitrogen and then rode it with air, couldnt feel the difference. Does it really feel that much different? I get it for other industries (moto, car, etc)
All of the above is technically correct (except the leakage part, diffusion through metal and thick rubber o-rings is next to nothing!) but the actual difference is negligible.Nitrogen pressure is far more consistent for several reasons:
It maintains more consistent pressure because pure nitrogen is far less sensitive to temperature changes.
It doesn't have the water vapor content of air, and the presence of water makes the air even more sensitive to changes in temp.
Nitrogen does not leak out of the system as easily so your pressure holds far longer than an air system that needs to be checked frequently.
Damping fade has to do with oil viscosity changing with temperature. Using nitrogen instead of air will not change that.realistically you probably won't feel a difference unless you're on a 8+ minute run and your shock heats up and fades...that has happened with me before on a shock that ran on air, and has never happened with shocks that ran on nitrogen
but if the shock as a whole was cooler wouldn't it be less susceptible oil heating up and fading as well?All of the above is technically correct (except the leakage part, diffusion through metal and thick rubber o-rings is next to nothing!) but the actual difference is negligible.
Damping fade has to do with oil viscosity changing with temperature. Using nitrogen instead of air will not change that.
The thermal mass of air/nitrogen is miniscule (like in the vicinity of one thousandth) of the oil, as is its conductivity, and the differences between nitrogen and air are next to nothing. The difference that makes to the temperature is sweet FA.but if the shock as a whole was cooler wouldn't it be less susceptible oil heating up and fading as well?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but he also preferred an Avalanche on the Sunday.DW has said himself that on his own bike he runs a CCDB and he likes that best.
Ian_Collins on this forum runs an Elka on his DHR. I'm sure he'll chime in when he sees this.