Also possible is to look at the midvalve as its fairly soft and tends to let the fork hand down in its stroke.
I'm pretty much an idiot when it comes to understanding shim stacks
My thoughts also Marcus, undersprung and overdampened.
Originally posted by drehwurm:
Idea No. 1 has been realized with exchanging the 18x0.1 and 16x0.1 shims with a 19x0.1 and 17x0.1 shim. Oil level has been raised by 10mm to fight bottoming, but due to lack of shims idea no.2 and 3. could't be realized so far.
The deflecting is gone, maybe also due to the change to Öhlins no.5 fork oil, but bottoming has increased (not surprisingly because of the weaker HSC). Next steps would be idea no.2 and 3. and I would like to hear comments on this one please.
Michael
* 2001 KTM 520EXC *
Michael, I am no expert, but how do you figure that with the shim change you made that the HSC is weaker?
The other thing is not to forget about rebound. I have read that often headshake is caused by too slow rebound. Have you already tried this avenue?
As for bottoming, be sure that it is the HSC you want to change....
Why not go in on the LS clickers?? Yes, the oil has to flow, but the valving shims are there to open for the high speeds.
Whether you want to add a crossover to the middle of the HS stack or just expand the existing crossover is a matter of preference.
Gut feeling is this design is never going to be as plush as the Marzocci's of years past.
already had the comp valve apart and it had shims just like yours plus the 12 x .1 in the HS stack)
I have a 00 200EXC with the same stack as drehwurm listed with the addition af a 18 x.2shim at the bottom, below the 10mm x.1. My question to drehwurm or james dean is: Have either of you rode the bikes with the mods that were mentioned?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?