Give this man a cookie. Recommended sag percentages are selected for a reason.
Why less people using Fox 40???
- Thread starter X-Bike
- Start date
Thats what knobs and air adjustments are for. I love knobs and air pressure.
Ive finally got all the adjustments for my 07 66 figured out. I change the settings depending on where Im riding. I have my race/trail setting and my FR setting. Thats all I need. A few more psi and a few turns on the compression and Im set.
Forks these days are aiming for this IMO. I had to change springs in the past and now it seems like you can make enough adjustment on a fork to where you dont really need different springs.
WHERES MY COOKIE?
Lotta knobs here in this thread...I love knobs.
Actually Fox Sells with distributors all the time like jenson Beyondbikes.com Cambria and you never see less than msrp cause fox wants it to be a level playing field. For instance Beyond or jenson might get the forks cheeper cause they buy more then like a local shop.
Those are not distributors, those are retailers. BIG difference.
The boxxer can be adjusted in travel.
The boxxer is 1lb+ lighter than a 40 (boxxer WC's are 6.1 and 40's are 7.1 as far as I am aware).
I can change the seals in my boxxer in 20 minutes too. I can even do a full oil change in less than 5.
Linear forks are terrible for downhill unless you love bottoming out. You need the travel to be at least a little bit progressive at the end.
The adjustment range on the boxxers is huge.
I've never seen anyone totally destroy a fork in real life, only in pictures and thats not much to go by (who knows what happened to those forks).
I can't think of any aspect where the 40 out does a boxxer WC. They just seem very overpriced to me. They may ride well but so does a boxxer and it's lighter and you can actually work on it. I like being able to fix something when it breaks as opposed to waiting 3 months for Fox to do it.
i think you might have this one wrong, as, to my knowledge at least, nitrogen is used for not having oxygen (corrosion) and also for having a more neutral temperature v/s pressure curve.
motocross is a actually a good example for this, in the sense that they choose nitrogen and race on a course that normally has no altitude change at all, but those dampers do get hot and thats why they use nitro.
Correct. Nitrogen is inert, dry and is not affected by temperature changes (big deal in suspension). This is why it is used. Atmospheric pressure changes will still affect it.
6.88 with steel spring, just to be clear. You can knock a fair amount off of that with ti spring. I am not sure if the ti spring is included anymore??
Actually, my brand new 05 40R's hit the scales at 6.76 pounds (with ti spring) out of the box, with an uncut steerer tube. Riding wise, i actually prefered the 40s to my 06 and 07 World Cups- once they had the right spring rate i found that the forks were so much more confidence inspiring purely because of the extra stiffness. I have had slightly more trouble with the boxxers (although they rebuilt them for me with new bushings when i sent them the forks), but otherwise they were both pretty damn reliable.
You're probably right, bottom line though, temperature's can change quite a bit from the top of a course to the bottom, or from early morning practice to mid-afternoon race runs. I should have used temperature or altitude instead of atmosphere. Moto tracks can span pretty big elevation differences, especially outdoor or harescrambles, although not often. I really don't know anything about moto, I just know that no one uses "air." And that back to back races are frequently at different altitudes from each other. Time spent dialing in suspension at each different race, although very neccessary, can waste valuable track time to learn the course and take care of other neccessary issues before the gates drop. If dh bikes are really going to use air pressure effectively as the predominant preload factor, then shops and race trailers will need nitro tanks, that's all. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think moto's use nitro for preload either, it's more for bottom out resistance and changing the progressiveness of the stroke.
Which is exactly why I don't understand how you can think that "one amount of progression" is right for everybody. So again, it's a critical adjustment for maximum performance.
I'm fairly sure the 07's don't have the Ti springs. But after you spend $1600 bucks on a fork you shouldn't have to go out and spend another $250 to get a Ti spring in the proper weight.
If the fork is too linear, it is possible to run correct sag and bottom excessively. I think the 40 is a great example where people have had this issue, and have gone to a harder spring (giving less than ideal sag) to stop the bottoming issue.
The internal bottom out cone in 05/06 just didn't do enough even at the max setting (especially for heavier riders, and even aggressive light riders) hence the redesign of the unit to provide higher pressures at end stroke for 07.
So hate to break it to you, but Jm has the right idea here. I'm sure they have improved for 07 to the point where it's not an issue, but that's not what most people are running.
He is however wrong on the metal-on-metal bottom out thing. The Boxxer and 40 both run rubber bottom out bumpers, which means you never get that metal on metal clunk (even though you bottom out hard). It's a nice addition, but don't let the lack of noise fool you into thinking you aren't bottoming out hard. Marzocchi forks don't run bumpers so you will hear a clunk on a hard bottom, but i'm sure it'd be easy enough to drop in a pair.
dampers use pressurized gas to avoid foaming and cavitation, thats the main use. derived from the design (volume displacement and the associated pressure changes) comes effective spring rate progression or bottom out protection as you call it.
bottom line is that i think air could very well be used in the future, but it might not be all that useful in the rear shock just for weight saving, but the ability to adjust spring rate could make it a good tool for bikes and courses where that is needed. technology might not be there right now but its not far away, and the new designs with low leverage ratios will probably mate quite well with air shocks since they require less pressure.
Isn't adjusting spring rate the same as adjusting preload. What's wrong with the current trend of adding a few preload spacers to your fork, spinning a preload knob, or giving a little spin to the threaded preload ring on a rear shock. This seams just as easy as attaching a shock pump and less finicky in design. Wouldn't that just be making a change for the sake of change and not really for any true performance benefit? Even bikes with low leverage ratios don't feel good with an air rear shock right now. DW link bikes have really low ratios, I've actually been told by a reliable source that Weagle actually designed the linkage to be paired with an air shock. Problem is that suspension performance of air shocks just doesn't match that of springs. On a mellow course like Sea Otter you can get away with it, but if there is anything nasty on the course everyone seems to put the springs back on imediately. Besides, leverage ratios don't apply to forks.
amigo you are really way wrong with that, preload can be describe as the force you need to exert in order to get the suspension "going", spring rate is the quotient between travel and force exerted.
i do actually that RS has in a brilliant way proved that air springs do work on dh forks, they have had their problems but surprisingly, those problems do not really stem from the air spring but from the boxxers structure (helped by the fact that they went away from open bath), and the damper.
Fraser you can sit and tout the Fox as the perfect fork all you want, but its just not. There simply is no perfect fork. Step back and present your arguement without being a rider pimping thier sponsors, and you'd see that.
The simple fact is, pre-07 Fox's were very linear, and even with the right spring they would bottom out on a hard enough hit. I also found on mine (2005 model) that the jump from the stock Ti spring to the firm was too big, and something in between would have suited me well. I haven't tried it since.
All the forks out on the market have drawbacks, thast all thier is to it. Some companies are better then others at fixing them. I am exceptionally curious about the 07 40, as it sounds like they have really addressed some of the fork's negatives. Guess we'll see. I do know that they are a great company at fixing problems, so I have no doubt that the 07 will be one highly tuned downhilling bastard.
Wonder when the air one is coming out.
The simple fact is, pre-07 Fox's were very linear, and even with the right spring they would bottom out on a hard enough hit. I also found on mine (2005 model) that the jump from the stock Ti spring to the firm was too big, and something in between would have suited me well. I haven't tried it since.
All the forks out on the market have drawbacks, thast all thier is to it. Some companies are better then others at fixing them. I am exceptionally curious about the 07 40, as it sounds like they have really addressed some of the fork's negatives. Guess we'll see. I do know that they are a great company at fixing problems, so I have no doubt that the 07 will be one highly tuned downhilling bastard.
Wonder when the air one is coming out.
If you'd read what I'd posted, you would notice I said they had issues, which have been fixed for 07. This was particularly true with heavier riders. Of course you bottom out the fork, but you are supposed to. If you don't bottom it out ever, particularly on big hits, you don't have it set up right.
90% of riders don't setup their suspension properly anyways, and then they just whine about it and blame the fork. This is a cross brand issue, not just fox. Saying that you have metal on metal (damaging) bottom outs at 150 lbs on every hit with a properly setup fork is BS however. Typical JM claim.
90% of riders don't setup their suspension properly anyways, and then they just whine about it and blame the fork. This is a cross brand issue, not just fox. Saying that you have metal on metal (damaging) bottom outs at 150 lbs on every hit with a properly setup fork is BS however. Typical JM claim.
Oh, so now it's "every hit" bottoms out a fork? I'm going to come out with this new game; it will be called the "jump to conclusions" game.
The laughable part is that you tout all this "fork setup, must properly tune it to each rider and each condition" BS, and then when we start describing an adjustment that "your" fork evidently doesn't have, you start going off and whining and trying to go back into your "safe place" where people don't set their forks up right or whatever. Sure, lots of people don't set their forks up right, but for the last time, you're trying to tell me with all of your "must set the fork up right" BS that one amount of progression suits everyone?
Hypocrite?
yes, but aren't the two directly correlated. therefore, for the purpose of this conversation basically affecting the same thing. For example, is it possible to to change one without the other. I think not. When you add preload spacers aren't you in essence stiffening the spring rate? remove spacers lessening the spring rate, and so on.
Spring rate is the same as the weight right, ie 450lbs spring, etc. I thought when you changed the preload adjustment you were basically manipulating the spring rate. I'm confused.
I weigh 165. And straight up dh terrain is what I ride most with some freeridish stuff thrown it.
I don't get all bent out of shape when I do some big jump or drop to a flat landing and bottom it. That's kind of to be expected. Like I said before it's g-outs and the middle of consecutive rocks/hits etc.
It's hardly my dream fork when this keeps happening when I put a spring in it that keeps it plush.
And just fyi for those that seemed to misunderstand my stiffness thing (heh).....fox 40s are probably the stiffest laterally and fore/aft out there. I have zero complaints in that department.
This is what I keep saying. With the spring that gives me the right sag, and feels great over chop, tracks well and sags the bike properly, I bottom it too easily. SO....I go to a heavier spring to fix that problem and then it rides harsher than I would like.
As much as JM's past rants on boxxers et al have annoyed me just as much as everyone else.....he's right about the progressive issue.
Right, in your case you need to dial in the bottom out adjuster. It is there for a reason, for some reason JM likes to pretend it isn't. The quote above was for people routinely bottom it by hucking off of nonsense. They need heavier springs for the type of riding they are doing.
That's why I want to try the 07s. The high speed dampers on the oldies didn't do the trick. Worked better but not enough. Even when dialed all the way in.
Anyway......I'm just repeating myself but I for one would like to see a better system to make them a little more progressive. Maybe they've done it for next year's model.
I've been on 07 internals most of the season, as has butch. I haven;t had a need to dial mine in, but it feels even plusher than last year. Could be the super lightweight spring they managed to dig up for me though, so it is hard to say.That's why I want to try the 07s. The high speed dampers on the oldies didn't do the trick. Worked better but not enough. Even when dialed all the way in.
Anyway......I'm just repeating myself but I for one would like to see a better system to make them a little more progressive. Maybe they've done it for next year's model.
Butch may have dialed in his bottom out a little bit? He'd be the best one to ask about that. Last year the bottom out adjustment was on or off basically and too much for lighter riders who were having issues, this year it is stepped and a bit more effective I'm told. Did you ever have yours adjusted? The high speed damper on the outside didn't have a wide range of adjustability, you had to adjust the bottom out cone, which basically shifted the entire damping range.
actually, spring weight as you call it is the spring rate, the spring compresses one inch when you apply 450lbs to it, quotient is 450 lbs/in.
springrate and preload arent really related but preload would affect the effective compression you get from a given amount of force applied
think of spring rate plotted on an x/y chart, as a straight diagonal line, that would be pushed to the left if you factor in preload.
since im no master at paint and dont want to fire up any other program, let me do a numerical example.
typical dh fork, spring rate is 30lbs/in. 8 inch travel
typical dh rider, weight is 180lbs.
dh bike weight distribution, 40% front, 60% rear.
this means (totally simplified, of course) that the fork will have 64lbs of rider weight on it.
scenario 1, no preload.
fork will sag 2,1 inches.
fork will bottom out at 240lbs
scenario 2, 15lbs of preload (4 preload spacers)
fork will sag 1,7 inches
fork will bottom out at 255lbs.
weight RC2
weight R
6.88 lbs./3.12 kg
6.81 lbs./3.09 kg
features/adjustments RC2
internally adjustable travel, low-speed compression, high-speed compression, hydraulic bottom-out in damper, coil spring preload Initial force placed on an air or coil spring., rebound
BTW, progressiveness does not = bottom out resistance. You can have bottomout resistance but poor progression, in fact that's what you get with a bottomout "system" at the bottom of the fork, it still doesn't adjust the overall progression, just the progression at the very end of travel.
The only rc2 I've owned is the 36 I have. I've ridden a few 40s quite a bit though. I buddy of mine who's been racing dh bikes forever (pro even:biggrin: ) basically has the same complaints I did when I've ridden his fork. I bitched about it being oversprung and he said it was because he kept bottoming the stock spring. I ridden on a another friend's bike who's lighter than me with the stock spring and I couldn't keep it from bottoming HARD even though it felt great and was pretty smooth over most everything.
As far as I know neither of them ever had the factory bottom out adjusted. I haven't had it done on my 36 either but it behaves the exact same way. I stuck the higher weight spring of the three they come with on there and it's ridable and doesn't bottom that often......but doesn't feel as plush as the med spring.
I think the forks are good, I certainly wouldn't turn one down......but obviously I wasn't the only one complaining about this because they did change the circuit for 07.
So for now or until I get a ride in on an 07 cartridge (first guy I mentioned has it ordered for his 06), my 888 with the sleeve and a little too much oil that causes it to hydraulically lock on bottom is my fave.
Plus it's black.:biggrin:
Use the softer spring, and get the bottom out adjusted, although at your weight, it may be a bit too much. It basically just shifts the entire high speed damping range into the firmer end of things.
Do you know if you can do this at home? I ain't skeerd. Just haven't looked at the mystery box yet.
Too late anyway. I've got a new 66 waiting for me at a friend's house.
Wanna buy a 36?
You cannot, the hydraulic bottom out adjuster is inside of the cart. No thanks on the 36, i already have more fox forx than i can shake a stick at. I do need one for a mk2 i have coming hopefully.
Wanna buy a float rlc with wc (scalopped) crowns?
Oh hell yeah. Hopefully it's worse than the old vanilla I did that to.
Nothing beats a changing head angle mid ride.
At least fox retains their springs without using a c-clip the diameter of my pubic hair on a piece of maluable aluminum.
eh? not following you.