for those of you on here who race harescrambles do you run on the slow side for rebound or fast side??
trying to find good suspension setup with just using clickers on stock suspension on 07 ktm 250sxf
dont have the money to send suspension out
so any and all info about how you run your suspension for the woods is appreciated!!
i understand to run compression softer for woods but not sure how to set the rebound on both the fork and shock and wether or not to adjust my high speed compression on shock
suspension for harescrambles...
Started by
Motojosh
, Mar 12 2012 06:11 PM
65 replies to this topic
Posted 12 March 2012 - 07:07 PM
Generally you run softer (faster) rebound for woods, but ultimately it depends on rider preferences and how well the valving works for said rider.
Posted 12 March 2012 - 10:43 PM
Quite the opposite in most cases. You run the stock rebound or slightly more (slower) as not to get kicked over small logs , roots and rocks. Sand is a different issue. I tend to run stock rebound if running the stock spring on the shock and if a heavier spring then I go in 1 click per .2kg difference in spring weight. That is for starters. I also tend to run maximum oil level in the forks so I can run minimum compression damping and still have bottoming resistance.
Posted 13 March 2012 - 04:33 AM
Dwight_Rudder, on 12 March 2012 - 10:43 PM, said:
Quite the opposite in most cases. You run the stock rebound or slightly more (slower) as not to get kicked over small logs , roots and rocks. Sand is a different issue. I tend to run stock rebound if running the stock spring on the shock and if a heavier spring then I go in 1 click per .2kg difference in spring weight. That is for starters. I also tend to run maximum oil level in the forks so I can run minimum compression damping and still have bottoming resistance.
ok thanks dwight i like your idea about the maximum oil level
im not going to crazy with changing up my suspension as i do race hare scrambles and hit the mx track quite often
Posted 13 March 2012 - 05:30 AM
For a woods set up, I run lighter fork rebound and stiffer shock rebound. That helps the front hold a line in rough corners.
Posted 13 March 2012 - 07:49 AM
Dwight_Rudder, on 12 March 2012 - 10:43 PM, said:
I also tend to run maximum oil level in the forks so I can run minimum compression damping and still have bottoming resistance.
Interesting, I don't think I've every read about that approach for a woods bike. It is always the opposite with low oil levels.
Posted 13 March 2012 - 07:56 AM
H-B-R, on 13 March 2012 - 07:49 AM, said:
Interesting, I don't think I've every read about that approach for a woods bike. It is always the opposite with low oil levels.
Low oil levels ? Then you would have to run higher compression to prevent bottoming or too stiff a spring. That would give a harsh ride in the first few inches of travel.
Posted 13 March 2012 - 09:08 AM
Dwight_Rudder, on 13 March 2012 - 07:56 AM, said:
Low oil levels ? Then you would have to run higher compression to prevent bottoming or too stiff a spring. That would give a harsh ride in the first few inches of travel.
Posted 13 March 2012 - 04:41 PM
george, I run a 01 cr for harescrambles and even before I put 04 forks on it I found that the forks were much better with 385 -400 cc of oil and lighter compression damping on clickers and valve stack. I did take about 3mm off the spring cup and run a litte stiffer spring for less preload. I use this same set up on the 04 forks and it works realy good for me
Posted 13 March 2012 - 05:03 PM
YHGEORGE, on 13 March 2012 - 09:08 AM, said:
Now you have me thinking. I have been FIGHTING my forks forever and using LOW oil level. I am on a Honda CR in the woods and have had EVERYONE say that I needed lower level to eliminate the midstroke spike. And the same EVERYONE has said I needed stiffer springs. Several tuners and many $$$ gone I am still getting beat up. Think I will re-install the original springs and raise the oil level with minimal comp settings and see what happens. Really can't get any worse. Where should I start with rebound settings? Thanks.
Go to 2 1/2 wt PJ1 fork oil at max level . Increase rebound one click. Back off compression till you're bottoming lightly then go back in one or two clicks.
Posted 13 March 2012 - 05:04 PM
Make sure you are running the correct sag numbers. You want 14% static sag and 25% rider sag.
Posted 13 March 2012 - 05:10 PM
OSOBAD and Dwight, thanks very much to you both. My fork rider sag with the springs(.46) I was told I needed is 1.8 inches with 11.8 total travel. Will reinstall the stock .44's with the PJ1 oil and test. May have to use another oil since PJ1 is very scarce in my area.
Edited by YHGEORGE, 13 March 2012 - 05:12 PM.
Posted 13 March 2012 - 08:42 PM
I'm going to try Dwights strategy next go around. I'm pretty happy with my setup finally.
ATF fluid in forks at 325 ML (low limit)
3 clicks from full soft compression on forks
5 clicks from full soft rebound
Shock is
2 clicks in on compression
High speed full soft
5 clicks in on rebound
Handles big hits, roots and choppy stuff. No deflecting up front or swapping in the rear. Basically just enough compression in both to achieve this, and still not get beat up.
Sits ok in the turns, not as much as I'd like. Was going to up rebound damping next to see if it'll sit down.
ATF fluid in forks at 325 ML (low limit)
3 clicks from full soft compression on forks
5 clicks from full soft rebound
Shock is
2 clicks in on compression
High speed full soft
5 clicks in on rebound
Handles big hits, roots and choppy stuff. No deflecting up front or swapping in the rear. Basically just enough compression in both to achieve this, and still not get beat up.
Sits ok in the turns, not as much as I'd like. Was going to up rebound damping next to see if it'll sit down.
Posted 13 March 2012 - 10:46 PM
YHGEORGE, on 13 March 2012 - 05:10 PM, said:
OSOBAD and Dwight, thanks very much to you both. My fork rider sag with the springs(.46) I was told I needed is 1.8 inches with 11.8 total travel. Will reinstall the stock .44's with the PJ1 oil and test. May have to use another oil since PJ1 is very scarce in my area.
11.8" is 300mm. You will want 42mm static sag (+-2mm) and 75mm rider sag. My Husky WR125/150 came with .42kg springs. Thing rode like a chopper. I changed to .40kg and sags were perfect. (Surprised me. I thought I might have to go to .38kg)
I weigh about 185lbs naked.
WOW only 45-46mm sag. Maybe they meant static sag ???? That would have been close. I now have 40 static and 75mm rider sag. Run the minimum preload you can.
Posted 14 March 2012 - 08:13 AM
Dwight_Rudder, on 13 March 2012 - 10:46 PM, said:
11.8" is 300mm. You will want 42mm static sag (+-2mm) and 75mm rider sag. My Husky WR125/150 came with .42kg springs. Thing rode like a chopper. I changed to .40kg and sags were perfect. (Surprised me. I thought I might have to go to .38kg)
I weigh about 185lbs naked.
WOW only 45-46mm sag. Maybe they meant static sag ???? That would have been close. I now have 40 static and 75mm rider sag. Run the minimum preload you can.
I weigh about 185lbs naked.
WOW only 45-46mm sag. Maybe they meant static sag ???? That would have been close. I now have 40 static and 75mm rider sag. Run the minimum preload you can.
Posted 22 March 2012 - 05:55 PM
Took forks to my local tuner to install lighter springs and the 2.5 oil Dwight recommended and got a surprise. In one leg the little nut that holds the valve body, shims etc had come loose and everything was just kinda floating around. The good thing is apparently it had not been like that too long as there were no damaged parts. Another interesting thing is that there were three more shims in one leg than in the other leg. Second time a tuner has told me this had occurred. Previous time there was some shim damage. Ridiculous. Possible to have faith in ANYONE anymore without standing over them??????
Posted 22 March 2012 - 06:17 PM
You're really lucky there wasn't any damage. Usually when that happens you'll have destroyed shims, scoring on the cartridge walls, messed up piston bands, etc. However, I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that a different shim configuration in one leg is necessarily incorrect. It's the combined effect of both legs that matters.
Posted 22 March 2012 - 06:23 PM
Yes I was lucky. Since the fork action was pretty bad I feel the tuner or his assistant was just not paying attention to his work. I understand that each tuner has his own style but I do not accept the two different legs valving ideas. From anyone.
Posted 23 March 2012 - 06:25 AM
YHGEORGE, on 22 March 2012 - 06:23 PM, said:
Yes I was lucky. Since the fork action was pretty bad I feel the tuner or his assistant was just not paying attention to his work. I understand that each tuner has his own style but I do not accept the two different legs valving ideas. From anyone.
