Page 41 of 67 FirstFirst ... 31 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 51 ... LastLast
Results 1,001 to 1,025 of 1675
  1. #1001
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,809
    Quote Originally Posted by sriracha View Post
    The rear shock is seeing the movement of a single pivot, though.

    I was thinking that things would feel the same, but you'd have a bit more travel at the end, ramping up more at the end.

    There would be a change in the air volume in the shock causing a more linear feel and more movement at the end of the stroke, which should be an increased rising rate at the end.

    If you ran the same amount of pressure as before, you would have a more linear rate with more travel, ramping up at the end?
    The rear shock is not seeing the movement of a true single pivot. That's the purpose of the APP links.

    But thinking about it more, both shocks have the same overall 200mm length, so I think your last statement would be true.
    '96 San Andreas
    '12 Santa Cruz Nickel LT
    '08 KTM 530
    '12 Toyota FJ TT
    '05 MiniCooper S
    '95 Honda HB Si
    '71 Dino 246 GT

  2. #1002
    rollin
    Reputation: sriracha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    2,537
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    both shocks have the same overall 200mm length, so I think your last statement would be true.
    Either way, I think it's worth experimenting with. I was planning on running a Marzocchi 44 fork. The switch version, where you can select-a-height between 150mm and 120mm.

    Thought it might balance things out nicely, with 140mm of rear wheel travel.

    I'm assuming that one can remove or re-install the travel limiting spacer, in a non-perminant fashion?

    Does anyone have experience removing or installing the OEM spacer? I'm not too familiar with the internals of a Fox Float RL rear shock.

  3. #1003
    Just the tip!
    Reputation: HHMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    152
    Quote Originally Posted by sriracha View Post
    Either way, I think it's worth experimenting with. I was planning on running a Marzocchi 44 fork. The switch version, where you can select-a-height between 150mm and 120mm.

    Thought it might balance things out nicely, with 140mm of rear wheel travel.

    I'm assuming that one can remove or re-install the travel limiting spacer, in a non-perminant fashion?

    Does anyone have experience removing or installing the OEM spacer? I'm not too familiar with the internals of a Fox Float RL rear shock.
    Hi, Sriracha. I did the 140mm conversion to my Nickel in late July after riding it for about a month in the stock setup with the RL. I love the change and would not go back. But there are certain things you should consider before doing this.

    1) The RL shock is terrible to begin with, at least mine was. Basically, the low speed comp settings were way too high and so it let too much small bump jitter through. It wasn't worth it to me to try to massage that shock to perform better or attempt a change in stroke. I went on Ebay and shopped until I found a used 200x57 RP23 with the position sensitive Boost Valve, Low velocity tune, and medium rebound tune. The damping settings on this work much better on the Nickel.

    2) That said, my RP23 is not stock either. I rebuilt the thing myself since it came blown already. I've got 200 psi in the IFP but I can't recall off hand what the depth is. If you really want to know, I can look it up. Due to it being blown though, I got it for $100. Main spring pressure right now is 130psi for my weight at 175#. I would guess that a stock RP23 would work pretty well though.

    3) I think a rear tire larger than 2.35 may contact your seat tube. Haven't confirmed it, but my 2.25 Maxxis Crossmark seems to have plenty of room.

    4) Mine is paired with a Revelation XX World cup set at 140mm of travel. It's 67 degree head angle and feels pretty damned nice. The frame rate is actually flat enough that the extra .25" of shock stroke is not adversely affected.

    In short, go for it if you want to make a nice trail monster.
    "Adventure begins where good judgment ends."

  4. #1004
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,809
    Quote Originally Posted by HHMTB View Post
    Hi, Sriracha. I did the 140mm conversion to my Nickel in late July after riding it for about a month in the stock setup with the RL. I love the change and would not go back. But there are certain things you should consider before doing this.

    1) The RL shock is terrible to begin with, at least mine was. Basically, the low speed comp settings were way too high and so it let too much small bump jitter through. It wasn't worth it to me to try to massage that shock to perform better or attempt a change in stroke. I went on Ebay and shopped until I found a used 200x57 RP23 with the position sensitive Boost Valve, Low velocity tune, and medium rebound tune. The damping settings on this work much better on the Nickel.

    2) That said, my RP23 is not stock either. I rebuilt the thing myself since it came blown already. I've got 200 psi in the IFP but I can't recall off hand what the depth is. If you really want to know, I can look it up. Due to it being blown though, I got it for $100. Main spring pressure right now is 130psi for my weight at 175#. I would guess that a stock RP23 would work pretty well though.

    3) I think a rear tire larger than 2.35 may contact your seat tube. Haven't confirmed it, but my 2.25 Maxxis Crossmark seems to have plenty of room.

    4) Mine is paired with a Revelation XX World cup set at 140mm of travel. It's 67 degree head angle and feels pretty damned nice. The frame rate is actually flat enough that the extra .25" of shock stroke is not adversely affected.

    In short, go for it if you want to make a nice trail monster.
    Could you measure your BB height for me?
    '96 San Andreas
    '12 Santa Cruz Nickel LT
    '08 KTM 530
    '12 Toyota FJ TT
    '05 MiniCooper S
    '95 Honda HB Si
    '71 Dino 246 GT

  5. #1005
    rollin
    Reputation: sriracha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    2,537
    Quote Originally Posted by HHMTB View Post
    In short, go for it if you want to make a nice trail monster.
    Thanks for the info! Yeah, considering the fork I want to run, the Marzocchi 44 switch between 150 and 120mm, 140mm of rear travel just makes sense.

    My plan was to ride the stock Fox Float RL for a while, just to get a base of how the bike feels stock, then send it to Push, where they eliminate the lockout and built-in pedal platform. The tune is something like $160 or so. I was hoping I could tell them to set the shock at 200x57mm, with no pedal platform. Hopefully this will give the bike smooth small bump compliance along with a bit more travel.

    Not looking to make a Butcher, but just want a balanced suspension. I'm sure 125mm feels good on the Nickel, but I certainly am intrigued by the 140mm mod... just weighing the options. Since there is no weigh penalty or geometry change, it seems like a nice option.

  6. #1006
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,809
    I just sent SC an email asking them what they think about this. I'll post the answer.
    '96 San Andreas
    '12 Santa Cruz Nickel LT
    '08 KTM 530
    '12 Toyota FJ TT
    '05 MiniCooper S
    '95 Honda HB Si
    '71 Dino 246 GT

  7. #1007
    rollin
    Reputation: sriracha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    2,537
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    I just sent SC an email asking them what they think about this. I'll post the answer.
    btw...an olive Nickel bag of funk is in transit to my residence!

    pretty excited about this bike. it should fit nicely in the stable, right between the 29'er Karate Monkey (with 44) and the Driver 8 (with 888).

    i seriously considered a 29'er frame, but I couldn't find the right frame for the right price. the Nickel was just too good of a deal to pass up...26" wheels it is!

  8. #1008
    Just the tip!
    Reputation: HHMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    152
    I asked SC whether this was possible a few months before I bought the Nickel and they had no clue if it would work. Of course officially, they can't condone it. But when I heard a few owners had done the 650b thing, I knew it would work so I pulled the trigger.

    The only reason I waited a month to do the conversion was it took that long for the right shock to appear on Ebay. Mine came off some guy's Ellsworth.

    BB height is unchanged from pre-modified geo. Same eye to eye on the shock. Something like 13.65 on mine using the stated fork if I remember right.
    "Adventure begins where good judgment ends."

  9. #1009
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,809
    Quote Originally Posted by HHMTB View Post
    BB height is unchanged from pre-modified geo. Same eye to eye on the shock. Something like 13.65 on mine using the stated fork if I remember right.
    Yeah, I keep forgetting the I to I is the same.
    '96 San Andreas
    '12 Santa Cruz Nickel LT
    '08 KTM 530
    '12 Toyota FJ TT
    '05 MiniCooper S
    '95 Honda HB Si
    '71 Dino 246 GT

  10. #1010
    rollin
    Reputation: sriracha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    2,537
    I considered the Fox RP23, but I read that even in the pro-pedal "off" mode, there still exists a factory set platform, similar to that of the Fox RL.

    I read that the Fox RL, even though it doesn't have pro-pedal adjustments, still has a factory built-in pedal platform. Push advertises on the website, that they get rid of this built-in platform, and that it makes the shock much more active.

    I think this is the mod I will go for....along with the 200x57 140mm mod.

  11. #1011
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,809
    Quote Originally Posted by sriracha View Post
    I considered the Fox RP23, but I read that even in the pro-pedal "off" mode, there still exists a factory set platform, similar to that of the Fox RL.

    I read that the Fox RL, even though it doesn't have pro-pedal adjustments, still has a factory built-in pedal platform. Push advertises on the website, that they get rid of this built-in platform, and that it makes the shock much more active.

    I think this is the mod I will go for....along with the 200x57 140mm mod.
    Will there be noticeable bob with no plateform?
    '96 San Andreas
    '12 Santa Cruz Nickel LT
    '08 KTM 530
    '12 Toyota FJ TT
    '05 MiniCooper S
    '95 Honda HB Si
    '71 Dino 246 GT

  12. #1012
    rollin
    Reputation: sriracha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    2,537
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    Will there be noticeable bob with no plateform?
    possibly, but Santa Cruz advertises their pivot location as being the ideal location for resisting bob yet being small bump compliant.

    theoretical keyboard engineering can only take us so far...one of us has to test it out in the real world.

  13. #1013
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,503
    I'm not sure about the Nickel/Butcher, but I asked Santa Cruz about the Float RL on my Superlight, and they said it does not have set ProPedal...

  14. #1014
    Just the tip!
    Reputation: HHMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    152
    Having peered inside the Boost Valved RP23 and the pre BV version (pre 2010), I can say that yes, some platform still exists in the BV versions, but it's very small effect. Basically, there's two compression flow paths built into the piston. One goes through the speed sensitive shim stack, the other goes through the position sensitive "Boost Valve" which is the source of the platform damping and bottom out damping.

    With the PP lever open, both circuits flow in parallel with the shim stack being dominant. The Boost Valve has less contribution but does affect the overall shape of the comp damping curve especially with respect to position within the stroke.

    With PP engaged, the shim stack path is spring loaded closed. The PP setting (1, 2, or 3) determines the amount of spring preload. When thus engaged, the shim stack now has resistance to opening AND the BV also has resistance to movement. The net effect is "platform" compression.

    All technical stuff aside, the RP23 is very smooth and supple without PP engaged. Maybe some of that is in my rebuild, but the architecture of it suggests that suppleness is what they were going for. As compared to the pre BV RP23, this one is far more consistent and doesn't give the "trap door" feeling of the older ones.

    However, if you are looking for maximum smoothness/plushness, Fox really isn't the ticket. Marzocchi is. No platform at all, higher volume, lower pressure, more linear spring, but a bit heavier. Though I haven't tried it on the Nickel, the Roco Air shocks have been amazing on my Highline, 5 Spot, Fury, and Sin. Not sure that the extra can diameter will fit on the Nickel though so proceed with caution.

    High forward single pivot bikes usually don't need much compression/platform damping IF you are a smooth pedaller. If you pedal squares or like to stand and hammer, any suspension bike will bob and this one will be no exception.

    @MC Shawn: I find it interesting that you and I gravitated to the same bike after the whole Mountain Cycle meltdown. Nice!
    "Adventure begins where good judgment ends."

  15. #1015
    rollin
    Reputation: sriracha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    2,537
    Quote Originally Posted by mountainbiker24 View Post
    I'm not sure about the Nickel/Butcher, but I asked Santa Cruz about the Float RL on my Superlight, and they said it does not have set ProPedal...
    I think the factory tune is indicated on the sticker, on the shock. there are different levels of pro pedal, depending on the frame. What does the label say, on your bike?

    I think there are two different numbers, one indicated pedal platform and the other indicating rebound valving? Something like that....

  16. #1016
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,809
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    I just sent SC an email asking them what they think about this. I'll post the answer.
    Here is what Garen said:

    Shawn,

    Im not positive here, but I imagine youd experience impact with the rear tire at the seat tube



    Id take all the air out of your current shock, bottom the bike out and see how close your rear tire gets to the seat tube, and go from there.



    Ride wise, I dont think youd feel a lot of difference; all the changes would happen at the bottom of the travel.

    Let me know if you have any other questions.



    Thanks,


    Then I sent back:

    Yeah, I checked that already and there is plenty of room. That is what I thought being the eye to eye is the same. Would the rate just continue to ramp up at those last 7mm of shaft travel?


    Then he responded:

    Yessir!
    '96 San Andreas
    '12 Santa Cruz Nickel LT
    '08 KTM 530
    '12 Toyota FJ TT
    '05 MiniCooper S
    '95 Honda HB Si
    '71 Dino 246 GT

  17. #1017
    rollin
    Reputation: sriracha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    2,537
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    Ride wise, I dont think youd feel a lot of difference; all the changes would happen at the bottom of the travel.
    .....
    Yessir!
    Thanks for the update! This was what I was hoping would happen. I am certainly more intrigued with the idea, now.

  18. #1018
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,809
    Quote Originally Posted by HHMTB View Post
    @MC Shawn: I find it interesting that you and I gravitated to the same bike after the whole Mountain Cycle meltdown. Nice!
    I always agree with what you have to say, you seem to always be spot on. So, when you say something, I listen.

    I think the Nickel is a natural progression from the Heckler and the Bullet. Could you imaging a monocoque Mountain Cycle with the suspension and geo of the Nickel? That would be pretty cool! It's something they should have done a long time ago. But, I am very happy with my Nickel, and I'm looking forward to making it a little better. 140mm of travel front and rear would be perfect for me.
    '96 San Andreas
    '12 Santa Cruz Nickel LT
    '08 KTM 530
    '12 Toyota FJ TT
    '05 MiniCooper S
    '95 Honda HB Si
    '71 Dino 246 GT

  19. #1019
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,809
    Quote Originally Posted by sriracha View Post
    Thanks for the update! This was what I was hoping would happen. I am certainly more intrigued with the idea, now.
    There is someone around here who did the 140mm shock. Look around for it. I'll also look when I get time. It might be in this thread. I advised against it at the time, but I forgot that the I to I length could be the same. That changes everything.
    '96 San Andreas
    '12 Santa Cruz Nickel LT
    '08 KTM 530
    '12 Toyota FJ TT
    '05 MiniCooper S
    '95 Honda HB Si
    '71 Dino 246 GT

  20. #1020
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,809
    When I got home I remeasured to see if I still had 7mm of clearance for a longer stroke shock, because now I have different tires. It's kinda hard to get in there and measure, but I'm pretty sure that I have 7mm of room between the tire and the seat tube, not much more though.

    I'm thinking that with an air shock, that it's going to be tough to use the last 1 or 2mm of stroke, because of the air spring, but I'm not positive about that.

    I'm going to ask X-Fusion if they can custom tune a shock to use ony 55 or 56mm of stroke.
    '96 San Andreas
    '12 Santa Cruz Nickel LT
    '08 KTM 530
    '12 Toyota FJ TT
    '05 MiniCooper S
    '95 Honda HB Si
    '71 Dino 246 GT

  21. #1021
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,809
    Quote Originally Posted by tobiwan View Post
    So, to all Nickel owners. Throw away the Fox-Damper - it is crap! I changed it to an Marzocchi Roco Air TST R and the bike feels much better in any situation. Its more sensitive on small bumps and feels bottomless on rocky terrain. By using the TST plattform the rear wheel can nearly be locked.
    I also tried an Rock Shox Monarch Plus RC3 and this one also was way better than the Fox. I just went for MZ because of the Lock-Out.
    And yes, there is no problem of using a 200 x57 mm damper on the frame. The suspension curve is designed for the 7mm more travel which results than in 141mm (if needed).
    So, I originally thought this was a bad idea. For some reason, I had in my mind that the shock was longer and the added 7mm would occur at the beginning of the stroke instead of the end of the stroke. After discussing this with someone else, later in this thread, I began to understand this. So, I apologize for not understanding this earlier.

    I was wondering if you could give us an update on your longer stroke shock. With the tires I have, there is barely enough room for a extra 7mm of shock stroke. I am going to ask X-Fusion if they can tune an O2 shock to have 56mm of shaft travel. That would give my Nickel an even 140mm of travel. And, a 140mm fork would make it perfect for me.
    '96 San Andreas
    '12 Santa Cruz Nickel LT
    '08 KTM 530
    '12 Toyota FJ TT
    '05 MiniCooper S
    '95 Honda HB Si
    '71 Dino 246 GT

  22. #1022
    mtbr member
    Reputation: noosa2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    1,370
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    When I got home I remeasured to see if I still had 7mm of clearance for a longer stroke shock, because now I have different tires. It's kinda hard to get in there and measure, but I'm pretty sure that I have 7mm of room between the tire and the seat tube, not much more though.
    Are you sure that the distance the wheel travels towards the seat tube is the same as the length of the shock stroke? As you know by adding the 7mm of stroke to the shock you increase the bikes travel by 17mm. I don't know if that means that the tire would now be 17mm closer to the seat tube but it is something to think about.

  23. #1023
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    262
    Awesome to hear that the Nickel frame can accept a 200x57mm shock to increase travel to 142mm. 650b guys DO NOT DO THIS!

  24. #1024
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,809
    Quote Originally Posted by noosa2 View Post
    Are you sure that the distance the wheel travels towards the seat tube is the same as the length of the shock stroke? As you know by adding the 7mm of stroke to the shock you increase the bikes travel by 17mm. I don't know if that means that the tire would now be 17mm closer to the seat tube but it is something to think about.
    Not sure what you mean. What I did get out of it, is the tires path is up and in. I was measuring straight into the seat tube. So, there should be a little more room then what I measured.

    We need to hear from Tobiwan, and see what tire he is using and how much room there is at full bottom. Maybe he could measure how much room is left from the edge of the rim to the seat tube..
    '96 San Andreas
    '12 Santa Cruz Nickel LT
    '08 KTM 530
    '12 Toyota FJ TT
    '05 MiniCooper S
    '95 Honda HB Si
    '71 Dino 246 GT

  25. #1025
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,809
    I started a new thread about the longer shock subject:
    200 x 57mm shock on a Nickel = 142mm of travel!
    '96 San Andreas
    '12 Santa Cruz Nickel LT
    '08 KTM 530
    '12 Toyota FJ TT
    '05 MiniCooper S
    '95 Honda HB Si
    '71 Dino 246 GT

Page 41 of 67 FirstFirst ... 31 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 51 ... 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
  •