Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 87
  1. #1
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,095

    Anyone try the XV2 high volume air cannister on a Mt Vision?

    Like many people I am reading about on this board, I don't ever see the last ~5mm of shock travel on my mt vision. Mine (2010) came with the RP2 with the XV1 high volume canister. I swapped it for a PUSHed AVA, but it looks like things are about the same in terms of travel, though it does feel a bit better. Still playing with pressures.

    I feels to me like the suspension is just too progressive (with the typical compromises that come with that), and either a coil or higher volume air shock is the way to go.

    I found that fox makes a bigger air canister (XV2) than the one that they spec (XV1). Anyone try this larger air can?

    I am trying to understand why Marin did not spec the larger can to begin with
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pulpwoody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    348
    Are you asking about the performance of the XV2 in general, or are you more concerned with getting the extra 5mm of travel?

  3. #3
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,095
    Quote Originally Posted by pulpwoody View Post
    Are you asking about the performance of the XV2 in general, or are you more concerned with getting the extra 5mm of travel?
    Performance in general. I assume getting more usable travel would be part of that, since there would be less ramp up at the end of the stroke. Just wondering if indeed it makes much difference, and if so, what the rest of the travel feels like. From playing around with air can volumes in the past, I think this is the way to go, but I would like others' actual experience if they have tried this.

    I don't obsess over getting full travel as long as it feels good. I never come remotely close to full travel on my Pike but it feels great, even set at 125mm when I rarely see over 110mm of that. But the Mt Vision is coming up real short in feel for a 120mm bike, IMO. My last frame MKIII was 125 or 130 in the rear, but it had all the suspension I wanted. Felt like WAY more travel (like an inch or more) than this bike on larger bumps and on drops.

    I rode the AVA again, and it actually uses slightly less travel (with more sag) except on drops and g-outs in which case it is about the same as the RP2. It does feel better, feels more controlled and I can run a little more sag and still pedals well. Still not where I want it to be on larger hits, though. The AVA was PUSHed for a different bike that needed a tad bit of bottoming control, so I may be able to get that tuned out.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pulpwoody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    348
    Well, my experience is on my Attack Trail, so I don't know if a XV2 would feel different on a 120 bike. Here's what I can tell you about MY experience with the XV2.

    I love it. The shock I got was tuned specifically for the AT, so it rocks. Very smooth on the rough stuff and very nice on the drops, and whatever pedal platform they have going on is great. I never use the pro pedal unless I'm on the road riding to the ride.

    For me, there's always some unused travel, because there aren't that many big drops here, but I run though the usable travel, no problem. I don't know if any bike out there would use ALL of the travel all the time. I guess that would be a frequent bottom out situation.

    I guess the XV2 would be a softer shock because of the extra volume? I know compared to a regular float, it's night and day.

    Hope that helped.

  5. #5
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,095
    Quote Originally Posted by pulpwoody View Post
    Well, my experience is on my Attack Trail, so I don't know if a XV2 would feel different on a 120 bike. Here's what I can tell you about MY experience with the XV2.

    I love it. The shock I got was tuned specifically for the AT, so it rocks. Very smooth on the rough stuff and very nice on the drops, and whatever pedal platform they have going on is great. I never use the pro pedal unless I'm on the road riding to the ride.

    For me, there's always some unused travel, because there aren't that many big drops here, but I run though the usable travel, no problem. I don't know if any bike out there would use ALL of the travel all the time. I guess that would be a frequent bottom out situation.

    I guess the XV2 would be a softer shock because of the extra volume? I know compared to a regular float, it's night and day.

    Hope that helped.
    Was the XV2 can the stock configuration, or did the bike originally come with a smaller can?
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3,180
    Be interesting to see how an XV2 can goes. I was maybe going to machine one up myself at one stage but I suspect you may also need a shock with higher low speed compression which does not affect high speed compression.Later boost valve shocks may be the way to go?The XV2 may induce more mid stroke wallow to get that little extra travel?But combined with running a little less sag then you may be on to something? With the XV1 on my 09 MV I personally find that there is a sweet spot about 20 to 25% sag which works better than 28% to 30% end of the scale. MV leverage ratio is very linear [ straight line]and drops like a stone from very high to very low. It's all about pedaling efficiency on these bikes.They use initial high leverage ratio balanced by high pivot in to give that floaty efficient feel .This leaves a region in the middle of the stroke were it could wallow if you aren't pedaling hard as that's where they use max pedal kick back to support the natural shock wallow instead of raising the rate like some designs. If you have your sag set in that area or you ride in a region of wallow then rapid rising rate. Either way you still don't get full travel so best to set it up so you get better quality travel with less sag.
    My Wolf Ridge has a different leverage ratio profile, still fairly linear with a rise in ratio at the bottom of the stroke and a more linear overall suspension profile. So I can set it at lower 28% sag.
    The AT has the least radical leverage ratio profile of all the Marin bikes and is completely different to the earlier Mv's but close to the 2011 MV. The AT leverage ratio profile looks similar to a Ibis Mojo HD[ bell shaped curve]. The ratio starts moderately high[ small bump compliance] then drops to it's lowest at 100mm travel to counter the air shock mid stroke wallow then rises again at the end to counter the rising rate of the air shock. This gives a more moderate suspension rate profile than the MV without the mid stroke wallow and extreme high rate at the end of the stroke. I'd be surprised if you couldn't use all the travel of a AT.

    I enjoy riding my MV because of the character the suspension gives it. Lush initial travel but stiffens in acceleration and out of the saddle. Lean back going down hill or doing drops and you ride on that last high suspension rate zone like riding on a rubber bump stop. The high initial pivot means the frame hinges in the middle slackening the head angle exiting a bermed corner and manual off a lip. It's just fun to ride fast. I can never ride it slow, even when I intend to.The downside is the fast ramp up over tree roots after the initial rear wheel travel and you only get to use 110mm of the travel.
    Last edited by gvs_nz; 06-17-2011 at 02:06 PM.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pulpwoody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    348
    That's quite the detailed description there!

    The XV2 is what is stocked on the new 2011 AT's, and I special ordered the shock since it didn't come with one from Marin (warranty frame.)

    I guess with the different leverage ratios, I don't know if the XV2 would be best for the MV. I would contact Marin and ask them.

  8. #8
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,095
    Quote Originally Posted by pulpwoody View Post
    That's quite the detailed description there!

    The XV2 is what is stocked on the new 2011 AT's, and I special ordered the shock since it didn't come with one from Marin (warranty frame.)

    I guess with the different leverage ratios, I don't know if the XV2 would be best for the MV. I would contact Marin and ask them.
    I'm figuring that they would say the XV1 is best, since that is what they chose to spec it with. But apparently I have a different idea of what I want from a rear suspension, judging how this one behaves. WAY too progressive, IMO. A larger air can often mitigate that to some extent. My experience with these things is that a company designs what it thinks works well, and it may line up with your tastes/terrain, or might not. When It is a little off you gotta either tinker with it, or get something else. I can't afford something else, so I'm going to tinker with it.

    My experience talking to Marin has been hit or miss:

    When I first ordered my frame, I thought it was going to come with the Ario shock. I was was looking into what it would cost to replace it with an RP2 or PR23, so I called Marin to find out which RP23 I should get for it (which tune, what sized air can). The guy told me the medium compression tune and standard air can. As it turns out, the frame showed up with an RP2. A welcome surprise, but it turns out I was given some bad info, as the shock is a low tuned compression and XV1 can. Talking to Fox confirmed that this was the spec'ed tune and can.

    When inquiring about the torque specs for the pivot bolts, I got one answer on the phone (25-28 NM) and another via email (16-20 NM, though up to 24 is acceptable).

    When I called about the linkage bearings feeling notched, he was very friendly, and very helpful. Still need to see how this part turns out.
    Last edited by kapusta; 06-21-2011 at 09:01 AM.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  9. #9
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,095
    Quote Originally Posted by gvs_nz View Post
    Be interesting to see how an XV2 can goes. I was maybe going to machine one up myself at one stage but I suspect you may also need a shock with higher low speed compression which does not affect high speed compression.Later boost valve shocks may be the way to go?The XV2 may induce more mid stroke wallow to get that little extra travel?But combined with running a little less sag then you may be on to something? With the XV1 on my 09 MV I personally find that there is a sweet spot about 20 to 25% sag which works better than 28% to 30% end of the scale. MV leverage ratio is very linear [ straight line]and drops like a stone from very high to very low. It's all about pedaling efficiency on these bikes.They use initial high leverage ratio balanced by high pivot in to give that floaty efficient feel .This leaves a region in the middle of the stroke were it wallows if you aren't pedaling hard and the overall suspension rate curve goes flat. If you have your sag set in that area or you ride in a region of wallow then rapid rising rate. Either way you still don't get full travel so best to set it up so you get better quality travel with less sag.
    My Wolf Ridge has a different leverage ratio profile, still fairly linear with a rise in ratio at the bottom of the stroke and a more linear overall suspension profile. So I can set it at lower 28% sag.
    The AT has the least radical leverage ratio profile of all the Marin bikes and is completely different to the earlier Mv's but close to the 2011 MV. The AT leverage ratio profile looks similar to a Ibis Mojo HD[ bell shaped curve]. The ratio starts moderately high[ small bump compliance] then drops to it's lowest at 100mm travel to counter the air shock mid stroke wallow then rises again at the end to counter the rising rate of the air shock. This gives a more moderate suspension rate profile than the MV without the mid stroke wallow and extreme high rate at the end of the stroke. I'd be surprised if you couldn't use all the travel of a AT.

    I enjoy riding my MV because of the character the suspension gives it. Lush initial travel but stiffens in acceleration and out of the saddle. Lean back going down hill or doing drops and you ride on that last high suspension rate zone like riding on a rubber bump stop. The high initial pivot means the frame hinges in the middle slackening the head angle exiting a bermed corner and manual off a lip. It's just fun to ride fast. I can never ride it slow, even when I intend to.The downside is the fast ramp up over tree roots after the initial rear wheel travel and you only get to use 110mm of the travel.
    I had considered the AT, but it seemed a bit too slack for my needs. Looks like a really fun bike, just not sure it would fit the bill as my do-it-all bike.

    The RP2 the MV came with is a boost valve model.

    I have read a lot of what you have written on here about the leverage ratios and sag settings. With the stock RP2 I tried sag numbers from ~12.5 to 15mm, though my hunch is that we all measure sag a little differently (I still have no idea what static seated position is most representative of how I actually ride). Anyway, for me it seems that around 28-29% is what is working the best. Interestingly, the pressure I run to get that is ~.93 of my riding weight (including a full water pack), which is pretty close to the .95 you have said you run. I find that if I run less sag, the pedal feedback gets noticeably worse, though I do find it an issue in the granny ring even at the lower pressure, just not as bad.

    Anyway, I am still playing with pressures and tweaking the cockpit.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3,180
    The other thing to consider with this frame is under braking it doesn't stiffen up much at all. You get your travel back with spades under braking. Watch under braking how the long links rotate around the virtual pivot.
    My Trance is less progessive and feels better pedalling seated over big woops with it's 130mm travel. But come to extended downhills and the Marin feel like it has double the rear travel of the Trance. I think I run closer to 13mm sag on the MV and 16mm on the WR. But once again it's personal preference for riding conditions. I'm still fiddling with settings after a couple of years. I hated it with a 140mm fork which really made the rear end pack up.

    I'll see if I can post some pics of the suspension rate curves at some stage. It's easier to see in ink.

  11. #11
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,095
    Quote Originally Posted by gvs_nz View Post
    The other thing to consider with this frame is under braking it doesn't stiffen up much at all. You get your travel back with spades under braking. Watch under braking how the long links rotate around the virtual pivot.
    My Trance is less progessive and feels better pedalling seated over big woops with it's 130mm travel. But come to extended downhills and the Marin feel like it has double the rear travel of the Trance. I think I run closer to 13mm sag on the MV and 16mm on the WR. But once again it's personal preference for riding conditions. I'm still fiddling with settings after a couple of years. I hated it with a 140mm fork which really made the rear end pack up.

    I'll see if I can post some pics of the suspension rate curves at some stage. It's easier to see in ink.
    Yes, the active braking aspect is appreciated. Of course, for the past 6 years I have been riding frames that were very active under braking (Azonic Saber and MKIII), so I kind of take that for granted at this point. The two frames that I was riding for the 6 years prior to that (Superlight and Heckler) were less active when braking.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    260
    Hm, you mention the shock being Pushed for a different bike. It seems any tinkering would be secondary to relevant valving. just sayin'

  13. #13
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,095
    Quote Originally Posted by socalscott View Post
    Hm, you mention the shock being Pushed for a different bike. It seems any tinkering would be secondary to relevant valving. just sayin'
    Valving IS part of the tinkering.

    Just sayin'

    Also, I disagree that spring curve is secondary to compression valving.
    Last edited by kapusta; 06-16-2011 at 12:47 PM.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3,180
    Here's some frame linkage ratios which is only part of the story. MV 09 is similar to MV 10. Both have unique leverage ratio and chain growth [pedal kick back ] profiles. Right at the bottom of the MV leverage ratio profile is where your XV2 sleeve will help. A little platform damping at the start[ allow lower air pressure] and low high speed compression tune would help.

    2009 MV and WR followed by 2011 AT and MV followed by 2011Giant Trance
    Attached Images Attached Images      

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    598
    Here is a reply I remember reading from back in '09 about XV and the "hammock" feeling. The response is from MMBJason. He used to answer quite a few questions on here years ago. I don't recall seeing him on MTBR lately though. I wonder if he doesn't work there or was told not to go on the forum.

    "Hello Rekibtm,
    One of the primary design features of the QUAD suspension system is the variable leverage ratio. Your Mount Vision has a much higher leverage ratio at the beginning of the travel that it does at the end of the travel. This effect is called "ramp up". The standard Fox air sleeve also has a naturally progressive spring curve. The XV sleeve has a more linear, or "flatter" spring curve. When this XV sleeve is used on suspension designs with a more naturally linear spring curve (or designs with regressive, or "falling rate" spring curves), the suspension feel could be said to "hammock" during certain parts of the travel. However, due to the QUAD link's natural Rising Rate, the XC Sleeve actually allows the suspension to react more efficiently, and remain compliant, further into it's travel.

    If you were looking for a much firmer ride without sacrificing small bump sensitivity you could switch to the standard air sleeve on your Mount Vision, but you will definitely notice the exaggerated "ramp up", and will not get the full use of the available 120mm of travel.

    I hope this answers your question.

    Have fun!

    Jason
    Marin Bikes "


    I have been prety happy with my RP23, but can't help thinking about getting a pushed Monarch.

  16. #16
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,095
    Quote Originally Posted by Flboy View Post
    Here is a reply I remember reading from back in '09 about XV and the "hammock" feeling. The response is from MMBJason. He used to answer quite a few questions on here years ago. I don't recall seeing him on MTBR lately though. I wonder if he doesn't work there or was told not to go on the forum.

    "Hello Rekibtm,
    One of the primary design features of the QUAD suspension system is the variable leverage ratio. Your Mount Vision has a much higher leverage ratio at the beginning of the travel that it does at the end of the travel. This effect is called "ramp up". The standard Fox air sleeve also has a naturally progressive spring curve. The XV sleeve has a more linear, or "flatter" spring curve. When this XV sleeve is used on suspension designs with a more naturally linear spring curve (or designs with regressive, or "falling rate" spring curves), the suspension feel could be said to "hammock" during certain parts of the travel. However, due to the QUAD link's natural Rising Rate, the XC Sleeve actually allows the suspension to react more efficiently, and remain compliant, further into it's travel.

    If you were looking for a much firmer ride without sacrificing small bump sensitivity you could switch to the standard air sleeve on your Mount Vision, but you will definitely notice the exaggerated "ramp up", and will not get the full use of the available 120mm of travel.

    I hope this answers your question.

    Have fun!

    Jason
    Marin Bikes "


    I have been prety happy with my RP23, but can't help thinking about getting a pushed Monarch.
    It looks like Jason is saying that the XV can will lead to some "hammock" on a bikes with a linear or regressive spring curve, but not the QUAD which is progressive.

    My assumption here is that he is comparing the standard can to the XV1 can, not the XV2 can, though I think it makes sense that what he is saying would apply when comparing any higher volume can to the standard can.
    Last edited by kapusta; 06-17-2011 at 07:29 AM.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  17. #17
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,095
    Quote Originally Posted by gvs_nz View Post
    Here's some frame linkage ratios which is only part of the story. MV 09 is similar to MV 10. Both have unique leverage ratio and chain growth [pedal kick back ] profiles. Right at the bottom of the MV leverage ratio profile is where your XV2 sleeve will help. A little platform damping at the start[ allow lower air pressure] and low high speed compression tune would help.

    2009 MV and WR followed by 2011 AT and MV followed by 2011Giant Trance
    Cool, thanks for the graphs. Where did you get them? I'd be interested to see what my old MKIII looks like for comparison.

    Wow, the leverage really does drop considerably for the Mt vision. I guess one upshot of that is that the last 5-6 mm of shock travel that many are missing is only about ~10-11 mm of actual suspension travel..
    Last edited by kapusta; 06-17-2011 at 07:26 AM.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3,180
    Yeh it's a pity it uses so much shock stroke fluffing round on the small stuff going backwards instead of up. It has the longest stroke vs vertical travel of all the Marins and nearly all other 120mm bikes. That's why it makes a brilliant epic back country expedition bike because it just eats that small boulder type terrain like no other.And there is virtually zero pedal feedback in that zone as well, so it is does as designed, pedal efficiently on that type of terrain.

    Same reason it's hopeless with a 140mm fork or trying to squeeze in to a too small a frame. Too much rear weight shift on a very weight shift sensitive frame. Highest initial leverage ratio in the business, shortest chain stays in the business and one of the slackest seat stays and shortest wheel bases in the business.

    Here's the MKIII
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Last edited by gvs_nz; 06-17-2011 at 02:48 PM.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    598
    One of the dudes from Marin told m the placement of the linkages is what is important, He told me not to go over 130 on a fork. So I have a 130 Rev on my MV. It is just a hair shorter than a 140 Fox. It has been GREAT since I put on the Rev.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    3,180
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    Like many people I am reading about on this board, I don't ever see the last ~5mm of shock travel on my mt vision. Mine (2010) came with the RP2 with the XV1 high volume canister. I swapped it for a PUSHed AVA, but it looks like things are about the same in terms of travel, though it does feel a bit better. Still playing with pressures.

    I feels to me like the suspension is just too progressive (with the typical compromises that come with that), and either a coil or higher volume air shock is the way to go.

    I found that fox makes a bigger air canister (XV2) than the one that they spec (XV1). Anyone try this larger air can?

    I am trying to understand why Marin did not spec the larger can to begin with
    It's a pity a 2nd hand coil shock wouldn't fit.

    If your on a budget you may also be able to make your own mini "sub tank" [ remote reservoir] like they used to use on MX forks. I've seen some DIY MX ones using plumbing PVC fittings. You could tune it's volume to suit what you want. Part of an old shock or tire pump with a schrader fitting may also be a candidate. Just need another schrader valve to pressurize the sub tank.
    Last edited by gvs_nz; 06-19-2011 at 01:19 AM.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by kapusta View Post
    It looks like Jason is saying that the XV can will lead to some "hammock" on a bikes with a linear or regressive spring curve, but not the QUAD which is progressive.

    My assumption here is that he is comparing the standard can to the XV1 can, not the XV2 can, though I think it makes sense that what he is saying would apply when comparing any higher volume can to the standard can.
    Hello,
    As a previous poster pointed out, I've not posted in a while. I keep an eye on the forums, and tend more towards trying to help out privately if I see people with unresolved issues. I've watched too many 'officials' wander into trouble, or accidentally pick a fight with a poster or posters.

    Anyway, onto the point of this thread.

    My experience, having done quite a lot of testing with Fox on the Quad Link suspension, is that the XV1 provides the best ride, which is a good balance between terrain management and pedaling efficiency. It's true that the XV2 will allow the Mount Vision to work further into its travel, but not necessarily to the desired effect. In order to stop the bike from moving too easily or deeply into the travel in moderate terrain (which effects pedaling efficiency) I found that I needed to run a firmer compression stack on the BSD shocks, or a higher Boost Pressure on the BV shocks. These combinations yielded a ride that had more of a 'dead' feel, versus the 'lively' or 'poppy' feel I get from the XV1 with the medium compression damper settings (I've also used the term '3D agility' to describe the feeling of a correctly set up Mount Vision).

    The 2010 Mount Vision uses a 7.5 x 2.0 shock (50mm stroke). Not every Fox chassis is capable of pushing the o-ring off the bottom of the shock. The measure of full travel is not if you've blown the o-ring off, but if you've pushed it the full 50mm (in the case of the Mount Vision). Check that measurement after your favorite ride, where you think you should be getting full travel, and see what you get. Also, with the 2010 Mount Vision you can run as much as 16.5mm (11/16", which is 33% of the total rear shock travel). However, the more sag you run, the greater chance you will have of getting some pedal feedback.

    Hope this helps!

    Jason
    Marin Bikes

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    163
    Quote Originally Posted by gvs_nz View Post
    It's a pity a 2nd hand coil shock wouldn't fit.
    I've been thinking about doing this, why wont it fit?

  23. #23
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,095
    Quote Originally Posted by mmbjason View Post
    Hello,
    As a previous poster pointed out, I've not posted in a while. I keep an eye on the forums, and tend more towards trying to help out privately if I see people with unresolved issues. I've watched too many 'officials' wander into trouble, or accidentally pick a fight with a poster or posters.

    Anyway, onto the point of this thread.

    My experience, having done quite a lot of testing with Fox on the Quad Link suspension, is that the XV1 provides the best ride, which is a good balance between terrain management and pedaling efficiency. It's true that the XV2 will allow the Mount Vision to work further into its travel, but not necessarily to the desired effect. In order to stop the bike from moving too easily or deeply into the travel in moderate terrain (which effects pedaling efficiency) I found that I needed to run a firmer compression stack on the BSD shocks, or a higher Boost Pressure on the BV shocks. These combinations yielded a ride that had more of a 'dead' feel, versus the 'lively' or 'poppy' feel I get from the XV1 with the medium compression damper settings (I've also used the term '3D agility' to describe the feeling of a correctly set up Mount Vision).

    The 2010 Mount Vision uses a 7.5 x 2.0 shock (50mm stroke). Not every Fox chassis is capable of pushing the o-ring off the bottom of the shock. The measure of full travel is not if you've blown the o-ring off, but if you've pushed it the full 50mm (in the case of the Mount Vision). Check that measurement after your favorite ride, where you think you should be getting full travel, and see what you get. Also, with the 2010 Mount Vision you can run as much as 16.5mm (11/16", which is 33% of the total rear shock travel). However, the more sag you run, the greater chance you will have of getting some pedal feedback.

    Hope this helps!

    Jason
    Marin Bikes
    Thanks a bunch for the input.

    Just to be clear, I measure the shock travel used, not the amount left over. The most I have seen is 45mm with the stock RP2. I was measuring something like 14-15mm sag at the time (I am 175-180 lbs with a full pack, and was running ~165 psi in the shock)

    I am really not that concerned with the remaining 5mm on the shock. Correct me if I am off on this, but my assumption is that even though I am missing 10% of the shock stroke, I am loosing a bit less than that percentage of the actual rear wheel travel, due to the significant change in leverage ratio throughout the travel.

    Right now it feels really good on smaller bumps (2"). It also feels great on drops. Not so much bottomless, as is feels like the drop was simply smaller.

    Where I feel like it is coming up short is on rougher trails, where I am hitting a lot of 3" and larger rocks/roots at speed. I know this is only a 120mm bike, but it still feels pretty rough for this much travel, and does not track well in the rough. It feels like there is a wall this suspension hits, and that at sag I am not that far from it, so when something big comes along, there is not much left to absorb it. I tried running less sag, but then the whole ride just seems too stiff, and climbing anything rocky or rooty became more difficult (it felt to me like pedal feedback, maybe it was just too stiff).

    I was hoping that a more linear travel would give me some more "headroom" beyond where I am @ sag., and maybe let me run a little less sag. But from what I am gathering from your comments, it sounds like having that extra "easy" travel beyond sag also means that you loose that responsive "pop" the bike has. Interesting, I guess that is a tradeoff. My last bike (MKIII, 125mm) handled the rough much better, but definitely sank down in corners, and did not have much pop to it. The Mt Vision is a lot more fun on twisty rolling singletrack with dips and berms. Honestly, I would trade a little bit of that pop and twisty-trail goodness for some more compliance. Fact is, my trails are mostly pretty rough, not a lot of the twisty-bermy-dippy goodness that this bike seems to make the most of.

    Do you have suggestions how I might get more of what I am looking for here?

    I will try going a little greater on the sag and see how that works out. That is interesting what you said about more pedal feedback at greater sag. In the range I have been playing around with, (~12.5mm - 15mm) it seems to be less noticeable at greater sag.

    Out of curiosity, how much is the rear of the bike sagged with the shock sagged to 33%? I am guessing that due to the higher leverage of the linkage in the beginning of the travel that the actual % suspension sag would be significantly greater than the % shock sag. Just wondering if I am thinking about this right.

    Thanks
    Last edited by kapusta; 06-21-2011 at 08:58 AM.
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  24. #24
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,095
    Quote Originally Posted by weedkilla1 View Post
    I've been thinking about doing this, why wont it fit?
    I have not actually tried to fit one, but it looks to me like it is too tight underneath the shock at the rear end. An air shock has a long, narrow shaft on that end, but a coil is a bit wider almost the whole length of the shock.

    Someone needs to get a coil shock and let the rest of us know how it fits. I nominate someone besides me. I think a piggy back res would actually fit OK, I have seen a few pictures of air shocks with piggy backs fitted.

    Maybe Jason could answer this?
    15mm is a second-best solution to a problem that was already solved.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    598
    I called Marin a whiel ago to see if a Monarch Plush woudl fit my MV, and they said no it wouldn't fit because of the piggy back resivoir.

Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 08-24-2012, 03:41 PM
  2. Which is higher volume: AVA or new RP2 (high volume canister)?
    By kapusta in forum Shocks and Suspension
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-31-2011, 02:56 PM
  3. Reducing Volume of High Volume Sleeve on a Float R
    By brettf in forum Shocks and Suspension
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 01-27-2009, 09:00 PM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-25-2009, 02:50 PM
  5. Fox RP23 High Volume vs. Rock Shox Monarch High Volume
    By beanfink in forum Clydesdales/Tall Riders
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-22-2008, 10:46 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
  •