suspension upgrade

whosahberg

Joined Dec 2005

1K Posts | 0+

australia

Discussion Starter
• Apr 22, 2006

• #1

i have been working on my suspension for a while , just after a setting that suits my weight and enviroment .

i was not happy with the results so i took the shock and forks
to a competent suspension dude .

he suggested 48 fork springs and gold valves , the rear shock was serviced - i had already fitted the correct rear spring .

the result ??

the bike tracks as straight as an arrow , sucks up rocks and tree roots , deals with big hits .

huge improvement .
i am in no way, shape, or form , affiliated with the gold valve establishment
8)

 

Taffy

Joined Nov 2001

17K Posts | 774+

Ely, England

• Apr 22, 2006

• #2

can you post your weight and riding environment?

we don't believe you. you have shares in gold valve. why would you be telling the truth otherwise? what's in it for you?

"just being kinda freindly" is no answer.

:wink:

Taffy

 

whosahberg

Joined Dec 2005

1K Posts | 0+

australia

Discussion Starter
• Apr 22, 2006

• #3

taffy

riding enviroment
90% gravel - rocks - square edged potholes -
basically the australian bush in the hills , the riding areas are massive .



weight

90 kg with alpinestars ect

i am in no way shape or form associated with the alpinestar empire 8)

 

D

DaleEO

Joined Oct 2002

3K Posts | 21+

Sunland, CA

• Apr 22, 2006

• #4

Glad to hear you've had great success with your suspension tuning!

IMHO the best money you can spend your bike. The Pirrelli commercial says it best "Power is nothing without control".

 

Ramo1

Joined Feb 2006

10 Posts | 0+

reno, nv.

• Apr 22, 2006

• #5

Did you have the shock revalved, or just serviced? I have been trying some stacks with the stock valves with some decent success, but would like to know if anyone has worked out a good stack for the shock. The forks have responded well to the changes with bv stacks, but am still playing with the midvalve. I think I may spring for the gold valves just for kicks.

Ramo

 

whosahberg

Joined Dec 2005

1K Posts | 0+

australia

Discussion Starter
• Apr 22, 2006

• #6

the shock was just serviced and a leaking seal replaced .

the person who did the work on the suspension is very experienced

the bike responds to 1 click of the adjusters , it did not do that before the work was done .

 

Ramo1

Joined Feb 2006

10 Posts | 0+

reno, nv.

• Apr 22, 2006

• #7

I've used the gold vavles several times in the past on the jap bikes and always seemed to work well straight out of the box, but this is the first time i've been fooling around with the wp stuff. Since I have the time right now, it will give me good base when the new valves are used.

The shim change in the shock seems to have a made big improvement with the small chop and hack. Before, even with a spring change, the ride was almost toothchatering now at this point it's a good all around plusher ride.

 

Taffy

Joined Nov 2001

17K Posts | 774+

Ely, England

• Apr 23, 2006

• #8

48s? mmmmmm!

that's interesting. i started to get REALLY involved in suspension at the turn of the year and i have a feeling that i need 48s for my 210 pounds. but it's amazing how many people are on the wrong suspension and tell you their bikes are fantastic with 42s etc etc and they weigh 250 pounds etc etc.

you tend to think you must have it all wrong. over at k-talk i've been advocating heavier springs and softer valving. not many if anyone else have - dangeroo0 and that's about it.

velo is going that way, he weighs less but he's on a 550 and has all the leccy bits on so the gap narrows.

as i've said, 46s with preload stuffed 46s without any so i'm sat here thinking that 48s are the next logical step. food for thought ....

regards

Taffy

 

whosahberg

Joined Dec 2005

1K Posts | 0+

australia

Discussion Starter
• Apr 23, 2006

• #9

taffy

when the suspension expert told me 48's is what's required i thought thats too stiff.
but he was bang on the money !!!

it's the valving that has to be spot on, and it is in this case :wink:

 

Ramo1

Joined Feb 2006

10 Posts | 0+

reno, nv.

• Apr 23, 2006

• #10

I'm using .48s as well with no preload and different shimstacks. The front at this point is a good deal better than with the stock bits. I go about 225 with gear.

Taffy, have you moved any shims around in the shock?

Ramo

 

Taffy

Joined Nov 2001

17K Posts | 774+

Ely, England

• Apr 23, 2006

• #11

ramo

no nothing in the shock. can't piss about with that quite the same as the forks can ya!

i can't really tell what's wrong with the rear, i just grumble like an old git but by piddling with the forks you get a feeling for some of what you want on the rear don't you?

i'm not interested in the bike at the moment. i race next sunday and i'm hoping that it'll kickstart some interest but i have a bike that stalls for no reason and i'm not happy here at present. bunch of twats in charge i'm afraid but there...

i really need to get a later model or make a complete change of machine. or stop even. 45 years and fed up...

FF sake someone humour me!

we'll see how the suspension goes next sunday and reflect on it. i'm quite fit at p[resent and think i'll enjoy the racing. if i can only lay off the beer the night before...

regards

Taffy

 

Ramo1

Joined Feb 2006

10 Posts | 0+

reno, nv.

• Apr 23, 2006

• #12

Taffy,

Sorry to hear you frustrated at the moment. I about quit after 5 different operations, wasn't able to ride for a couple of years. I just needed to get back to it with a different attitude.

With the shock, I made a 2 stage stack on the primary piston with good results for me. It's about the same as working with the forks, just getting a tool to recharge the shock was the hardest part. Race tech has a wp charging tool that worked well and is easy to use. If you like I'll will post the stack I'm currently using.

If you're up for it Maybe we can work out some shock settings. I've got some time, and can give different stacks a try. Ya think?

Keep your chin up and just have fun. That's what it's all about.

regards

Ramo

 

Johnf3

Joined Oct 2005

935 Posts | 21+

Texas

• Apr 23, 2006

• #13

Taffy said:

48s? mmmmmm!

that's interesting. i started to get REALLY involved in suspension at the turn of the year and i have a feeling that i need 48s for my 210 pounds. but it's amazing how many people are on the wrong suspension and tell you their bikes are fantastic with 42s etc etc and they weigh 250 pounds etc etc.

you tend to think you must have it all wrong. over at k-talk i've been advocating heavier springs and softer valving. not many if anyone else have - dangeroo0 and that's about it.

velo is going that way, he weighs less but he's on a 550 and has all the leccy bits on so the gap narrows.

as i've said, 46s with preload stuffed 46s without any so i'm sat here thinking that 48s are the next logical step. food for thought ....

regards

Taffy

Click to expand...

Taff,
I'm on the heavy spring/light valving bandwagon too...

 

dsducati

Joined Apr 2004

518 Posts | 0+

Arizona

• Apr 24, 2006

• #14

FWIW, one of the most respected suspension tuners here in the states for off road riding (Bob Bell at precision concepts) sets the WP forks up with 4.6 or 4.8 springs. Don't think you guys are off base at all.
dan