Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mpmffitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    399

    Has anyone upgraded thier Trek Ex5 suspension?

    The spring coil rock shox recon 120mm will not cut my type of riding but im cautious about changing my front suspension without first knowing what i can do with the rear suspension. The Rock Shox Ariel with only 7.25 by 2.0 is not enough but i want to make sure the Trek EVO link wont be compromised by the upgrade in suspension.

    Any suggestions?

  2. #2
    perpetual pucker factor
    Reputation: charging_rhinos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,232
    you will definitely lose your warranty if you long-shock a bike. But it can be done on some bikes without too much risk. The problem lies with the angles of your linkage rocker. If you squeezed something like a 2.25" or 2.5" stroke on there, you won't get as much additional travel as you'd hope. I bet it won't even fit at all. The rocker would have to be angled downward like on a Giant Reign to get more travel by sticking a longer shock on that frame. I have a feeling you're stuck with what you have for now.
    tangaroo: What electrolytes do chicken and turkey have again?
    rck18: All of them, because they're meat.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mpmffitz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    399
    I appreciate that reply, I'm prob just going to upgrade to an rp23 and an a 170mm Rock Shox Lyrik Solo Air RC2DH fork it will be rigid in the back so it's worth a try.

  4. #4
    perpetual pucker factor
    Reputation: charging_rhinos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,232
    Just be careful adding so much travel to the front. An increase of 50mm is pretty substantial. With a more 'rigid' back end as you put it, more force will be placed on a slackened front end. You really really don't want to push the strength of your front end to its limit. If you are actually needing a 170mm lyric, I would strongly suggest looking into selling your bike and getting something a little more burly. Just something to think about
    tangaroo: What electrolytes do chicken and turkey have again?
    rck18: All of them, because they're meat.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,276
    Quote Originally Posted by charging_rhinos View Post
    Just be careful adding so much travel to the front. An increase of 50mm is pretty substantial. With a more 'rigid' back end as you put it, more force will be placed on a slackened front end. You really really don't want to push the strength of your front end to its limit. If you are actually needing a 170mm lyric, I would strongly suggest looking into selling your bike and getting something a little more burly. Just something to think about
    Agree. As a rule of thumb, generally no more than 20mm should be added to the stock length of a fork, although axle-to-crown length is what really matters.

    I am positive that a Fuel EX should not be running a 170mm fork for many reasons. One of them is the way the bike will handle, since the front end will be so high.

Similar Threads

  1. Question for those who rebuild thier own Talas III...
    By Jeepdude in forum Shocks and Suspension
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-08-2013, 11:09 PM
  2. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-14-2012, 05:12 PM
  3. Upgraded Trek 820 photos?
    By vertsk8er2 in forum Bike and Frame discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-24-2011, 08:19 PM
  4. Anyone make thier own cassettes???
    By sillyrabbit26ersrforkids in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 08-30-2011, 11:09 AM
  5. How to find a upgraded fork for my son's cheap entry level Trek
    By surftime in forum Shocks and Suspension
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-02-2011, 09:32 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •