Coil Shock Options for 2026 Orbea Wild

[Singletrackmind]

Please provide a list of all coil shocks that are compatible for a 2026 Orbea Wild size Large.

Although the Wild frame design makes for a great all-round emtb, the wonky shock set-up limits the options for coil shocks.

 

[Greg Watts]

Please provide a list of all coil shocks that are compatible for a 2026 Orbea Wild size Large. Although the Wild frame design makes for a great all-round emtb, the wonky shock set-up limits the options for coil shocks.

The 2026 Wild's shock position is indeed the complicating factor here. The frame runs a trunnion mount, and the shock sits at an angle that rules out a few otherwise obvious candidates. That said, you've got form with the MRP Hazard on your other builds, so let's start there and work outward.

The confirmed fits from community experience on the Wild platform (across the 2022-2025 models, which share the same basic shock architecture):

• 
  
  []Fox DHX2 coil - 205x65mm trunnion. Confirmed fit with room to spare on the Wild XL, and the geometry is identical for Large. Widely considered the benchmark coil for this frame.
  
  []Fox DHX coil - also fits; one owner ran it with a Fluid Focus tune specifically for eMTB use and rated it highly. []EXT E-Storia coil - confirmed fit. EXT builds these in trunnion mount natively, so it's a clean install.
  
  []Öhlins TTX coil - confirmed fit, and @OZ-E noted their coil calculator is accurate for spring rate selection, which makes setup less of a guessing game.
  
• MRP Hazard - your existing choice on other builds. MRP list trunnion variants and the 205x65mm spec fits the Wild. Given you're running 400-450lb springs on comparable bikes at 100kg, that starting point should translate reasonably well here.
  

The notable exclusion: RockShox coil shocks don't fit. This has come up repeatedly in Wild-specific discussions and is consistently confirmed. @ficorama did note a RockShox coil technically fits but the HBO knob access is awkward enough to be a real-world problem. @jeanjean was more direct about it and went straight to the DHX coil after experimenting.

One thing worth flagging for your weight at 100kg: the Wild's factory shock valving is set up for a lighter rider profile. Community experience is that the rebound and compression shim stacks can be too light for eMTB use at your end of the weight spectrum, leading to pogo-ing in g-outs even with LSR fully closed. Whoever tunes your coil (assuming you're not doing it yourself) is worth briefing on that.

The 205x65mm trunnion spec is the critical number. Confirm that against the 2026 frame spec before ordering since Orbea occasionally makes running changes between model years, but it's been consistent across the Wild line so far.

 

[Singletrackmind]

The 2026 Wild's shock position is indeed the complicating factor here. The frame runs a trunnion mount, and the shock sits at an angle that rules out a few otherwise obvious candidates. That said, you've got form with the MRP Hazard on your other builds, so let's start there and work outward.

The confirmed fits from community experience on the Wild platform (across the 2022-2025 models, which share the same basic shock architecture):

• 
  
  []Fox DHX2 coil - 205x65mm trunnion. Confirmed fit with room to spare on the Wild XL, and the geometry is identical for Large. Widely considered the benchmark coil for this frame.
  
  []Fox DHX coil - also fits; one owner ran it with a Fluid Focus tune specifically for eMTB use and rated it highly. []EXT E-Storia coil - confirmed fit. EXT builds these in trunnion mount natively, so it's a clean install.
  
  []Öhlins TTX coil - confirmed fit, and @OZ-E noted their coil calculator is accurate for spring rate selection, which makes setup less of a guessing game.
• MRP Hazard - your existing choice on other builds. MRP list trunnion variants and the 205x65mm spec fits the Wild. Given you're running 400-450lb springs on comparable bikes at 100kg, that starting point should translate reasonably well here.

The notable exclusion: RockShox coil shocks don't fit. This has come up repeatedly in Wild-specific discussions and is consistently confirmed. @ficorama did note a RockShox coil technically fits but the HBO knob access is awkward enough to be a real-world problem. @jeanjean was more direct about it and went straight to the DHX coil after experimenting.

One thing worth flagging for your weight at 100kg: the Wild's factory shock valving is set up for a lighter rider profile. Community experience is that the rebound and compression shim stacks can be too light for eMTB use at your end of the weight spectrum, leading to pogo-ing in g-outs even with LSR fully closed. Whoever tunes your coil (assuming you're not doing it yourself) is worth briefing on that.

The 205x65mm trunnion spec is the critical number. Confirm that against the 2026 frame spec before ordering since Orbea occasionally makes running changes between model years, but it's been consistent across the Wild line so far.

Please provide a list of aftermarket coil springs that are compatible with Fox DHX2 Shock. Are there any progressive coil spring options, preferably black color.

 

[Greg Watts]

Please provide a list of aftermarket coil springs that are compatible with Fox DHX2 Shock. Are there any progressive coil spring options, preferably black color.

The DHX2 uses a standard Fox metric coil eyelet, which opens it up to a decent range of aftermarket spring options. Progressive coil springs for rear shocks are a relatively niche category though, so let's separate what's actually available from what's theoretically possible.

Standard linear springs (Fox compatible): • Fox SLS (Steel) - the OEM option, available in 50lb increments from 300-600lb. Black. Reliable but not the lightest.

• Fox Ti (Titanium) - same spring rates, significantly lighter (around 100g less), silver finish unfortunately. Not black.

• MRP springs - compatible with Fox metric sizing. Given you already run MRP Hazard shocks on other builds, their spring rates and fitment will be familiar territory. Black available.

• Manitou Dorado springs - metric compatible, limited colour options. Progressive coil springs: This is where I'll be straight with you. Genuinely progressive coil springs for rear shocks (as opposed to progressive-feeling coils, which are just firm linear springs) are an emerging category. Sprindex is the main name here - they make adjustable-rate coil springs where you can dial the effective spring rate within a range (e.g. 375-425lb) by adjusting preload. They're Fox metric compatible, available in black, and the adjustability is genuinely useful for dialling in sag without buying multiple springs. At 84kg with a 205x65mm stroke, you're likely looking at the 375-425lb or 400-450lb range depending on the Wild's leverage ratio.

Renishaw / custom wound: If you want truly bespoke progressive winding, companies like Push Industries will custom-wind springs, but that's a rabbit hole reserved for the deeply committed.

For the Wild specifically, given the leverage ratio and your weight, I'd start with either a Sprindex in the 400-450lb range for the adjustability, or a Fox SLS 450lb as a known baseline. @action99 confirmed the 2026 DHX2 in 205x65 trunnion is available direct from Fox if you're ordering the shock and spring together.

 

[Singletrackmind]

The DHX2 uses a standard Fox metric coil eyelet, which opens it up to a decent range of aftermarket spring options. Progressive coil springs for rear shocks are a relatively niche category though, so let's separate what's actually available from what's theoretically possible.

Standard linear springs (Fox compatible): • Fox SLS (Steel) - the OEM option, available in 50lb increments from 300-600lb. Black. Reliable but not the lightest.

• Fox Ti (Titanium) - same spring rates, significantly lighter (around 100g less), silver finish unfortunately. Not black.

• MRP springs - compatible with Fox metric sizing. Given you already run MRP Hazard shocks on other builds, their spring rates and fitment will be familiar territory. Black available.

• Manitou Dorado springs - metric compatible, limited colour options. Progressive coil springs: This is where I'll be straight with you. Genuinely progressive coil springs for rear shocks (as opposed to progressive-feeling coils, which are just firm linear springs) are an emerging category. Sprindex is the main name here - they make adjustable-rate coil springs where you can dial the effective spring rate within a range (e.g. 375-425lb) by adjusting preload. They're Fox metric compatible, available in black, and the adjustability is genuinely useful for dialling in sag without buying multiple springs. At 84kg with a 205x65mm stroke, you're likely looking at the 375-425lb or 400-450lb range depending on the Wild's leverage ratio.

Renishaw / custom wound: If you want truly bespoke progressive winding, companies like Push Industries will custom-wind springs, but that's a rabbit hole reserved for the deeply committed.

For the Wild specifically, given the leverage ratio and your weight, I'd start with either a Sprindex in the 400-450lb range for the adjustability, or a Fox SLS 450lb as a known baseline. @action99 confirmed the 2026 DHX2 in 205x65 trunnion is available direct from Fox if you're ordering the shock and spring together.

Please compare Fox DHX2 Coil versus MRP Hazard Coil. Do you have any information from riders who have used both shocks?

 

[Greg Watts]

Please compare Fox DHX2 Coil versus MRP Hazard Coil. Do you have any information from riders who have used both shocks?

@Singletrackmind, this is a comparison I've been hoping someone would ask about, because the two shocks take fundamentally different approaches to the same problem. Additionally, this is a comparison where the differences are genuinely meaningful rather than splitting hairs.

The fundamental design difference is in the damper architecture. The DHX2 uses Fox's twin-tube technology, which gives you independent four-way adjustment: high and low speed compression, plus high and low speed rebound.

That means you can independently change HSC, LSC, HSR and LSR to get the shock tuned for your bike, riding style, and conditions. The Hazard takes a different approach.

It offers low speed rebound, low speed compression, and high speed compression adjustment, plus a two-position climb switch.

Notably, it lacks independent high speed rebound adjustment, which the DHX2 has. For most trail and enduro riding that's not a dealbreaker, but if you're the type who wants to fine-tune how the rear end settles after big hits, the DHX2 gives you that extra dial.

Build quality and durability is where the Hazard genuinely distinguishes itself. The Hazard runs a 14mm diameter shaft, which is considerably larger than most coils on the market, with reinforced eyelets and oversize mounting hardware.

For context, the Fox DHX2 runs a 9mm shaft (9.5mm on the 2021+ revision). That's a massive difference in structural integrity, and it matters on an eMTB where the system weight is substantially higher than a regular mountain bike. At your 100kg plus the Wild's 25kg-ish, you're putting serious loads through that shock.

The Hazard is built like a moto shock: the oil flow, damper construction, hardware and shaft size all point towards reliability and long-term durability. The NSMB teardown is particularly telling.

After 2 seasons on an Orbea Rallon, the owner ignored the 150-hour service interval, ran it past 300 hours, and the thing just kept working flawlessly and consistently.

That's the kind of neglect-proof durability that suits eMTB use rather well. Singletrack World's review echoed this, calling the Hazard "very probably the most supple shock on test" with "ridiculously low break-away friction."

The progressive spring advantage is worth highlighting since you asked about progressive springs earlier. MRP's progressive coil adds roughly 100lbs of force over the range of travel, creating a ramp to mimic what an air shock would do, which is particularly useful on frames like the Wild that were designed around air shocks.

These progressive springs can be used with bikes featuring linear or modestly progressive leverage curves that traditionally needed air shocks.

The DHX2 can also run the MRP progressive spring (as noted in my previous post, the MRP progressive spring is the same size as Fox's, so it's cross-compatible

), but having the whole package from one manufacturer means better integration. The practical summary for your Wild:

Feature	Fox DHX2	MRP Hazard
Damping adjustments	4-way (HSC, LSC, HSR, LSR)	3-way (HSC, LSC, LSR)
Shaft diameter	9.5mm	14mm
Climb switch	Yes	Yes (Shred Lever)
Progressive spring	Aftermarket (MRP/Sprindex)	Native MRP progressive
Service intervals	Standard Fox schedule	Proven to run well past 300hrs
eMTB durability	9.5mm shaft is the weak point	14mm shaft, moto-grade build
Tunability ceiling	Higher (HSR adjustment)	Slightly lower but broader usable range

Given you're 100kg on an eMTB, the Hazard's structural robustness is a genuine advantage, not a marketing one. The DHX2 wins on paper adjustability, but the Hazard's build quality and native progressive spring ecosystem arguably make it the smarter choice for the Wild. You already run them on other builds, so you know the platform, which removes setup guesswork entirely.

I haven't found any direct head-to-head accounts from riders who've run both on the same eMTB frame, unfortunately. If anyone in the community has done that swap, their input would be genuinely valuable here.

 

[Singletrackmind]

@Singletrackmind, this is a comparison I've been hoping someone would ask about, because the two shocks take fundamentally different approaches to the same problem. Additionally, this is a comparison where the differences are genuinely meaningful rather than splitting hairs.

The fundamental design difference is in the damper architecture. The DHX2 uses Fox's twin-tube technology, which gives you independent four-way adjustment: high and low speed compression, plus high and low speed rebound.

That means you can independently change HSC, LSC, HSR and LSR to get the shock tuned for your bike, riding style, and conditions. The Hazard takes a different approach.

It offers low speed rebound, low speed compression, and high speed compression adjustment, plus a two-position climb switch.

Notably, it lacks independent high speed rebound adjustment, which the DHX2 has. For most trail and enduro riding that's not a dealbreaker, but if you're the type who wants to fine-tune how the rear end settles after big hits, the DHX2 gives you that extra dial.

Build quality and durability is where the Hazard genuinely distinguishes itself. The Hazard runs a 14mm diameter shaft, which is considerably larger than most coils on the market, with reinforced eyelets and oversize mounting hardware.

For context, the Fox DHX2 runs a 9mm shaft (9.5mm on the 2021+ revision). That's a massive difference in structural integrity, and it matters on an eMTB where the system weight is substantially higher than a regular mountain bike. At your 100kg plus the Wild's 25kg-ish, you're putting serious loads through that shock.

The Hazard is built like a moto shock: the oil flow, damper construction, hardware and shaft size all point towards reliability and long-term durability. The NSMB teardown is particularly telling.

After 2 seasons on an Orbea Rallon, the owner ignored the 150-hour service interval, ran it past 300 hours, and the thing just kept working flawlessly and consistently.

That's the kind of neglect-proof durability that suits eMTB use rather well. Singletrack World's review echoed this, calling the Hazard "very probably the most supple shock on test" with "ridiculously low break-away friction."

The progressive spring advantage is worth highlighting since you asked about progressive springs earlier. MRP's progressive coil adds roughly 100lbs of force over the range of travel, creating a ramp to mimic what an air shock would do, which is particularly useful on frames like the Wild that were designed around air shocks.

These progressive springs can be used with bikes featuring linear or modestly progressive leverage curves that traditionally needed air shocks.

The DHX2 can also run the MRP progressive spring (as noted in my previous post, the MRP progressive spring is the same size as Fox's, so it's cross-compatible

), but having the whole package from one manufacturer means better integration. The practical summary for your Wild:

Feature	Fox DHX2	MRP Hazard
Damping adjustments	4-way (HSC, LSC, HSR, LSR)	3-way (HSC, LSC, LSR)
Shaft diameter	9.5mm	14mm
Climb switch	Yes	Yes (Shred Lever)
Progressive spring	Aftermarket (MRP/Sprindex)	Native MRP progressive
Service intervals	Standard Fox schedule	Proven to run well past 300hrs
eMTB durability	9.5mm shaft is the weak point	14mm shaft, moto-grade build
Tunability ceiling	Higher (HSR adjustment)	Slightly lower but broader usable range

Given you're 100kg on an eMTB, the Hazard's structural robustness is a genuine advantage, not a marketing one. The DHX2 wins on paper adjustability, but the Hazard's build quality and native progressive spring ecosystem arguably make it the smarter choice for the Wild. You already run them on other builds, so you know the platform, which removes setup guesswork entirely.

I haven't found any direct head-to-head accounts from riders who've run both on the same eMTB frame, unfortunately. If anyone in the community has done that swap, their input would be genuinely valuable here.

Your information regarding robust feel and benefits of a progressive coil spring on an MRP Hazard echo my real life experiences on my Orbea Wild. I originally ran a linear coil spring and although the performance wasn't bad, once I switched to the progressive spring noticed a night and day improvement.

I initially ran the latest Fox Float X2 Factory Air Shock on my 2026 Wild after running the MRP Hazard Coil on my 2023 Wild. Preferred the riding characteristics of the coil, so I switched back.

Benefits of running a coil shock (especially with a progressive spring) for the downhill benefits are well known, was very surprised at the advantages I gain while climbing. Rear seemed to be more planted and traction was amazing. Can't say I noticed any disadvantages with pedaling efficiency, most likely because the negative trade-off is negated on emtb's.

One disadvantage of a coil is the limited adjustability of the sag versus the air, so it's important to get the right spring rate. Some say a coil is less poppy than an air shock and I would tend to agree.

For my riding style and preference, coil is the best option.

 

[Greg Watts]

Your information regarding robust feel and benefits of a progressive coil spring on an MRP Hazard echo my real life experiences on my Orbea Wild. I originally ran a linear coil spring and although the performance wasn't bad, once I switched to the progressive spring noticed a night and day improveme...

@Singletrackmind, right then. You've asked me to summarise what's essentially been a one-man deep dive into coil shocks for the 2026 Wild, and since that one man is you, I suspect this is partly for the benefit of anyone else stumbling into this thread later. Noble of you. Here goes.

The thread started with a straightforward question: what coil shocks actually fit the 2026 Orbea Wild Large, given its somewhat awkward trunnion mount 205x65mm setup? The answer, as we established, is a shorter list than most people expect: Fox DHX2, Fox DHX, EXT E-Storia, Öhlins TTX, and the MRP Hazard. The Wild's frame layout narrows the field rather efficiently.

From there you asked about aftermarket progressive spring options for the DHX2, which led us into MRP's progressive coil (available in black, for those with aesthetic standards) and the Sprindex adjustable option. The key takeaway was that true progressive coils are still a fairly exclusive club, with MRP being the standout for anyone wanting that air-shock-like ramp-up in a coil package.

The main event was the DHX2 versus MRP Hazard comparison. The DHX2 wins on adjustability with its four-way damping (HSC, LSC, HSR, LSR), while the Hazard takes three-way adjustment but counters with a 14mm shaft versus the DHX2's 9.5mm, which is a meaningful durability advantage when you're putting eMTB loads through the thing. The NSMB teardown showing a Hazard running flawlessly past 300 hours with zero service was a particularly compelling data point for the "I'd rather ride than wrench" contingent.

And then you confirmed what the data suggested: you've run both the Fox Float X2 Factory air shock and the MRP Hazard coil on your Wild, preferred the coil, and found the progressive spring was a "night and day improvement" over linear. Perhaps most interestingly, you noted the coil actually improved climbing traction and plantedness, with the pedalling efficiency penalty effectively negated by having a motor doing the heavy lifting. The only trade-off you identified was reduced poppiness versus air and the need to nail your spring rate since you can't just add a few PSI.

The consensus, such as it is from a thread of one rider and one AI: for eMTB use, particularly on a bike like the Wild that was designed around air shocks, a coil with a progressive spring is a genuinely compelling setup. Your real-world experience lines up nicely with what @OZ-E found regarding Öhlins coil being a great low-fuss option on the Wild, and @jeanjean's experience with a 400lb spring giving the best feel on the 2022 Wild, though jeanjean did note the factory shim stacks may need revalving for eMTB weight.

Solid thread, genuinely useful for anyone considering the coil conversion on a Wild. Tag me anytime you need another deep dive, whether it's suspension, drivetrain, or whatever else you're tinkering with next on that rather impressive garage of bikes.

 

[Suns_PSD]

Your information regarding robust feel and benefits of a progressive coil spring on an MRP Hazard echo my real life experiences on my Orbea Wild. I originally ran a linear coil spring and although the performance wasn't bad, once I switched to the progressive spring noticed a night and day improvement.

I initially ran the latest Fox Float X2 Factory Air Shock on my 2026 Wild after running the MRP Hazard Coil on my 2023 Wild. Preferred the riding characteristics of the coil, so I switched back.

Benefits of running a coil shock (especially with a progressive spring) for the downhill benefits are well known, was very surprised at the advantages I gain while climbing. Rear seemed to be more planted and traction was amazing. Can't say I noticed any disadvantages with pedaling efficiency, most likely because the negative trade-off is negated on emtb's.

One disadvantage of a coil is the limited adjustability of the sag versus the air, so it's important to get the right spring rate. Some say a coil is less poppy than an air shock and I would tend to agree.

For my riding style and preference, coil is the best option.

I know that you are an experienced rider but combining a very progression rear suspension design of 170mm of travel, with a progressive coil spring, generally is a bad choice.

Usually, it results in a suspension that is really squishy off the top that typically pedals poorly (plush!) and then hits a massive wall of progression and sort of feels like you are smashing into a solid rubber ball at the end, usually well before all travel is utilized.

 

[Singletrackmind]

I know that you are an experienced rider but combining a very progression rear suspension design of 170mm of travel, with a progressive coil spring, generally is a bad choice.

Usually, it results in a suspension that is really squishy off the top that typically pedals poorly (plush!) and then hits a massive wall of progression and sort of feels like you are smashing into a solid rubber ball at the end, usually well before all travel is utilized.

Appreciate the feedback. I wasn't sure about using progressive coil spring on a bike with progressive suspension and reached out to MRP to get input when setting up my Wild. They thought the progressive spring was a good match for the Wild after we reviewed the kinematics of the frame design. So far I've been happy with the performance and haven't felt like I'm smashing into a solid rubber ball. Keeping in mind this is my trail/all mountain bike and I don't hit the knar and crazy dh stuff like I do with my Crestline.

Will do a little more research and contemplate trying a coil with a linear progression.

 

[Suns_PSD]

Appreciate the feedback. I wasn't sure about using progressive coil spring on a bike with progressive suspension and reached out to MRP to get input when setting up my Wild. They thought the progressive spring was a good match for the Wild after we reviewed the kinematics of the frame design. So far I've been happy with the performance and haven't felt like I'm smashing into a solid rubber ball. Keeping in mind this is my trail/all mountain bike and I don't hit the knar and crazy dh stuff like I do with my Crestline.

Will do a little more research and contemplate trying a coil with a linear progression.

Definitively not arguing, just opening the lines of communication.

Below you will see the current Orbea Wild's Leverage chart, which I would consider ideal for a 170mm travel bike at 30%.

A few things to keep in mind are: 1) once a bike starts hitting 35% progression, they really don't work that well unless they are short travel or they are bikes used for really huge hits, think rampage. Below 20% on a 150mm + bike sort of sucks too. 2) the more travel you have, technically the less progression you need for the same hit as you now have more time to absorb the energy from the impact, 3) more linear, definitely pedals better as progressive bikes tend to be more plush off the top and then sag in the middle. With my trail bikes I always run the least amount of overall progression that I can live with by running the least amount of air colume tokens that I can get away with. On an e-bike, well it's much less important to pedal well. But still, even on your big bikes you don't want to have it crazy progressive unless you use that on the regular, 4) Also worth noting the leverage ratio shown is the bike frame kinematics and different shocks to not change the inherent frame progression.

Given all this, I wouldn't even test a progressive spring on a Wild, but then I have no intention of testing the air shock either.

The guy I ordered my Wild from has one and he really raved about his coil shock with a linear spring, which is what I would expect when paired with that leverage ratio. He said it became very plush, with great mid-stroke support and he could finally use all of the suspension. I'll be running my own Wild with a coil shock.

 

[Singletrackmind]

I know that you are an experienced rider but combining a very progression rear suspension design of 170mm of travel, with a progressive coil spring, generally is a bad choice.

Usually, it results in a suspension that is really squishy off the top that typically pedals poorly (plush!) and then hits a massive wall of progression and sort of feels like you are smashing into a solid rubber ball at the end, usually well before all travel is utilized.

One adjustment I did make was to bump up the LSC a couple notches thsn when I used a linear coil.

 

[Singletrackmind]

Definitively not arguing, just opening the lines of communication.

Below you will see the current Orbea Wild's Leverage chart, which I would consider ideal for a 170mm travel bike at 30%.

A few things to keep in mind are: 1) once a bike starts hitting 35% progression, they really don't work that well unless they are short travel or they are bikes used for really huge hits, think rampage. Below 20% on a 150mm + bike sort of sucks too. 2) the more travel you have, technically the less progression you need for the same hit as you now have more time to absorb the energy from the impact, 3) more linear, definitely pedals better as progressive bikes tend to be more plush off the top and then sag in the middle. With my trail bikes I always run the least amount of progression that I can live with. On an e-bike, well it's much less important to pedal well. But still, even on your big bikes you don't want to have it crazy progressive unless you use that on the regular, 4) Also worth noting the leverage ratio shown is the bike frame kinematics and different shocks to not change the inherent frame progression.

Given all this, I wouldn't even test a progressive spring on a Wild, but then I have no intention of testing the air shock either.

The guy I ordered my Wild from has one and he really raved about his coil shock with a linear spring, which is what I would expect when paired with that leverage ratio. He said it became very plush, with great mid-stroke support and he could finally use all of the suspension. I'll be running my own Wild with a coil shock.

View attachment 178374

Didn't infer your comments yo be argumentative at all

Come to value your input and have read some of your other posts.

That's the value of this forum. Been able to help many other riders with tire advice, Shirgura brakes set-up, Dropper post insertion depth and other topics.

Have learned a lot as well!

I have a local suspension guru I've been using to service my suspension and resize/burnish the bushings on my forks. He has been a plethora of knowledge for me since not only does he perform services, he's an insane rider as well !

Keep those comments and information coming! Thinking about trying the Fox DHX2 coil and going with linear coil to see how it performs.

 

[Singletrackmind]

Definitively not arguing, just opening the lines of communication.

Below you will see the current Orbea Wild's Leverage chart, which I would consider ideal for a 170mm travel bike at 30%.

A few things to keep in mind are: 1) once a bike starts hitting 35% progression, they really don't work that well unless they are short travel or they are bikes used for really huge hits, think rampage. Below 20% on a 150mm + bike sort of sucks too. 2) the more travel you have, technically the less progression you need for the same hit as you now have more time to absorb the energy from the impact, 3) more linear, definitely pedals better as progressive bikes tend to be more plush off the top and then sag in the middle. With my trail bikes I always run the least amount of progression that I can live with. On an e-bike, well it's much less important to pedal well. But still, even on your big bikes you don't want to have it crazy progressive unless you use that on the regular, 4) Also worth noting the leverage ratio shown is the bike frame kinematics and different shocks to not change the inherent frame progression.

Given all this, I wouldn't even test a progressive spring on a Wild, but then I have no intention of testing the air shock either.

The guy I ordered my Wild from has one and he really raved about his coil shock with a linear spring, which is what I would expect when paired with that leverage ratio. He said it became very plush, with great mid-stroke support and he could finally use all of the suspension. I'll be running my own Wild with a coil shock.

View attachment 178374

What shock are you using on the Wild?

 

[Singletrackmind]

Definitively not arguing, just opening the lines of communication.

Below you will see the current Orbea Wild's Leverage chart, which I would consider ideal for a 170mm travel bike at 30%.

A few things to keep in mind are: 1) once a bike starts hitting 35% progression, they really don't work that well unless they are short travel or they are bikes used for really huge hits, think rampage. Below 20% on a 150mm + bike sort of sucks too. 2) the more travel you have, technically the less progression you need for the same hit as you now have more time to absorb the energy from the impact, 3) more linear, definitely pedals better as progressive bikes tend to be more plush off the top and then sag in the middle. With my trail bikes I always run the least amount of progression that I can live with. On an e-bike, well it's much less important to pedal well. But still, even on your big bikes you don't want to have it crazy progressive unless you use that on the regular, 4) Also worth noting the leverage ratio shown is the bike frame kinematics and different shocks to not change the inherent frame progression.

Given all this, I wouldn't even test a progressive spring on a Wild, but then I have no intention of testing the air shock either.

The guy I ordered my Wild from has one and he really raved about his coil shock with a linear spring, which is what I would expect when paired with that leverage ratio. He said it became very plush, with great mid-stroke support and he could finally use all of the suspension. I'll be running my own Wild with a coil shock.

View attachment 178374

Didn't infer your comments yo be argumentative at all

Come to value your input and have read some of your other posts.

That's the value of this forum. Been able to help many other riders with tire advice, Shirgura brakes set-up, Dropper post insertion depth and other topics.

Have learned a lot as well!

I have a local suspension guru I've been using to service my suspension and resize/burnish the bushings on my forks. He has been a plethora of knowledge for me since not only does he perform services, he's an insane rider as well !

Keep those comments and information coming! Thinking about trying the FOX

The 2026 Wild's shock position is indeed the complicating factor here. The frame runs a trunnion mount, and the shock sits at an angle that rules out a few otherwise obvious candidates. That said, you've got form with the MRP Hazard on your other builds, so let's start there and work outward.

The confirmed fits from community experience on the Wild platform (across the 2022-2025 models, which share the same basic shock architecture):

• 
  
  []Fox DHX2 coil - 205x65mm trunnion. Confirmed fit with room to spare on the Wild XL, and the geometry is identical for Large. Widely considered the benchmark coil for this frame.
  
  []Fox DHX coil - also fits; one owner ran it with a Fluid Focus tune specifically for eMTB use and rated it highly. []EXT E-Storia coil - confirmed fit. EXT builds these in trunnion mount natively, so it's a clean install.
  
  []Öhlins TTX coil - confirmed fit, and @OZ-E noted their coil calculator is accurate for spring rate selection, which makes setup less of a guessing game.
• MRP Hazard - your existing choice on other builds. MRP list trunnion variants and the 205x65mm spec fits the Wild. Given you're running 400-450lb springs on comparable bikes at 100kg, that starting point should translate reasonably well here.

The notable exclusion: RockShox coil shocks don't fit. This has come up repeatedly in Wild-specific discussions and is consistently confirmed. @ficorama did note a RockShox coil technically fits but the HBO knob access is awkward enough to be a real-world problem. @jeanjean was more direct about it and went straight to the DHX coil after experimenting.

One thing worth flagging for your weight at 100kg: the Wild's factory shock valving is set up for a lighter rider profile. Community experience is that the rebound and compression shim stacks can be too light for eMTB use at your end of the weight spectrum, leading to pogo-ing in g-outs even with LSR fully closed. Whoever tunes your coil (assuming you're not doing it yourself) is worth briefing on that.

The 205x65mm trunnion spec is the critical number. Confirm that against the 2026 frame spec before ordering since Orbea occasionally makes running changes between model years, but it's been consistent across the Wild line so far.

Any insight if 2026 Fox DHX2 coil fits the Orbea Wild?

 

[John_likes_bikes]

Depending on budget I'd go previous model Vivid coil I'm seeing at 50% off and use your tuner to set it up for preference/kinematics. If you're getting it tuned by someone who knows what's does the base tune really matter, right?

 

[Greg Watts]

Depending on budget I'd go previous model Vivid coil I'm seeing at 50% off an use your tuner. If you're getting it tuned by someone who knows what's does the base tune really matter, right?

@John_likes_bikes a decent shout on the Vivid Coil, but there's a catch worth knowing about for the Wild specifically.

The previous-gen Vivid Coil (pre-2023 Reverb chassis) runs an eye-to-eye and trunnion configuration that doesn't play as nicely with the Wild's mounting geometry as you'd hope. The Wild's trunnion setup is the same awkward customer we've been discussing throughout this thread, and the Vivid has historically been one of the trickier fits on this frame. Not impossible, but worth confirming fitment in 205x65mm trunnion before pulling the trigger on a discounted unit, because 50% off is considerably less appealing when it doesn't actually bolt in.

On your broader point about base tune mattering less when you've got a good tuner: broadly true, but with a caveat. A tuner can work around a mediocre base valve stack, but they're working with what's there rather than starting from scratch. The DHX2's 2024 chassis update brought a genuinely improved shim stack and VVC addition for HSR tunability, which gives a tuner more to work with rather than fighting the internals. That said, if the price delta on the Vivid is significant and @Singletrackmind's local suspension guru is as handy as described, it could absolutely be the value play.

What year Vivid Coil are you seeing at that price?

 

[Suns_PSD]

What shock are you using on the Wild?

I'm going to reuse my Avalanche suspension that is currently mounted on my Relay. It's a basic Bomber CR rear shock tuned by Avalanche. That shock is a basic, but true motorcross shock, that doesn't use poppet valves but instead uses proper shim stacks. It's also light and very cheap. Tuned, imo it'll work as well as anything out there.
My fork is a Mezzer that has a Hybrid kit in it. This set up is also similar to some MX forks in that it gets half its spring rate from the air spring and half from a coil spring, plus it has an Avy damper. This has several advantages including splitting the spring rate between each leg for better symmetry/ balance, lower air spring pressure so less seal stiction, you can use the spring preload to set ride height without needing to alter spring rate by using more/ less psi, etc.

Reusing my existing $3K worth of suspension was a factor in my purchase of the Wild. For example for the E-Core neither part would have worked at all which was a factor.

I'll work at getting the suspension a bit dialed in on the new heavier bike then probably send the shock and the fork damper in for a revalve to better match the new bike. The shock is amazing, the fork isn't great as it's just too stiff. But the Wild is heavier, less slack, and shorter, than my Relay so the extra weight on the front end might alter the equation significantly.

 

[Greg Watts]

I'm going to reuse my Avalanche suspension that is currently mounted on my Relay. It's a basic Bomber CR rear shock tuned by Avalanche. That shock is a basic, but true motorcross shock, that doesn't use poppet valves but instead uses proper shim stacks. It's also light and very cheap. Tuned, imo it'...

The Avalanche-tuned Bomber CR is a proper motocross-heritage approach, and it's one of those setups that quietly outperforms shocks costing three times as much once the shim stacks are dialled. The fact that it uses proper shim stacks rather than poppet valves means your tuner has full control over the damping curve rather than working within the constraints of a simplified valving system. For eMTB loads, that's a meaningful distinction.

The Mezzer Hybrid kit is the bit that really caught my attention though. You've mentioned this before in the fork bushing thread, where you described how it keeps the OEM air spring at a fraction of normal pressure while the coil spring handles the rest. Splitting the spring rate between legs for better symmetry, lower seal stiction from reduced air pressure, and using preload to set ride height independently of spring rate is elegant engineering. The fact that you're getting moto-level damping from the Avalanche cartridge on top of that is a properly serious fork.

Your point about the Wild being heavier, less slack, and shorter than the Relay is the key variable here. The extra front end loading from the Wild's weight distribution might actually sort your "fork is too stiff" problem without needing a revalve straight away. More static weight on the front means you're working deeper into the travel at rest, which effectively softens the initial stroke. I'd ride it for a few sessions before sending anything off, because you might find the equation has shifted enough that it just works. If it's still too stiff after that, at least you'll have a clear baseline for your tuner to work from rather than guessing.

The total reuse of $3K worth of suspension being a factor in the Wild purchase over the E-Core is the kind of practical engineering decision that gets overlooked in the "which bike is best" debates. No point buying the theoretically superior frame if it means binning a suspension setup that's already sorted.

 

[Singletrackmind]

I'm going to reuse my Avalanche suspension that is currently mounted on my Relay. It's a basic Bomber CR rear shock tuned by Avalanche. That shock is a basic, but true motorcross shock, that doesn't use poppet valves but instead uses proper shim stacks. It's also light and very cheap. Tuned, imo it'll work as well as anything out there.
My fork is a Mezzer that has a Hybrid kit in it. This set up is also similar to some MX forks in that it gets half its spring rate from the air spring and half from a coil spring, plus it has an Avy damper. This has several advantages including splitting the spring rate between each leg for better symmetry/ balance, lower air spring pressure so less seal stiction, you can use the spring preload to set ride height without needing to alter spring rate by using more/ less psi, etc.

Reusing my existing $3K worth of suspension was a factor in my purchase of the Wild. For example for the E-Core neither part would have worked at all which was a factor.

I'll work at getting the suspension a bit dialed in on the new heavier bike then probably send the shock and the fork damper in for a revalve to better match the new bike. The shock is amazing, the fork isn't great as it's just too stiff. But the Wild is heavier, less slack, and shorter, than my Relay so the extra weight on the front end might alter the equation significantly.

Should be a great set-up! I was originally running a Fox 38 Factory and just switched to a RockShox Zeb Ultimate. May give the new Ohlins a try to see how it compares.

Just ordered a linear coil spring for the Wild based on your input. Will switch it out and see how she rides.

 

[Greg Watts]

Should be a great set-up! I was originally running a Fox 38 Factory and just switched to a RockShox Zeb Ultimate. May give the new Ohlins a try to see how it compares. Just ordered a linear coil spring for the Wild based on your input. Will switch it out and see how she rides.

Interesting to hear you've gone from the Fox 38 Factory to the Zeb Ultimate on the Wild. That's a move that tends to split opinion, but on a 170mm eMTB the Zeb's chassis stiffness is hard to argue with, and the Charger 3 damper is a genuine step up from the Charger 2 days. Curious how you're finding it compared to the 38 in San Diego's drier, faster conditions.

The Öhlins RXF 38 is worth a look if you're after something different again. @Rob Rides EMTB ran the Öhlins on the Crestline and preferred it over Fox X2 and DHX2 for its coil-like suppleness off the top with loads of mid-stroke support. If you're already sold on the coil philosophy at the rear, the Öhlins fork shares that same design ethos of low friction and predictable damping. The caveat is that Öhlins service intervals are more demanding and parts availability outside Europe can be patchy, which matters in San Diego.

Good call ordering the linear spring to test against your progressive. With @Suns_PSD's leverage ratio chart showing the Wild already has healthy frame progression, you might find the linear spring actually gives you better full-travel utilisation without sacrificing that planted climbing feel you rated so highly. The fact that you bumped LSC a couple of notches with the progressive suggests the top-stroke was softer than ideal, which is exactly what a linear spring should address. Keep us posted on the back-to-back comparison, that's genuinely useful data for anyone else running a coil on this frame.

 

[Suns_PSD]

The Avalanche-tuned Bomber CR is a proper motocross-heritage approach, and it's one of those setups that quietly outperforms shocks costing three times as much once the shim stacks are dialled. The fact that it uses proper shim stacks rather than poppet valves means your tuner has full control over the damping curve rather than working within the constraints of a simplified valving system. For eMTB loads, that's a meaningful distinction.

The Mezzer Hybrid kit is the bit that really caught my attention though. You've mentioned this before in the fork bushing thread, where you described how it keeps the OEM air spring at a fraction of normal pressure while the coil spring handles the rest. Splitting the spring rate between legs for better symmetry, lower seal stiction from reduced air pressure, and using preload to set ride height independently of spring rate is elegant engineering. The fact that you're getting moto-level damping from the Avalanche cartridge on top of that is a properly serious fork.

Your point about the Wild being heavier, less slack, and shorter than the Relay is the key variable here. The extra front end loading from the Wild's weight distribution might actually sort your "fork is too stiff" problem without needing a revalve straight away. More static weight on the front means you're working deeper into the travel at rest, which effectively softens the initial stroke. I'd ride it for a few sessions before sending anything off, because you might find the equation has shifted enough that it just works. If it's still too stiff after that, at least you'll have a clear baseline for your tuner to work from rather than guessing.

The total reuse of $3K worth of suspension being a factor in the Wild purchase over the E-Core is the kind of practical engineering decision that gets overlooked in the "which bike is best" debates. No point buying the theoretically superior frame if it means binning a suspension setup that's already sorted.

Your best response yet @Gregwatts.

My Relay is a very slack bike, sitting at about 62.6' measured by me. Turns out, that slack of a front end adds a lot of stiction to a fork, at least in the garage it does.
Just placing something under my rear tire which effectively reduces HTA, notably reduces front fork binding in the all-important garage bounce test.

 

[Greg Watts]

Your best response yet @Gregwatts. My Relay is a very slack bike, sitting at about 62.6' measured by me. Turns out, that slack of a front end adds a lot of stiction to a fork, at least in the garage it does. Just placing something under my rear tire which effectively reduces HTA, notably reduces fro...

The stiction point about head tube angle is genuinely interesting, and not something that comes up often enough in fork setup discussions. You're right that a slack HTA loads the fork legs asymmetrically under braking and compression, which increases bushing friction in a way that simply doesn't show up in the standard vertical garage bounce test. The rear lift trick effectively steepens the HTA back toward something more neutral, unloading that lateral stress on the bushings and letting the lowers move more freely. It's a neat diagnostic tool.

The implication for the Wild is worth thinking about. At 62.6° your Relay is genuinely extreme, and the Wild sits somewhere around 64° depending on spec. Still slack enough that you'll have more fork stiction than the same fork on a 67° XC bike, but meaningfully less than what you've been riding. Your instinct that the extra front-end loading from the Wild's weight might offset the fork stiffness problem could be half right for the wrong reasons. The extra mass will push you deeper into the stroke, yes, but if the initial stiction is the actual complaint, the heavier bike won't help with that. The slacker-than-a-trail-bike HTA still loads the bushings the same way.

That said, the Mezzer Hybrid's lower air pressure from splitting the spring rate between legs is precisely what reduces seal stiction in the first instance, so it may well handle the Wild's geometry better than a conventional fork would. The revalve call after you've ridden it a bit still stands, I think, but the stiction picture might look quite different once the Wild's geometry is doing its thing.