Revalved Marzocchi Shiver 45 for plushness.
- Thread starter bergerhag
- Start date
GMP
Active member
Don't be so sure about that, especially with stiffer springs. Its tough to properly analyze a problem in a race, you have to do it in more controlled conditions. Stock rebound stack is too light even for stock springs.
Exactly what do you have in the bike now (springs/valving/oil/oil height) that works (or doesn't work) as you describe?
Dave had some very good points. Les valved my bike and it worked great but tweaked like Dave's it worked even better. I ran one of the nastiest, most rocky enduros last Sunday. Big technical rocks in 1st/2nd, faster rocks in 3rd/4th, and everything in between. The bike worked fantastic, I didn't feel beat up at all at the finnish. The fork did not deflect at all, and the only time the bike went off line is when a loose rock was hit and moved. By comparison, my KTM300 riding buddy was totally wasted. My 250 is a lot lighter and the valving stiffer, and its the best suspended bike I've ever had for the rocks. Even stock it was good and did not deflect badly as you describe.
That 450 should eat rocks, and feel even more planted than my 250 due to its weight, thats the advantage of a big 4-stroke you get for the other trade offs. Even your stock valving should not perform that bad. You have a problem, but I doubt its the base valving thats extremely far off.
How tight do you torque your lower triple clamps? DO NOT go by the manual. MUCH less, about 10 - 12 Nm with the bolts anti-seized.
bergerhag
Silver Level Site Supporter
If it was a rebound problem it wouldn't have gone away with softer base valving, would it? Softer base valve should rather exaggurate an already too soft rebound, wouldnt it? Please enlighten me 
I have not yet dismantled my rebound stack, so I don't know if it's the same as the 2-strokes.
The base valve om my FSE '05 is NOT the same as the 2-strokes, as read in pobits thread on valve specs.
The FSE forks has 22x0.10 shims closest to the base valve, as compared to the EC 21x10. Thus there is no extra bleed in the valve as it is in the EC.
I was almost happy with my previous soft base valve, only problem was that forks bottomed when going slow on steep rocky downhills.
Springs: 4,2 N+4,6N
base valve:
22x.1
19x.1
17x.1
15x.1
Oil: 120mm 7.5wt
Clickers: rebound -9, comp -9
The above setup totally removed the harshness over medium/small rocks at high speed.
With the below setup pobit suggested, the clicker settings, either rebound or compression had any noticable effect on my high(motorcycle) speed deflection/harshness.
Springs: 4,6N
basevalve: stock
22x.1
22x.1
11x.1
19x.1
11x.1
17x.1
15x.1
13x.2
Oil: 140mm 7.5 wt
Bike handling was good, no problems going slow, low speed damping in landings and whoops felt really good. But harshness still there.
Today I'm going to try again with the soft base valve setup, but I have now two 4,6N springs, 140mm of 7.5 wt oil. Starting off with rebound at -9 and comp at -5.
triple clamp torque: 14Nm upper, 11Nm lower
I have not yet dismantled my rebound stack, so I don't know if it's the same as the 2-strokes.
The base valve om my FSE '05 is NOT the same as the 2-strokes, as read in pobits thread on valve specs.
The FSE forks has 22x0.10 shims closest to the base valve, as compared to the EC 21x10. Thus there is no extra bleed in the valve as it is in the EC.
I was almost happy with my previous soft base valve, only problem was that forks bottomed when going slow on steep rocky downhills.
Springs: 4,2 N+4,6N
base valve:
22x.1
19x.1
17x.1
15x.1
Oil: 120mm 7.5wt
Clickers: rebound -9, comp -9
The above setup totally removed the harshness over medium/small rocks at high speed.
With the below setup pobit suggested, the clicker settings, either rebound or compression had any noticable effect on my high(motorcycle) speed deflection/harshness.
Springs: 4,6N
basevalve: stock
22x.1
22x.1
11x.1
19x.1
11x.1
17x.1
15x.1
13x.2
Oil: 140mm 7.5 wt
Bike handling was good, no problems going slow, low speed damping in landings and whoops felt really good. But harshness still there.
Today I'm going to try again with the soft base valve setup, but I have now two 4,6N springs, 140mm of 7.5 wt oil. Starting off with rebound at -9 and comp at -5.
triple clamp torque: 14Nm upper, 11Nm lower
GMP
Active member
Does the base valve body have a free bleed hole drilled in one of the ports?
What shock spring are you running?
Its possible you created an imbalance by going to stiffer fork springs and retaining a soft shock spring. I would think at your weight you would need at least a size up from stock, I'd guess 5.6Nm - 5.8Nm if 5.4Nm is stock. You want the correct rate spring, and then run less preload. Too soft a spring thats cranked down to meet sag specs feels nasty and screws up the fork. It does nothing to hold the bike up properly in the travel, and kicks the rear up when its near full extension. This may also be why your smashing the hell out of your skid plate and frame.
What shock spring are you running?
Its possible you created an imbalance by going to stiffer fork springs and retaining a soft shock spring. I would think at your weight you would need at least a size up from stock, I'd guess 5.6Nm - 5.8Nm if 5.4Nm is stock. You want the correct rate spring, and then run less preload. Too soft a spring thats cranked down to meet sag specs feels nasty and screws up the fork. It does nothing to hold the bike up properly in the travel, and kicks the rear up when its near full extension. This may also be why your smashing the hell out of your skid plate and frame.
GMP
Active member
A 6.2Nm, really? What was stock, 5.4Nm?
If stock was 5.4Nm, you may need the shock revalved (rebound) for a 6.2, thats a huge jump.
105mm is too little sag. As Dave pointed out, and works very well, you want no more than 10mm preload on the shock spring (8mm is good). The race sag will be around 115mm+ but don't sweat that number as long as the bike steers good. Work with shock spring preload in half turn increments of the ring for best feel. Thats how you want to select your rear spring, so you need less than 10mm preload to get the bike to balance and feel good.
Yes, that is what I mean by a bleed hole.
If stock was 5.4Nm, you may need the shock revalved (rebound) for a 6.2, thats a huge jump.
105mm is too little sag. As Dave pointed out, and works very well, you want no more than 10mm preload on the shock spring (8mm is good). The race sag will be around 115mm+ but don't sweat that number as long as the bike steers good. Work with shock spring preload in half turn increments of the ring for best feel. Thats how you want to select your rear spring, so you need less than 10mm preload to get the bike to balance and feel good.
Yes, that is what I mean by a bleed hole.
bergerhag
Silver Level Site Supporter
Well, it felt better now, however now I started to feel it somewhat harsh in the rear end.
So, do I want 115 mm race sag? Then I definately need a spring change on the rear.
Tried 15 clicks on comp on rear end, that held up the 1-1.5 m drop landings. 19 out made it bottom. High speed comp fully open, still felt a little harsh on smaller square edges. Maybe spring is too stiff then.
I got to ride a clubmate's EC300 '04 tonight, stock suspension. Now THAT'S a completely different animal than the FSE. It felt light as a bicycle compared to my bike. Stock suspension, with too light springs for me, was way better than my FSE. Only a little "spiky" on the small stuff.
Perhaps I just got the wrong bike
So, do I want 115 mm race sag? Then I definately need a spring change on the rear.
Tried 15 clicks on comp on rear end, that held up the 1-1.5 m drop landings. 19 out made it bottom. High speed comp fully open, still felt a little harsh on smaller square edges. Maybe spring is too stiff then.
I got to ride a clubmate's EC300 '04 tonight, stock suspension. Now THAT'S a completely different animal than the FSE. It felt light as a bicycle compared to my bike. Stock suspension, with too light springs for me, was way better than my FSE. Only a little "spiky" on the small stuff.
Perhaps I just got the wrong bike
GMP
Active member
Forget about sag numbers for the moment, try this:
Back off your shock spring preload to 8mm. Ride it. Only add as much as you need to make it steer, in half turn increments, no more than 10mm. On my 250, I reached a point in preload where I could feel a definate difference in both front and rear action with just a half turn on the ring. The fork should feel better with the rear less jacked up. If it squats too much add LS compression, but not much more than half way in.
Dave suggested this, it works for me, very well. Ryno, a fast NETRA guy, tried it as well and is very happy. Our race sag#s are around 120mm and the bike still steers great. Everything feels better than it did @ 12mm preload and about 105-110mm race sag.
Sounds funny, just try it.
You never mentioned your rebound stack, I'm sure you could use more. Too little HS rebound will make the fork snap up very fast initialy after compression and feel like a deflection, its hard to tell sometimes, you have to pay close attention.
Like I said before you made such a radical shock spring change you might need valving adjustments to compensate.
Back off your shock spring preload to 8mm. Ride it. Only add as much as you need to make it steer, in half turn increments, no more than 10mm. On my 250, I reached a point in preload where I could feel a definate difference in both front and rear action with just a half turn on the ring. The fork should feel better with the rear less jacked up. If it squats too much add LS compression, but not much more than half way in.
Dave suggested this, it works for me, very well. Ryno, a fast NETRA guy, tried it as well and is very happy. Our race sag#s are around 120mm and the bike still steers great. Everything feels better than it did @ 12mm preload and about 105-110mm race sag.
Sounds funny, just try it.
You never mentioned your rebound stack, I'm sure you could use more. Too little HS rebound will make the fork snap up very fast initialy after compression and feel like a deflection, its hard to tell sometimes, you have to pay close attention.
Like I said before you made such a radical shock spring change you might need valving adjustments to compensate.
bergerhag
Silver Level Site Supporter
Thanks alot GMP. Backing off preload made a huge difference. I just set it at a point where I got a race sag of 115mm. High speed speed comp at half a turn from full soft. Low speed at 17 out. It threw me out of some rutted turns a couple of times, otherwise it was perfect. I'll try to add a little more rebound on the forks, or I'll just move up the forks a bit in the triples.
Works precisely the way I want it now besides for the turning. But I still have my super soft base valve in the front. It works for me.
Entered in a race in the 'just for fun' class today. Look what it got me!
Thanks again all of you for your invaluable insights.
Works precisely the way I want it now besides for the turning. But I still have my super soft base valve in the front. It works for me.
Entered in a race in the 'just for fun' class today. Look what it got me!
Thanks again all of you for your invaluable insights.
Attachments
GMP
Active member
You should be able to go in a little more on the LS comp to make up for less preload without things getting harsh. With the '07 Sachs, I'm at 14 out and its sweet in really bad rocks. Try a few more clicks until things get worse and then back off, its easy.
What you say about steering and being thrown out of ruts points to lack of rebound control in the fork. With proper damping and all else being correct, the bike should still steer well with 120mm sag.
Again, what is that rebound stack?
What you say about steering and being thrown out of ruts points to lack of rebound control in the fork. With proper damping and all else being correct, the bike should still steer well with 120mm sag.
Again, what is that rebound stack?
bergerhag
Silver Level Site Supporter
Ok have now been busy riding smooth snow ruts for a couple of months, hardly a need for suspension at all. 
But last time out some rocks hade emerged from its winter sleep, and now my fork setup was horrible. The very soft base valve stack i used seemed to blow by immediately at the mere sight of a rock making the ride very harsh.
Yeah I know, you told me so .
Now, I want to get this sorted once and for all.
The '05 FSE does NOT use either bleed shim or bleed hole in the base valve. No bleed whatsoever. Is a base valve bleed setup necessary to make it supple over roots and rocks?
What I have learned from you guys is that it is a good idea to pull out the first crossover 11x10 shim. Should I perhaps place that 11x10 at the top of the stack to get a little bleed? Like:
Stock base valve:
22x10
22x10
11x10
19x15
11x10
17x15
15x15
13x20
Stiffer stock+bleed?
11x10
22x10
22x10
19x15
11x10
17x15
15x15
13x20
Or do I need even more bleed as in the EC forks? Perhaps change the 22x10's to 21x10's?
Or should I drill a bleed hole?
What exactly is the purpose of the bleed anyway? Where/when does it come to play?
Rebound piston has the same 2 mm bleed hole and same shim arrangement as the '06 EC found in pobit's post, but the FSE midvalve is a check plate/spring setup.
Stock rebound shim stack:
21x10
19x10
17x10
15x10
As I use .46 N springs I would need to add some extra rebound shims.
Also the stock setup beeing a little on the soft side rebound wise with std springs, it would call for even more rebound for me?
How much extra rebound would I need for my stiffer springs based on pobit's findings:
Pobit's rebound stack:
21x10
21x10
19x10
19x10
18x10
17x10
15x10
Please help
But last time out some rocks hade emerged from its winter sleep, and now my fork setup was horrible. The very soft base valve stack i used seemed to blow by immediately at the mere sight of a rock making the ride very harsh.
Yeah I know, you told me so
.Now, I want to get this sorted once and for all.
The '05 FSE does NOT use either bleed shim or bleed hole in the base valve. No bleed whatsoever. Is a base valve bleed setup necessary to make it supple over roots and rocks?
What I have learned from you guys is that it is a good idea to pull out the first crossover 11x10 shim. Should I perhaps place that 11x10 at the top of the stack to get a little bleed? Like:
Stock base valve:
22x10
22x10
11x10
19x15
11x10
17x15
15x15
13x20
Stiffer stock+bleed?
11x10
22x10
22x10
19x15
11x10
17x15
15x15
13x20
Or do I need even more bleed as in the EC forks? Perhaps change the 22x10's to 21x10's?
Or should I drill a bleed hole?
What exactly is the purpose of the bleed anyway? Where/when does it come to play?
Rebound piston has the same 2 mm bleed hole and same shim arrangement as the '06 EC found in pobit's post, but the FSE midvalve is a check plate/spring setup.
Stock rebound shim stack:
21x10
19x10
17x10
15x10
As I use .46 N springs I would need to add some extra rebound shims.
Also the stock setup beeing a little on the soft side rebound wise with std springs, it would call for even more rebound for me?
How much extra rebound would I need for my stiffer springs based on pobit's findings:
Pobit's rebound stack:
21x10
21x10
19x10
19x10
18x10
17x10
15x10
Please help
