Jump to content

Anyone on a 2010 around 165 lbs

By whiskey wheelie,
in YZ400F/426F/450F/450FX

 Share

Recommended Posts

Proficient

whiskey wheelie

Posted
Posted

Curious if you had to go to lighter springs or not? My buddy who rides pro and is 190 thought it was stiff compared to his 09 with mb1 suspension...especally in the choppy stuff. His felt way more plush in the first few inches thats for sure... i went 2 from softest and its still pretty stiff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

brentn

Posted
Posted

The bike was designed for the 165-175 lbs rider, that includes your gear and your own weight, in other words your gross weight.

Have you adjusted your sag on the bike? There are good articles out there on how to do it.

How long have you had the bike? I always find new front forks are stiff as hell but then you use the bike a bit and things seem to loosen up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Proficient

whiskey wheelie

Posted
  • Author
Posted
The bike was designed for the 165-175 lbs rider, that includes your gear and your own weight, in other words your gross weight.

Have you adjusted your sag on the bike? There are good articles out there on how to do it.

How long have you had the bike? I always find new front forks are stiff as hell but then you use the bike a bit and things seem to loosen up.

Including gear? Ive thought the 450's were for around 175-180 dry weight without gear? racetechs spring calculater says i need a much lighter rear spring but the front is good. It's got about 37 hrs now i think on it so know its good there. Sag also has been set.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Community Regular

andy250

Posted
Posted

I weigh 150lbs. I'm running a 5.4kg/mm (stock 09 crf450 spring) in the rear and .46 in the front. It works pretty good right now, but I may try going back to the stock .47's in the front next time I change fork oil.

For your weight, I'd guess stock front springs (.47kg/mm) with a 5.5kg/mm in the rear will be about right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

grayracer513

Posted
Posted
Ive thought the 450's were for around 175-180 dry weight without gear?
You're right, but it's more like 175-190.

The rates generated by spring calculators vary quite a bit, and are reflective of a certain tuner's philosophy more than of hard science. Also, they occasionally get the OEM rates wrong. Pays to double check that and try more than one generator (MX-Tech has one). Or talk to a good tuner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Proficient

whiskey wheelie

Posted
  • Author
Posted
You're right, but it's more like 175-190.

The rates generated by spring calculators vary quite a bit, and are reflective of a certain tuner's philosophy more than of hard science. Also, they occasionally get the OEM rates wrong. Pays to double check that and try more than one generator (MX-Tech has one). Or talk to a good tuner.

And since I'm running off-road, Id imagine that these spring rates stock for a 175-190 lb. guy would be pretty stiff for me being i ride mostly cross country and am 165 at most right now? I guess a lot has to do with valving too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

grayracer513

Posted
Posted

It depends. In the first place, speaking in general terms because tuning philosophies vary a lot, springs for MX, which is what the bike was built for, tend to be stiffer than those for off-road. But another thing to think about is that when the factory shoots for a target weight range, they make an estimate of how heavy the rider will be wearing typical riding gear. As an off-roader, your gear load can be as much as 5-10 pounds up on that of an MX racer, who will usually carry no water, tools, or spares. That can make you the equivalent of a 175 pound rider and partially compensate for the difference.

In the end, it's how the bike works for you as you use it that matters. I'd try it as is, maybe open out the clickers most of the way to see how it acts near full soft on compression, then go from there. If you need lighter springs, you can add them. Then, if you want to really work it up, you can get hold of somebody like Dave Johnson at SMART Performance. :ride:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

YamaLink

Posted
Posted

I'm 165 before gear. Spring rate in the rear is good for my weight with the stock setup. Fork rate is a tad stiff for me with stock oil level and my riding style/ability. On the mx track I'm just in regular riding gear and in full disclosure I have a 1" YamaLink on the back running anywhere from 90 to 95mm sag, and have a few cc of fork oil taken out, but.....

As for off-road gear and whatnot, a gallon of gas is about 7 pounds, my toolpack is at least 4 even though I carry the minimum much to the dismay of my riding buddies and I carry at least a gallon of water and food. Adds up quick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Contributor

BRZ

Posted
Posted

I'm at 166 without gear and for me, both front and rear spring rates seem fine.

I ride mx tracks only and race vet expert.

I'm currently running 105mm sag, but I want to try 110mm in the near future.

Until recently I had a 2010 CRF450 and the suspension on the 2010 YZF feels much better, even considering that the CRF had a Factory Connection link.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Proficient

whiskey wheelie

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I'm at 166 without gear and for me, both front and rear spring rates seem fine.

I ride mx tracks only and race vet expert.

I'm currently running 105mm sag, but I want to try 110mm in the near future.

Until recently I had a 2010 CRF450 and the suspension on the 2010 YZF feels much better, even considering that the CRF had a Factory Connection link.

do you know what settings your running? I cant complain to much about it on the trail except on the first few inches of travel... doesnt handle rocks, roots too well obviously. otherwise it's pretty good despite the rear wants to kick up on square edges. MB1, Enzo, Norcal, and TBT all recommended a softer rear spring... the fronts seem plenty soft to me but they say its a tad unbalanced from a spring rate perspective. (rear stiffer than front.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mentor

Phil Hannah

Posted
Posted

I am 215 w/o gear and with the link i am 17 out l/s comp,1.5 h/s, 11r. sag in 101-108 range. I came upon the soft l/s setting on a really rough practice track with no jumps. At 17 out the bike will follow the big whoop type bumps and not kick in the square edge. I use the sag to tune in turning and chassis balance. 17 sounds like a lot but this bike has stiff valving in the rear. I am using stock rear spring with sag and freesag numbers that are in range and .49s in the front. Try the softer l/s and see what you think. Again i have the link which stiffens the initial travel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Contributor

BRZ

Posted
Posted
do you know what settings your running? I cant complain to much about it on the trail except on the first few inches of travel... doesnt handle rocks, roots too well obviously. otherwise it's pretty good despite the rear wants to kick up on square edges. MB1, Enzo, Norcal, and TBT all recommended a softer rear spring... the fronts seem plenty soft to me but they say its a tad unbalanced from a spring rate perspective. (rear stiffer than front.

Here are my settings (track only):

Fork:

Spring rate: stock

Oil quantity: stock

Compression: 11 clicks out

Rebound: 8 clicks out

Fork leg height: 5mm up

Shock:

Spring rate: stock

Race sag: 105mm

Hi-compression: 1-1/4 turns out

Lo-compression: 9 clicks out

Rebound: 10 clicks out

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Reply with:

ThumperTalk

Register a new account Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...
Terms of Use
Copyright
Privacy Policy