Unlikely comparison: 888 RC2X vs. 2009 40 RC2?
- Thread starter RMR
- Start date
Fixed!
Yes it would, Personally I belive oil height is the best way to know if your fork is properly filled.
Unfortunaly, it actually is the correct amount. Problem is, you cant get all the old oil out, and with any fork, again that is why oil hieght is actually more accurate. specially with some that over grease there parts as they reassemble, keeps levels right were you want them.Fixed!
You CAN get all the old oil out, but it involves removing the cartridge from the fork and taking off the spring so you can cycle it freely.
It doesn't take much effort to just record the previous heights when you first open the fork. You should be doing that anyway if you aren't already positive what your dump amount needs to be.
It doesn't take much effort to just record the previous heights when you first open the fork. You should be doing that anyway if you aren't already positive what your dump amount needs to be.
Excelent point about checking it beofre you dump it out, but even the marz techs have told me on many occasions teh same thing, even if you cycle it freely out of the fork, your just not going to get all the oil out.
You can. Flushing with brake cleaner works fine for the older cartridges once they're out of the fork. Since they're completely open chamber there shouldn't be any o-rings in there to worry about damaging. In fact, a very thorough cleaning and polishing can sometimes make those forks TOO plush. Amazing how much drag most suspension setups have that I come across.
Pretty much. Almost all major forks in stock form are like that. If you go through the effort of getting rid of ALL the drag in a fork, you find out there is usually very little actual damping is going on there.
Spahman,
I'm a bit heavier than you and I ride a Soft spring in each leg. This might be too soft for me, but I'm a finesse rider and it's working for me. At your weight, definitely give it a shot. You can always mix one Soft and one Medium if you prefer.
DirtyMike,
It's true that oil height is the more important measurement, but this fork isn't especially sensitive to a couple millimetres here or there and the volume method is much quicker. If I pull the cartridge and cycle it a few times to remove oil, there's not enough oil left to worry me. I have a 200 mL Erlenmeyer flask that makes filling each leg with 200 mL of fluid a quick and easy task.
Biffff,
The compression adjustment on the bottom of the right leg is a high-speed/all-speed adjuster. The 888 RC2X has essentially zero dedicated low-speed compression damping. This is part of why it's so plush, so prone to brake dive, and generally moving all over the place all the time. The X-cartridge adjuster on the bottom of the left leg is a hydraulic bottom-out bumper that activates in the last inch or two of travel.
I'm a bit heavier than you and I ride a Soft spring in each leg. This might be too soft for me, but I'm a finesse rider and it's working for me. At your weight, definitely give it a shot. You can always mix one Soft and one Medium if you prefer.
DirtyMike,
It's true that oil height is the more important measurement, but this fork isn't especially sensitive to a couple millimetres here or there and the volume method is much quicker. If I pull the cartridge and cycle it a few times to remove oil, there's not enough oil left to worry me. I have a 200 mL Erlenmeyer flask that makes filling each leg with 200 mL of fluid a quick and easy task.
Biffff,
The compression adjustment on the bottom of the right leg is a high-speed/all-speed adjuster. The 888 RC2X has essentially zero dedicated low-speed compression damping. This is part of why it's so plush, so prone to brake dive, and generally moving all over the place all the time. The X-cartridge adjuster on the bottom of the left leg is a hydraulic bottom-out bumper that activates in the last inch or two of travel.
Last edited:
Different forks react differently to oil levels. ten to fifteen cc's can be pretty noticable on the ramp, specially fo really lite guys, or really heavy guys.
My 66 is def one of those forks, if you try to rebuild it off the sites volumes, youll only get 4 to 5 inches of travel.... kinda scary actually. If I add five cc's to each side, its a noticable change in ramp up. My Brothers 07 88 rc2 we did the same tuning with oil height, five cc's at a time up and down..... Its actually pretty noticable as you tune a little at a time. <specially seeing how oil weight and elvel is really the only custom tuning you can do on older Marz forks>
DirtyMike,
I agree with you in principle, but when a person is already down to about 200 mL of oil in a 888 RC2X, the difference isn't dramatic. If we were talking about adding oil at or beyond 220 mL, then yes, you notice every drop of oil.
I agree with you in principle, but when a person is already down to about 200 mL of oil in a 888 RC2X, the difference isn't dramatic. If we were talking about adding oil at or beyond 220 mL, then yes, you notice every drop of oil.
I got my 888 opened last night... sure is much easier when you take your time and are less nervous.
The bike shops here in everett washington are horrible! After telling them i wanted soft springs put it... I go to find out whats really in it last night.. yellow Mediums!!!
grrr stupid roadie shops!! I did manage to drain some oil and it helped a bit..
Can anyone point me in the right direction to order some soft springs for my year?
The bike shops here in everett washington are horrible! After telling them i wanted soft springs put it... I go to find out whats really in it last night.. yellow Mediums!!!
grrr stupid roadie shops!! I did manage to drain some oil and it helped a bit..
Can anyone point me in the right direction to order some soft springs for my year?
Try Tims Bike Shop since your in Everett.
He said changing the oil levels wouldn't help... so I just did it my self
If you go too low, youll end up cavitating the oil and lose dampening. I would say you can safely get down to 180 without a problem.
DirtyMike,
The Marzocchi folks said they've had good results at 200 mL, but wouldn't go much below that. If 180 mL works, then it would be pushing the limit of safety.
PepperJester,
No, the 888 RC2X compression adjuster is on the bottom of the right leg. The locations of the compression and rebound adjusters are reversed on the VF2, according to the manual, so perhaps that's what you're thinking about.
Spahman,
So you're going to ditch your fork and spend a grand on a new one because you're frustrated by a lack of understanding of how to tune a fork? Unless you buy a new fork that happens to be perfectly adjusted for you, you're just going to run into the same problems. Your current fork needs about $10 worth of oil, perhaps $35 worth of springs, and some of your time to get it running perfectly. I'm no accountant, but that sounds like the better deal.
The Marzocchi folks said they've had good results at 200 mL, but wouldn't go much below that. If 180 mL works, then it would be pushing the limit of safety.
PepperJester,
No, the 888 RC2X compression adjuster is on the bottom of the right leg. The locations of the compression and rebound adjusters are reversed on the VF2, according to the manual, so perhaps that's what you're thinking about.
Spahman,
So you're going to ditch your fork and spend a grand on a new one because you're frustrated by a lack of understanding of how to tune a fork? Unless you buy a new fork that happens to be perfectly adjusted for you, you're just going to run into the same problems. Your current fork needs about $10 worth of oil, perhaps $35 worth of springs, and some of your time to get it running perfectly. I'm no accountant, but that sounds like the better deal.
I was never questioning the side of the leg that has compression rather the location top vrs. bottom. The original poster incorrectly stated that both compression adjusters are on the bottom. When in fact on it top side.
It was me you quoted and I was correct about the compression adjustment's location, but I did make an incorrect statment earlier about the X adjustment.
I correctly stated the high-speed/all-speed compression adjustment is at the bottom of the right leg.
The "C" adjustment at the top of the left leg is the X cartridge, which is a hydraulic bottom-out adjustment. I incorrectly stated this as being at the bottom of the left leg, which would've been immediately obvious to anyone looking at their 888, since there's no adjustment down there. If you've been turning the "C" at the top if your fork's left leg, then we've just found the answer to why it doesn't seem to make much of a difference to your compression damping.
Please see section 5.14 of the 2006 Marzocchi Owner's Manual. That's column 2 on page 143.
I'll even provide you with a link.
I do belive RMR is correct on that one.
Should be rebound in top, ocmpression on the bottom, with a bottom out adjustment on the left
Last edited:
Like you I have some notes, but I dont have any oil volume written down, I went with oil heights/levels. Mainly because everytime I have called marz in the past, thats what they have always given me, along with them telling me to forget about oil amounts, just stick to levels.
When we start doing stuff like this with our forks, we are already pushing what is safe by going away from what the designers intended anyways.
Also it is why I always give a fork a thorough check out when I am done, listen for topping out, strange noises, feel for anything that is like cavitating fluid..... curbs and staricases work really well for this.
DirtyMike,
As we discussed earlier, I agree that oil height is the definitive measurement, but the dimensional tolerances on a fork are extremely tight, which makes volume a viable method of setting the oil level, providing the fork is completely drained of oil and all measurements are performed with a reasonable amount of care.
If the fork is thoroughly drained, then I suspect adding 180 mL of oil will be inadequate, though I haven't experimented with anything much below 200 mL.
I realize we're operating outside the manufacturer's specs, but it's well established that 200 mL of oil in a 888 RC2X works well and doesn't cause an undue increase in the spring rate. My statement that 180 mL would be pushing the limit of what's safe was a diplomatic way of saying that if the fork is well drained, I'd bet 180 mL is inadequate. That is where the lack of safety comes in.
If you'll forgive me for being pedantic, inadequate oil will create an emulsion, not cause cavitation.
As we discussed earlier, I agree that oil height is the definitive measurement, but the dimensional tolerances on a fork are extremely tight, which makes volume a viable method of setting the oil level, providing the fork is completely drained of oil and all measurements are performed with a reasonable amount of care.
If the fork is thoroughly drained, then I suspect adding 180 mL of oil will be inadequate, though I haven't experimented with anything much below 200 mL.
I realize we're operating outside the manufacturer's specs, but it's well established that 200 mL of oil in a 888 RC2X works well and doesn't cause an undue increase in the spring rate. My statement that 180 mL would be pushing the limit of what's safe was a diplomatic way of saying that if the fork is well drained, I'd bet 180 mL is inadequate. That is where the lack of safety comes in.
If you'll forgive me for being pedantic, inadequate oil will create an emulsion, not cause cavitation.
Hmm actually...........
the term 'emulsion' specifically describes two immiscible liqiuids, as per merriam webster:
"a system (as fat in milk) consisting of a liquid dispersed with or without an emulsifier in an immiscible liquid usually in droplets of larger than colloidal size"
I guess cavitation is not technically correct either as you are not actually creating a vacuum such that the oil is in vapor state...you really just mixing air into oil to create a temporary foamed oil that is compressable...but it IS the accepted term used to describe this.
the term 'emulsion' specifically describes two immiscible liqiuids, as per merriam webster:
"a system (as fat in milk) consisting of a liquid dispersed with or without an emulsifier in an immiscible liquid usually in droplets of larger than colloidal size"
I guess cavitation is not technically correct either as you are not actually creating a vacuum such that the oil is in vapor state...you really just mixing air into oil to create a temporary foamed oil that is compressable...but it IS the accepted term used to describe this.
And I thought I was being pedantic! 
It's true that an emulsion is, properly, a mixture of two liquids. Some industries use the term loosely. You're correct that I should've been more rigorous and referred to the process as "foaming".
Cavitation, however, is definitely not an appropriate term. As you indicated, cavitation is a process in which low pressure zones are created that are below the vapor pressure of the working fluid, causing bubbles to spontaneously form. In this context, we're talking about an oil level so low that it doesn't cover all suspension components, leading to splashing and foaming.
Cavitation and foaming are both problems in suspension design, so the two terms should not be confused - nor should the issue be complicated by people who erroneously refer to the latter as an "emulsion".
It's true that an emulsion is, properly, a mixture of two liquids. Some industries use the term loosely. You're correct that I should've been more rigorous and referred to the process as "foaming".
Cavitation, however, is definitely not an appropriate term. As you indicated, cavitation is a process in which low pressure zones are created that are below the vapor pressure of the working fluid, causing bubbles to spontaneously form. In this context, we're talking about an oil level so low that it doesn't cover all suspension components, leading to splashing and foaming.
Cavitation and foaming are both problems in suspension design, so the two terms should not be confused - nor should the issue be complicated by people who erroneously refer to the latter as an "emulsion".
Last edited:
RMR I'm gonna do that... you just don't know how much money I've put into this fork... its frustrating.. brand new Xcart in it.. tons of rebuilds trying to get it to feel right.
It really bugged me when I put on a 2002 shiver and it felt 20x better!..
Do you really think it'll be a good DH fork after soft springs?
It really bugged me when I put on a 2002 shiver and it felt 20x better!..
Do you really think it'll be a good DH fork after soft springs?
I understand you're out of patience and want assurance, but no one can guarantee whether it's going to work out. I can, however, tell you about my experience in more detail. Keep in mind I'm very much a finesse rider: fast, smooth, and averse to hucks or needlessly leaving the ground. I'm lighter than average and I like my suspension soft.
Initially, I was unhappy with the fork. Sure, it was smooth over small bumps, but I was lucky to get more than half of the travel.
First, I swapped one spring to a Soft. That helped, so I did the second spring. A bit better, but now it was quite soft on top, yet I still wasn't getting full travel, so I changed the oil. That's when the magic happened.
I went with 200 mL per side of Motorex 5W10 suspension oil (not sure if the oil, itself, makes a difference, but that's what's in there). The fork felt better across the full range of travel and I was using almost all of the travel on a regular basis. Low-speed damping is minimal, so the fork dives when braking and moves all over the place, but it's so smooth, plush, and maintenance-free that I can't help but love it.
With the reduced the oil level, I could probably go back to one Soft and one Medium spring, but I'm content with the current situation. The only forks that seem to feel better are Blackbox Boxxers that are fresh off a full rebuild. Any other fork - or the Boxxers after a few weeks of riding - seems sticky, quirky, and generally not right. My 888 might never have perfect performance, but it has pretty darn good performance and it stays that way for a year at a time.
Few things to add to your rebuild Spahman
get a gallon of denatured alcohol.
get a good fork oil
get some slick honey, or some litium grease<preferably slick honey.
Ok those are the norms..... now the not so normals
Go to your auto store, get a good carnuba car wax, and get a good teflon engine oil treatment.
Take the teflon treatment, shake it up, pour it in a glass bowl and cover it for a day or two, use something to remove the oil off the top leaving you with mostly all teflon in the bottom.
When you get the lowers off, wipe down the stantions with the alcohol to get all the old oil off, then get your carnuba out and apply it to teh stantions just like you would waxing a car....let it sit while you clean and prep other stuff..... Buff it once its dry ETC ETC.
Replace about ten cc's of your fork oil with the seperated teflon totalling the amount your looking for<Via volume or height>
everything from there is normal. The added teflon, and waxing usually makes a phenominal difference in your fork.
get a gallon of denatured alcohol.
get a good fork oil
get some slick honey, or some litium grease<preferably slick honey.
Ok those are the norms..... now the not so normals
Go to your auto store, get a good carnuba car wax, and get a good teflon engine oil treatment.
Take the teflon treatment, shake it up, pour it in a glass bowl and cover it for a day or two, use something to remove the oil off the top leaving you with mostly all teflon in the bottom.
When you get the lowers off, wipe down the stantions with the alcohol to get all the old oil off, then get your carnuba out and apply it to teh stantions just like you would waxing a car....let it sit while you clean and prep other stuff..... Buff it once its dry ETC ETC.
Replace about ten cc's of your fork oil with the seperated teflon totalling the amount your looking for<Via volume or height>
everything from there is normal. The added teflon, and waxing usually makes a phenominal difference in your fork.
Now you're talking. Now go through with that same approach with every other sliding surface of the fork, and take it two steps further.
1. Getting the springrate right should've been step number 1, nothing else matters if it's over/under sprung IMO
2. Take the fork to someone who has lots of experience dialing in DH forks. Have they rebuild it, set it up for you. There's gotta be an experienced DH rider/mechanic somewhere near you. If not find someone on this site, maybe someone who's posted in this thread.
3. There is no reason that fork shouldn't feel perfect with minimal effort maintenance.
edit:
4. Try what DirtyMike said in his latest post
Last edited:
It did have the correct spring rate at first... greens are soft right? When I first sent it off to M they swapped my green springs for these yellow..
meh long story! i plan on getting started on this project this week
thanks for all the help guys
i had an 888rc2x. loved the feel and the stiffness. very solid feel to it. however, one time I drove 11 hours to a race, and the bikes were upside down in the back of the van. I grabbed my bike by the front wheel to pull it out and the lowers came off! 
turns out that the damper rod had a chamfer on it right by where the piston attaches, and the damper rod was what held the fork together. that chamfer made the rod extremely thin there, and both damper rods had failed allowing the lowers to seperate from the stanchions. marz replaced them no questions asked, but it seemed like an incredible amount of liability for them. i never did hear about a recall. I did hear from a guy who had his lowers come off mid jump, and he broke his back!!
turns out that the damper rod had a chamfer on it right by where the piston attaches, and the damper rod was what held the fork together. that chamfer made the rod extremely thin there, and both damper rods had failed allowing the lowers to seperate from the stanchions. marz replaced them no questions asked, but it seemed like an incredible amount of liability for them. i never did hear about a recall. I did hear from a guy who had his lowers come off mid jump, and he broke his back!!
I have an 06 66rc2x and an 07 88rc2x
I may try a Boxxer, but I will keep this pillowfork. I dont have much exposure to many others but what I do have seems to backup many of the comments - the Boxxer and 40 seem more controlled and maybe peform a little better damping wise, but the 888 is awesome and bombprrof. I like the 66 due to the ability to tweak it with air pressure, and feel its a little superior to the 888 for my purposes.
Ultimately, despite the passionate advocates of one or another, any fork these days is a good fork, and it comes down to a matter of fit/what you prefer less than absolute performance comparisons by any 3rd parties.
I may try a Boxxer, but I will keep this pillowfork. I dont have much exposure to many others but what I do have seems to backup many of the comments - the Boxxer and 40 seem more controlled and maybe peform a little better damping wise, but the 888 is awesome and bombprrof. I like the 66 due to the ability to tweak it with air pressure, and feel its a little superior to the 888 for my purposes.
Ultimately, despite the passionate advocates of one or another, any fork these days is a good fork, and it comes down to a matter of fit/what you prefer less than absolute performance comparisons by any 3rd parties.