[Andeh]

I haven't seen anything yet on this: https://mrpbike.com/products/noken

As a lighter rider, I have a hard time using most of my travel on my Zebs even with 0 tokens, especially the 160mm version. I can't run lower pressure without making it lose support, but I will end up using ~15-20mm less travel than my 160mm Lyrik on the same big g-out type compressions, with both forks tuned to have similar feel for the first 2/3 of travel. This product seems to make a lot more sense to me than some of the snake oil carbon pucks out of Europe.

Thoughts?

 

[jonKranked]

first i'm seeing of that too. idea seems sound enough.

if you're willing to pay a little more:

The RUNT ROCK SHOX ZEB — Diaz Suspension Design

IN STOCK! Take your suspension to the next level with The RUNT: Easy drop-in installation. The RUNT is a Patented air spring upgrade, known as the original AIRcoil. The dual positive air chamber design creates the ideal spring rate throughout the entire stroke. Mimicking the linear feel of a

diazsuspensiondesign.com

creates a dual positive air spring. same concept as the manitou IRT.

 

[djjohnr]

Make sure you have downtube clearance.

 

[canadmos]

Did a beaver make that?

 

[Westy]

first i'm seeing of that too. idea seems sound enough.

if you're willing to pay a little more:

The RUNT ROCK SHOX ZEB — Diaz Suspension Design

IN STOCK! Take your suspension to the next level with The RUNT: Easy drop-in installation. The RUNT is a Patented air spring upgrade, known as the original AIRcoil. The dual positive air chamber design creates the ideal spring rate throughout the entire stroke. Mimicking the linear feel of a

diazsuspensiondesign.com

creates a dual positive air spring. same concept as the manitou IRT.

The Runt takes up the same volume as two tokens, so it isn't likely to help if the issue is getting the last bit of travel.

First thing I would do is a basic service to make sure it isn't over filled with oil.

 

[Jm_]

Finally, air springs are good.





































































Just kidding, they still suck.

 

[SkaredShtles]

Finally, air springs are good.





































































Just kidding, they still suck.

Coil 4 lyf, yo!

 

[jonKranked]

The Runt takes up the same volume as two tokens, so it isn't likely to help if the issue is getting the last bit of travel.

it works completely different than tokens, it adds a second positive air spring rather than decreasing chamber volume. it creates a dual rate air spring (+), giving a lot more tuneability. you run a lower pressure in the primary air spring to keep initial stroke sensitivity without losing midstroke support, the second chamber runs a higher pressure. when the pressures in the two chambers (springs) equalizes, both chambers will start compressing - meaning that it won't ramp up as much in the last portion of the travel (which is the problem here). the overall effect is that it is more linear spring curve.

First thing I would do is a basic service to make sure it isn't over filled with oil.

this is not a bad idea.

 

[jonKranked]

 

[Jm_]

One of the problems of forks is their 1:1 ratio and our relatively low sprung to unsprung mass ratio and how seals and the like create a significant amount of drag in the realm of what should be damping reacting to input, so something like the runt or some of the similar things help a lot with the spring...but then add in more drag that hurts the damping...I get the point of this and it makes sense...but good god could we just stop making forks other than XC race shit with air springs and go back to coil springs that do everything better? Sigh...

 

[Westy]

it works completely different than tokens, it adds a second positive air spring rather than decreasing chamber volume. it creates a dual rate air spring (+), giving a lot more tuneability. you run a lower pressure in the primary air spring to keep initial stroke sensitivity without losing midstroke support, the second chamber runs a higher pressure. when the pressures in the two chambers (springs) equalizes, both chambers will start compressing - meaning that it won't ramp up as much in the last portion of the travel (which is the problem here). the overall effect is that it is more linear spring curve.



this is not a bad idea.

I am familiar with how they work. I bought a cheap used one to try for kicks. It will provide a more linear spring rate when compared to a fork with a similar positive chamber volume, but makes the overall progression worse when compared to zero tokens. I measure the Runt for a lyrik to have about the same volume as 2 spacers. Somewhere I even did the math and plotted the various possible spring rates. Runt is a good solution if you run tokens and want something more adjustable or linear. But if your problem is already having too much ramp up at the end of the day physics still depends on the ratio of your negative and positive chamber volumes and total compressionratio. That Vorsprung doohicky would probably work better as it adds volume to the fork, as would the aforementioned Noken if it fits.

However as this seems to be a fairly unique problem it is possible it just has too much oil in it.

 

[Andeh]

I've thought about the Runt a few times, but am reluctant to shell out for it for a couple reasons. 1) it's expensiver & travel dependent. 2) I fucking hated my EXT Era with its triple chamber air spring. Granted, there were a lot of issues with that fork, but having the extra faff of the air spring setup didn't help.

 

[HardtailHack]

I've thought about the Runt a few times, but am reluctant to shell out for it for a couple reasons. 1) it's expensiver & travel dependent. 2) I fucking hated my EXT Era with its triple chamber air spring. Granted, there were a lot of issues with that fork, but having the extra faff of the air spring setup didn't help.

Ohhhh, triple chamber is the dream for me.

 

[Andeh]

Ohhhh, triple chamber is the dream for me.

By triple I just mean the same thing as Runt / Ohlins: negative + postive 1 + positive 2. Technically conventional air springs are 2 chambers (neg / pos).

 

[Jm_]

I am familiar with how they work. I bought a cheap used one to try for kicks. It will provide a more linear spring rate when compared to a fork with a similar positive chamber volume, but makes the overall progression worse when compared to zero tokens. I measure the Runt for a lyrik to have about the same volume as 2 spacers. Somewhere I even did the math and plotted the various possible spring rates. Runt is a good solution if you run tokens and want something more adjustable or linear. But if your problem is already having too much ramp up at the end of the day physics still depends on the ratio of your negative and positive chamber volumes and total compressionratio. That Vorsprung doohicky would probably work better as it adds volume to the fork, as would the aforementioned Noken if it fits.

However as this seems to be a fairly unique problem it is possible it just has too much oil in it.

That is exactly how my Runt performed compared to my Secus. Secus is way more like "this is a normal spring rate and progression". Runt is always crazy progressive at end and unable to really make linear unless going to a real light spring force overall, which is often not enough to prevent bottoming. As soon as you start doing that, it kind of puts it in an impossible situation to achieve what it intends IME.

 

[toodles]

This product seems to make a lot more sense to me than some of the snake oil carbon pucks out of Europe.

Sounds mental, but those activated carbon things seem to work hey. Got two mates that got them and there's a not subtle difference.

 

[toodles]

but good god could we just stop making forks other than XC race shit with air springs and go back to coil springs that do everything better? Sigh...

I love coil sprung for reliability, low fuss and a broad range of performance reasons, but geez man. Air springs aren't that hard to get working fine also.

 

[Jm_]

I love coil sprung for reliability, low fuss and a broad range of performance reasons, but geez man. Air springs aren't that hard to get working fine also.

To that point, id take an “ok” air spring like my luftkappe-copy lyrik air spring w/an excellent damper like my avalache rather than chasing my tail w/endless spring mods and 2-4 chamber air springs or whatever. In other words, it better have a damn good damper.

 

[Andeh]

To that point, id take an “ok” air spring like my luftkappe-copy lyrik air spring w/an excellent damper like my avalache rather than chasing my tail w/endless spring mods and 2-4 chamber air springs or whatever. In other words, it better have a damn good damper.

Yep, I actually really like my Lyrik D1 air spring. Very easy for me to find the right pressure that seems good all-around. But the D1 chassis doesn't do 170. That's why I'm interested in this thing, to get my 170 Zeb feeling closer to my 160 Lyrik.

 

[captainspauldin]

Yep, I actually really like my Lyrik D1 air spring. Very easy for me to find the right pressure that seems good all-around. But the D1 chassis doesn't do 170. That's why I'm interested in this thing, to get my 170 Zeb feeling closer to my 160 Lyrik.

Could is also be a difference in the dampers between the Lyrik and Zeb? It kinda sounds like you should have more air volume in the Zeb when compared to the Lyrik..

 

[Andeh]

Could is also be a difference in the dampers between the Lyrik and Zeb? It kinda sounds like you should have more air volume in the Zeb when compared to the Lyrik..

Dampers are identical. I've got Charger 3.1 in both, same medium tune in both.

The Zeb air spring is full diameter, unlike the 38 which is tube in tube to reduce it. So for, say, 160mm travel in both Lyrik and Zeb, the Zeb air spring is much larger volume and ramps up more at the end. Which is what I'm trying to address. Fox did the tube in tube thing on the 38 to address the increase in volume vs. the 36. When I've run a 38 160 GRIP2, I had at least a couple of tokens and HSC fully closed and could still bottom it out.

 

[jonKranked]

When I've run a 38 160 GRIP2, I had at least a couple of tokens and HSC fully closed and could still bottom it out.

that's because the grip 2 damper doesn't really have any damping, unfortunately.

 

[toodles]

To that point, id take an “ok” air spring like my luftkappe-copy lyrik air spring w/an excellent damper like my avalache rather than chasing my tail w/endless spring mods and 2-4 chamber air springs or whatever. In other words, it better have a damn good damper.

Yeah I got a Luftkappe on a Zeb and a Charger 2.1 and it does the job. Even if its not perfect, its certainly not the weakest link in the whole rider-bike combination haha

 

[toodles]

Dampers are identical. I've got Charger 3.1 in both, same medium tune in both.

The Zeb air spring is full diameter, unlike the 38 which is tube in tube to reduce it. So for, say, 160mm travel in both Lyrik and Zeb, the Zeb air spring is much larger volume and ramps up more at the end. Which is what I'm trying to address. Fox did the tube in tube thing on the 38 to address the increase in volume vs. the 36. When I've run a 38 160 GRIP2, I had at least a couple of tokens and HSC fully closed and could still bottom it out.

I found the Zeb to be much, much more progressive than the Lyrik or Pike. Possibly due the air in the lowers ramping up or maybe just the spring itself.

Sucks they stopped doing the 170 Lyriks hey.

 

[Redwood Mulch Chucker]

The RUNT is sized to be the same length as the maximum number of volume spacers for the given fork/travel. This is typically around 5-7 volume spacers. It is much larger than 2 "tokens" no matter what fork/travel. It actually takes up even more volume when compared to RS spacers due to the large 8mm hex in the middle of the spacers.

Perhaps it takes up the volume of two tokens when fully compressed (never measured that), but that is irrelevant to the way it works as it's a dynamic volume spacer.

I find it amusing that MRP claims the Noken "can preserve small-bump compliance and mid-stroke support" but their own marketing graphs show less mid support than a stock ZEB.

In any case, the big issue with the ZEB is the lower leg volume ramp effect as some have mentioned. The only thing that addresses this is the Secus, or a coil kit.

 

[Westy]

The RUNT is sized to be the same length as the maximum number of volume spacers for the given fork/travel. This is typically around 5-7 volume spacers. It is much larger than 2 "tokens" no matter what fork/travel. It actually takes up even more volume when compared to RS spacers due to the large 8mm hex in the middle of the spacers.

Perhaps it takes up the volume of two tokens when fully compressed (never measured that), but that is irrelevant to the way it works as it's a dynamic volume spacer.

I find it amusing that MRP claims the Noken "can preserve small-bump compliance and mid-stroke support" but their own marketing graphs show less mid support than a stock ZEB.

In any case, the big issue with the ZEB is the lower leg volume ramp effect as some have mentioned. The only thing that addresses this is the Secus, or a coil kit.

Fully compressed the Runt is about two tokens, no guarantees it will fully compress.

 

[bullcrew]

This fork cap herpie I have no idea how it's going to support my ass with mid stroke like a 3 chamber...

I just wanted to call it that...nothing else to say

Lied::: I like runt I think it made a good addition for what I was looking for and secus did the same except I was at upper range of max psi...

Love my Ohlins and 3 chambers...

 

[HardtailHack]

Dumb question but will it get full travel with no air in the spring?

Being a fat mediocre rider has its benefits, pump up the Mezzer or Selva and just be happy that I'm not on a Z1.
I need to try a modern fork to se how my 4-5yo models hold up.

 

[Andeh]

Fuckit, I ordered one to try once I'm healed up. It's one of the cheaper (and easier) ways I've tried to satisfy my suspension tweaking curiosity.

I've run the EXT triple chamber thing and didn't like it, so skeptical Runt would feel good for me. Tried a Secus and could get full travel but then it was too soft, couldn't get it feeling right to me, felt really hard to use more travel and have similar midstroke support as before.

 

[canadmos]

Fuckit, I ordered one to try once I'm healed up. It's one of the cheaper (and easier) ways I've tried to satisfy my suspension tweaking curiosity.

I've run the EXT triple chamber thing and didn't like it, so skeptical Runt would feel good for me. Tried a Secus and could get full travel but then it was too soft, couldn't get it feeling right to me, felt really hard to use more travel and have similar midstroke support as before.

What are you putting it on?

I have a 170mm Zeb, which I've used all travel on maybe only once or twice. So I'd probably try this just to see, if it can be found for a reasonable price in Canada.

 

[toodles]

I have a 170mm Zeb, which I've used all travel on maybe only once or twice. So I'd probably try this just to see, if it can be found for a reasonable price in Canada.

Similar to mine. The times I've bottomed it was because I'd done something very wrong haha

 

[canadmos]

Similar to mine. The times I've bottomed it was because I'd done something very wrong haha

Same, same.

It's not even that the fork feels bad, but it just doesn't seem in sync with the softer feeling X2 Float shock on the rear.