shock poll

Mike Baldwin...when asked what weight fork oil he was running in his H2.....he did a lot of his own work at that point of his racing and set up his own bikes...running up front as a privateer ..."whatever oil they shipped it with,that is what is in it i guess"...

I have always found air shocks undependable. I love my series-12 shocks. Never a problem with them. I have them on three bikes. As for front fork oil I use non detergent Motor oil and I add 5% seal conditioner. I change my fork oil every season and I flush the system fully.

steell wrote:

Nebr_Rex wrote:

I will have to disagree with you on those 2 points.

No problem, you have every right to be wrong :laugh:

And so do you.:whistle:

Yeah, but you see I can site my sources, the best known suspension and frame experts in the world (Tony Foale being in the UK and Kevin Camaron in the US), so it's them you're saying are wrong.
Are you really sure you want to proclaim yourself the worlds foremost expert on motorcycle suspension?

Or is it maybe possible you mis-heard something somewhere and are now staking everything on it?

(((How about on a shock where the shaft bottoms out before the spring?)))

Do you really expect me to address every possible type of shock absorber, or you just wanting to argue? How about friction shocks? Or maybe magnetic shocks? Or even within hydraulic shocks you have fixed orifice versus variable orifice, and several types of that.


KZ_Rage, can't argue with the Progressives, although some people might, I have Progressive fork springs on my daily rider 750 twin and on my ZX11, Racetech Gold Valve emulators and linear springs in GSX750 forks on my 750 twin project. Progressive may not be great on the track, but I love them for every day street use. The Gold Valve emulators are pretty cool also, I am rebuilding my spare ZX11 shock with the Gold Valve emulator and a Racetech straight weight spring.

Sorry been way to busy with work'in and ride'in my bikes do any read'in and quote'in.
Maybe some day I'll get the time to do all that.
I just gave an opinion and you jumped all over it.
For what reason?

I don't see any difference between my response and yours.

I will have to disagree with you on those 2 points.

No problem, you have every right to be wrong


And so do you.

I don't know why you took it as jumping all over you, or your opinion.

Actually, I believe you're one up on me, you have two responses to my one. So we'll declare you the winner and move on

Thanks for the thoughts everyone (and the debate). Avoided air, settled on a pair of Progressive 440 shocks with 115-155 springs. Great ride, seems pretty much correct for my weight at one notch preload. Found 'em briefly used for an Excellent Price; the gamble worked out. Yeah, they're 12.5" and stock would be 13.5" but all good- I checked clearance if they ever bottom out (at this rating and just me should never happen). Very pleased with these shocks!

MkII wrote: "pre-load adj. ride height and sag." quoted Steel

not exactly. setting static and rider sag is first accomplished with correct value springs for the weight of the bike (static)or a fully kitted rider (rider sag)then tweaked with pre-load to a certain extent for rider preferred feel while only using up a certain amount of spring doing so.

Ride height is a totally diff exercise adj. via shock or chassis linkage ala Ducati and or adjustability ala top shelf Ohlins for ex. The front end is adj. by sliding the tubes up or down to accomplish a desired front end height.

your basic info is sound but pre-load has nothing to do with ride height. ride height is a chassis/geometry adjustment not a suspension adj. this fact is one often assumed or confusing to folks and it makes suspension guys twitch.

+1

But a majority of riders think that those adjustments are like seat adjustments in a car, when in all actuality affect the way the bike handles. lol If you have too much sag and/or incorrect spring rate, the bike may blow through the suspension, this will also have an affect on turning. Too little sag and/or steep head angle can help turning but sacrifice fast straight, head shake.

If the bike is too tall for you, look into modifying the seat, suspension linkage, or shortening the shock internally.

If the bike is too tall for you, look into modifying the seat, suspension linkage, or shortening the shock internally.

No0t sure where this came from, I didn't see any mention of a bike being to tall for anyone, maybe I missed it.


So, tell me friend, say you have a 250 lb girl friend (hypothetically of course), and she wants to go for a ride on your bike. You can't just say no, because if you do you'll be cut off forever, so what's the first thing you do? Could it be that you're going to reach down to those shiny rear shocks and twist those collars till they're resting on the highest point? So you don't feel like your spine is being hammered every time you hit a bump because the shocks are bottoming out ?

So, you increase the pre-load to restore the ride height to keep the shock from bottoming due to your significant others ample dimensions?

But a majority of riders think that those adjustments are like seat adjustments in a car,

Ok, I just have to ask, do you really know the majority of riders? If not, then how do you know what they think?

steell wrote: So, tell me friend, say you have a 250 lb girl friend (hypothetically of course), and she wants to go for a ride on your bike.

Side car.

Kidkawie wrote:

steell wrote: So, tell me friend, say you have a 250 lb girl friend (hypothetically of course), and she wants to go for a ride on your bike.

Put the bottle down, tell her you're going to the bathroom, then sneak out the door.

I am one of those that likes "full figured" women but 250# is pushing even my limit by a bit. :whistle:

steell wrote: ... say you have a 250 lb girl friend...You can't just say no, because if you do you'll be cut off forever...

you say that like it would be a bad thing... :sick: :pinch: