Upgrades to NRS Suspension- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    32

    Upgrades to NRS Suspension

    I had a look around and did not see this question addressed anywhere here. Please alert me if it is already posted.

    My son has a 2001 NRS 3, with Judys up front and the Fox SID on the back. I would like to increase the travel, esp at the front, but I want to keep things balanced.

    Therefore I am wondering - what is the best front shock to give him about 5 inches of travel (130 mm) and what rear shock will balance out the back?

    Thanks for the help!

  2. #2
    Devil Mtn
    Reputation: reklar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    685
    Quote Originally Posted by leer13
    I had a look around and did not see this question addressed anywhere here. Please alert me if it is already posted.

    My son has a 2001 NRS 3, with Judys up front and the Fox SID on the back. I would like to increase the travel, esp at the front, but I want to keep things balanced.

    Therefore I am wondering - what is the best front shock to give him about 5 inches of travel (130 mm) and what rear shock will balance out the back?

    Thanks for the help!
    Well the NRS is designed to take a 80mm fork and gets 3.75" of travel in the rear with the stock rockers. A different shock will not help, but different rocker arms will. SGF used to make an aftermarket set of rockers that allow 4.5" of travel in the rear, but SGF is no longer around.

    My NRS felt unbalanced and too slack with a 105mm fork and the stock rockers. The SGF rockers balanced things out and the suspension is much more forgiving. I may have an extra set of the rockers available--not sure. Send me a PM.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    9

    Upgrade to NRS Suspension

    I agree on the 80 mm of travel up front. I put a 100 mm Fox on the front of mine, and it lifts off the ground when climbing. Stick with 80 on that thing. Not sure what a Fox SID is. They do make a Fox to replace the Rock Shock SID in back. However, if your Rock Shock SID is not leaking, don't bother.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: majura's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    524
    The cost of new fork and rear shock would be a hair below the price of a close-out frame that would be more suited for what you want. Have a search around and you should be able to find some close-out deals on a frame that will be able to handle 100-130mm of travel (Reign or Trance).

    I have known people to put a 100mm for up front. It does slow the steering and makes it harder to keep the nose down, but if you're not wanting to spend a whole lot and improve on what you have now: Rock Shox Tora Air or Recon Air. These are entry-mid level forks that wont blow the bank and still deliver performance.

  5. #5
    Bike Geek
    Reputation: norcalruckus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    735

    judy

    Ok,

    If I am not mistaken, can't you change the travel on the fork by moving the spacers? I think you can get 100 mm out of it. What you may want to do is send the rear shock to hippietech. They can alter it more to your liking.
    RIP AL DAVIS

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    16
    I have a got an NRS 2 2003 with the long travel rockers and a rockshox revelation U-turn coil (85-130). A U-turn fork suits this setup really well, I can climb most things on the road without winding the fork in but offroad wind it down to 100mm and it climbs really well.
    I used to run an MX Pro 105 on the standard rockers and the bike was very unbalanced, it was hopeless on steep climbs even with the long travel plates it wasn't great.

  7. #7
    Devil Mtn
    Reputation: reklar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    685
    Quote Originally Posted by medshed
    I have a got an NRS 2 2003 with the long travel rockers and a rockshox revelation U-turn coil (85-130). A U-turn fork suits this setup really well, I can climb most things on the road without winding the fork in but offroad wind it down to 100mm and it climbs really well.
    I used to run an MX Pro 105 on the standard rockers and the bike was very unbalanced, it was hopeless on steep climbs even with the long travel plates it wasn't great.
    Did your MX Pro have ETA? With the SGF rokers, my NRS was very balanced with the MX Pro w/ ETA ... great on steep climbs after engaging the ETA and so much more forgiving on the descents. I agree it was pretty unbalanced with the stock rockers, but much improved with the SGF rockers.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    16
    Yes it had ETA, but it just didn't climb.It was a great fork but I was always failing to get up climbs that my friends rode up with ease (Not on NRSs). The revelations squeeze a lot of travel into a relatively short fork (For comparison the 130mm revelations are about the same length axle-crown as a pair of 105mm 06 zocchi MX Pro SLs whatever the statistics say) and have variable travel which just makes the NRS more versatile.
    I used the revelations on the NRS without the long travel rockers and it still climbed really well, I just had to wind the fork all the way down to 85mm.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    9

    Fork for NRS

    The main point is greater than 80 mm does not work on an NRS. Also, anyone who says you can increase the travel on a Judy might not know what they're talking about. If you went through that trouble on a junky Judy shock, you would be wasting your time and money. I have had 3 shocks on my NRS -- a Rock Shock Pilot (junk - sent back twice), a Rock Shock Duke U-Turn SL (sent back for repairs 3 times), and a Fox. The long and short of it is this bike is a piece of high-maintenance crap, and I can't wait to replace the whole thing with a Specialized or something decent. Don't wast any more money on your Giant junk. I have rebuilt the rear suspension several times and am just sooo tired of this thing. I am done spending any more money on this piece of crap and will never buy another Giant bike as long as I live.

  10. #10
    Devil Mtn
    Reputation: reklar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    685
    Quote Originally Posted by skibum123
    The main point is greater than 80 mm does not work on an NRS.
    Again, I had a nice ride on my NRS w/ the longer rockers and an MX Pro w/ ETA. The ETA was critical however ... if you don't engage it before hitting steep ups, the front would lift. Heck, the front would lift with an 80mm fork on some steeps but that sort of thing can also be corrected by rider positioning and setup.

    The long and short of it is this bike is a piece of high-maintenance crap, and I can't wait to replace the whole thing with a Specialized or something decent. Don't wast any more money on your Giant junk. I have rebuilt the rear suspension several times and am just sooo tired of this thing. I am done spending any more money on this piece of crap and will never buy another Giant bike as long as I live.
    LOL ... there are plenty of satisfied riders out there with experience to the contrary. Sorry you had a bad experience. You do realize you are posting to the Giant forum?

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Benno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,012
    What does rebuilding the rear suspension have to do with Giant anyway? Unless you are talking about bushings/bearings. The new Maestro bikes are much better as they use sealed bearings for all pivots.

  12. #12
    Devil Mtn
    Reputation: reklar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    685
    Quote Originally Posted by Benno
    What does rebuilding the rear suspension have to do with Giant anyway? Unless you are talking about bushings/bearings. The new Maestro bikes are much better as they use sealed bearings for all pivots.
    Also sounds like he mostly weren't happy with the forks ... what does that have to do with Giant?

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by majura
    I have known people to put a 100mm for up front. It does slow the steering and makes it harder to keep the nose down
    You'll see me out in Majura sometimes with a 2005 Marz AM3 (130mm) on my 2004 NRS2.

    The main reason for purcase was I found it cheap! However, I like it - mostly cause it's REALLY stiff! Compared to the wobbly Manitous the bike shipped with, it's awesome. It's the same fork as the 2004 Junior Ts on my DH bike, but with 40mm less travel and single crown!

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nagatahawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,188
    I have an "05 NRS 1 full carbon, I recently replaced the front forks with Marzochhi 115mm
    and had the rear shock rebuilt. I was crashing every ride because of the poor front forks and rear shock action. it climbs well and the rear shock dampens now! and rarely crash. I just returned from Mammoth Mountian and the bike was excellent on the lower trais. I wish I had more travel for the rear. the rear shock is now leaking oil.

    I am currently looking at a Foes FX with 6 inches of travel. Seems that most of the traiils around here (SoCal) require an All Mountain setup.

    wn

  15. #15
    bacon! bacon! bacon!
    Reputation: SkaredShtles's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,309
    I've been running an '01 Xtc Team with a Psylo U-Turn. Works great. Run it 80mm most of the time, but when I know a big downhill is coming or a lot of tech I stretch it out to 130mm. I pretty much never run it in between...

Members who have read this thread: 1

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.