Results 1 to 2 of 2
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ktm520's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004

    Monarch RT on SB95

    I've been working with my rear shock setup quite a bit pretty much ever since I got this frame a year ago. It came stock with the 2013 CTD LV shock. The "LV" is Foxes new high volume eyelet design which has the same volume as the old HV can with sleeve. The shock came stock with a .4^3 in. spacer in it.

    Long story short, I started by revalving the rebound which was terribly over damped for my 165lb tall lanky body. After that, I focused on better small bump and square edge, which ultimately led to tossing the boost valve in favor of a shim stack still using the stock piston. Good results, but still not where I wanted to be, although I'm still tweaking. I always felt the spring had too much volume.

    I started looking into Monarch's, really wanting a RC3 but not wanting to spend the money. The idea of Push's RT-AM has always intrigued me so I researched what it would take to build something like that and got good answers. Ended up scoring a brand new 2013 Monarch R off ebay for a song and swapping in the RT adjuster assy. This shock still has the older piston design in it, which I'm already familiar with tuning. I resisted the temptation to soften the comp stack preload before the first ride so I could get a feel for the stock low tune.

    Only one short ride so far, but a definite improvement over my current CTD tune. Spring volume is lower than the CTD but this turned out to be a good thing, as I previously noted. The lsc/"threshold" adjuster works and has a useable range for trail riding. Adjustments are more like lsc should feel, not harsh/notchy like the CTD even after removing the bv. Rebound is a little off, but I didn't really get to play with that much. It has a preloaded rebound stack and I'm thinking that might be the issue. Maybe Rapid Recovery is all hype.

    Looking forward to working more with this shock. More to come. I still haven't given up the CTD, though its not looking good for it's future, both performance and logistics wise. RS products are cheaper, easier to service, and can actually get parts for them.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ktm520's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    For reference, the old standard SV Fox can comp ratio is still one step higher than the LV with the largest spacer, .92^3 in. I'm guessing the Monarch SV can is similar to the Fox SV. The stock SB tune with the LV and .4 spacer is one step below what Fox calls "most linear curve" on their air volume chart. I'm kind of surprised Yeti chose that setup since the leverage ratio is damn near flat.

Similar Threads

  1. Monarch RL vs. Monarch RT3 rear shock
    By blammo585 in forum 29er Components
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-16-2016, 05:02 PM
  2. Rockshox difference between Monarch 4.2 & Monarch RT3
    By MontanaTrailJunky in forum Shocks and Suspension
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-13-2013, 10:19 AM
  3. Yes I know... Monarch RC3 vs Monarch Pluc RC3 vs Vivid air on a NomadC
    By sir_crackien in forum Shocks and Suspension
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-05-2013, 08:50 AM
  4. RS Monarch, Monarch Plus, Vivid tune diagram
    By Breal604 in forum Shocks and Suspension
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-05-2011, 05:15 PM
  5. rock shox monarch rc3 plus vs monarch rt3
    By allenfstar in forum All Mountain
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-27-2011, 05:07 PM

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

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



VISIT US AT and the ConsumerReview Network are business units of Invenda Corporation

(C) Copyright 1996-2018. All Rights Reserved.