bullitboy

Member
Feb 18, 2002
1
0
I performed a search on this and found nothing. So I pose the question, what is the benifit of these thing? For $300 they should be great. I just recently had the MX-Tech re-valve and I noticed MX-Tech is starting to offer the Enzo system on their website.

So, is the show worth the dough? :aj:
 

marcusgunby

LIFETIME SPONSOR
Jan 9, 2000
6,450
2
$300 is alot of money for some empty cannisters with a reducer valve fitted.I have known a few people to try them and have heard no bad comments-only positive.
 

dave186

Sponsoring Member
Nov 19, 2001
903
0
I was thinkin, would it be possible to build your own? I could come up with some sort of small alum. tank and some braided line and fittings for under $300. Do you need to have 2 seperate tanks, or could you run both forks into 1 tank?
 

Jeremy Wilkey

Owner, MX-Tech
Jan 28, 2000
1,453
0
Dave,
It would be very easy to make something Cheaper. The Enzo tanks are designed to be factory level.. Meaning exspensive light materials. The system works to minimize weight, but be effective. The only hard part would be the adjustable restrictive barrier. Also the smaller tanks means more faster pressure rise and greater overall adjustablity, but you could configure it diferently and it should work out about the same. Ross has a patent on the deal as far as I know.. But I'd would'nt personally go down that road... But I'm sure if you want to sweat it out, I doubt he'd get too upset, unless you decide to sell them.. :)

Br,
Jer
 

dave186

Sponsoring Member
Nov 19, 2001
903
0
Whats the adjustable restrictive barrier? Like a valve, kind of like a clicker? What I was thinking was get some like 1.5" aluminum tubing and cutting say a 4" length, then welding a cap on each end. fit up some hoses and voila, you got some sub tanks. if you wanted it to look like carbon fiber, get some stickers :D
 

WhiPit

Member
Mar 16, 2000
236
0
Jer,

"more faster" ?? :p

BTW, you can't just "get some 4 inch tube and weld the ends". Actually, there are some volume issues to be figured out.

I hope Jer will elaborate on the advantages..........

;)
 

Jeremy Wilkey

Owner, MX-Tech
Jan 28, 2000
1,453
0
Whipit,
More Faster, More better, can't hardly? Gezzish.. My poor mother.. She did'nt rasie me to talk like that..

Anyway here's Ross's statement..

2001
Subtank system.

Readers, Here's a paste of Ross's e-mail.. Some of it is rehash but our assements were correct. I would like to thnak Ross thanks for taking your time to join our discussion.

"The concept of my subtank system is to create a "speed sensitive spring characteristic". As you know, the two elements of suspension are SPRING and DAMPING. The SPRING element is load or position sensitive. If 10 lbs. is applied to a 10 lbs. per inch rated spring, it will compress one inch. 20 lbs. = 2 inches, etc. But it is not speed sensitive, because if 10 lbs. is dropped on the spring, it will compress more than 1 inch, but after bouncing up and down for a while, it will settle at 1 inch of compression. Adding speed to the situation changes the reaction. The second element is DAMPING, which is speed sensitive. It is like stroking your hand through water: the faster you stroke your hand, the more resistance the water provides. Speed determines the amount of resistant force. But DAMPING is not position sensitive or load sensitive. If a load is placed in the water, it will sink to the bottom. Nothing will hold it in place, only the speed sensitivity will control how fast it sinks.

So the two elements work together to give total suspension action. But my system creates an additional speed sensitive element within the spring characteristic. In a front fork, the TOTAL spring character is determined by the coil spring rate, and the AIR SPRING RATE combined. The AIR SPRING RATE is the compression of the air volume within the fork determined by the oil level. A low oil level provides a large air volume which compresses at a slower progressive rate. A high oil level provides a small air volume which compresses at a faster progressive rate.

The sub tank system provides additional air volume to manipulate. By dividing the total air volume into two "chambers", and separating them with a "restrictive barrier", it is possible to control the compression of the air volume by metering restriction between the two "chambers". The compressing "charge" is created by the inner fork tube entering the outer fork tube. This charge compresses the oil level chamber in the fork. With the sub tank system installed, a high oil level can be set within the fork. The sub tank provides additional air volume, which when combined with the oil level volume is actually providing a large total air chamber volume. When the fork is compressed slowly or uses shorter amounts of stroke, the total air volume of both chambers is compressed equally, giving the sensation of a very low oil level, and the action is soft. But as the fork compression speed increases, or longer amounts of stroke are used, the restrictive barrier prevents equal compression between the two chambers, so the oil level air chamber compresses at a higher rate than the sub tank chamber volume. This gives the sensation of a high oil level in the fork, and the action is firmer. In other words, when the fork is compressed slowly or uses short stroke, it feels like it h as a low oil level. But when the fork is compressed faster, or uses longer stroke, it feels like it has a high oil level. The tuning elements of the system are the volumes of each chamber (oil level and sub tank volume) and restrictive barrier (flow adjustment on sub tank). My system is installed on the stock cap through the air bleed hole, which is drilled out larger and tapped to accept a larger flow fitting. The hoses attach to the cap fittings, and then to the sub tanks. The adjustment flow is the point of greatest restriction.

I hope that this clears up any confusion about the system. The difference between the KAYABA bladder system and my sub tank system is that the restrictive barrier between the two chambers is HYDRAULIC in the bladder system, and PNUEMATIC in the sub tank system. WHich is better? I believe that PNUEMATIC, air restriction is better because air can compress and will not spike. HYDRAULIC, oil restriction is not compressible, so sometimes it spikes. Also, the bladder system is not adjustable, and the sub tank system is. "


The system works, but I condsider it to be 4th in importance hieracrchy..

1.) Mechincal
2.)Spring
3.)Valving
4.)Sub tank...

As for the multiple tanks being one.. In theory the multiple, tanks could make adjustment more maninpulatable, if you combined both hoses.. However the natural wave nature of gas compressablity may cause the rise to be less pronunced, and may make them softer overal. A system with double tanks may require that you set the forks oil ht more exstremely high rather than say a more moderate setting with a single tank.. Due to the increased area of one tank..

Let pounder this some more.. I'm not as clear as I'd Like to be..

BR,
Jer
 

WhiPit

Member
Mar 16, 2000
236
0
Jer,

Sorry man, couldn't resist........you know what they say about suspension tuners that can't spell!

BTW, if you get a moment, RR is around and would be glad to talk.

;)
 

jmics19067

LIFETIME SPONSOR
Jan 22, 2002
2,097
0
I was thinkin, would it be possible to build your own?

well I really dont think you would have to build them. Why not just retrofit the old remote style shock resorvoirs to your forks? It might not be perfect since the tapered needle flow valve was designed for oil and not air but it just might be a good starting point.
Now if you really want to add some things to play with bottom out the floating diaphragm in the reservoir and you can have two air springs to play with for the fork by adding pressure to the canister. :think:

just a thought from someone who has no formal education in science or suspension theory but just a mechanic who spends most of his time trying to get something to work with not having the right things to do his job. :confused:
 

dave186

Sponsoring Member
Nov 19, 2001
903
0
Now thats an idea, but im not sure it would work, you would probably want to get rid of the bladder inside so that there was enough air volume. My old XR had a big ol knob on the resevoir to adjust the compression. I think I understand how these things work now, because of that "restrictive barrier" it is basically making the air spring of the fork have dampening. So when you hit something big and the suspension moves fast, it has a high rising rate, then when you hit small stuff, the suspension will move faster for a better ride/better traction. am I right?
 

Onore GT

Member
Feb 20, 2001
27
0
I have a set of the old subtanks without the restriction adjustment. I must say it was one of the best mods I have made to my KX. The KX seems to handle better when the forks ride higher in the stroke. The bladder forks hold the forks up really well, unfortunately they have a hard feeling whenever the speed of the fork is high. With the subtanks I went from getting armpump and struggling through long motos to feeling like I could charge the entire moto. The fork is much more compliant and is slightly less progressive but I was able to play around with the oil height and clicker adjustments to still maintain plenty of safety. Front wheel traction was better also. $300 is a lot of money to drop on one item but I can definately say this is one mod that works.
 

SFO

LIFETIME SPONSOR
Feb 16, 2001
2,001
1
I was thinking about air orifice metering devices and remebered the old AOF turbo boost regulators we would make out of fish tank aeration controllers.
Then I thought, hey, I use these things all the time...
Building air over oil hydraulic systems for custom automated machines.
this stuff is all available through McMaster Carr.
Just add a PLC and a linear encoder and you can build an interactive sub tank.
 
Top Bottom