suspension question for 01CR250

Joined
Jun 26, 2001
Messages
31
Likes
0
#1
does anyboby know whats the max weight set up for the rider is the01 CR 250. I weight 210 LBS,i ride recretional tack rider at just below novice level. I was told that because of my size that i would be better off to send it to a suspension shop for revalve and stiffer springs. I spoke to another rider and was told that i could set up the bike to my weight with the stock stuff. please shed some on this.( the rider formerly known as raykx now I ride red sweeeet!;)
 
Joined
Dec 27, 2000
Messages
78
Likes
0
#3
I ride C-Class, weigh about the same as you, and still have the stock suspension (have changed the fluid). I don't really have any major complaints. It could be made better for trails, but I primarily ride tracks and like it the way it is. Could it be better - maybe - worth spending the money for me at this time? No.

RogerB
01 CR250
 
Joined
Jun 26, 2001
Messages
31
Likes
0
#4
its not that i don't like the suspesion, i just want to know if i could set up the bike to my weight with the stock stuff or sent it out to have it modified?:think
 
Joined
Nov 25, 2000
Messages
85
Likes
0
#5
The owners manual says that they are set up for 150-160 lb rider stock. I vaguely remember weighing 160 but the bikes didn't have 13" of travel then either! So as far as that goes 90% of us weigh too much for stock suspension. However we use it with no problems. Unless you are dicing with McGrath, I'd say get your settings to the best you can and have fun. I have a couple friends that weigh 210 and they change to a stiffer rear spring for a cheaper fix. A trip to the suspension shop is "always" wonderful if you got the dough-ray-me!
 

slideways11

Sponsoring Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2000
Messages
411
Likes
0
#6
For play ridding you could probably get by with some stiffer springs. If you are serious about racing the stock cr suspension is the pits. Dont ride your friends 01yz250 or you will really hate yourself for buying the cr. I sent my shock and forks to SO. Cal Suspension Service in Lake Elsinore, ask for Steve he will sort you out. And even though I ordered 2 yzs for 02, the shocks and forks are going to Steve first.
01cr250 turning blue in 02
 
Joined
Jun 26, 2001
Messages
31
Likes
0
#7
slideways 11

reading your tread what was the problem w/CR that you didn't like? I take that your not crazy about the CR frame. I got off a 96 kx 250 and the first time I took the bike out I said that dam the ride was way diff. AND I said what the hell did I get myself into. But I grown to like the bike alot. It took me awhile but I'm happy w/the CR. I don't plan to race the bike just some hard play riding at the track.;)
 

JTT

Subscriber
Joined
Aug 25, 2000
Messages
1,407
Likes
0
#8
Raykx, check you static and race sag #s. This will give you a good indication of whether you need to go to stiffer springs or not. Revalves are usually a good thing, but work with springs first, then clickers, then, if you still can't get it to where you are satisfied, step up to the revalve...unless of course you can afford it, just go for it. If it is done by a reputable suspension shop, you will be happy with the results. JMO

At 210, you will likely benefit from heavier springs. I know my CR is much better with heavier springs (particularly rear) and I am 185-190.
 

slideways11

Sponsoring Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2000
Messages
411
Likes
0
#9
raykx For hard play riding I think you will be happy with your CR. All the tracks I race on are outdoor supercross tracks. I dont so much think the al. frame is a problem, it is more of a combination of bad suspension components and a ridiculous powerband. On a big mx track the bike works alot better, but on these short, tight jump filled tracks down here the bike just doesnt work well. I time all my practice sessions that way I can tell which mods help and which ones hurt. After the revalve I dropped 3 seconds off my lap times, which is a big improvement. I also have ordered another cylinder from E. Gore ported for low to mid power as soon as it gets here I will let you know how that works.
 

AAT

Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2001
Messages
8
Likes
0
#10
raykx,

I go about 185lbs. and ride my CR250 '01 in the C class. I was bottoming my front and rear more than three to four times a lap. The big jumps were not a problem if my timing was on and I was hitting the down-side, but if my timing was off - bad news.
I added 5.1 rear and .45 in the front the bike got better but danced around on the small stuff so I revalved it several times till I was happy.

I think you should try springs then oil height with clicker adjustments and then only as a last resort - revalve.

With the right springs and valving, you and anyone else will be faster
 
Joined
Jul 30, 2001
Messages
143
Likes
0
#11
'01 CR250 Suspension

I weight 210 and ride mostly motocross at the Novice level. My '94 stock suspension stunk compared to the '01 stock suspension. I went with heavier springs and revalving on my '94 and it made a world of difference. I haven't ridden my '01 more than 10 times yet but could tell right away that the rear was way too soft. The front is not that bad but I do blow through both the front and rear in the high speed compression. G-Outs, square-edged holes, and the whoops seem to bottom the rear too easy. The front doesn't seem to bottom as easy but I have done it over jumping. Adjusting the high speed dampening on the rear helped but it's still not enough. If you don't ride that aggressive, then the stock stuff could be okay with tuning.
I have .45kg/mm fork springs and 5.1kg/mm rear spring on order and will probably invest in revalving soon.
 

shaggy829

Subscriber
Joined
May 28, 2001
Messages
130
Likes
0
#12
raykx

you should run .46 and 5.1 springs the revalve is optional but will go a long
way with arm pump and confidence.
 

AAT

Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2001
Messages
8
Likes
0
#13
I agree with the .46 in the front, but the rear will require at least a 5.2 for a slow rider of that weight (with valving work it could be very plush) and a 5.4 for a novice of that weight doing some MX (jumps) riding. Trail stuff the 5.2 will be ok.
 

shaggy829

Subscriber
Joined
May 28, 2001
Messages
130
Likes
0
#14
att
5.2 would be a little stiff 5.4 definatly too stiff.5.1 ideal. how do you calculate spring rates accordihg to rider skill.
I have always caculated springs according to rider weight. :think
 

AAT

Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2001
Messages
8
Likes
0
#15
Shaggy829

Yes I know most people simply look at the rider weight and not skill level. I also know that some people forget to take into account the rising rate of the linkage and the length of the singarm and the size of the rear wheel. A good example is my 2001 CR250 compared to a 2001 DRZ400, if one person owned both bikes and used the same skill level on both bike and used the CR for MX and the DRZ for two track, back roads and trail rides - the rear spring would still be heavier on the DRZ.

Spring rate is used to hold up the weight of rider and bike as we all know. However, your specific valving and oil flow philosophies (restrict flow with a low flow base valve or increase flow with a high flow base valve) also affect the spring rate to a minor degree. The valve stack can also be used to compensate to some degree for the wrong spring or to achieve a specifically design suspension feel based on rider preference. Mac would HATE Larocco's bike and visa versa.

Next, spring rates based on rider skill level is NO NEW SECRET to suspension tuners. You find a rider who is fast and does all the big jumps but has poor riding skills and never hits the downside of a double and you better give him a heavier spring till he learns to ride. Know find a very fluid rider who always lands on the front wheel or better yet, land equally on both wheel with the bike at the same angle as the down slope and has great timing - know he can run a lighter spring if he prefers. Some of the same concepts go for setting rider/race sag. You can't just do what the numbers say and set all bikes and riders to the same thing.

If it was that easy, then every degreed mechanical engineer who truly understood thermal dynamics, fluids, defection, modulus of elasticity, calculus and mechanics of materials and so on would all use the same base valve and shim combos. Think of it like a engine dyno, the bike with the most or widest horse power on the dyno isn't always the best on the track.

This is just my opinion and we know what opinions are like.