Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 219
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: zachdank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    3,303

    VP-Free with Short Shock (merged thread)

    Can you put a different size shock on a VPfree to change it to a 6-7 inch travel?
    I've heard some people talking about it, and i was just wondering if anyone tried it here.
    Thanx

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,343
    Quote Originally Posted by zachdank
    Can you put a different size shock on a VPfree to change it to a 6-7 inch travel?
    I've heard some people talking about it, and i was just wondering if anyone tried it here.
    Thanx

    I did a search a last week and found a Free with a 8.5 x 2.5 rear shock . I believe it makes for 7" rear travel. I think there was also some discussion on RM as well. I am looking into a Free for DH but @ some point may want to make it into a trail bike - i'd do the 8.5 x 2.5 to lower the BB height.

  3. #3
    rollin
    Reputation: sriracha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    2,622
    Quote Originally Posted by zachdank
    Can you put a different size shock on a VPfree to change it to a 6-7 inch travel?
    I've heard some people talking about it, and i was just wondering if anyone tried it here.
    Thanx
    photo john put a 8.5x2.5 dhx on his vpfree, making it a mini free with 180mm of travel.

    they talk about it in this thread:
    http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.ph...15276#poststop

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    832

    yes you can

    aked sc tech about running a dhx air (this shock is now a sc build option) and being that the dhx air isn't available in a 8.75 x 2.75 if they had a special version anyways here's the answer

    "we use the 8.75" x 2.5" (dhx air) version on the Free. You do lose a little bit of travel, but there is no way around that really.... The travel ends up at around 7.75".

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,343
    Quote Originally Posted by Gripo
    aked sc tech about running a dhx air (this shock is now a sc build option) and being that the dhx air isn't available in a 8.75 x 2.75 if they had a special version anyways here's the answer

    "we use the 8.75" x 2.5" (dhx air) version on the Free. You do lose a little bit of travel, but there is no way around that really.... The travel ends up at around 7.75".

    That's the same length but a different stroke ??? I can see the advantage of running a shorter length shock - lower BB.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    231

    I've got one

    Mine has an 8.5 x 2.8 DHX 5 on it and it's great. There's less movement in the back than my five inch Trek Liquid and it weighs 36 lbs, which is only four pounds heavier. I ride it for everything and it does everything well. My XC friends with bikes ten pounds lighter will beat me to the top but I can keep them in sight and that's good enough. It's a solid bike and I've had no problems with linkages or bearings or squeaking. Just keep the pivot areas clean with compressed air and they'll last just as long as any other setup.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  7. #7
    aka baycat
    Reputation: Ryan G.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    8,484
    Lep-

    Can you give me a run down on your build kit if it it isn't to much of a hassle? Really sick bike.

    Do you use it as a trail bike? How far can you pedal that thing before you are toast?

    -Ryan

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    231

    Thanks

    The build is nothing special, pretty basic really, but it gets the job done. This is my one bike and I primarily trail ride it. I typically ride around 30 miles per week with the average ride being from 10-15 miles. The longest single ride I have done so far was 24 miles and there was little difference between my performance and that of my friends on lighter bikes. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to say I'm in great shape or are a great rider, I'm just saying this bike is extremely capable no matter what style you ride. Most importantly, I come back from every ride liking the bike and appreciating its abilities more than the previous ride. It has deffinitely increased my confidence level and thus raised my riding level since I got it about 10 months ago. I highly recommend this bike. If it came down to building a mid thirty pound Nomad or a VP Free, you might as well go with the VP Free.

    * Frame Size & Color: Medium, slate gray ano
    * Fork: Fox TALAS 36 RC2
    * Shock Fox DHX 5.0
    * Brakes: Hayes Carbon Nine's
    * Cranks: Truvativ Holtzfeller 22, 32
    * Shifters: Front- SRAM X9, Rear- SRAM X7
    * Front Derailleur: Shimano XT
    * Rear Derailleur: SRAM X9
    * Pedals: Crankbrothers Mallet C
    * Stem: Easton Vice
    * Handlebar: Easton Monkeybar EA70
    * Seatpost: Thomson Elite
    * Saddle: WTB Rocket V Stealth
    * Bottom Bracket: Truvativ Gigapipe
    * Headset: WTB Momentum C
    * Front Tire: WTB Weirwolf 2.5
    * Wheels: WTB Dual Duty FR
    * Rear Tire: WTB Weirwolf 2.35

    * overall Weight: 36 lbs

  9. #9
    aka baycat
    Reputation: Ryan G.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    8,484
    Thanks man, sounds like it is speced perfect, looking to donate the bike .

    Your crankset is running an internal BB right, heard it messes up the chainline or something with an external?

    And what is your height?

  10. #10
    Just another FOC'er
    Reputation: .Danno.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,222
    Quote Originally Posted by Leprechaun
    Mine has an 8.5 x 2.8 DHX 5 on it and it's great. There's less movement in the back than my five inch Trek Liquid and it weighs 36 lbs, which is only four pounds heavier. I ride it for everything and it does everything well. My XC friends with bikes ten pounds lighter will beat me to the top but I can keep them in sight and that's good enough. It's a solid bike and I've had no problems with linkages or bearings or squeaking. Just keep the pivot areas clean with compressed air and they'll last just as long as any other setup.
    I never heard of a Fox DHX 5.0 in 8.5 X 2.8, but of course that's not saying much Are you sure though that it's not 8.5 X 2.5 and your spring is just labeled 2.8?

    A friend I ride with has the 5th Element 8.5 X 2.5 on his Free and like Gripo says, it knocks the travel down to about 7.75 and maybe 1/2" off the BB height.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    231

    Deffinitely possible

    Ya, I think you're probably right. I just went off what the spring said on it, 2.8. But it would make more sense if it were 2.5.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    231

    Hmmmmmm

    Quote Originally Posted by baycat
    Thanks man, sounds like it is speced perfect, looking to donate the bike .

    Your crankset is running an internal BB right, heard it messes up the chainline or something with an external?

    And what is your height?

    Ya, probably not, but ahhh..... No, I think I'll be riding this bike till it dies which shouldn't happen in my lifetime.

    I've heard the same thing about the external BB. Some can get them to work, others can't. I'm not sure if this helps, but with my setup if I wanted to run a third ring up front SC told me I needed to get a Saint front derailleur because it was the only one that would work. I would recommend emailling SC, they're great and would me more than happy to help you out.

    I'm currently 5'11" 1/2" on good days. The medium feels great.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,343
    Why a 8.5 x 2.5 shock ? Just wondering why some want or do go with the shorter shock ? Thanx

  14. #14
    Just another FOC'er
    Reputation: .Danno.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,222
    Quote Originally Posted by keen
    Why a 8.5 x 2.5 shock ? Just wondering why some want or do go with the shorter shock ? Thanx
    For my friend there were two reasons. First, he wanted a lower BB and I think his dropped from 14 3/4 to around 14 1/4. Second, he slacked it out by about 1 degree I believe. Lower & slacker.

    Like sliding the shuttle forward on your Bullit.

  15. #15
    Justin Vander Pol
    Reputation: juice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,603

    Lowered vp-free

    A few folks have asked about my project to lower my VP-Free. This isn't a new thing, lots of folks have done it, but I thought I'd share for those of you looking for a lower, more flickable bike.

    Why'd I do it? I've always felt my VP-Free was a bit too tall, meaning the bottom bracket was too high. Lowering it will really make it groove! I've got friends going big (and they're big guys) on 170mm forks, so I figured 200mm was overkill, even though I use my bike pretty hard.

    Even with the new, low setup, which is 20 mm lower both front and back, I still have a 14.4" bottom bracket. Not super low, so it should still be versatile.

    Starting setup: '05 888rc 200mm with Risse lowrider crowns. Stock Fox DHX 8.75" x 2.75" [edit: typo earlier listed this as 2.5] shock in back giving it 8.5" of travel. I liked the head angle and how it handled, it just felt top heavy.

    New, lowered setup: '06 66RC2X 170mm with a Swinger 6-way 8.5" x 2.5" shock giving it about 7.5" of travel. I hope I like the Swinger, I might be buying a used Roco or DHX if it doesn't work out.

    Here's how the geometry stacks up betwen the two setups. I took actual measurements for all of these with a tape and an angle finder thing I have.

    Measurement -- original geo -- new lowered geo
    Head angle -- 66 degrees -- 66 degrees
    Wheelbase -- 46.75" -- 46.75"
    BB height -- 15.1" -- 14.4"
    Standover -- 32.5" -- 31.5"

    What really surprised me is that the wheelbase didn't shorten up any. I chock this up to either bad wheelbase measurements (was a bit hard with 1 person) or to the fact that the swing link causes the chainstay to lengthen with a shorter eye-to-eye.

    Some of you might also be interested that the conventional wisdom about 1" longer fork = 1 degree slacker head angle is total crap. Once a bike is fairly slack, this factor is exaggerated. Actual measurements showed that a 1" increase in axle to crown was almost a 2 degree slacker head angle in the 64 to 66 degree range. This makes sense if you're into trigonometry at all.

    I was hoping to get a ride in before I posted up my results, but the weather is crap here in Seattle. I have been getting some riding in, but it's all been on my xc bike.

    Here's a pic of the final project. I think the bike just looks faster now. I'm also stoked to ride a singlecrown on tight stuff, and maybe even learn to throw in some X-ups when I'm riding Whistler.

    Last edited by juice; 01-11-2007 at 01:23 PM.

  16. #16
    Doesnt ride Banshees
    Reputation: Banshee Rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,406
    Wowzers, thanks a bunch for posting those measurements! I've got a 8.5x2.5 Swinger 6-Way I picked up and have been meaning to put on my VP-Free. The BB drop is more significant than I thought! Great new's indeed, the high BB is the #1 thing holding that bike back, I'm really excited to get the ball rolling now!

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,343

    shorter shock

    When I had my Free I originally planned to run an 8.5 x 2.5 rear shock. There was a thread on RM where they discussed the effects of the shorter shock on the VPP - seemed the starting point was off as the suspension was deeper in its travel.

    .

  18. #18
    Justin Vander Pol
    Reputation: juice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,603
    Quote Originally Posted by keen
    When I had my Free I originally planned to run an 8.5 x 2.5 rear shock. There was a thread on RM where they discussed the effects of the shorter shock on the VPP - seemed the starting point was off as the suspension was deeper in its travel.
    Yeah, we'll have to see. It might be a while before I can get in a shore trip and really see how it performs on trails that I'm familiar with. I did look over it pretty closely, and there's still plenty of rearward travel in the VPP S-curve even with a the shorter shock, so I think it'll be fine. I might dig up that RM thread and see wha they have to say. Maybe I should hold on to my 8.75" DHX for a while.

  19. #19
    bog
    bog is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,239

    Fox DHX and Roco 8.5 x 2.5

    I have both shocks for my Nomad if anyone is interested in trying them on their VPF. I'm considering getting a VPF and was very interested in seeing how it would handle with the 8.5 shock and my 66 RC2X. They work well on the Nomad but the VPF seems like it would be perfect with this setup.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    62
    Juice - have you tried running a lighter spring for more sag and cranking up the bottom out control. This should have a similar effect to what your doing but you get the added benifit of more negative travel for better tracking. It would be intersteing to try both but I bet you will be faster with 8.5" travel set up with 4" sag then you will be with 7.5" travel and 3" sag.

  21. #21
    Justin Vander Pol
    Reputation: juice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,603
    dirtdogg - I don't think that would work for me. Seems like it could make for an unbalanced bike and some goofy geometry if you're on steep stuff with the rear tire just barely staying on the ground. I was already running fairly high sag with my bottom-out all the way in. I don't like much pressure in the DHX boost valve, and that means you don't get all that much bottom out resistance.

    I still think 8.5" is overkill for anything I'm willing to do. I won't launch anything huge, and even at that I want a nice transition. How big do I go? I dunno, internet measuring units have always confused me I mostly ride Whistler, the Shore and a bunch of local trails - lots of moderate sized drops or beautifully sculpted landings.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    61
    Get a lower bike and let the great VPF like it was.because the vpp system dont work well with a small shock

  23. #23
    Some Assembly Required
    Reputation: man w/ one hand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,073
    I was thinking that a shock, the correct length w/a shorter stroke, would be the best case scenerio to limit travel. That way you don't have a adjustments of the shock extreme one way or the other, causing the shock to be under stress.
    "Why are you willing to take so much & leave others in need...just because you can?"

  24. #24
    TNC
    TNC is offline
    noMAD man
    Reputation: TNC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,059

    You may be right.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bora
    Get a lower bike and let the great VPF like it was.because the vpp system dont work well with a small shock
    Or maybe not. I would really like to hear or see a "real" engineering explanation of how a shorter shock affects that allegedly unique "S" wheelpath...or doesn't affect/hurt the wheelpath. Either way it's something to consider, and I'd sure like to know more about it.

    In a similar comparison, SC wound up putting some 8.75 X 2.75 Progressive Gravity air shocks on some Nomads with no apparent negative affect to the wheelpath curve or performance of the suspension design that we know of. While a longer or shorter shock probably always affects the leverage advantage to some degree, how big it is and how it impacts performance seems to be the biggest issue. On a Bullit, for example, it's not very noticeable...remember I'm talking about the leverage advantage/disadvantage, not geometry issues...and of course a Bullit doesn't have the complex wheelpath issue of a VPP design.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    62
    If you want to go faster downhill and pedaling is less of an issue it could help to increase the sag setting beyond optimal. You will be outside of the ideal efficency window but the reduced head angle and lower BB might be big enough to offset that. On the other hand if you want a more efficient pedaler and DH speed is not an issue than you can increase your shock platform.
    Limiting your travel is pointless. I guess it could help you mentally. The idea of pedaling a 7" bike does seem a lot easier than pedaling an 8.5" bike.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    62
    if you want a more zippy ride build up a light wheel set and use single ply tires. I have two wheel sets one for DH/FR and one for XC. The difference is amazing.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    61
    The wheelpath curve whit a small shock , and with right sag begans very high in the curve and the virtual efect dont work correctly ....sry mi English its too poor

  28. #28
    TNC
    TNC is offline
    noMAD man
    Reputation: TNC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,059

    8.75 X 2.5 Dhxa

    Quote Originally Posted by Towelie
    I recently decided to go this route--8.75x2.5 to limit travel without altering the geometry. The downside is that this is an odd size so Avalanche and CCDB were the only (expensive) options I could find. In the end, I decided to give the CCDB a try.
    I'm looking at a list just received today from Fox, and it shows an 8.75 X 2.5 DHXA. In fact I thought it odd that an 8.75 X 2.75 DHXA is not on this list. There is an 8.75 X 2.75 DHXC but no 8.75 X 2.5 DHXC.

  29. #29
    TNC
    TNC is offline
    noMAD man
    Reputation: TNC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,059

    I wouldn't be concerned.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bora
    The wheelpath curve whit a small shock , and with right sag begans very high in the curve and the virtual efect dont work correctly ....sry mi English its too poor
    I'd bet your English is only about 10 times better than my Portuguese. I'm not questioning that fact of your assessment, but I'm just curious where you got the info? I can see the apparent logic of such an assessment, but did you read this somewhere or get it from SC...or are you an engineer in Portugal?

  30. #30
    Justin Vander Pol
    Reputation: juice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,603
    I'm still waiting to get out on a real ride and see how the bike handles. I've talked to a few folks who've done this change, but it's been a while. I think I was on the lift at Whistler with some dude who did this down in Cali and he said it was a fairly common setup down there.

    Right now the biggest storm in 5 years is blowing into town so we'll probably have to wait a week or two for my test ride - and then we have to deal with Christmas chaos. I did get a ride in on tuesday, but it was a 2.5 hour hammerfest xc night ride, so I took the (too) light Yeti.

  31. #31
    bog
    bog is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,239

    I wouldn't worry too much about it myself...

    I'm a Professional Mechanical Engineer but to reallly know what's going on I'd have to see the exact curve or plot it out myself. I know that the curves really don't curve much at all so you'd likely not feel much difference. It's not like you'll be sitting 1+" deeper in the travel and will get outside of the pedaling sweetspot. Imagine how many people out there run different amounts of sag and different air pressure or coil weight setups. Unless something is really out of wack you shouldn't notice much. I've played with different air and coil shocks on my old VPF and my Nomad and there is quite a bit of wiggle room with each setup before it feels bad (and I have been able to get each bike to feel bad).

    With a shorter travel shock you normally use a heavier spring or increase preload so you gain back a bit of what you lost by going with a shorter shock length.

  32. #32
    Justin Vander Pol
    Reputation: juice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,603
    I did my first "ride" this weekend. If any of you watch the news you'll know how the trails looked out here - trees down everywhere. Our ride mostly consisted of pulling trees off of the trail and getting an upper body workout with our hand saws.

    I did get enough riding in to know that the suspension will handle just fine... but will it be as supple as before? I dunno yet, but I think so. The Swinger is actually a nicer shock than I expected, but we'll have to wait for Whistler to really find out. So far I think I made the right move in dropping the bike.



    Here's a pic of a little jump that we were playing on. In it's current form it's a bit of a launcher, and I had more speed than the runout really allowed - hence the hang on and grab the brakes style. Good fun in between clearing trails.

  33. #33
    RPG
    RPG is online now
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    619

    Anyone put a shorter stroke shock on a VP-Free???

    I'm looking to reduce the BB height along with some travel on the VP free, but wasn't sure if anyone has tried tried this. What would it do to the HA and CS? How much sag would you run? Also, how would this affect the Virtual pivot? Anyone who has first hand experience please chime in, along with some pictures too.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    795

    Hey Juice, any more ride reports on this project?

    Very interested in hearing how it affects handling and all. Thanks.

  35. #35
    Justin Vander Pol
    Reputation: juice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,603
    Well we had another 2 inches of rain today. I've been hitting the snow more than the bike lately, so it'll probably be a while unless we get some dry weather this weekend. Forecast is cold and wet, so the telemark skis or snowboard are more likely to get some play than the free.

    This winter is definitely for the record books in the rain department here in soggy Seattle.

    In terms of handling, so far soo good! I dropped the front and rear equally, so the geometry didn't change other than the BB height. But I'm still just getting the feel on xc trails and urban hits - not really the territory for the beefy build I have on the Free.

    One thing I noticed - I just switched over to Maxxis Minions from Nevegals. The Minions are continally spitting little pebbles up on my face and continually clinking them against the down-tube. Other than that they handle pretty well in the wet (40d 2.7 front, triple compound 2.5 in back). Kind of odd, I might go back to Nevegals for fear of putting my eye out when I'm not wearing glasses.

  36. #36
    Some Assembly Required
    Reputation: man w/ one hand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,073
    Quote Originally Posted by juice
    One thing I noticed - I just switched over to Maxxis Minions from Nevegals. The Minions are continally spitting little pebbles up on my face and continually clinking them against the down-tube. Other than that they handle pretty well in the wet (40d 2.7 front, triple compound 2.5 in back). Kind of odd, I might go back to Nevegals for fear of putting my eye out when I'm not wearing glasses.
    I have the pebble prob w/my Nevegals too. 2.7 ft/bk. They really sling stuff forward out in ft of me. Sometimes it comes up at me or the bike. Love my Neveys.
    "Why are you willing to take so much & leave others in need...just because you can?"

  37. #37
    BOSS TYCOON
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    182
    Do you think i could do the same thing on my nomad. The problem is that i love the 6.5 inches of travel, but i hate am not a big fan of the higher bottom bracket, and a 66degree headtube would help it out

  38. #38
    PULL
    Reputation: NoManerz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    701

    VP-Free Owners with 2.5 stroke shocks, Updates?

    To all the guys/gals running the 2.5 stroke shocks, how do you like them?

    I am tossing around the idea of running one because I want a lower bottom bracket and I think it would pair nicely with a 7 inch single crown fork. Any impressions or so on, I'd love to hear them.

  39. #39
    PULL
    Reputation: NoManerz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    701
    no one?

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    28

    Anyone running a shorter shock on VP-Free

    Would running a shorter shock say 8.5 eye to eye with 2.5 stroke lower bottom bracket and slacken head angel some and make the bike a little more downhill oriented. Seems like it would work well and still leave plenty of travel.

  41. #41
    Some Assembly Required
    Reputation: man w/ one hand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,073
    Quote Originally Posted by RickP
    Would running a shorter shock say 8.5 eye to eye with 2.5 stroke lower bottom bracket and slacken head angel some and make the bike a little more downhill oriented. Seems like it would work well and still leave plenty of travel.

    I've seriously thought about this too. I'm looking to shorten the travel on my VP Free. I've got a Cane Creek Double Barrel on it & when I send it in for maintanence/oil change I'm gonna consult them about making the stroke shorter but leaving the i2i the same, so not to mess up th' geo. Hindsight; I should'a done it when I ordered th' DB.
    You got me to thinkin'......I've still got my old Bullit frame w/the 5th element that came on it. That shock is 8.5x2.5 I think....I just might hav'ta play around w/it during th' holidays...hmmmm
    "Why are you willing to take so much & leave others in need...just because you can?"

  42. #42
    PULL
    Reputation: NoManerz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    701
    Yea I am going to do it. Ordering up the 8.5 2.5 double barrel at the end of this week.

    It drops the bottom bracket to around 14.2-14.5ish.

  43. #43
    Tear it all out! SuperModerator
    Reputation: CraigH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    7,755
    I know PhotoJohn was doing that with his. Mark Weir was doing this too before the Nomad came out.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    44
    Any updates? I'm seriously considering doing this as well, but would like to hear some results first

  45. #45
    PULL
    Reputation: NoManerz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    701
    If you do a search one guy has had this setup for a while now on a red vp-free. He rides the shore and I have heard nothing but good news so far.

    I remember hearing that mark weir ran this setup with the fox 36 up front also.

  46. #46
    Just another FOC'er
    Reputation: .Danno.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,222
    A friend of mine has been running his with an 8.5 X 2.5 for a couple of years now. He likes it way better with the lower BB, and it didn't seem to screw up the VPP pedaling sweet spot.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    44

    I did it !

    Well I went ahead with some changes to my vp free to hopefully make it a better all round ride than it already is. First I swapped fork from a 888 rcx2 to a 66 light with eta. I then stopped by marrzochi canada to see about a rocco air in a 8.5 x 2.5 as I have not yet seen them available yet. Well they just happened to have received some. So after paying way too much for a new shock here is a pic. Test ride tomorrow and feedback to follow
    Attached Images Attached Images

  48. #48
    Some Assembly Required
    Reputation: man w/ one hand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,073
    Quote Originally Posted by geerider
    Well I went ahead with some changes to my vp free to hopefully make it a better all round ride than it already is. First I swapped fork from a 888 rcx2 to a 66 light with eta. I then stopped by marrzochi canada to see about a rocco air in a 8.5 x 2.5 as I have not yet seen them available yet. Well they just happened to have received some. So after paying way too much for a new shock here is a pic. Test ride tomorrow and feedback to follow

    Sweet ride. Lookin' forward to the feedback on that Zokie shock. I wondered when they were going to hit the market. Hope she works out for ya, I hate it when I see something like that I gotta have. It's even worse when you can justify it by the fact that you "need it".
    Enjoy it. Keep us posted.
    "Why are you willing to take so much & leave others in need...just because you can?"

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    44

    Good job! Update

    Well, with work, rain, and life in general I finally went for my first good ride on my newly updated bike. I did a loop on Burnaby mountain as a shake down and was very happy with the changes.
    When I first built up the free I had swapped the parts from a norco team dh including the single ring setup, 888, etc. The bike was fun but not versatile, but I also own a cove g-spot set up as an more xc bike. I have owned the g-spot for about three years or so and has been a great bike. It has a 5thcoil shock and a z150sl, 2.3 highrollers, a nice bike.
    Let me just say that the vp free has stolen the love away from my old cove. I out climbed my old bike on the way up even though it is probably 5 pounds heavier and defenitely descended with a much plusher ride on the way down.A very coil like ride.
    Granted some of the difference could be the fork but the rear roco air shock really impressed me. I put 150 psi in the shock and didn't really touch a thing after that.
    Of course I will play around with it a bit, but for a first ride it was two thumbs up anyone looking for a g-spot

  50. #50
    Justin Vander Pol
    Reputation: juice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,603
    Quote Originally Posted by NoManerz
    If you do a search one guy has had this setup for a while now on a red vp-free. He rides the shore and I have heard nothing but good news so far.
    That would be me, and yes, I LOVE the new setup (did it 8 months ago, or so). My Swinger blew out, so now I'm running a ROCO TST on it, and like the bike even more. I always thought the bike felt top-heavy before I made the change.

    FYI - the kind of ridng I do is shore-type techy downhills where you have to pedal to the top, and also a bit of Whistler when I can escape up there. Super steep and rocky is my forte, and I haven't had any issues with the lower BB.

    I put a 170mm 66rc2x on there and a 2.5x8.5 shock. It dropped both the front and rear down about .75", but kept the head angle the same. The bike just plain rocks now, and I never miss the extra travel. Single crown is nice, too, and I've decided to learn full x-ups this year (umm, we'll see how this goes).

    I don't think the shorter rear shock would be good with a 200mm fork like the 888, the bike would be too slack for anything but DH racing. But with the current crop of single-crown 7 inchers, this is a great way to go.

    If you want to get all nerdy (like me) about it you can see actual, as-measured geometry of my bike on my little setup database web page: http://vanderpol.org/bike/setup.htm

    Have fund with it!

    PS - I also just hacksawed off the front cable stops, the one's closest to the head tube. These little *****es kept bruising my knees when I rode without armor. My armor would also snag the cables. Now I just zip-tie the cables and run them under the top tube, a WAY better place for the cables.

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    86

    VP FREE short SHOCK

    Hey guys,
    This question is for the guys running a 8.5 i to i and 2.5 stroke shocks. How are you guys liking it? There isn't much info on the setup that i have found.I heard that Mike Weir was running this set up? I would like to try it and get the bb lower and help rake out the head angle. What kind of sag are you running on the combo? Also any pics would be awesome.
    Thanks in advance!!!!!!!

  52. #52
    Lord of the Chainrings
    Reputation: Mudd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    2,924
    While we're on the subject, I have a question.
    Wouldn't installing a "lighter" spring accomplish the same goal?
    "Hesitation is the Mother of Failure!"

    ~~ 951 for Dirt & Roadster for Asphalt ~~

  53. #53
    Just another FOC'er
    Reputation: .Danno.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,222
    I've got a friend that did that and seems to really like it. The bike is significantly lower with reduced standover and corners a lot better. He runs around 30% sag and has no bob, but that may partly be because he's got a 5th Element on it.

    Running a softer spring on the 8.75 shock really isn't the same because the standover is higher, and having that much sag will really cause it to blow through the remaining travel quickly. It'll also have zero snap on jumps and riding the real steep stuff where you're nose wheeling part of the time, gets harder because it'll still be topping out at full height.

    His BB is 14.25 running a Boxxer Ride and 2.5 Kenda tires.

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation: lonbalz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    196

    Shorter shock

    Just installed a 8.5 X 2.5 roco world cup on my free. It slackened the bike out to almost 66 degrees which is almost perfect. Night and day difference in the handling of the bike. Even though I'm running an '07 Van36 RC2, the bike balances out pretty well now. The roco is a completey different feel than the DHX 5 coil. Feels much, much better over all than the DHX did. I use the bike for 50% aggressive trail, 50% freeride. It is a great setup! The lower bottom bracket really helps with the maneuverability of the bike through corners and you don't sit up quite as high as you do with the stock shock. It also does not inhibit the bike in any way from freeride use either. The backend definitely feels much more lively with the shorter shock. You still have plenty of travel though. My spring is a little undersprung for me, but it still feels pretty good. With gear, my sag is about an 1.5 inches i to i. It should be closer to an inch or just a little over. Overall, IMO it's a great choice to go with the shorter rear shock if your doing more than just freeride.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  55. #55
    Trying a little
    Reputation: dusthuffer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    1,781
    whats the bb height with the short shock?

    I never apologize. I'm sorry, but that's just the way I am.

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation: lonbalz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    196

    BB height

    My bb measures 14 and 3/8 inches. Not sure what it is after I sit on it which I have not measured yet. It feels good though. I ghaven't had any real probs with pedal smack either so far.

  57. #57
    Trying a little
    Reputation: dusthuffer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    1,781
    I think with the stock 8.75 shock and a big ass fork like the 888 the bb is like 15.5. But static bb height measurements are worth jack.

    I never apologize. I'm sorry, but that's just the way I am.

  58. #58
    PULL
    Reputation: NoManerz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    701
    You might have seen my bike from my thread a while back. BB is mid 14's. It has transformed my bike into everything I could want out of my free. Running around 30-32% sag. Head angle from my thread is around 64-65ish static. When I sit on the bike it begs to go fast.


  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MRUFF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    49
    What kind of Saint cranks are you guys running? Regular or the long axle type?
    Thanks.

  60. #60
    PULL
    Reputation: NoManerz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    701
    the 805s with the raceface conversion kit for 73mm

    here is a link to the retro fit kit to make them work
    http://www.jensonusa.com/store/produ...ro+Bb+Kit.aspx

  61. #61
    All Mt, DH
    Reputation: rogue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    488
    Shortly I will install a DHX Coil with 8.5 x 2.5 on my Free... with the already there 2007 66 rc2x 180mm fork. Should be interesting.
    2007 Blur 4x
    2009 Driver 8

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    86
    This change definitly looks worthy of doing. The only other choice is to go with a full on DH rig. I am new to the VPP thing and I'm impressed with its DH ability but low and slack are the way to go. 7.75" is still alot of travel.

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    255
    I fitted my Free with a 8.5 Pushed DHX, super plush, my only question is that it now feels super soft, is this the result of the push, or does the shorter shock induce more leverage and therefore a bigger coil required than when running a 8.75? Hope i made my self clear.
    I liked the ride and lower more manouverable feel. Does not pedal so well, but i have this rig for more gravity assisted rides anyway.

    any comments on the leverage/ coil question would be appreciated.

    Thanks,

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    86
    The leverage ratios would still stay the same. When you get your shock pushed the "platform" of the shock tends to be less noticable from what i understand. How do you like the handling with the shorter shock compared to before?

  65. #65
    Just another FOC'er
    Reputation: .Danno.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,222
    Quote Originally Posted by KMAD57
    The leverage ratios would still stay the same.
    The leverage ratio does actually rise because there's a huge regressive section at the beginning of the curve that gets partially cut off when you put the shorter shock on it. I've got a graph somewhere around here if anybody really cares.

    BTW, to maintain the same percentage sag you'd have to go with a stiffer spring even if the leverage ratio was constant.

  66. #66
    supermachete
    Guest
    I'm planning on doing the same. I swapped my dual crown for a totem last fall and It's felt a bit twichy since. how much does the ratio increse? will a 25lb bump up in spring weight cover it? or 50?

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    86
    How is the leverage ratio going to change? The links are still following the same arcs as before the shock change. The rate changes would follow the same paths. By using the short shock all you are doing is starting more into the stroke designed into the links.

  68. #68
    Just another FOC'er
    Reputation: .Danno.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,222
    Quote Originally Posted by KMAD57
    How is the leverage ratio going to change? The links are still following the same arcs as before the shock change. The rate changes would follow the same paths. By using the short shock all you are doing is starting more into the stroke designed into the links.
    I have yet to see a bike that has a constant leverage curve. If you cut off the first 0.7" off this curve the average is higher.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    86
    Any one else running this setup? I'm still sitting on the fence.

  70. #70
    Doesnt ride Banshees
    Reputation: Banshee Rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,406
    Quote Originally Posted by Mudd
    Wouldn't installing a "lighter" spring accomplish the same goal?
    No. While you may achieve the same BB height with a lighter spring and more sag as you would with a shorter shock, the ride characterisics wouldn't be the same. To prevent excessive bottoming due to the lighter spring, you would have to increase the bottom out adjustment, which would result in a harsher ride deeper in the frames travel (where you would be wallowing),

    The BB height was the biggest flaw with the VP-Free. Mine measured static at 15.5", absurd. I would love to see this bike with a 14.25" BB when/if they bring it back.

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    255
    i have run it once, i like the lower BB and running a 66 the slacker head angle is nice too, it corners better from the one outing. Jury is still out for me.

  72. #72
    All Mt, DH
    Reputation: rogue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    488
    Quote Originally Posted by jezhkrider
    i have run it once, i like the lower BB and running a 66 the slacker head angle is nice too, it corners better from the one outing. Jury is still out for me.
    I have installed the 8.5 x 2.5 DHX Coil on my Free with an RCS 500x2.5 Ti spring. I used this spring on the same DHX for a while on my Nomad. Others have told me that Ti on the DHX is a bit risky due to the clearance on the piggyback reservoir, which I can confirm, in fact my spring is a little eccentric and at some rotations in hits and some are ok. I havent ridden the Free with the DHX yet (only the original 8.75x2.75 5th Element with the original Ti spring--- think its a 450lbs). I had a mate help with the sag measurements and it seems the 500lb spring may be ok, getting around 33% sag.
    Overall I really dont like high BB bikes,so I think i'll appreciate the shorter shock, time will tell. By the way I'm 90kg and are running a 2007 66 rc2x up front.
    2007 Blur 4x
    2009 Driver 8

  73. #73
    40% of the time it works
    Reputation: dirtysancheez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    13
    Man i would like to hear about your set up. I run a ti spring on my 8.75 dhx and I tightened it down hard enough to seat it not to rub and so far so good. I want to try an 8.5 air shock maybe the new Marz anybody seen what they are going for. I have another question did you have to mess with chain length or have problems with shifting??

  74. #74
    PULL
    Reputation: NoManerz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    701
    No problems with chain length or shifting.

    You should be setting your chain length at full chain growth which is when the bike is bottomed out.

    I just love this setup.

    I hope the new vp free is set up around this short shock bb height, I'd love a 2 pound lighter frame. Dreaming of a 35 pound, freeride, 7 inch travel bike....

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    255

    Vp Free, 2.5 Shock and a DC Fork

    Hi,

    current set my on my Free is a 2.5" Pushed DHX and a 180mm 66 up front, feels great, corners superbly etc.

    Just wondered if anyone was running the shorter shock with a 200mm DC, if so any comments?

    I fear it may make things way too slack and the bike therefore starts misbehaving.

    Any comments or thoughts would be appreciated,

    Jez
    Last edited by jezhkrider; 11-05-2007 at 02:33 AM.

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Trojan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    96
    Quote Originally Posted by jezhkrider
    Hi,

    current set my on my Free is a 2.5" Pushed DHX and a 180mm 66 up front, feels great, corners superbly etc.

    Just wondered if anyone was running the shorter shock with a 200mm DC, if so any comments?

    I fear it may make things way too slack and the bike therefore starts misbehaving.

    Any comments or thoughts would be appreciated,

    Jez
    Hi Jez,
    I have a 05 Free with Boxxer World Cups,after using on UK downhill for 1 year im just not happy with it and considering swapping them out for some TOTEMS (coil).
    Front end is too high, doesn't turn the best and just feels sluggish, heavy, with **** turning circle! Even spent £100 to get them TF tuned and still not happy!
    Thinking if change to the T then will be plusher, better turning, lowering the front by 20mm should get to the 65deg head angle its supposed to be at, hopefully i will prefer it but its a lot of dosh to fork out (scuse pun) to then find its not much different & i should flog the lot now and change to another bike...i do quite fancy an sx trail!!

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    255
    Trojan,
    thanks for that. I was running a 888 with the reg 2.75" shock, which I liked, but found the bike rode high when on the longer shock ( that gives all 8.5" of travel ).
    The shorter shock drops the BB, so it corners better and works well with the 66. But for DH Duties I just wondered if anyone had combined the 2.5" shock and a 200mm up front.

    Good luck with the Totem, I have only good things to say about the 66 however.

  78. #78
    PULL
    Reputation: NoManerz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    701
    I remember reading some guy was racing a short shock with a 40 on ridemonkey. I remember he liked it. The fox 40 is a very low triple.

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    756
    I run a 2.5" shock with a 180mm fork up front as well, my bike is slacker than a friends running a 2.75" shock with 200mm forks up front.

    Personally I wouldn't want my bike any slacker

  80. #80
    Freeriding Feline
    Reputation: SuperKat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    2,548
    I run a DHX Air w/ an '05 Marz 66. Awesome set up.
    "If you give up your dream, you die."
    Twitter - KIKat1029

  81. #81
    TNC
    TNC is offline
    noMAD man
    Reputation: TNC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,059

    For DH

    Quote Originally Posted by jezhkrider
    Trojan,
    thanks for that. I was running a 888 with the reg 2.75" shock, which I liked, but found the bike rode high when on the longer shock ( that gives all 8.5" of travel ).
    The shorter shock drops the BB, so it corners better and works well with the 66. But for DH Duties I just wondered if anyone had combined the 2.5" shock and a 200mm up front.

    Good luck with the Totem, I have only good things to say about the 66 however.
    If you're going to do DH or shuttle type activities solely with a 200mm DC fork and 8.5 shock setup, then it will probably work even if it's not the optimum setup. I'm not sure I'm understanding your take on the better cornering as you drop the rear end but raise the front...at least as it applies to the Free. This usually reduces front tire traction causing you to have to provide more forward bias body english to maintain good steering. Lowering "both" the front and rear can do the most to improve cornering performance.

    Now...everything's a compromise, and up to a point, slacker steering geometry can aid descending times and consistency in the steeper and more technical sections of a DH run, as long as one doesn't go too far. If the terrain contains more high speed cornering sections that flatten out to some degree, then the 200mm/8.5" setup might become a handful. That said, can anyone provide the AtoC numbers on the forks you're considering here to see what the real impact will be on the front end height? Dual crown forks usually have shorter AtoC numbers than equal single crown versions.

  82. #82
    Just another FOC'er
    Reputation: .Danno.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,222
    Quote Originally Posted by TNC
    ...That said, can anyone provide the AtoC numbers on the forks you're considering here to see what the real impact will be on the front end height? Dual crown forks usually have shorter AtoC numbers than equal single crown versions.
    I know a few of them:
    8" Fox 40 - 571mm
    8" Boxxer - 570mm
    8" 888rc2x - 580mm
    180mm Totem - 565mm
    180mm 66 - 565mm

    Going from a Boxxer or 40 to a Totem will only make the bike about 1/4 degree steeper.

  83. #83
    TNC
    TNC is offline
    noMAD man
    Reputation: TNC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,059

    200mm 888?

    Quote Originally Posted by .Danno.
    I know a few of them:
    8" Fox 40 - 571mm
    8" Boxxer - 570mm
    8" 888rc2x - 580mm
    180mm Totem - 565mm
    180mm 66 - 565mm

    Going from a Boxxer or 40 to a Totem will only make the bike about 1/4 degree steeper.
    I'm assuming that 888 is a 200mm version? I had an old '04 Marz handbook lying around that indicated a 200mm 888 was 605mm. I thought I heard that later 888's have lowered the AtoC for a given travel range, so I didn't want to throw in an antique fork's numbers. So we're talking about a 15mm increase in fork length. You'd just have to ride that setup to really feel how much "real world" difference that would make. Even little factors like how much sag the OP dials into his rear shock could make a big difference on all of this. I'll leave the math to the slide rule professionals to sort that one out...LOL!

  84. #84
    Just another FOC'er
    Reputation: .Danno.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,222
    Quote Originally Posted by TNC
    I'm assuming that 888 is a 200mm version? I had an old '04 Marz handbook lying around that indicated a 200mm 888 was 605mm. I thought I heard that later 888's have lowered the AtoC for a given travel range, so I didn't want to throw in an antique fork's numbers. So we're talking about a 15mm increase in fork length. You'd just have to ride that setup to really feel how much "real world" difference that would make. Even little factors like how much sag the OP dials into his rear shock could make a big difference on all of this. I'll leave the math to the slide rule professionals to sort that one out...LOL!
    Yeah, that's the 06/07 200mm 888. I've acutally got my 06 888rc2x slightly under 580mm. I've heard that the 2008 888s are quite a bit lower, but I haven't seen one.

    The older ones were stupid high at the 605mm you referred to. Even worse was the older 170mm 66s that were 595mm. That's a tall fork for 170mm of travel! The 7" (178mm) Boxxers were only 544mm.

  85. #85
    PULL
    Reputation: NoManerz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    701
    Super slack bikes really are not that hard to manage. I've taken my bike on xc rides with it's 64-65 degree head angle and it's no big deal. Going up hill the fork wanders left and right a bit but going down this thing screams for speed and stayed locked where I point it.

    I'd take a 64-66 head angle over a 67-70 any day of the week. Just personal preferences and the trade off are not that big of a deal to me.

    My setup is 2.5 shock with a totem coil.

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    756
    My understanding is the older 888's had a drop crown where the new ones have a flat crown thus the AtoC is not so high

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    255
    thanks for the input, I think i will stay with the current 66/ 2.5 set up.

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Trojan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    96

    Hope

    Quote Originally Posted by TNC
    If you're going to do DH or shuttle type activities solely with a 200mm DC fork and 8.5 shock setup, then it will probably work even if it's not the optimum setup. I'm not sure I'm understanding your take on the better cornering as you drop the rear end but raise the front...at least as it applies to the Free. This usually reduces front tire traction causing you to have to provide more forward bias body english to maintain good steering. Lowering "both" the front and rear can do the most to improve cornering performance.

    Now...everything's a compromise, and up to a point, slacker steering geometry can aid descending times and consistency in the steeper and more technical sections of a DH run, as long as one doesn't go too far. If the terrain contains more high speed cornering sections that flatten out to some degree, then the 200mm/8.5" setup might become a handful. That said, can anyone provide the AtoC numbers on the forks you're considering here to see what the real impact will be on the front end height? Dual crown forks usually have shorter AtoC numbers than equal single crown versions.
    Hi TNC, thanks for the info. my problem is the height of the front end i think its just too high (Med VP with 06 boxxers-i'm 6ft) even with no stem spacers, low rise bars.
    Im thinking that if i go from 200mm '06 boxxers to totems, the top tube will drop effectively by 5mm in height (not 20mm as i presumed before (200>180?)someone said its 570 a/c on boxxers, 565 on totems) but i should also be able to get the stem much lower onto the headset, maybe extra 15mm when i get rid of the top crown thats taking up a lot of space as it is. So therefore getting the bars 20mm lower?....but its gonna cost me to find out if it will satisfy my needs.
    maybe its due to the sag in the rear too, im 182lbs so should need a 478 spring (according to mojo's spring calculator) i actually have a 400! so am running more sag in the rear (22mm as opposed to the reccomended18.82mm) than i should plus that combined with the longer fork (it came with a Manitou Travis? 180mm i think) is probably making things worse than it should be. Interesting to see the single crown fork doesnt lower it as much as i would have thought, all down to the a/c huh?

    Maybe if i treat her to some new Totems and a Ti coil (should i go lighter or heavier 450 or 500???) i will enjoy another season or 2's riding the beast...thx

  89. #89
    TNC
    TNC is offline
    noMAD man
    Reputation: TNC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,059
    Trojan, I'm not a big fan of most of the spring calculators I've seen...maybe the one you used is different. And totally relying on sag isn't always the perfect setup in some cases. It often takes some actual useage trial and error in many cases. Spring calculators and factory recommended sag are good starting points, but there's no way I can tell you what will be the best setup for your situation. The balance of ride height between front and rear is obviously critical. Trojan, I didn't see a mention of which rear shock you have...2.5 or 2.75. I rode a Free with the 2.75 rear shock and one of those tall, 605mm 888's at Bootleg Canyon, and I thought it handled excellently. It had a 5th E coil on the rear. The SC crew at the SC booth at Interbike had set the bike up for Demo Days, and it worked very well...a good balance front and rear.

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    255
    having been out again on the 500lbs spring and bottoming the bugger out, i looked on TFtuned shox site, due to the reduced stroke and travel the need for a heavier spring has been confirmed, on the reg 500lbs is fine, for the shorter shock with redcued travel the spring rate gos to 550. Tim Flooks, he's a top guy, a guy who will be getting more business from me very soon.

  91. #91
    legal alien
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    112
    Have you measured your head angle? If so, what is it?

    I'm running the 8.5 x 2.5, with a Totem in front and 2.5 Nevegals. The good news is my BB is right around 14.5(ish), The bad news is that my head angle is about 64!

    The BB was previously close to 15, but the HA was about 66. I haven't ridden the new setup, but it is super slack when static, and even more slack (due to rear sagging more than front) when I'm on the bike, so needless to say I'm a little worried...

  92. #92
    PULL
    Reputation: NoManerz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    701
    Running the same setup resident alien, you will love it!!! Give it time.

  93. #93
    All Mt, DH
    Reputation: rogue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    488
    I'm running a 8.5x2.5 DHX and a marz 66 180mm up front for 4 DH days now.
    I seem to like this setup better, in that its more stable, corners a bit better. I feel a bit faster.
    2007 Blur 4x
    2009 Driver 8

  94. #94
    Justin Vander Pol
    Reputation: juice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,603
    Quote Originally Posted by rogue
    I'm running a 8.5x2.5 DHX and a marz 66 180mm up front for 4 DH days now.
    I seem to like this setup better, in that its more stable, corners a bit better. I feel a bit faster.
    I agree. I've been running a 2.5 Roco and Marz 66 170mm for a full year now and absolutely love it - it just feels faaaast. I'd never go back to the stock setup.

  95. #95
    legal alien
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    112
    i remember your post. you said your HA was 66. mine is 64 with a fork that is 10mm higher. seems strange that such a minor difference in fork height could make such a difference in the head angle.

  96. #96
    PULL
    Reputation: NoManerz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    701
    I really hope the new vp-free comes with this kind of geo, 14.2 ish bb height, adjustable 64-67 head angle (64 is unlikely for a production freeride bike), and a 3 inch stroke rear shock would be ideal with two travel heights, 7.75, 8.25 inches... just my dream.

  97. #97
    Just another FOC'er
    Reputation: .Danno.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,222
    Quote Originally Posted by Resident Alien
    i remember your post. you said your HA was 66. mine is 64 with a fork that is 10mm higher. seems strange that such a minor difference in fork height could make such a difference in the head angle.
    10mm would slack it out just about exactly 1/2 degree.

  98. #98
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Trojan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    96
    Quote Originally Posted by Resident Alien
    Have you measured your head angle? If so, what is it?

    I'm running the 8.5 x 2.5, with a Totem in front and 2.5 Nevegals. The good news is my BB is right around 14.5(ish), The bad news is that my head angle is about 64!

    The BB was previously close to 15, but the HA was about 66. I haven't ridden the new setup, but it is super slack when static, and even more slack (due to rear sagging more than front) when I'm on the bike, so needless to say I'm a little worried...
    Hi Thanks for the reply,
    I dont know if i have 8.5 x 2.5 the spring says, 8.5 x 2.8 ?? so is the 2.8 the stroke?
    Also how do you measure the head angle without a shadowgraph or some bit of technology, whats the old skool way maybe i could try to measure.
    Strange your h/a/ is 64 as the SC website says its 65...is your spring rate set right? I have checked mine on MOJO spring caculator & mines way too low, i think this is contributing to my over sag and it feeling like a chopper, espech with the Boxxers up frint.

  99. #99
    Just another FOC'er
    Reputation: .Danno.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,222
    Quote Originally Posted by Trojan
    Hi Thanks for the reply,
    I dont know if i have 8.5 x 2.5 the spring says, 8.5 x 2.8 ?? so is the 2.8 the stroke?
    Also how do you measure the head angle without a shadowgraph or some bit of technology, whats the old skool way maybe i could try to measure.
    Strange your h/a/ is 64 as the SC website says its 65...is your spring rate set right? I have checked mine on MOJO spring caculator & mines way too low, i think this is contributing to my over sag and it feeling like a chopper, espech with the Boxxers up frint.
    If the shock is 8.75" (centers of mounting bolts) long that's the standard length.
    If it's 8.5" long that's the short shock.

    Home improvement stores have cheapo angle finders that are around $10.

  100. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    255
    Quote Originally Posted by Trojan
    Hi Thanks for the reply,
    I have checked mine on MOJO spring caculator & mines way too low, i think this is contributing to my over sag and it feeling like a chopper, espech with the Boxxers up frint.
    Check out TFT too, i have had to go to 550lbs from my reg 500lbs. a 2.8 coil will work fine on a 2.5 shock from what I have been told.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Members who have read this thread: 2

Posting Permissions

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