Yea the headset is what I'll be tackling next to try and quiet things up. I wonder if there's some sort of design flaw with that area considering the need for so much maintenance and not to mention the fact that I cracked the front of the head tube somehow on my last frame.
strange, i've had no issues with my aluminum slash headset yet. mine is hacked with a filed down knockblock spacer and using a regular chromag stem
Has to be something with the carbon frames. The guy I work closely with at my lbs just got a slash and he's experiencing the same thing after only a handful of rides. One of them being in the wet[/Quote]
I have also experience some creaking from the headset. I detention it and then retention it. It goes away for 2-3 rides then slowly starts creaking again until I detention it. Sort of weird. Its a carbon model.[/Quote][/Quote] have you tried to grease better bearing and carbon frame?
creaking seems pretty normal and trek hardly applies any factory grease - and even if they did, you'd still need to eventually tear the bike down and apply new grease. just how it is.
best thing you can do is tear the bike down and grease it all. if you don't, you'll probably find rust forming on bearing housings by the time you hear creaking.
its really just bike maintenance that all bikes need to have done and it's good to be intimate with these parts on your bike so you can identify little problems before they become big ones.
creaking seems pretty normal and trek hardly applies any factory grease - and even if they did, you'd still need to eventually tear the bike down and apply new grease. just how it is.
best thing you can do is tear the bike down and grease it all. if you don't, you'll probably find rust forming on bearing housings by the time you hear creaking.
its really just bike maintenance that all bikes need to have done and it's good to be intimate with these parts on your bike so you can identify little problems before they become big ones.
After my last bike, a Transition Spire, came with dry pivot bolts and a lack of locktight I was curios to see how the Slash came. Same thing, dry pivots and no locktight. Had the mechanic at LBS pull a pivot bolt before I even took the bike home. After seeing that he agreed to go through the whole bike to check for adequate grease, locktight, and torque of all the critical pieces. QC seems to be an issue these days across bike brands.
creaking seems pretty normal and trek hardly applies any factory grease - and even if they did, you'd still need to eventually tear the bike down and apply new grease. just how it is.
best thing you can do is tear the bike down and grease it all. if you don't, you'll probably find rust forming on bearing housings by the time you hear creaking.
its really just bike maintenance that all bikes need to have done and it's good to be intimate with these parts on your bike so you can identify little problems before they become big ones.
I do agree with you, but you shouldn't have to tear things apart and regrease as frequently as some of us are having to. I've had plenty other bikes and none of them have required as much "grease maintenance" as this model year slash.
creaking seems pretty normal and trek hardly applies any factory grease - and even if they did, you'd still need to eventually tear the bike down and apply new grease. just how it is.
best thing you can do is tear the bike down and grease it all. if you don't, you'll probably find rust forming on bearing housings by the time you hear creaking.
its really just bike maintenance that all bikes need to have done and it's good to be intimate with these parts on your bike so you can identify little problems before they become big ones.
After my last bike, a Transition Spire, came with dry pivot bolts and a lack of locktight I was curios to see how the Slash came. Same thing, dry pivots and no locktight. Had the mechanic at LBS pull a pivot bolt before I even took the bike home. After seeing that he agreed to go through the whole bike to check for adequate grease, locktight, and torque of all the critical pieces. QC seems to be an issue these days across bike brands.
This was my experience with both my spire and partners slash. Similar with both my previous Treks too which were both pre bike boom and covid. The QC really need improving as it’s such a simple thing to get right from factory.
creaking seems pretty normal and trek hardly applies any factory grease - and even if they did, you'd still need to eventually tear the bike down and apply new grease. just how it is.
best thing you can do is tear the bike down and grease it all. if you don't, you'll probably find rust forming on bearing housings by the time you hear creaking.
its really just bike maintenance that all bikes need to have done and it's good to be intimate with these parts on your bike so you can identify little problems before they become big ones.
I do agree with you, but you shouldn't have to tear things apart and regrease as frequently as some of us are having to. I've had plenty other bikes and none of them have required as much "grease maintenance" as this model year slash.
Perhaps you are using a grease that washes away too easily with water? (or use a pressure washer too close to these areas?) I re-greased everything on mine last winter, when I took everything apart mid summer, everything was still covered in grease, I just took of a thin layer that was covered and dirt and added some more. Took the rear end apart last week again, as I was installing a new shock I figured i'd check the pivots and they were still full of grease as well. That's after 1800+ miles season (and I thoroughly clean the bike after each full day ride).
creaking seems pretty normal and trek hardly applies any factory grease - and even if they did, you'd still need to eventually tear the bike down and apply new grease. just how it is.
best thing you can do is tear the bike down and grease it all. if you don't, you'll probably find rust forming on bearing housings by the time you hear creaking.
its really just bike maintenance that all bikes need to have done and it's good to be intimate with these parts on your bike so you can identify little problems before they become big ones.
I do agree with you, but you shouldn't have to tear things apart and regrease as frequently as some of us are having to. I've had plenty other bikes and none of them have required as much "grease maintenance" as this model year slash.
Perhaps you are using a grease that washes away too easily with water? (or use a pressure washer too close to these areas?) I re-greased everything on mine last winter, when I took everything apart mid summer, everything was still covered in grease, I just took of a thin layer that was covered and dirt and added some more. Took the rear end apart last week again, as I was installing a new shock I figured i'd check the pivots and they were still full of grease as well. That's after 1800+ miles season (and I thoroughly clean the bike after each full day ride).
Using PT PPL-1 for most stuff and it's still there when I take things apart. No pressure washer used. Just garden hose on shower setting with muc off cleaning agent. Its washed more often during winter and beginning of the season when trails are more wet, and washed less during the summer. Seems that some simply have more luck with creaks and groans on the bike than others. After all, everyone rides differently and different terrain.
This is the shock: RockShox, Super Deluxe Ultimate RC2T, Rear shock, 230x62.5, Shaft Eyelet: Standard, Body Eyelet: Standard, Linear, Linear Reb/LowComp, 320lb Threshold (I prefer going with the linear air can, which I'm under the impression provides better mid stroke support than the bigger negative chamber air can. Then I add tokens for bottom out resistance.)
Isn't it the other way round, that bigger negative chamber, the more mid stroke support? At least thats the case with the old SDU with a MegNeg.
I've read that too before "bigger negative chamber, the more mid stroke support", but I'm not sure how it makes sense. One thing is for sure, the negative air chamber is there to assist you moving the shock in it's travel. (when the suspension is not compressed or at sag, the pressure in negative and positive chamber is the same or close to the same. This helps reducing the effort required to compress the suspension as the negative chamber is pushing with you)
During compression the positive air chamber compresses and the negative air chamber expands. Just as it takes a force to compress the positive air volume, after a given amount of travel it takes force to expand the negative air chamber (where suction is created in it). If the negative spring volume is increased it reduces the amount force required to expand the negative air volume.
Based on the above, a bigger negative air chamber does make the shock/fork feel more compliant as the larger negative chamber is easier to expand than a smaller one, the extra resistance that the negative chamber creates during compression of the shock and expansion of the negative chamber doesn't ramp up as fast as a smaller negative chamber. (analogous to the concept where adding volume reducers to the positive air chamber makes the suspension harder to bottom out as the pressure increases faster during compression)
Therefore, a smaller negative air chamber doesn't help to increase sensitivity, but it helps adding support as the smaller negative chamber takes more force to expand during shock compression than a larger negative chamber. I might not totally be right, but that's what I gathered by googling around and have felt it on the trail!
Also relevant to this discussion. I often see people running their shocks/forks with LSC fully open thinking it'll help with small bump compliance. That might be true if you ride reaaaaaaaaally slowly. Generally speaking, my take on it is the opposite, fully open LSC has you sitting lower in the travel, reducing small bump compliance (because the deeper in the travel, the more force you need to compress the suspension). If you don't ride extremely extremely slow, any bump/rock/root you encounter while riding will engage the HSC a lot more than the LSC. This is why I typically run LSC almost fully closed (helps keeping the suspension from needlessly compressing during any slow compression, berms, ondulations in terrain, jumps) while I open HSC more. It also makes the bike more stable and predictable on jumps. My sweet spot is to open HSC to a point where the suspension doesn't use toooo much travel on any impact, but feels buttery smooth. Obviously, this depends on how and where you ride, weight, suspension, frame, etc, but generally applies in most scenarios.
Some of my riding buddies argued over me about this for weeks, I couldn't careless. I eventually got fed up of talking about it and forced them to try my recommendations. They now feel like they figured out how to properly setup their suspensions haha. And as we all know, it makes a HUGE difference.
Using PT PPL-1 for most stuff and it's still there when I take things apart. No pressure washer used. Just garden hose on shower setting with muc off cleaning agent. Its washed more often during winter and beginning of the season when trails are more wet, and washed less during the summer. Seems that some simply have more luck with creaks and groans on the bike than others. After all, everyone rides differently and different terrain.
I use UR0906, put it on pivots and bearing faces, then happily use a Pressure washer and itll stay where you put it for a good while, I do a good chunk of testing parts so bikes come apart often and its always still there. - its excellent for the Headset... Especially frames that are IS or use floating cups.
This is the shock: RockShox, Super Deluxe Ultimate RC2T, Rear shock, 230x62.5, Shaft Eyelet: Standard, Body Eyelet: Standard, Linear, Linear Reb/LowComp, 320lb Threshold (I prefer going with the linear air can, which I'm under the impression provides better mid stroke support than the bigger negative chamber air can. Then I add tokens for bottom out resistance.)
Isn't it the other way round, that bigger negative chamber, the more mid stroke support? At least thats the case with the old SDU with a MegNeg.
I've read that too before "bigger negative chamber, the more mid stroke support", but I'm not sure how it makes sense. One thing is for sure, the negative air chamber is there to assist you moving the shock in it's travel. (when the suspension is not compressed or at sag, the pressure in negative and positive chamber is the same or close to the same. This helps reducing the effort required to compress the suspension as the negative chamber is pushing with you)
During compression the positive air chamber compresses and the negative air chamber expands. Just as it takes a force to compress the positive air volume, after a given amount of travel it takes force to expand the negative air chamber (where suction is created in it). If the negative spring volume is increased it reduces the amount force required to expand the negative air volume.
Based on the above, a bigger negative air chamber does make the shock/fork feel more compliant as the larger negative chamber is easier to expand than a smaller one, the extra resistance that the negative chamber creates during compression of the shock and expansion of the negative chamber doesn't ramp up as fast as a smaller negative chamber. (analogous to the concept where adding volume reducers to the positive air chamber makes the suspension harder to bottom out as the pressure increases faster during compression)
Therefore, a smaller negative air chamber doesn't help to increase sensitivity, but it helps adding support as the smaller negative chamber takes more force to expand during shock compression than a larger negative chamber. I might not totally be right, but that's what I gathered by googling around and have felt it on the trail!
Also relevant to this discussion. I often see people running their shocks/forks with LSC fully open thinking it'll help with small bump compliance. That might be true if you ride reaaaaaaaaally slowly. Generally speaking, my take on it is the opposite, fully open LSC has you sitting lower in the travel, reducing small bump compliance (because the deeper in the travel, the more force you need to compress the suspension). If you don't ride extremely extremely slow, any bump/rock/root you encounter while riding will engage the HSC a lot more than the LSC. This is why I typically run LSC almost fully closed (helps keeping the suspension from needlessly compressing during any slow compression, berms, ondulations in terrain, jumps) while I open HSC more. It also makes the bike more stable and predictable on jumps. My sweet spot is to open HSC to a point where the suspension doesn't use toooo much travel on any impact, but feels buttery smooth. Obviously, this depends on how and where you ride, weight, suspension, frame, etc, but generally applies in most scenarios.
Some of my riding buddies argued over me about this for weeks, I couldn't careless. I eventually got fed up of talking about it and forced them to try my recommendations. They now feel like they figured out how to properly setup their suspensions haha. And as we all know, it makes a HUGE difference.
I agree with everything you've said @ppqb! Curious to hear what others think too though.
In a similar vein, I've also had good luck on my Lyrik going back to the older B1 air spring from the newer C1 spring as well in terms of keeping mid stroke feeling more supportive and therefore riding higher in the travel where I want it, especially when pushing hard through rough stuff. Its a personal preference for sure though.
Using PT PPL-1 for most stuff and it's still there when I take things apart. No pressure washer used. Just garden hose on shower setting with muc off cleaning agent. Its washed more often during winter and beginning of the season when trails are more wet, and washed less during the summer. Seems that some simply have more luck with creaks and groans on the bike than others. After all, everyone rides differently and different terrain.
I use UR0906, put it on pivots and bearing faces, then happily use a Pressure washer and itll stay where you put it for a good while, I do a good chunk of testing parts so bikes come apart often and its always still there. - its excellent for the Headset... Especially frames that are IS or use floating cups.
- a little pottle goes a very very long way.
I'm of the mentality that grease is grease. Sure, you should be using higher performance stuff for things like the hub pawls and headset. But otherwise I don't see one bicycle assembly grease having a massive performance difference between brands. Say PT vs Peaty's or such.
Isn't it the other way round, that bigger negative chamber, the more mid stroke support? At least thats the case with the old SDU with a MegNeg.
I've read that too before "bigger negative chamber, the more mid stroke support", but I'm not sure how it makes sense. One thing is for sure, the negative air chamber is there to assist you moving the shock in it's travel. (when the suspension is not compressed or at sag, the pressure in negative and positive chamber is the same or close to the same. This helps reducing the effort required to compress the suspension as the negative chamber is pushing with you)
During compression the positive air chamber compresses and the negative air chamber expands. Just as it takes a force to compress the positive air volume, after a given amount of travel it takes force to expand the negative air chamber (where suction is created in it). If the negative spring volume is increased it reduces the amount force required to expand the negative air volume.
Based on the above, a bigger negative air chamber does make the shock/fork feel more compliant as the larger negative chamber is easier to expand than a smaller one, the extra resistance that the negative chamber creates during compression of the shock and expansion of the negative chamber doesn't ramp up as fast as a smaller negative chamber. (analogous to the concept where adding volume reducers to the positive air chamber makes the suspension harder to bottom out as the pressure increases faster during compression)
Therefore, a smaller negative air chamber doesn't help to increase sensitivity, but it helps adding support as the smaller negative chamber takes more force to expand during shock compression than a larger negative chamber. I might not totally be right, but that's what I gathered by googling around and have felt it on the trail!
Also relevant to this discussion. I often see people running their shocks/forks with LSC fully open thinking it'll help with small bump compliance. That might be true if you ride reaaaaaaaaally slowly. Generally speaking, my take on it is the opposite, fully open LSC has you sitting lower in the travel, reducing small bump compliance (because the deeper in the travel, the more force you need to compress the suspension). If you don't ride extremely extremely slow, any bump/rock/root you encounter while riding will engage the HSC a lot more than the LSC. This is why I typically run LSC almost fully closed (helps keeping the suspension from needlessly compressing during any slow compression, berms, ondulations in terrain, jumps) while I open HSC more. It also makes the bike more stable and predictable on jumps. My sweet spot is to open HSC to a point where the suspension doesn't use toooo much travel on any impact, but feels buttery smooth. Obviously, this depends on how and where you ride, weight, suspension, frame, etc, but generally applies in most scenarios.
Some of my riding buddies argued over me about this for weeks, I couldn't careless. I eventually got fed up of talking about it and forced them to try my recommendations. They now feel like they figured out how to properly setup their suspensions haha. And as we all know, it makes a HUGE difference.
I agree with everything you've said @ppqb! Curious to hear what others think too though.
In a similar vein, I've also had good luck on my Lyrik going back to the older B1 air spring from the newer C1 spring as well in terms of keeping mid stroke feeling more supportive and therefore riding higher in the travel where I want it, especially when pushing hard through rough stuff. Its a personal preference for sure though.
Im not a shock expert by any means, i just change things and try out settings until i feel that they work great in my opinion.
On my previous Fuel EX8 i had a Super Deluxe Ultimate that i ran for about 6m and tried different setups, and couldn't get it as i would want it to be. So i installed the MegNeg and took out the token in the positive chamber and went with 2 bands in negative side and boy o boy did it make a difference.
This is what the larger negative chamber did to the shock compared to smaller: - more bottom out support, earlier i easily bottomed it out and now only when i did a holy f*ck landing. - more mid stroke support that translated to a better pedaling platform with less bobing. - more sensitive a supple on small and larger impacts. - feet don't lift from my pedals, as before they would flap around on rock gardens etc.
So my conclusion is that bigger negativ chamber is better for mid stroke support and suppleness on some bikes, especially the Fuel, and I don't think that the Slash is so different. But I don't know, i haven't got my bike yet but in my case i would go with the larger negative can.
Im a heavier guy (210) that likes DH/Enduro and medium jumps and drops, and i set my shock setting depending on the trail i ride. Rebound depending on the kick back on jumps or enduro tracks with rock gardens etc. And my lsc based on compression in turns/berms and entering jumps. Never closed or fully open on both settings.
I've read that too before "bigger negative chamber, the more mid stroke support", but I'm not sure how it makes sense. One thing is for sure, the negative air chamber is there to assist you moving the shock in it's travel. (when the suspension is not compressed or at sag, the pressure in negative and positive chamber is the same or close to the same. This helps reducing the effort required to compress the suspension as the negative chamber is pushing with you)
During compression the positive air chamber compresses and the negative air chamber expands. Just as it takes a force to compress the positive air volume, after a given amount of travel it takes force to expand the negative air chamber (where suction is created in it). If the negative spring volume is increased it reduces the amount force required to expand the negative air volume.
Based on the above, a bigger negative air chamber does make the shock/fork feel more compliant as the larger negative chamber is easier to expand than a smaller one, the extra resistance that the negative chamber creates during compression of the shock and expansion of the negative chamber doesn't ramp up as fast as a smaller negative chamber. (analogous to the concept where adding volume reducers to the positive air chamber makes the suspension harder to bottom out as the pressure increases faster during compression)
Therefore, a smaller negative air chamber doesn't help to increase sensitivity, but it helps adding support as the smaller negative chamber takes more force to expand during shock compression than a larger negative chamber. I might not totally be right, but that's what I gathered by googling around and have felt it on the trail!
Also relevant to this discussion. I often see people running their shocks/forks with LSC fully open thinking it'll help with small bump compliance. That might be true if you ride reaaaaaaaaally slowly. Generally speaking, my take on it is the opposite, fully open LSC has you sitting lower in the travel, reducing small bump compliance (because the deeper in the travel, the more force you need to compress the suspension). If you don't ride extremely extremely slow, any bump/rock/root you encounter while riding will engage the HSC a lot more than the LSC. This is why I typically run LSC almost fully closed (helps keeping the suspension from needlessly compressing during any slow compression, berms, ondulations in terrain, jumps) while I open HSC more. It also makes the bike more stable and predictable on jumps. My sweet spot is to open HSC to a point where the suspension doesn't use toooo much travel on any impact, but feels buttery smooth. Obviously, this depends on how and where you ride, weight, suspension, frame, etc, but generally applies in most scenarios.
Some of my riding buddies argued over me about this for weeks, I couldn't careless. I eventually got fed up of talking about it and forced them to try my recommendations. They now feel like they figured out how to properly setup their suspensions haha. And as we all know, it makes a HUGE difference.
I agree with everything you've said @ppqb! Curious to hear what others think too though.
In a similar vein, I've also had good luck on my Lyrik going back to the older B1 air spring from the newer C1 spring as well in terms of keeping mid stroke feeling more supportive and therefore riding higher in the travel where I want it, especially when pushing hard through rough stuff. Its a personal preference for sure though.
Im not a shock expert by any means, i just change things and try out settings until i feel that they work great in my opinion.
On my previous Fuel EX8 i had a Super Deluxe Ultimate that i ran for about 6m and tried different setups, and couldn't get it as i would want it to be. So i installed the MegNeg and took out the token in the positive chamber and went with 2 bands in negative side and boy o boy did it make a difference.
This is what the larger negative chamber did to the shock compared to smaller: - more bottom out support, earlier i easily bottomed it out and now only when i did a holy f*ck landing. - more mid stroke support that translated to a better pedaling platform with less bobing. - more sensitive a supple on small and larger impacts. - feet don't lift from my pedals, as before they would flap around on rock gardens etc.
So my conclusion is that bigger negativ chamber is better for mid stroke support and suppleness on some bikes, especially the Fuel, and I don't think that the Slash is so different. But I don't know, i haven't got my bike yet but in my case i would go with the larger negative can.
Im a heavier guy (210) that likes DH/Enduro and medium jumps and drops, and i set my shock setting depending on the trail i ride. Rebound depending on the kick back on jumps or enduro tracks with rock gardens etc. And my lsc based on compression in turns/berms and entering jumps. Never closed or fully open on both settings.
I partially agree with your comments / what you've noticed. These: """ - more sensitive a supple on small and larger impacts. - feet don't lift from my pedals, as before they would flap around on rock gardens etc. """ make sense to me, as the larger negative chamber makes the shock easier to move in it's travel, increasing sensitivity and helping keep the feet on the pedals.
The other items you mentioned: """ - more bottom out support, earlier i easily bottomed it out and now only when i did a holy f*ck landing. - more mid stroke support that translated to a better pedaling platform with less bobing. """ are somewhat contradictory to the ones I agree with. I don't understand how the larger negative chamber can increase bottom out support (nor have I experienced it). I also don't see how it increases mid stroke support, as the larger negative chamber makes the shock more sensitive / easier to move in it's travel (granted it's more noticeable in the beginning of the travel). As you said though, there are other variables in play that affect the feeling and performance of the shock.
I've had a MegNeg too before, on a Kona Process 153 2019 where the rear suspension was horrible for me. My issue was that there was no small bump sensitivity AND the shock would bottom out too easily. Adding pressure to avoid bottom outs made small bump sensitivity even worse, obviously. Adding (tons of) tokens would help with bottom out resistance, but not so much with small bump sensitivity as I could not lower the pressure much or would bottom out too often again. I got the MegNeg, I ran it with 3.5 volume reducers in the positive chamber and 0 in the negative chamber. At that point, small bump compliance was alright and bottom resistance remained decent. This is somewhat the opposite of what you are doing.. interesting! Back then, the Super Deluxe didn't have an external HSC adjustment, but I believe opening HSC would have helped my case. I ended up selling the bike as the rear suspension kinematics weren't suiting me at all. A buddy still has one, he is running the same setup I had (MegNeg and full of positive tokens) AND the cascade component linkage which increases progression. The rear end actually feels decent with his setup, making it even more compliant on small bumps and better bottom resistance.
I agree with everything you've said @ppqb! Curious to hear what others think too though.
In a similar vein, I've also had good luck on my Lyrik going back to the older B1 air spring from the newer C1 spring as well in terms of keeping mid stroke feeling more supportive and therefore riding higher in the travel where I want it, especially when pushing hard through rough stuff. Its a personal preference for sure though.
Im not a shock expert by any means, i just change things and try out settings until i feel that they work great in my opinion.
On my previous Fuel EX8 i had a Super Deluxe Ultimate that i ran for about 6m and tried different setups, and couldn't get it as i would want it to be. So i installed the MegNeg and took out the token in the positive chamber and went with 2 bands in negative side and boy o boy did it make a difference.
This is what the larger negative chamber did to the shock compared to smaller: - more bottom out support, earlier i easily bottomed it out and now only when i did a holy f*ck landing. - more mid stroke support that translated to a better pedaling platform with less bobing. - more sensitive a supple on small and larger impacts. - feet don't lift from my pedals, as before they would flap around on rock gardens etc.
So my conclusion is that bigger negativ chamber is better for mid stroke support and suppleness on some bikes, especially the Fuel, and I don't think that the Slash is so different. But I don't know, i haven't got my bike yet but in my case i would go with the larger negative can.
Im a heavier guy (210) that likes DH/Enduro and medium jumps and drops, and i set my shock setting depending on the trail i ride. Rebound depending on the kick back on jumps or enduro tracks with rock gardens etc. And my lsc based on compression in turns/berms and entering jumps. Never closed or fully open on both settings.
I partially agree with your comments / what you've noticed. These: """ - more sensitive a supple on small and larger impacts. - feet don't lift from my pedals, as before they would flap around on rock gardens etc. """ make sense to me, as the larger negative chamber makes the shock easier to move in it's travel, increasing sensitivity and helping keep the feet on the pedals.
The other items you mentioned: """ - more bottom out support, earlier i easily bottomed it out and now only when i did a holy f*ck landing. - more mid stroke support that translated to a better pedaling platform with less bobing. """ are somewhat contradictory to the ones I agree with. I don't understand how the larger negative chamber can increase bottom out support (nor have I experienced it). I also don't see how it increases mid stroke support, as the larger negative chamber makes the shock more sensitive / easier to move in it's travel (granted it's more noticeable in the beginning of the travel). As you said though, there are other variables in play that affect the feeling and performance of the shock.
I've had a MegNeg too before, on a Kona Process 153 2019 where the rear suspension was horrible for me. My issue was that there was no small bump sensitivity AND the shock would bottom out too easily. Adding pressure to avoid bottom outs made small bump sensitivity even worse, obviously. Adding (tons of) tokens would help with bottom out resistance, but not so much with small bump sensitivity as I could not lower the pressure much or would bottom out too often again. I got the MegNeg, I ran it with 3.5 volume reducers in the positive chamber and 0 in the negative chamber. At that point, small bump compliance was alright and bottom resistance remained decent. This is somewhat the opposite of what you are doing.. interesting! Back then, the Super Deluxe didn't have an external HSC adjustment, but I believe opening HSC would have helped my case. I ended up selling the bike as the rear suspension kinematics weren't suiting me at all. A buddy still has one, he is running the same setup I had (MegNeg and full of positive tokens) AND the cascade component linkage which increases progression. The rear end actually feels decent with his setup, making it even more compliant on small bumps and better bottom resistance.
I think it has to do with the frame kinematics on different bikes depending on if its linear or progressive and how your riding style is.
For example you had alot of tokens in you shock and i had none, and after a day in a lifted Bike Park i had 1mm left of shock travel according to the sag ring, so i would say that i had it dialed in with zero tokens in the positive chamber. On the other hand the recommendation says that i have to increase the pressure by 20%, and by doing that the bike felt way to high in travel and didn't feel good at all, so I went down to 240psi and about 32% sag before it felt good.
Post Message
Quote
