Will A Smaller Ti Spring Fit A Longer Stroke shock
- Thread starter 819
- Start date
most likely not. what are the exact numbers on the side of the spring? If the second # is not 3.0 or greater it will not work due to coil bind, and even if it doesn't physically bind it will damage the spring by compressing it beyond it's range of elasticity and the coil will sag and eventually fail. don't do it, get the right spring.
uhh...., defeating the purpose?
You can run a LONGER SPRING than your stroke i it physically fits. You CANNOT run a shorter spring (in this case 3.0"). It will coil bind and you could break the spring, yourself or completely obliterate the damper.
Of course not, there is more travel in the spring than there is shock stroke so there will never be any bind. He will bottom out the shock before the spring binds, as should be the case. Going smaller (spring length) is the real danger, which is what the original question is about. The only real negative I can think of in running a coil that large is that it is excess material not needed and is just adding weight to the shock.
edit: damn, i type too slow.
You can to a point with a Ti spring. (fewer coils, only slightly larger dia wire) The way you can find out is take the overall length of the spring and subtract the wire diameter times the number of active coils. That will give you the maximum stroke for the spring.
Thanks. This was along the lines of the reasoning I was given. That said, there are enough comments above to ward me off trying.
Thanks for the feedback.
I wonder it this makes things clearer or blurs them off.
I've been running the very exact same spring on a 9.5x3.0 roco and have had zero issues so far. On this setup, the spring is very far from binding because it has few coils, although it is sure that the spring is NOT made to come even close to binding. Which brings the question how much travel does it actually provide without being overly stressed. I used it for 2 years in 2 different frames with minimum preload, no problems. If you are still overly concerned about the spring cracking upon repeated bottom-outs (do you bottom out that often?), just cut out a couple of plastic rings and slide them under you bottom-out bumper to act as a travel limiter. You are not going to lose noticeable amount of travel, and your 270g Ti spring will be safer (maybe).
Edit: just check if there are enough preload threads available on the shock to accomodate the shorter spring. Mine fit so so, maybe 1 thread left.
I've been running the very exact same spring on a 9.5x3.0 roco and have had zero issues so far. On this setup, the spring is very far from binding because it has few coils, although it is sure that the spring is NOT made to come even close to binding. Which brings the question how much travel does it actually provide without being overly stressed. I used it for 2 years in 2 different frames with minimum preload, no problems. If you are still overly concerned about the spring cracking upon repeated bottom-outs (do you bottom out that often?), just cut out a couple of plastic rings and slide them under you bottom-out bumper to act as a travel limiter. You are not going to lose noticeable amount of travel, and your 270g Ti spring will be safer (maybe).
Edit: just check if there are enough preload threads available on the shock to accomodate the shorter spring. Mine fit so so, maybe 1 thread left.
Last edited:
Bit late to this thread, but it'll work fine just like miuan suggested. Believe it or not progressive springs have an actual stroke rating given with them that is greater than the number written on the spring. Obviously there would be some decrease in lifespan, but I haven't really seen any broken (maybe one internet picture, ever), and there are a fair few people I know running 2.75's on 3.0 stroke shocks. If you want to save some money (and assuming it's the right rate), I think you'll be perfectly safe running that spring on the DHX.