Page 4 of 43 FirstFirst 1234567814 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 200 of 2148
  1. #151
    mtbr member
    Reputation: heartfixer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    102

    ... and if we just ... Uber back on track....

    Well, I had a problem with the insertion depth of the Cane Creek Double Xc Flush...detailed in an earlier post. I took the frame and headset to the LBS and the wrench suggested removing the extra material so the headset would fit. I measured with a dial caliper and removed the extra material with a hacksaw, used a bench grinder and files to clean it up. I then took some threaded rod and washers and made a bearing press and mounted the headset in the frame. A short while later I had the fork, stem and handlebars mounted and adjusted. I rechecked every bolt on the bike and took it out for a short spin. It rides great!! The Marz AM1 150mm fork absorbs every bump without a whimper, the ETA clamps down gradually as it should, I just need to do the Oak Mtn loop (16.5 miles) to get a real feel for the bike. I am in the process of getting a swingarm and shock to do the rear (alrready bought the wheel and brake). Can't wait to finish it. I'll let you guys know how it turns out.

  2. #152
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ryguy79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,463
    stinch, except for less tire clearance than i'd like, i've had no issues with the caad4 swingarm.

  3. #153
    Retro Cannondale Addict
    Reputation: Mogul218's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    79

    Powder Coat



    Hey rw420, I really dig your Super with the powder coat. I had some questions about the advantages and disadvantages of it.

    Could you elaborate on pros/cons of the powder coat?

    Are there issues applying decals afterwards? I noticed you don't have decals on your baby blue SV.

    Is the serial number still visible for resale purposes in the future? How vast are the color choices?

  4. #154
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rw420's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    412
    Quote Originally Posted by Mogul218
    Hey rw420, I really dig your Super with the powder coat. I had some questions about the advantages and disadvantages of it.

    Could you elaborate on pros/cons of the powder coat?

    Are there issues applying decals afterwards? I noticed you don't have decals on your baby blue SV.

    Is the serial number still visible for resale purposes in the future? How vast are the color choices?
    The powder coat is awesome. In my opinion there is no downside. I guess it might be a bit heavier than paint but I doubt you would ever notice. It looks great and is extremely durable. I never liked the original yellow/green color scheme that came on this model. A buddy of mine offered to bead-blast the frame which removed the paint and made a nice rough surface for the powder coat to cling to. I took it to a local powder coat shop and they did the frame for $50 and a matching swingarm for $25. He gave me good pricing because I chose from the colors/ finishes that he had leftover from other jobs. There are hundreds of colors and finishes to choose from. Some are more resilient than others. The finish I went with is an industrial finish that is very resistant to scratches. Durability and price drove my selection over color but I do like the blue. I don't think that decals would stick to the finish I have but I haven't tried. I prefer the look without them. Some of the smoother finishes would probably take decals OK. I just checked the serial number and it is still visible but I have no intention of selling any of my Uber frames anyway...

    One other thing - I prefer to call it 'Fox' blue rather than 'Baby Blue'

  5. #155
    Retro Cannondale Addict
    Reputation: Mogul218's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by rw420
    The powder coat is awesome. In my opinion there is no downside. I guess it might be a bit heavier than paint but I doubt you would ever notice. It looks great and is extremely durable. I never liked the original yellow/green color scheme that came on this model. A buddy of mine offered to bead-blast the frame which removed the paint and made a nice rough surface for the powder coat to cling to. I took it to a local powder coat shop and they did the frame for $50 and a matching swingarm for $25. He gave me good pricing because I chose from the colors/ finishes that he had leftover from other jobs. There are hundreds of colors and finishes to choose from. Some are more resilient than others. The finish I went with is an industrial finish that is very resistant to scratches. Durability and price drove my selection over color but I do like the blue. I don't think that decals would stick to the finish I have but I haven't tried. I prefer the look without them. Some of the smoother finishes would probably take decals OK. I just checked the serial number and it is still visible but I have no intention of selling any of my Uber frames anyway...

    One other thing - I prefer to call it 'Fox' blue rather than 'Baby Blue'
    One more question I have to ask. Were you concerned with the baking process of powder coating and the effect it might have on the welds?

  6. #156
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rw420's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    412
    Quote Originally Posted by Mogul218
    One more question I have to ask. Were you concerned with the baking process of powder coating and the effect it might have on the welds?
    No - the powder coat process is not that hot. And even if it was, heat-treating is a good thing.

  7. #157
    mtbr member
    Reputation: az1jeff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    604
    Quote Originally Posted by Scathel
    Two lovely looking ubers there guys.
    I agree. Both bikes, both well done. Liking the green and the white.

  8. #158
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    4

    jekyll swingarm and cane creek double Xc headset on ebay

    hey, just want to let everybody on this forum that I just posted a jekyll swingarm on ebay Item number: 290155633820 this swingarm was going to be used for an uber v project that never happened. it is very very clean, the scratches are mostly from being stored in my garage. also have a cane creek double Xc headset ,used to reduce cannondale headset so you can install a fork with a 1 1/8" steer tube.

  9. #159
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rw420's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    412

    Not all experiments work out

    Quote Originally Posted by rw420
    OK, here it is. I took my white frame and polished swingarm and added an '08 Fox 36 Talas RC2 and an '08 DHX Air 7.875x2.25 plus a few other new bits.

    Gets 160/130/100 adjustable fork travel and over 170mm rear travel.
    32 pounds complete.
    The longer rear shock didn't work out for me. After a couple trail rides (~28 miles) it became obvious that the bike just didn't handle as well as I'm used to. It was too tall. I felt like I was more 'on top' of the cockpit than 'in it'. It also felt like it changed the arc of the swingarm too much - pushed it beyond the horizontal and down 'under' the pivot. One cool thing was that this allowed the bike to jump vertically very easily from a dead stop. But I'm no trials rider and that feature didn't lend itself well to my style of trail riding. I also found that even though I had an additional 3/4" of rear wheel travel, I was blowing through all of it even with the bottom out damping cranked down and my sag set appropriately.

    So I replaced the 7.875x2.25 shock with a 7.5x2. This brought the rear end down but slackened the geometry by over a degree, which would make the 160mm setting on the fork virtually useless. To bring the fork in range, I reversed the headtube adapters and moved the tall part above the headtube. This was exactly what it needed. After doing my normal 14 mile ride, I have to say that I'm very pleased. The geometry is exactly where I want it with the fork in 130mm mode. In that position it feels like my normal target geometry for setting up the Ubers. For big events, I can pop it up to 160mm with a flick of the lever and it also drops down to 100mm where it climbs like a goat. The bike feels very 'flickable' despite the addition of about 3 pounds over my other setup with the Talas 140. I'm thinking that these two setups are going to make a nice stable - they seem similar enough that I can easily switch between them, yet I think the different forks will give each of them individual characteristics.

    So here it is with the revisions:
    160/130/100 adjustable fork travel and about 155mm rear travel
    Attached Images Attached Images

  10. #160
    ajm
    ajm is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by rw420
    The longer rear shock didn't work out for me. After a couple trail rides (~28 miles) it became obvious that the bike just didn't handle as well as I'm used to. It was too tall. I felt like I was more 'on top' of the cockpit than 'in it'. It also felt like it changed the arc of the swingarm too much - pushed it beyond the horizontal and down 'under' the pivot. One cool thing was that this allowed the bike to jump vertically very easily from a dead stop. But I'm no trials rider and that feature didn't lend itself well to my style of trail riding. I also found that even though I had an additional 3/4" of rear wheel travel, I was blowing through all of it even with the bottom out damping cranked down and my sag set appropriately.

    So I replaced the 7.875x2.25 shock with a 7.5x2. This brought the rear end down but slackened the geometry by over a degree, which would make the 160mm setting on the fork virtually useless. To bring the fork in range, I reversed the headtube adapters and moved the tall part above the headtube. This was exactly what it needed. After doing my normal 14 mile ride, I have to say that I'm very pleased. The geometry is exactly where I want it with the fork in 130mm mode. In that position it feels like my normal target geometry for setting up the Ubers. For big events, I can pop it up to 160mm with a flick of the lever and it also drops down to 100mm where it climbs like a goat. The bike feels very 'flickable' despite the addition of about 3 pounds over my other setup with the Talas 140. I'm thinking that these two setups are going to make a nice stable - they seem similar enough that I can easily switch between them, yet I think the different forks will give each of them individual characteristics.

    So here it is with the revisions:
    160/130/100 adjustable fork travel and about 155mm rear travel
    Great description of your adjustments. Your ride looking just right!!!

  11. #161
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    4
    Look at this 145/130 volvo edition guys...



    Frame Super V 99+caad 4
    Fork-Rock Shok revelation u-turn 100/130
    -Dnm Burner Lock out 180mm
    Brakes Magura marta Sl(160-160) 180front coming
    group Xtr 2007
    krank Truvativ Stylo3.3 team
    wheelsMavic 717 mozzi xt
    hand Ritchey wcs
    seatpost easton ea70
    Schwalbe albert2.25.Fat albert front coming 2.35

  12. #162
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rw420's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    412
    Quote Originally Posted by HiVaru
    Look at this 145/130 volvo edition guys...



    Frame Super V 99+caad 4
    Fork-Rock Shok revelation u-turn 100/130
    -Dnm Burner Lock out 180mm
    Brakes Magura marta Sl(160-160) 180front coming
    group Xtr 2007
    krank Truvativ Stylo3.3 team
    wheelsMavic 717 mozzi xt
    hand Ritchey wcs
    seatpost easton ea70
    Schwalbe albert2.25.Fat albert front coming 2.35
    Looks sweet. What rear shock is that?

  13. #163
    mtbr member
    Reputation: heartfixer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    102

    Good job! half-Ubered ride report...

    Halfway thru the project...front-end rebuild completed, swingarm on the way. Took the first rides this past weekend and really impressed with the way the bike handles. I used the 2006 Marz AM-1 fork w 130mm travel, I set the rebound about 3/4 of the way to full damping and it seemed to give the best ride that way. I really like the new fork and disk brake. I can't believe C'dale sold any of these with the old 60mm headshock. My bike originally had one of those 200mm stems with a set of 6" end-bars on it....really goofy looking and way too far forward riding position.

    I left my steerer tube pretty long and used a stack of spacers below the 100mm 6 degree rise stem to raise the handlebar height...didn't want to whack off too much length and then regret it in a week or two! Best I can measure, my headtube angle is @ 67 degrees. I might drop the air preload on my shock and get to 68 or 69 degrees

    I don't know if its considered uncool to recommend an ebay vendor but I will go ahead and stick my thumbs up for "goodbikedeals". I got my fork there and I am very pleased with everything. There are also many more Marzochi forks available if you are looking. I spent a lot of time searching for a deal and I couldn't match the price anywhere else.

    Thanks to everyone who posted technical suggestions for the mods.....maybe someone will gather everything together and come up with a quick "recipe" for an "Uber Vee"!!

    Also, if anyone has a tip for a rear shock...please chime in. That's next on the list. I plan to re-drill the front shock mount and with an '04 Jekyll swingarm use a 7" i2i shock length.

    Also, Mendon or RW420, are there any special swingarm bushings or bearings I need to purchase to do the swap-out? Any tech tips will be much appreciated!!!



    BTW, I might suggest the Cane Creek Double Xc short headset instead of the Double Xc flush...I got the flush and I had to remove about 1/4" of extra material from the "skirt" of each piece so it would insert into the head tube...my mistake.

  14. #164
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ryguy79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,463
    I just swapped out my front tire from a 2.1 Fire XC Pro to a 2.35 Nevegal dual compound. Gonna see if it helps float over the sandy sections in a little bit. Hopefully a little more front grip too.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  15. #165
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rw420's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    412
    Quote Originally Posted by heartfixer
    Halfway thru the project...front-end rebuild completed, swingarm on the way. Took the first rides this past weekend and really impressed with the way the bike handles. I used the 2006 Marz AM-1 fork w 130mm travel, I set the rebound about 3/4 of the way to full damping and it seemed to give the best ride that way. I really like the new fork and disk brake. I can't believe C'dale sold any of these with the old 60mm headshock. My bike originally had one of those 200mm stems with a set of 6" end-bars on it....really goofy looking and way too far forward riding position.

    I left my steerer tube pretty long and used a stack of spacers below the 100mm 6 degree rise stem to raise the handlebar height...didn't want to whack off too much length and then regret it in a week or two! Best I can measure, my headtube angle is @ 67 degrees. I might drop the air preload on my shock and get to 68 or 69 degrees

    I don't know if its considered uncool to recommend an ebay vendor but I will go ahead and stick my thumbs up for "goodbikedeals". I got my fork there and I am very pleased with everything. There are also many more Marzochi forks available if you are looking. I spent a lot of time searching for a deal and I couldn't match the price anywhere else.

    Thanks to everyone who posted technical suggestions for the mods.....maybe someone will gather everything together and come up with a quick "recipe" for an "Uber Vee"!!

    Also, if anyone has a tip for a rear shock...please chime in. That's next on the list. I plan to re-drill the front shock mount and with an '04 Jekyll swingarm use a 7" i2i shock length.

    Also, Mendon or RW420, are there any special swingarm bushings or bearings I need to purchase to do the swap-out? Any tech tips will be much appreciated!!!



    BTW, I might suggest the Cane Creek Double Xc short headset instead of the Double Xc flush...I got the flush and I had to remove about 1/4" of extra material from the "skirt" of each piece so it would insert into the head tube...my mistake.
    Please post a picture. I'd love to see how the front end turned out.

    You will use your existing pivot bolt and spacers to mount the new swingarm. Try not to lose track of the spacers when you remove the swingarm pivot bolt. They can easily drop out and bounce out of bounds - usually in a very remote area under the workbench.

    If the swingarm bearings feel notchy, you can get the best replacements from http://www.enduroforkseals.com/id169.html.
    You need the 6903 2RS MAX for our swingarm pivots (full complement - no spacers).

    I really can't say enough good things about the Fox DHX Air 5.0.
    The size you need is 7.5x2.0.

  16. #166
    mtbr member
    Reputation: heartfixer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    102

    Wink Thanks for the bushing info...

    Already ordered them!! If I'm gonna tear it down that far I might as well do the bearings/bushings while I've got it apart.

    Also, I tried to post a picture but the file is too big. I'll shoot a smaller few and get 'em on here.

    Thanks again!

  17. #167
    mtbr member
    Reputation: heartfixer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    102

    New question here. any comments on the handlebar-mounted lock-out lever?

    I rode Monday morning with a guy that had a little lever on his rt handlebar that was cabled to both his front fork and rear shock lock-outs. He said it came on his Trek when he bought it. I liked the idea but haven't seen any listed on ant of the e-stores. Any tips?

    Thanks!!

  18. #168
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by heartfixer
    I rode Monday morning with a guy that had a little lever on his rt handlebar that was cabled to both his front fork and rear shock lock-outs. He said it came on his Trek when he bought it. I liked the idea but haven't seen any listed on ant of the e-stores. Any tips?

    Thanks!!
    Fox and Jagwire both have remote lock out kit. I see them on ebay every now and then. Jenson stocks the Jagwire kit currently I believe. They replace the cam on the shock lever with their only piece, and because of that, it is application specific. Depending on what shocks you have, it might not work for you.

  19. #169
    Uber V Cripp
    Reputation: jdcamb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    221
    Quote Originally Posted by ryguy79
    I just swapped out my front tire from a 2.1 Fire XC Pro to a 2.35 Nevegal dual compound. Gonna see if it helps float over the sandy sections in a little bit. Hopefully a little more front grip too.

    That is a cool looking bike.

  20. #170
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ryguy79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,463
    Quote Originally Posted by jdcamb
    That is a cool looking bike.
    Thanks! I rode it on what were probably the gnarliest trails I've ever ridden today and it was great! I love it. I was riding through rocks at speeds I never would have dreamed of when it was stock. Its nice to not have to be nearly as picky about my line.

    we were riding at mt herman, just north of colorado springs. no pics were taken today, but for an idea, i searched for some previously posted pics.



    Last edited by ryguy79; 09-06-2007 at 09:08 PM.

  21. #171
    mtbr member
    Reputation: heartfixer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    102

    Smile Hey RW, how do you calculate 170mm rear travel with the Fox DHX 7.875 x 2.25 shock?

    Quote Originally Posted by rw420
    OK, here it is. I took my white frame and polished swingarm and added an '08 Fox 36 Talas RC2 and an '08 DHX Air 7.875x2.25 plus a few other new bits.

    Gets 160/130/100 adjustable fork travel and over 170mm rear travel.
    32 pounds complete.

    It will take a few rides to tune the suspension but based on the driveway test I think I'll like it.
    ey RW, how do you calculate 170mm rear travel with the Fox DHX 7.875 x 2.25 shock? I have an '04 Jekyl swing arm coming and need to grab a nw shock...I'm thinkin' light weight so the Fox air sounds good, but my question is: is there a formula to come up with the 170mm rear travel @ 2.25" stroke? Or did you eye-ball it with a buddy and a yardstick? If you get 170mm travel with a 2.25 shock, how much travel would ya get with a 2.5" travel shock? Or 2.0"?

    I had a couple of messages with somebody, might be you, about which rear shock to get. I can't find the messages but I thought the poster suggested a 7.5 x 2.5 rear shock. I will swap to the Jekyll swing arm and re-drill my front tabs by 7/8" too. Also, can you give a few statistics for your setup, such as your weight and the adjustment setpoints that you like for the Fox DHX shock you use?

    Thanks!
    Last edited by heartfixer; 09-07-2007 at 08:31 PM.

  22. #172
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ryguy79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,463
    heartfixer, I can't answer your questions, but rw420 did wind up going back to the 7.5x2 shock which gives about 150mm travel. Its about a 3:1 ratio of wheel travel to shock stroke.
    Last edited by ryguy79; 09-07-2007 at 09:10 PM.

  23. #173
    mtbr member
    Reputation: heartfixer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    102

    Okay, so 2.5" x 25.4mm = 53.50mm travel times 3.1 ratio = 165.850 mm travel from a

    2.5" stroke rear shock.....hmmmmm. Then you gotta set the sag correkly...what does that do to your Head tube angle? I gotta go lie down.

  24. #174
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ryguy79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,463
    Quote Originally Posted by heartfixer
    2.5" stroke rear shock.....hmmmmm. Then you gotta set the sag correkly...what does that do to your Head tube angle? I gotta go lie down.
    I don't know what math you're doing, because at an approximate 3:1 ratio, I get about 190mm travel with 2.5" stroke shock. Approx 171mm with 2.25" stroke shock. Approx 152mm with a 2" stroke shock.

    FYI, 2.5 * 25.4 = 63.5. Not 53.5.

  25. #175
    mtbr member
    Reputation: heartfixer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    102

    New question here. according to my dial caliper 1 inch = 25.40 mm

    So I was converting the shock stroke of 2.5" x 25.40 mm to change the stroke from inches to mm; and I did make an error in the math...2.5" x 25.40 mm = 63.50mm stroke length. (I originally had it at 53.50mm) Next I used the 3.1 ratio you gave for the rear suspension: 63.50 shock compression x 3.1 ratio = 196.850mm rear wheel travel? Maybe the 3.1 suspension ratio is too high?

  26. #176
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ryguy79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,463
    I was approximating at 3:1 (three to one), not 3.1.

    3.1:1 may be more accurate, given that the stock 1.5" shock provides 120mm travel. Though I don't know if changing to the jekyll arm changes the leverage at all because of the slightly more rearward shock mount on the swingarm. i hope the uber-v experts chime in on this.

  27. #177
    mtbr member
    Reputation: heartfixer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    102

    Good point!! I missed that!

    Ah well it's late. So let's redo the math:
    We're still at 63.50mm travel from a 2.5" shock, so 63.50mm x 3.0 ratio is still up at 190.50mm rear wheel travel. Let's see:
    170mm /63.50mm = 2.06 ratio...looks like a 2.0" travel rear shock will give 170mm rear wheel travel.

  28. #178
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ryguy79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,463
    Quote Originally Posted by heartfixer
    Ah well it's late. So let's redo the math:
    We're still at 63.50mm travel from a 2.5" shock, so 63.50mm x 3.0 ratio is still up at 190.50mm rear wheel travel. Let's see:
    170mm /63.50mm = 2.06 ratio...looks like a 2.0" travel rear shock will give 170mm rear wheel travel.
    you're getting things all mixed up here. 2" stroke will give you about 150mm travel. Thats been discussed to death here. You're dividing the 170mm travel that rw420 got with a 2.25" shock with the stroke (in mm) of a 2.5" stroke shock...then somehow saying that you'll get 170mm with a 2.0" travel shock...that just doesn't make any sense. Rest you must, young jedi.

    Starting with the stock swingarm and shock, 1.5" stroke and 120mm travel (at least it was on my 99), this is a ~3.15:1 ratio of wheel travel to shock stroke. Follow through with that ratio with longer shock strokes for approximate travel.

  29. #179
    mtbr member
    Reputation: heartfixer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    102

    Bonking ... not feelin' well Egad! This is embarassing! I'll get some rest and pencil-whip this tomorrow!

    G'nite.

  30. #180
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ryguy79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,463
    Quote Originally Posted by heartfixer
    G'nite.
    You're 2 hours ahead so I've got an advantage...its only 11 here.

  31. #181
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rw420's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    412
    Quote Originally Posted by ryguy79
    I was approximating at 3:1 (three to one), not 3.1.

    3.1:1 may be more accurate, given that the stock 1.5" shock provides 120mm travel. Though I don't know if changing to the jekyll arm changes the leverage at all because of the slightly more rearward shock mount on the swingarm. i hope the uber-v experts chime in on this.
    Wow. You guys have sure beat the crap out of this topic. Now I'm going to beat it to death...

    The leverage ratio of the SVs, Jekylls, and Ravens are all about 3 to 1 (or 3:1). This means that, on average, the rear axle moves about three times the amount that the shock compresses. So, as ryguy accurately stated, a 2" stroke gives about 6" (150mm) of travel and a 2.25" stroke provides about 6.75" (170mm) travel. [FYI - We have measured the travel on the Uber Vs and consistently come up with about 155mm for the 2" stroke.] The stated leverage ratio is actually an average over the entire stroke of the shock. In reality, the leverage ratio at any point in the stroke may be higher or lower than this average.

    If the frame design causes the leverage ratio to decrease over the course of the stroke, say from 3.1 to 2.9, this would be considered a rising rate of suspension because the forces at the axle (the ground forces) have a decreasing leverage over the shock as it goes through the stroke, allowing the shock to be more supportive at the end of the stroke. Another way to say this would be that the shock's resistance (due to frame design) ramps up during the stroke.

    On the flip side, many single-pivot frames are designed to ramp down, or have a falling rate of suspension. This was done to counteract the forces of chain tension on the suspension and resist pedal-induced bobbing. Pedal-induced suspension compression occurs toward the beginning of the stroke. For example, the Prophet has a dramatic "falling rate" suspension design. These frame designs allow the shock to be more supportive at the beginning of the stroke to resist the effects of chain tension. As the shock compresses, the shock is overtaken and compresses easier, creating a plush response to bigger hits.

    IMHO, falling rate suspension designs don't make a whole lot of sense anymore now that good platform-damping shocks are available. Platform damping is a form of compression damping that does not allow the shock to compress under the type of force that is created by chain tension. However, this damping opens up when a spike of force from a bump or trail feature affects the suspension. Shocks like the DHX and RP23 are adjustable so you can set the threshold level where the shock opens up. As ryguy stated in the SV thread, if you set this threshold too high, you will lose some small bump sensitivity and if you set it too low, you will lose some pedalling efficiency.

    If you build an Uber V with a '99 frame (or cut the tabs) and use a 7.5x2.0 shock, you end up with a suspension that is relatively linear but does seem to ramp up a bit at the end of the stroke. I find this to be ideal because it allows the rider to adjust the small bump/pedaling efficiency and ramp up (bottom-out) with the shock features.

    We discovered through experimentation that using the longer-stroke shock (7.875x2.25) creates a strange suspension rate curve where the shock first ramps up and then ramps down, thereby blowing through the end of the stroke. In other words, you don't really get the benefit of the extra 3/4" travel. (It also made the bike way too tall.) We have also seen this effect to a lessor extent on medium-size frames where we didn't have enough room on the tabs to move the shock mount a full 7/8" forward. laxin1 (my nephew) runs a bit less sag to counteract this effect at the end of the stroke.

    The conclusion:
    The Uber V is optimal at 6" travel with a 7.5x2.0 shock on either a '99 front or another model year with the shock mount drilled 7/8" forward of the original location.

  32. #182
    Retro Cannondale Addict
    Reputation: Mogul218's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    79
    You guys are going to make my head explode!!! LOL!

  33. #183
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ryguy79's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,463
    Quote Originally Posted by rw420
    Wow. You guys have sure beat the crap out of this topic. Now I'm going to beat it to death...
    I was bored last night...

    btw, great post.

  34. #184
    Devolution is real!
    Reputation: toyota200x's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    477
    I have a 1998 super v that I was thinking about selling today but now I I wana keep it because all these bikes look so awesome.

    Can anyone give me any help with a standard headset on a cannondale. It clunks back and fork like it is loose and I have no idea how to keep it from doing it. It moves back and fork at the bottom cup.

  35. #185
    mtbr member
    Reputation: heartfixer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    102

    Good job! Now that's something I can chew on for a while!!!

    "The conclusion:
    The Uber V is optimal at 6" travel with a 7.5x2.0 shock on either a '99 front or another model year with the shock mount drilled 7/8" forward of the original location."

    GREAT STUFF!!! Now this is the kind of post that answers so many questions I had about the workings of the Uber V suspension.

    RW, you answered so much about I needed to know: what length and travel and type of shock to buy, and why. Thanks.

  36. #186
    mtbr member
    Reputation: heartfixer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    102

    Just thought of one more question:

    "The conclusion:
    The Uber V is optimal at 6" travel with a 7.5x2.0 shock on either a '99 front or another model year with the shock mount drilled 7/8" forward of the original location."

    This doesn't mention adding a Jekyll swing arm. What is the effect of the Jekyll swing arm upgrade?

  37. #187
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bbbr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    231
    The Jekyll swing arm allows you mount the 7.5X2.0 shock on a 99' or mod. frame. With the Active 100sl swing arm you are limited to using a 6.5X1.5 shock with 99' or modified frame. The shock mounting position on the Jekyll swing arm is about an inch farther back than the 100sl swing arm.

    The original 100sl swing arms used a funky sized shock eye to eye (5.5" i think) and Cannondale started using the Jekyll style swing arms (CAAD4, bonded and late model Jekyll) starting in 2000.
    Alea Jacta Est

  38. #188
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rw420's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    412
    Quote Originally Posted by heartfixer
    "The conclusion:
    The Uber V is optimal at 6" travel with a 7.5x2.0 shock on either a '99 front or another model year with the shock mount drilled 7/8" forward of the original location."

    This doesn't mention adding a Jekyll swing arm. What is the effect of the Jekyll swing arm upgrade?
    Yes, you have to use a Jekyll style swingarm. Wouldn't be an Uber without it.

  39. #189
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    9

    My Uber V ... at last

    Well it's been a labour of a couple of months, tried to buy a Jekyll swingarm on ebay but gave up waiting for it after 6 weeks and built my uber on the stock swingarm - funny thing is, just as I got it all finished the Jekyll swingarm actually arrived in the post! Now can't decide if I should tear this bike apart again for the sake of fitting the Jekyll swingarm, or just ride this one until it breaks.

    Parts list is :

    Marzocchi Z1 FR SL 130 mm forks
    FSA Orbit Z headset
    Easton 110 mm stem
    Original Coda 'bars
    Magura Louise brakes 180 mm fr / 160 mm rear
    Manitou Swinger SPV 4 way platform damped air shock, 190 x 50 mm (7.5 x 2" to you yankees), mounting tab cut & drilled 20 mm forward
    SRAM 7 grip shifters & rear derailleur
    Shimano LX Hollowtech cranks
    DMR V12 pedals
    XT hubs, Mavic 321 rims

    Rides so much sweeter than the original Super V it's bloody unbelieveable.

    Saddest thing of all is, I just got a new job this week and will be moving to the middle east in a few weeks ... flattest sandiest place on earth
    Attached Images Attached Images

  40. #190
    Retro Cannondale Addict
    Reputation: Mogul218's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    79
    Kia, looks real nice man! I think you definitely need to throw the Jekyll swing arm on there though. The swing arm you have on there right now is apparently pretty fragile. Do you get to take the bike with you to the Middle East?

  41. #191
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3
    I currently have a 2000 SuperV 1000 that already has a jekyll swing arm that was replaced years ago under warranty when the original swing arm cracked. Can someone please send me some info on how you cut the tabs to fit the 7.5x2.0 shock? I feel comfortable drilling the hole, but don't quite know what tool to use with cutting the tabs. Also when drilling the hole 7/8" inches forward, is it horizontally forward? Do you change the vertical position of the hole at all?

  42. #192
    Retro Cannondale Addict
    Reputation: Mogul218's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by nbarsotti
    I currently have a 2000 SuperV 1000 that already has a jekyll swing arm that was replaced years ago under warranty when the original swing arm cracked. Can someone please send me some info on how you cut the tabs to fit the 7.5x2.0 shock? I feel comfortable drilling the hole, but don't quite know what tool to use with cutting the tabs. Also when drilling the hole 7/8" inches forward, is it horizontally forward? Do you change the vertical position of the hole at all?
    Are you positive it's a 2000? If it happens to be a '99 you don't need to cut the tabs. Check out this thread for pictures of the drilling. Scroll down a bit and make sure your forum options is seat to linear view if you have problems viewing it. Good luck!

  43. #193
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3
    Its definatley a 2000, I have the large tabs

  44. #194
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rw420's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    412
    Quote Originally Posted by nbarsotti
    I currently have a 2000 SuperV 1000 that already has a jekyll swing arm that was replaced years ago under warranty when the original swing arm cracked. Can someone please send me some info on how you cut the tabs to fit the 7.5x2.0 shock? I feel comfortable drilling the hole, but don't quite know what tool to use with cutting the tabs. Also when drilling the hole 7/8" inches forward, is it horizontally forward? Do you change the vertical position of the hole at all?
    I always try to place the hole so that it is the same distance from edge of the tab as it was originally. We don't have this down to an exact science. I have noticed that there is variation in tab shape over the different model years. Theoretically, moving the hole vertically should have some effect on the shape of the curve of leverage ratio through the stroke of the shock but we may be splitting hairs here. We use a rotary cutting tool (dremel) with a grinding wheel on it to remove the excess tab material. There are probably other cutting tools that would work well too. I suppose you could use a small hacksaw to remove most of the material and then a round file for shaping. Just be careful - aluminium is a soft metal and a slip of the hand can do some damage!

    The following link is to some instructions that I have posted previously. It is very important to make sure that the holes in the two tabs line up. That's why I use the shock bushing as a guide for cutting the second hole. I have had to do some surgery to correct mis-aligned holes.
    http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.ph...08#post3328608

  45. #195
    Retro Cannondale Addict
    Reputation: Mogul218's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    79
    Just posted some updated pics in my sig of all 3 of my bikes.

  46. #196
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    330
    Anybody know if the 98 freeride models are a suitable case for surgery. They came stock with 120mm of rear travel. Am I right in thinking that the frame is stock and the changes are all in the swing arm and RX shock? Thanks for any advice.

  47. #197
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rw420's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    412
    Quote Originally Posted by Baker921
    Anybody know if the 98 freeride models are a suitable case for surgery. They came stock with 120mm of rear travel. Am I right in thinking that the frame is stock and the changes are all in the swing arm and RX shock? Thanks for any advice.
    It will definitely work. You will need a swingarm. Before I give any recommendations on surgery can you measure the eye-to-eye of the rear shock and maybe post a picture of the bike?

  48. #198
    Horizontally Compliant
    Reputation: BigToe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    100
    Quote Originally Posted by Baker921
    Anybody know if the 98 freeride models are a suitable case for surgery. They came stock with 120mm of rear travel. Am I right in thinking that the frame is stock and the changes are all in the swing arm and RX shock? Thanks for any advice.
    I believe it should work fine, and, from what I can tell, the Freeride is the same as the other Super V's of that era. Someone else can chime in if they have different info, but I have two frames, one was the '98 Freeride, and the other was a standard Super V (900?). The frames and swingarms on my two bikes were identical.

  49. #199
    Retro Cannondale Addict
    Reputation: Mogul218's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    79

    Listen! Hydraulic Disc Brakes

    Hey everyone. I'm considering moving up to disc brakes. Mendon recommended to me that I should look at the Avid BB 5 or 7 mech discs. For you guys with hydraulics, are they a pain in the ass? The cable routing looks very wonky from what I can tell. Do you ever get the lines caught in your pedals or on anything else on the trail?

  50. #200
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    330
    Thanks for the info. Maybe the ebay gods will be kind to me. I bought a 96 700 carbon and realised after that it wasn't suitable. Long story short I built it up as a lightweight trail bike and my wife pinched it.

Page 4 of 43 FirstFirst 1234567814 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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