fox v rockshox forks
- Thread starter Kentrider
- Start date
I would say no, kind of similar thing. Btw you are aware that you can upgrade your Revelation fork by simply getting a new damper and a set of low friction seals. That would make it equivalent to a Pike Ultimate.
Karsten
No special tools needed and its a 30 min job with basic mechanical skills. Take a look around on you tube, lots of videos that shows the process.
Karsten
steve_sordy
Wedding Crasher
@Kentrider What problem do you have with the Revelation forks that you believe the Fox 34 will fix? You don't say which Revelation or which Fox 34, but the Revelation has 35 mm stanchions so they are straight away a bit stiffer than the Fox34.
I used to have top of the range Pikes on my clockwork bike and now I have the Revelation RC Debonair on my Focus Jam2. Before I rode it I was thinking of an upgrade. It was a mistake to think that way before I had ridden the bike and played around with the fork.
I have done two things to the fork that have made a big difference and now I'm happy to keep it as is.
1. I deflated the fork and re-inflated it following the Rockshox detail steps. (I suspect that the LBS just inflated it in one go).
2. I removed the single token to allow the fork to compress more while I was riding it.
I had started by playing around with %sag, rebound and compression damping, which I do anyway on any fork. But I was still not 100% happy. The fork wasn't using as much of its travel as I believed it should and it still felt harsh. The above two steps sorted both those problems.
I used to have top of the range Pikes on my clockwork bike and now I have the Revelation RC Debonair on my Focus Jam2. Before I rode it I was thinking of an upgrade. It was a mistake to think that way before I had ridden the bike and played around with the fork.
I have done two things to the fork that have made a big difference and now I'm happy to keep it as is.
1. I deflated the fork and re-inflated it following the Rockshox detail steps. (I suspect that the LBS just inflated it in one go).
2. I removed the single token to allow the fork to compress more while I was riding it.
I had started by playing around with %sag, rebound and compression damping, which I do anyway on any fork. But I was still not 100% happy. The fork wasn't using as much of its travel as I believed it should and it still felt harsh. The above two steps sorted both those problems.
Last edited:
It’s a Coke vs Pepsi kind of thing, I think.
Because of my riding style; wheels on the ground most of the time; I’ve always benefited from taking out all of the volume spacers in my fork.
How do you think it "benefits" you?
I'm always boosting off anything and everything so I run no fork volume spacers.
all volume spacers do is change the volume of air in the (positive) air spring changing spring curve.
Adding volume spacers increases spring curve making the initial spring rate softer and the end stroke ramp up faster. This gives more small bump compliance as you can run the fork softer and then as deeper into the travel the spring ramps up more it will deal with bigger hits. Running a fork like this is not not so good for support when pushing into a lip/kicker (or natural feature you use to pop off of) though.
Removing all volume spacers makes the entire spring curve more linear (not actually linear though, air springs never are) thus offering more support earlier into the travel/stroke. (especially if running less sag, as I do). You need good support early into the travel for jumping. The trade off is higher initial spring rate and less small bump performance. Jumpers (like me) don't care too much about this and generally have a strong upperbody/core to deal with it anyway.
Last edited:
ebikerider
Active member
This is badly worded and confusing. Adding tokens does not make the initial spring rate softer.
No volume spacers at 100 psi....25mm sag
4 volume spacers at 100psi...25mm sag
Same breakaway force for both examples and initial spring rate stays the same.
The difference with the tokens being added is the progression increases as you mention. This progression gives a much better platform to push into lips or kickers. To get that support from no tokens you need to run a much higher pressure than is needed which then compromises the damping at some point in its working range (if not all if pressure is very high).
What size jumps do you do?
If you are running 100psi and not bottoming out with no volume spacers you (obviously) won't need 100psi to resist bottoming out with 4 volume spacers fitted in the same fork. so Yes. By fitting volume spacers you will reduce spring rate at the forks beginning stroke. Otherwise why fit them at all?
Ramp up deep into the travel of a softer intiial spring rate does not behave the same way as support from a stiffer spring rate with less sag in a less progressive spring curve.
No it doesn't.
Ramp up deep into the travel of a softer intiial spring rate does not behave the same way as support from a stiffer spring rate with less sag in a less progressive spring curve.
ebikerider
Active member
100psi in a fork with zero tokens has the same initial spring rate as a fork with 100psi and maximum tokens. The initial spring rate only changes with a change in pressure, yes it ramps up quicker but the initial is the same. Pressure must change. You are writing like people can read your mind and your unwritten words.
Low speed compression gives lots of 'pop' off lips and kickers and progression saves my body on landings. That's how I roll
No dude. I wrote my reply expecting the reader to have basic English comprehension skills.
I didn't say initial spring rate changed with 100psi in both set-ups. I was expalining that if you had been running 100psi with no spacers and were using full travel but weren't bottoming the fork out harshly you'd have to reduce air pressure to still achieve full travel if you added 4 volume spacers. This is why volume spacers create a softer initial stroke and more small bump compliance.
Ramping up LSC will kill some of that small bump performance.
I get why you think your set-up is correct. And if you're happy with it that's fine. We're not all the same and we clearly don't have the same riding styles.
Despite running barely any compression damping and no tokens at all I generally use less travel landing than I do popping/boosting off stuff but that's because I pretty much always prefer to aim to land smoothly on a downslope. Not to horrible head nodder gas to flat landings
Macone
E*POWAH Master
its not worth arguing with old FIGJAM it just gives him more opportunities to tell us how good he is. I find the "dont feed the Bears method" better in his case100psi in a fork with zero tokens has the same initial spring rate as a fork with 100psi and maximum tokens. The initial spring rate only changes with a change in pressure, yes it ramps up quicker but the initial is the same. Pressure must change. You are writing like people can read your mind and your unwritten words.
Low speed compression gives lots of 'pop' off lips and kickers and progression saves my body on landings. That's how I roll
Similar threads
EMTB Forums
Latest articles
-
The new 2025 Orbea Rise - my wish come true?
A few months ago, I wrote an article about a great bike that didn’t...- Knut Nes
- 5 min read
- Views: 9K
- Reaction score: 7
- Comments: 20
-
The lightweight Canyon Neuron:ONfly CF is here!
Finally, Canyon is out with their first mid-assist, lightweight emtb...- Knut Nes
- 6 min read
- Views: 4K
- Reaction score: 5
- Comments: 5