Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    Tonight we ride.
    Reputation: fonseca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    771

    Wanna Lose weight? Ask me how!

    Yes folks, with a simple diet change and a one time incredibly low fee of just $200 [SIZE=1](additional shipping and handling charges apply)[/SIZE], you too can instantly drop 10.8oz! Simply eliminate all excess iron from your diet and increase your ti intake using our product. It works, guaranteed!




    Stock spring: 19.5oz
    Ti spring: 8.7oz

    That brings the total weight of the Swinger 6-way to 24.8oz with stainless one-piece reducers. Not bad for an 8.75x2.75 shock. For comparison, the Swinger 4-way air in 7.87x2 with reducers is 15.7oz. The nice thing about the longer shock is the low leverage ratio: just 2.18 in 6" mode, whereas the short travel rockers with the 2" stroke shock in 5.7" mode is 2.85. Huge difference in the effectiveness and range of compression, rebound, SPV pressure and volume adjustments. I'd like to get an 8.75 Swinger air for a truly head to head comparison of the effects and feel of different leverage ratios. But I doubt I will since the Evolver is available, and I can surmise the differences anyway.

    The 350lb ti spring feels much more supple than the stock steelie, strange. In 7" mode it almost seems too soft, but I show only 25% sag with no preload and 110psi in the chamber. It's very firm in 6" mode, too firm for FR/DH for sure, although less SPV pressure would probably give a bit more sag.

    It climbs just as well as my short travel Switchblade when set up properly for XC (additional air in the shock's SPV chamber for less sag and a bit more platform damping). The SB is currently being rebuilt as a lighter (target weight 25lbs) trailbike, but in the meantime I'm having a blast on the SM. The Fox 36 Talas RC2 is truly an amazing fork, best I've ever ridden, and just a little over 5lbs. So much adjustment capability. I'm only getting 140mm of a claimed 160mm travel though, and lowering the pressure in the fork way below recommended doesn't seem to help. Too much oil in the damper maybe?

    I've come to the conclusion that it just isn't possible to have one do it all bike. Or at least not ideal. The SM is awesome once I get over 15mph, but at the slow speeds often required for my local trails, it's too much bike as currently built. Especially in the near-standstill techie sections. I can compensate with more spring preload/PSI, and increased low speed compression damping, but lately it feels like the wrong tool for the job, even though the geometry is spot on trailbike and it climbs great.

    I did have to use the Ventana Plus 4 crown race to clear the 36's topcaps.



  2. #2
    the 36 year old grom
    Reputation: demo_slug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,726
    Quote Originally Posted by fonseca
    . The Fox 36 Talas RC2 is truly an amazing fork, best I've ever ridden, and just a little over 5lbs. So much adjustment capability. I'm only getting 140mm of a claimed 160mm travel though, and lowering the pressure in the fork way below recommended doesn't seem to help. Too much oil in the damper maybe?
    the last inch or so on the 36 has a hydraulic bottom out feature. multi stage compression damping. basically the compression ramps in the last inch of travel. let the air out of your fork and have a bounce on it, you'll feel the bottom out compression step up in the last inch. if you can't get full travel like that then you can have fox change the setting on it. the 36 cartridge is a full sealed unit and I think it needs to be bled, so I don't mess with it.

  3. #3
    Nightriding rules SuperModerator
    Reputation: crisillo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    20,762
    yummy.. ti springs

  4. #4
    Tonight we ride.
    Reputation: fonseca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    771
    Quote Originally Posted by demo_slug
    let the air out of your fork and have a bounce on it, you'll feel the bottom out compression step up in the last inch. if you can't get full travel like that then you can have fox change the setting on it.
    You're right, if I compress it with no air, only 1/4" of stanchion is showing, meaning just under 160mm travel. The problem is that at 170lbs I should be running 55-62psi according to the Fox manual. If I do that I only get 110mm travel max. I'm at 35psi and barely get 140, and it's too plush, unless I up the low speed compression damping. And somehow I doubt that's a good way to set up athis fork. That's one downside to losing weight I guess. I couldn't hope to bottom it out.

    The ti is definitely a nice bit of weight savings, and blingy, but I'm kicking myself: the same spring just went for $70 less on ebay! Argh.

  5. #5
    Trophy Husband
    Reputation: geolover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2,991
    Quote Originally Posted by fonseca
    The ti is definitely a nice bit of weight savings, and blingy, but I'm kicking myself: the same spring just went for $70 less on ebay! Argh.
    fonzi

    Don't sweat it...it's only money. Your bike still has the bling and the weight loss...the extra 70 bucks was worth it.
    Extreme stationary biker.

  6. #6
    Chumley for prez!
    Reputation: mr. welcorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    452
    Quote Originally Posted by fonseca
    The nice thing about the longer shock is the low leverage ratio: just 2.18 in 6" mode, whereas the short travel rockers with the 2" stroke shock in 5.7" mode is 2.85. Huge difference in the effectiveness and range of compression, rebound, SPV pressure and volume adjustments. I'd like to get an 8.75 Swinger air for a truly head to head comparison of the effects and feel of different leverage ratios.
    Nice looking bike
    If you are looking for an air shock...you might want to hold off for one of these (pushed ROCO = fox killer):
    http://www.ace1mail.com/gallery/2008...1011-full.html

    I couldn't agree more about the leverage ratio differences. Lower rules. I am running the short travel link on my SM and until i get more cash, the best solution i have come up with is to run in 4.5" mode (2.25:1). I don't miss the extra ~inch of travel that i lost at all (except when doing drops to flat). As long at the drops/jumps have a steep landing/transition everything is kosher. The bike feels like a 4x/DS bike with these settings and cranking my Z1 down to 130, the cornering is great. My rp3 works significantly better with the lower leverage ratio too (although not ideal). I would say less travel with lower leverage ratio is the way to go IMHO....same goes for running 6 vs.7 inch for the big link, as you suggested.

    As it looks like you have discovered, one nit picky gripe i have with the SM's is fork crown clearance....practically nothing will fit without having to resort to the ventana CK race. Maybe they just planned on everyone sacking up and putting dual crowns on there . fox's won't fit (36 or 32talas), marz. 66 (no way), I am not sure about rock shox, but i doubt my buddies lyrik will clear the downtube, as the mission control knob is pretty tall, and if the lyrik won't fit, i think the totem is probably out. Since the SM is/was titus's big travel bike, i would think that they would want to allow clearance for most big travel SC forks (I think this problem is probably partially resolved on the new 1.5 HT versions)?

  7. #7
    Trophy Husband
    Reputation: geolover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2,991
    Quote Originally Posted by mr. welcorn
    As it looks like you have discovered, one nit picky gripe i have with the SM's is fork crown clearance....practically nothing will fit without having to resort to the ventana CK race. Maybe they just planned on everyone sacking up and putting dual crowns on there . fox's won't fit (36 or 32talas), marz. 66 (no way), I am not sure about rock shox, but i doubt my buddies lyrik will clear the downtube, as the mission control knob is pretty tall, and if the lyrik won't fit, i think the totem is probably out. Since the SM is/was titus's big travel bike, i would think that they would want to allow clearance for most big travel SC forks (I think this problem is probably partially resolved on the new 1.5 HT versions)?
    I have a 2006 SuMo (1.5HT) with an 06 66rc2x and it fits no problem. The newer SuMo's are slacker...and better.
    Extreme stationary biker.

  8. #8
    Chumley for prez!
    Reputation: mr. welcorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    452
    Quote Originally Posted by geolover
    I have a 2006 SuMo (1.5HT) with an 06 66rc2x and it fits no problem.
    66rc2x.....drool. I think the 1.5 HT makes a pretty big difference in what forks will clear, Oh well, ride what you got i guess. the ventana race is a perfectly legitimate solution, I just don't think it should necessary on a bike designed for 7" of travel.

    [/QUOTE]The newer SuMo's are slacker...and better. [/QUOTE]
    I don't know if i would want mine much slacker, for the sake of cornering.....as far as "better", you got me touche....(pronounced toosh) .

  9. #9
    Tonight we ride.
    Reputation: fonseca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    771
    I guess the lack of knob clearance is the tradeoff for "trailbike" geometry. All I really needed was 2mm (if that!), but now I've got 4mm. Ah well. If only the HT was that much longer, as I find it to be an ugly solution. But at least there is a solution, cheers to Ventana; they were great to deal with directly and got that race to me very fast.

    I've read the smaller sized current model SMs have clearance issues too.

    I have to say that the RP3 is my least favorite shock for the SM. I much prefer the Swinger 3-way and 4-way air. It must be due to the suspension rate with the linkage in the "air" position, which IIRC was linear and then falling at the end, but the RP3 required super high pressure for me to prevent it from blowing through the travel. And with the high volume sleeve it was completely unusable. I ran it in 5.7" mode, maybe it's better in 4.5" The volume of the Swingers and the SPV adjustability has been ideal for me. I do love the RP3 with HV sleeve on my SB though, huge improvement over my old Pushed Float.

    Not to be biased, but I'm not sure I want anything Marz on my bike. I have yet to have a positive experience with their customer service, and that includes recent dealings regarding the '07 All Mountain. It's like pulling teeth. Fox and Manitou, on the other hand, have been awesome every time. Manitou just sent me a replacement rebound knob gratis even though I offered to pay, and answered all my emails promptly.

    I am seriously considering a new SM for a full-on DH bike. I may as well suck it up and have a dedicated steed for each discipline. I'm getting tired of swapping parts. And breaking light stuff. I just want one dialed in setup I can jump on and ride.

    My only real issue with this bike is TT length. I'm on a medium. I have a layback post and very long 120mm stem on there, and that gives me the perfect cockpit length and riding position. I find it hard to believe that I need to be on an XL frame at 6', 32" inseam, but if I want to run a 60mm or so stem and straight post, it looks like that's the proper size. Seems like the large frame should be a little larger?


  10. #10
    Trophy Husband
    Reputation: geolover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2,991
    Quote Originally Posted by fonseca
    My only real issue with this bike is TT length. I'm on a medium. I have a layback post and very long 120mm stem on there, and that gives me the perfect cockpit length and riding position. I find it hard to believe that I need to be on an XL frame at 6', 32" inseam, but if I want to run a 60mm or so stem and straight post, it looks like that's the proper size. Seems like the large frame should be a little larger?
    I'm 6'2 and ride a large SuMo with a 50mm stem...34 inch inseam. I think maybe 70mm might feel a little better though for all around DH/FR.
    Extreme stationary biker.

  11. #11
    the 36 year old grom
    Reputation: demo_slug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,726
    Quote Originally Posted by fonseca
    You're right, if I compress it with no air, only 1/4" of stanchion is showing, meaning just under 160mm travel. The problem is that at 170lbs I should be running 55-62psi according to the Fox manual. If I do that I only get 110mm travel max. I'm at 35psi and barely get 140, and it's too plush, unless I up the low speed compression damping. And somehow I doubt that's a good way to set up athis fork. That's one downside to losing weight I guess. I couldn't hope to bottom it out.
    :
    I run 70 PSI.... I weigh 230. I bottom that Beotch out ever ride. I don't feel it bottom, but my Tye wrap on the stanchion says so.

    maybe yours will break in ??

  12. #12
    Tonight we ride.
    Reputation: fonseca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    771
    Quote Originally Posted by geolover
    I'm 6'2 and ride a large SuMo with a 50mm stem...34 inch inseam. I think maybe 70mm might feel a little better though for all around DH/FR.
    Would you recommend I go large for my next frame? Standover shouldn't be an issue. I really feel like I need the setback post I'm using, which I don't like as it shifts my weight more over the rear wheel. Not much, but it doesn't help when climbing.

    Today I messed around with the Syntace VRO stem, which you can adjust fore and aft. As pictured (crappy phone camera) it's at about 90mm. Tomorrow I'll flip the stem upside down to get the bar lower, but I think 90mm with 0-5 degrees rise should be doable on this bike at least. Maybe I can go shorter. It felt nice on the downhills, but I had to compensate a bit on climbs. That's due in part to the height I'm sure, that's probably the equivalent of 15 degree rise.



    Man, I need to get a new bar too! The 12 degree backsweep on the Syntace bar feels so nice. It's time to retire the Monkeylite anyway.

    Demo, I hope the Talas just needs to break in. I ran 50psi today and used 120mm travel, and that was trying to land hard off a small drop. At 40psi I can use 150mm, but then it's too plush.

    I smack my pedals occasionally in 7" mode, but the rear doesn't feel overly plush, even when climbing. I'm getting 23mm sag, or 33%, in 7" mode with 110psi in the SPV chamber. I need to remeasure in 6", but it's so much firmer that I drop the SPV pressure down to 75psi when I switch to that travel setting, otherwise I feel all the small bumps. Playing with settings has been a lot of fun. I feel a terrible case of UGI coming on. Must resist. . .

  13. #13
    Trophy Husband
    Reputation: geolover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2,991
    Quote Originally Posted by fonseca
    Would you recommend I go large for my next frame? Standover shouldn't be an issue. I really feel like I need the setback post I'm using, which I don't like as it shifts my weight more over the rear wheel. Not much, but it doesn't help when climbing.
    At 6' you could easily fit a large, especially if this will be used as a AM/Light FR bike. You could even go with a shorter stem (~70 mm). You'll likely not get rid of the light front end, though...it's what the SuMo does.

    I smack my pedals occasionally in 7" mode, but the rear doesn't feel overly plush, even when climbing. I'm getting 23mm sag, or 33%, in 7" mode with 110psi in the SPV chamber. I need to remeasure in 6", but it's so much firmer that I drop the SPV pressure down to 75psi when I switch to that travel setting, otherwise I feel all the small bumps. Playing with settings has been a lot of fun. I feel a terrible case of UGI coming on. Must resist. . .
    The Roco coil is pure butter!
    Extreme stationary biker.

  14. #14
    Chumley for prez!
    Reputation: mr. welcorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    452
    Quote Originally Posted by geolover
    At 6' you could easily fit a large, especially if this will be used as a AM/Light FR bike. You could even go with a shorter stem (~70 mm). You'll likely not get rid of the light front end, though...it's what the SuMo does.



    The Roco coil is pure butter!
    I agree with that. the SUMO just has a light front end....for me it is managable on all but the steepest climbs, but steep climbs are hard, I feel like i have very little control over where the front of my bike goes, even with the ETA slammed. Granted i could run a longer stem, but i like the way the cockpit feels with a 70mm. I have come to the conclusion that no matter what i do, the SUMO is just never going to be a climbing machine. It is the STA, 68 or 69 or whatever it is, is just really slack, but that is what makes it descend so well IMO .

    geo, you have a roco coil on your sumo?....tst or wc? it fits ok? With what linkage? i am jealous.

  15. #15
    Trophy Husband
    Reputation: geolover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2,991
    Quote Originally Posted by mr. welcorn
    geo, you have a roco coil on your sumo?....tst or wc? it fits ok? With what linkage? i am jealous.
    TST. It's works great, but I find I'm too lazy to screw with it (I guess flipping a switch is just too much to ask ). Generally I leave it in the DH position...even for climbing.

    It fits fine on my bike...2006 version (new style) with the FR/coffin (8.75x2.75) linkage. It's buttery goodness...I recommend it. I'm curious how the air shocks might act with this set up (Evolver and Roco).
    Extreme stationary biker.

Posting Permissions

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