Dengfu E82
- Thread starter kaaskopf
- Start date
- Thread starter
- #32
Madrone Jab derailleur with UDH stiffening link. good stuff , 0 play, works on linkglide 10S and was very easy to setup. 10/10 would recommend!
Final weight = 26 kg
for a Full coil-Tank build with over 1000wh i would say that is decent
Last edited:
Rear shock 230x62,5 right,?
And the diameter of the drop post 21,6?
Thanks
And the diameter of the drop post 21,6?
Thanks
bram.biesiekierski
Active member
Is it riding yet?
THoughts om the Jab derailer?
THoughts om the Jab derailer?
I meant 31,6 , sorry . Really a nice ride !!!!
Are you gonna sell the old one?
( just asking)- Thread starter
- #39
not selling anything!
old e10 still works well and will be the backup bike
this e82 is almost finished, one of the last jobs was bleeding of the rear brake... everything went smooth till last steps..
broke 2x T15 torx on the bleed port of the TRP brakes trying to open the bleed port
need new caliper or lots of luck
the only and last thing of this e82 build
old e10 still works well and will be the backup bike
this e82 is almost finished, one of the last jobs was bleeding of the rear brake... everything went smooth till last steps..
broke 2x T15 torx on the bleed port of the TRP brakes trying to open the bleed port
need new caliper or lots of luck
the only and last thing of this e82 build
bram.biesiekierski
Active member
Bummer. That sounds pretty bad if it warrants a new set of brakes. Are the brakes new or second hand. Bleed screws is definetly not a spot for locktight. The seal is made via a conical wedge being driven into a conical seat.
You shouldnt have issues with Hope. I have had about 3 or 4 sets over the years. And have never had issues.
You shouldnt have issues with Hope. I have had about 3 or 4 sets over the years. And have never had issues.
so i fckd up both bleed ports of the TRP DH Evo brakes
they were like almost new but somebody loctited the bleed ports into
place and i couldnt remove them from
the calipers. both stuck even with heat
broke 3 t15 bits so i gave up and ordered a new set of Hope V4 brakes for this build, fcking up my budget but they will look nice
which means dropping the motor again and reroute the brake hose and shortening other hoses
basicly 1 step forward 6 back
bram.biesiekierski
Active member
I love hope v4s. I have the t3-v4 on my remedy and e22. Strong and reliable
Hi Kaaskopf, what shifter are you using and how is your experience with the shifter?looks and feels premium, shifts great! setup was easy
with the udh stiffening link 0 play so shifting should stay good for longer
I'm interested in the 10spd LG setup, 11-39T, I just don't need all that gear range on my bike, and want something durable. However I would prefer the XT Shifter of the 11 speed, and was curious.
- Thread starter
- #46
i currently have the biggest headset creak when leaning on the bars
i checked everything cleaned (new parts?) and put grease everywhere and its still there when i bounce the front around
currently on the cane 'creek'
headset
i will put the original parts and see if its still there
edit; pulled out the cane creek headset and the lower inside bearing cup lip of was 1mm longer compared to dengfu headset causing it to not sit right, installed dengfu's headset and sound is gone!
edit2:
there are multiple users from facebook reporting, both works components, hope and cane creek headsets all bottom bearing cups are 1mm to tall to fit right in E-82 frame causing creeking and more problems
be warned
i checked everything cleaned (new parts?) and put grease everywhere and its still there when i bounce the front around
currently on the cane 'creek'
headseti will put the original parts and see if its still there
edit; pulled out the cane creek headset and the lower inside bearing cup lip of was 1mm longer compared to dengfu headset causing it to not sit right, installed dengfu's headset and sound is gone!
edit2:
there are multiple users from facebook reporting, both works components, hope and cane creek headsets all bottom bearing cups are 1mm to tall to fit right in E-82 frame causing creeking and more problems
be warned
Last edited:
Kostya_1975
E*POWAH Master
the battery compartment lid might be squeaking
bram.biesiekierski
Active member
You may be able to turn a larger chamfer on the OD of the headset cups. I had to do this with the works cups into my e55 because the counterbores into the carbon frame were too short for the aftermarket cups. BUT, i havent actually ridden the bike properly yet, so I cannot say 100% this will work. I dont have any squeaking while bouncing around in my driveway yet. I just havenr actaully got the bike out on the trail yet for a proper ride.i currently have the biggest headset creak when leaning on the bars
i checked everything cleaned (new parts?) and put grease everywhere and its still there when i bounce the front around
currently on the cane 'creek'
i will put the original parts and see if its still there
edit; pulled out the cane creek headset and the lower inside bearing cup lip of was 1mm longer compared to dengfu headset causing it to not sit right, installed dengfu's headset and sound is gone!
edit2:
there are multiple users from facebook reporting, both works components, hope and cane creek headsets all bottom bearing cups are 1mm to tall to fit right in E-82 frame causing creeking and more problems
be warned
- Thread starter
- #49
thanks! will have a look at that
my bike is full of foam everywhere to make it silent
most things i learned from my older e10 that is really silent, only motor rattle sometimes
will do some more testing with dengfu headset tomorrow
- Thread starter
- #50
proper ride out, it drives amazing! love it!
here on my bike carrier and e10 for comparison
e82 is longer, slacker and motor axle is also 1.75cm lower
love the bike so far!
improvements could be better tires + shimano lever/maven combo
did i say how good it shifts gears?! omg
roofcarrier; Manebo Chrono SX ebike (max 25kg) (no batteries inside)
Last edited:
artyyartyy
Member
hi,
Nice build. You mounted 260x65 coil shock. I analysed this frame and it is linear so air shock should be more appropriate (in theory at least). Did you jump or make anything like this? Did your coil shock bottom out? What is your weight and spring rate? I put coil shock in my frame and with my weight (88kg) and spring rate (700lbs) and it bottomed out on 0.5m drop so I am a little concerned with it. I decided to try with an airshock (in process now).I'am very curious about your opinion...
Nice build. You mounted 260x65 coil shock. I analysed this frame and it is linear so air shock should be more appropriate (in theory at least). Did you jump or make anything like this? Did your coil shock bottom out? What is your weight and spring rate? I put coil shock in my frame and with my weight (88kg) and spring rate (700lbs) and it bottomed out on 0.5m drop so I am a little concerned with it. I decided to try with an airshock (in process now).I'am very curious about your opinion...
artyyartyy
Member
one more question what is head angle in your bike?
- Thread starter
- #53
head angle is around 63.5* as the stock geo is 64 with 180 front shock. i run mullet so -0.5* ish. calcalated not measured
your coil calculations are off. you forgetting to look into leverage rate.
every frame has different values . one shock that works for my frames doesnt for yours
my weight is around 110kg ready to ride
i used a 650lbs coil. frame travel 190mm with 65 stroke
go look up the tf tuned coil calculator and fill out everything.
i run about 28% sag in the rear and do not bottom out at all.
i would say its more progressive compared to e10. when i bounce around on it there is less travel and it feels more supportive conpared to e10
i use coil shocks on all my bikes
your coil calculations are off. you forgetting to look into leverage rate.
every frame has different values . one shock that works for my frames doesnt for yours
my weight is around 110kg ready to ride
i used a 650lbs coil. frame travel 190mm with 65 stroke
go look up the tf tuned coil calculator and fill out everything.
i run about 28% sag in the rear and do not bottom out at all.
i would say its more progressive compared to e10. when i bounce around on it there is less travel and it feels more supportive conpared to e10
i use coil shocks on all my bikes
artyyartyy
Member
Thanks a lot for your answer, i did not mention that my coil shock is 210x50 (160 wheel travel) so it is OK with calculator but what it says is 803lbs spring, my is 700lbs and it is a little too soft. let's count 65x650=42250 and 50x700=35000that means your max foce is 17% bigger. BTW What is your biggest drop or jump made on this bike like?
- Thread starter
- #55
i did a 1meter huck to flat yesterday and some smaller drops didnt bottom out, so whatever the calculations says it works for me
also all the creeking sound is gone for now
what i did;
replaced headset + bearing cups for dengfu.
greased up 3x engine bolts
greased up shock bolts/bushings
and put some thicker foam on battery cover. nothing rattles or makes sound anymore
also all the creeking sound is gone for now
what i did;
replaced headset + bearing cups for dengfu.
greased up 3x engine bolts
greased up shock bolts/bushings
and put some thicker foam on battery cover. nothing rattles or makes sound anymore
Last edited:
bram.biesiekierski
Active member
An 800 inch pound spring is a very stiff spring. I would be extremely surprised if a 80-90kg person could get anywhere near bottom out on almost any mountain bike. Most bikes kinda keep in a similar range of lever rates. Even if you were needing such a large spring, at that sort of level, the damper is going to have a very hard time controlling it. Rebound would struggle for sure.
I think something is very wrong with your calcs, or perhaps wrong length spring into the shock, or even wrong length eye to eye shock.
I think something is very wrong with your calcs, or perhaps wrong length spring into the shock, or even wrong length eye to eye shock.
artyyartyy
Member
First, as i found e82 was designed as 160 travel frame, it has two optional shock length (210, 230) I chose 210 x50 rock shox, trailhead calc and others showed 800lbs spring (which is not accsessible) so i used 700 lbs spring which is the biggest one. Secundo, with this spring shock bottomed out on small drops. Now i decided to use air shock 210 x55 and check results. Please, tell me where i am wrong in the proccess.
bram.biesiekierski
Active member
For the record, I dont have any first hand experience with the e82. So take my opinion as just that, a random guy on the internets opinion. But what I do know is that for any given frame, your travel is determined by the shock stroke, not the shock eye to eye measurement. Also, it is rather uncommon for a frame to accept multiple different eye to eye length shocks. Sometimes people will put older imperial unit shocks into metric frames and vice versa, in order to tweak them. But a 20mm variation in shock length does sound kind of weird to me.
210mm eye to eye shock is rather unusual for a bike with intended 160-170mm travel. Generally, (and I mean this as commonly applied accros the industry, not specific to any one bike.) But generally, shorter travel bikes, EG <140mm will use a shorter shock like a 210mm eye to eye. It is very common for mid travel bikes, Eg approx 140-160mm will use 230mm eye to eye measurement. And lastly, longer travel >170mm / DH bikes will often use 250mm eye to eye shock.
There are ofcourse exceptions to this. But the reason this is prety much common practice is because those length shocks (more specifically the common stroke range of those shocks) correspond well to the intended travel frame, with regards to leveridge ratio. In an ideal setting, the frame designers should always use the largest shock stroke to achieve the desired travel. And the only time that using a shorter shock becomes desireable is to do with packaging in the frame. Some linkage designs dont leave much room for a shock, and this is why trunion mount exists. So the frame designers can fit a larger stroke shock into a smaller physical space.
As you have found out, springs are often sold in common sizes typically around 400-650 pound inch range. Out side of this, your options become less and less, and finding extreme spring rates can become difficult or impossible.
And thats not the only issue. The damper inside most shocks will also be designed around the common range of spring rates the average user is likely to run. Outside of this the damlper is likely going to struggle to control rebound, or have insufficient adjustments.
WIth out knowing more specifically of the e82 or your set up, i would suggest using a 230mm eye to eye shock, and selecting the stroke length to adjust your travel. A quick look on Dengfu website specify a 230x60mm eye to eye shock. So im not even sure where you got the idea to buy a 210mm shock??? As i said above, this sounds very weird to me.
Putting a 210x50mm shock into a frame designed around a 230x60mm shock is instantly going to cut like 1/3 off the top of the travel range. And also probaly over compress the linkage at bottom of shock travel. Maybe even bind the linkage or collide with the frame before bottoming out the shock. After re-reading your comments. I am certain all your problems are because you have used a 210mm eye to eye shock in a frame designed for a 230mm eye to eye shock.
Some shocks will actually have washer/shim that you can use to adjust the stroke travel. For example, you might get a 230x65 shock, but they will include for example a 5mm shim/washer that you can use to reduce the shock to 60mm instead of 65mm.
Lastly, you could also slightly tune the eye to eye of a 230mm shock down a few millimeters by the use of offset bushings in the mounting hardware. This will slightly adjust where abouts in the travel range that the shock operates in, and could be handy if you wanted to slightly reduce the shock stroke. Eg 230x57.5mm or similar. Basically reducing the travel off the start of travel vs the end of travel, if you specifically wanted to run a shorter than intended stroke.
210mm eye to eye shock is rather unusual for a bike with intended 160-170mm travel. Generally, (and I mean this as commonly applied accros the industry, not specific to any one bike.) But generally, shorter travel bikes, EG <140mm will use a shorter shock like a 210mm eye to eye. It is very common for mid travel bikes, Eg approx 140-160mm will use 230mm eye to eye measurement. And lastly, longer travel >170mm / DH bikes will often use 250mm eye to eye shock.
There are ofcourse exceptions to this. But the reason this is prety much common practice is because those length shocks (more specifically the common stroke range of those shocks) correspond well to the intended travel frame, with regards to leveridge ratio. In an ideal setting, the frame designers should always use the largest shock stroke to achieve the desired travel. And the only time that using a shorter shock becomes desireable is to do with packaging in the frame. Some linkage designs dont leave much room for a shock, and this is why trunion mount exists. So the frame designers can fit a larger stroke shock into a smaller physical space.
As you have found out, springs are often sold in common sizes typically around 400-650 pound inch range. Out side of this, your options become less and less, and finding extreme spring rates can become difficult or impossible.
And thats not the only issue. The damper inside most shocks will also be designed around the common range of spring rates the average user is likely to run. Outside of this the damlper is likely going to struggle to control rebound, or have insufficient adjustments.
WIth out knowing more specifically of the e82 or your set up, i would suggest using a 230mm eye to eye shock, and selecting the stroke length to adjust your travel. A quick look on Dengfu website specify a 230x60mm eye to eye shock. So im not even sure where you got the idea to buy a 210mm shock??? As i said above, this sounds very weird to me.
Putting a 210x50mm shock into a frame designed around a 230x60mm shock is instantly going to cut like 1/3 off the top of the travel range. And also probaly over compress the linkage at bottom of shock travel. Maybe even bind the linkage or collide with the frame before bottoming out the shock. After re-reading your comments. I am certain all your problems are because you have used a 210mm eye to eye shock in a frame designed for a 230mm eye to eye shock.
Some shocks will actually have washer/shim that you can use to adjust the stroke travel. For example, you might get a 230x65 shock, but they will include for example a 5mm shim/washer that you can use to reduce the shock to 60mm instead of 65mm.
Lastly, you could also slightly tune the eye to eye of a 230mm shock down a few millimeters by the use of offset bushings in the mounting hardware. This will slightly adjust where abouts in the travel range that the shock operates in, and could be handy if you wanted to slightly reduce the shock stroke. Eg 230x57.5mm or similar. Basically reducing the travel off the start of travel vs the end of travel, if you specifically wanted to run a shorter than intended stroke.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #59
in your screenshot it states 33% sag at 757..
first of all your values are wrong that you inputted;
shock length is 230x65 or 230x60 for e-82 giving 180 or 190mm rear travel
also u have more succes running less sag. i always aim for 28% for coil shocks
if you run the right shock u will find it will not bottom out but instead it boosts performance at cost of weight
first of all your values are wrong that you inputted;
shock length is 230x65 or 230x60 for e-82 giving 180 or 190mm rear travel
also u have more succes running less sag. i always aim for 28% for coil shocks
if you run the right shock u will find it will not bottom out but instead it boosts performance at cost of weight
Similar Threads
-
-
The Golden Goose. 72v Dengfu E55 CYC X1 Pro.
- Started by bram.biesiekierski
- Replies: 112
-
-
Markhor Kunlun M510 - 190mm - Super Enduro Build-Log- Started by kaaskopf
- Replies: 172