Review: Cane Creek's New Helm MKII Fork - The Extra-Adjustable Alternative
Cane Creek's Helm fork debuted three years ago, and since that time a 29” version and a coil-sprung option have been added to the mix. For 2020 the fork has received several significant updates to ensure that it can continue to hold its own in the competitive trail / enduro segment of the market.
The chassis and overall look remain relatively the same (other than the limited edition hot pink option); it's on the inside where the bulk of the updates took place. Those include a new compression and mid-valve circuit, lighter weight damper oil, and a redesigned air piston, all changes intended to help the fork achieve the ideal balance of buttery smoothness and support.
The Helm MKII is available for 29” or 27.5” wheels with between 130 – 160mm of travel that can be adjusted internally. It's priced at $899 USD, or $950 if you want to snag a hot pink one.
The chassis and overall look remain relatively the same (other than the limited edition hot pink option); it's on the inside where the bulk of the updates took place. Those include a new compression and mid-valve circuit, lighter weight damper oil, and a redesigned air piston, all changes intended to help the fork achieve the ideal balance of buttery smoothness and support.
The Helm MKII is available for 29” or 27.5” wheels with between 130 – 160mm of travel that can be adjusted internally. It's priced at $899 USD, or $950 if you want to snag a hot pink one.
Helm MKII Details
• 140 - 160mm travel (internally adjustable)
• 35mm stanchions
• Air sprung (coil sprung options available)
• 29" and 27.5" versions
• Externally adjustable rebound, low-speed compression, high-speed compression
• 15 x 110mm spacing
• Offset: 44 or 51mm
• Weight: 2,040 grams (actual, 29", air sprung)
• MSRP: $899 USD
• www.canecreek.com
• 140 - 160mm travel (internally adjustable)
• 35mm stanchions
• Air sprung (coil sprung options available)
• 29" and 27.5" versions
• Externally adjustable rebound, low-speed compression, high-speed compression
• 15 x 110mm spacing
• Offset: 44 or 51mm
• Weight: 2,040 grams (actual, 29", air sprung)
• MSRP: $899 USD
• www.canecreek.com
Damper Adjustments & Internals
On the damper side, the Helm has 12-clicks of low-speed compression, 10-clicks of high-speed compression, and 10-clicks of rebound adjustment. The damper itself still uses a sealed cartridge with an expanding bladder system to compensate for the oil that's displaced during compression, but SKF now takes care of the seals, and 2.5-weight Motorex oil is now used, which is a lighter weight than before.
Air Spring
It's the air spring design that sets the Helm apart from the likes of RockShox and Fox. Instead of a self-equalizing system, where a bypass port or dimple on the fork's stanchion would allow air to pass from the positive into the negative chamber, on the Helm the positive and negative air chambers need to be equalized manually, a step that adds an extra minute or two to the setup process. The positive chamber is inflated first, just like you would with nearly every air-sprung fork on the market, and then a valve at the base of the fork needs to be pushed in to allow air to move into the negative chamber. Make sure not to weight the fork during this step, or you risk inadvertently reducing the travel.
It makes setup take a little longer, but the manual equalization does allow for an extra level of fine-tuning – it's possible to run slightly more pressure in the negative spring to make the initial part of the fork's travel extra-sensitive. Take care not to go overboard with the negative spring pressure, though, or you'll reduce the amount of available travel.
Unthreading the gold nut allows the valve to be pushed in. Its action is similar to a Presta valve, and it allows air to pass from the positive chamber into the negative chamber.
Compression adjustments are found on the right side of the fork.
The Helm MKII uses a bolt-on, four-sided thru-axle.
End Stroke Ramp-Up Adjustment
The Helm's end-stroke ramp-up can be altered by unscrewing the air cap (let the air out first, obviously) pulling out the upper assembly, and then unthreading a wing-nut. Once that's loosened, the air volume piston can be slid to a different position on the aluminum rod to increase or decrease the amount of progression as the fork nears the end of its travel. It's a clever system, and the fact that it's self-contained eliminates the need to rummage through your toolbox in a search of the right size plastic spacers.
Travel Adjustment
Cane Creek's internal travel adjust system is incredibly easy to use. It uses clip-on spacers rather than requiring a completely different air spring, and in less than 30 minutes you could shrink a 160mm fork all the way down to 130mm. My test fork was set to 140mm, which meant that it had two 10-millimeter spacers installed.
If the legs are removed carefully with the fork held horizontally, there shouldn't be any oil loss, barring any moments of clumsiness. I've definitely spilled my fair share of fork oil over the years, but in this case, I was able to pull the lowers off and access the travel spacers without losing a drop. The air spring seal head is no longer threaded, which means that all it takes is the removal of a retaining ring and it can be pulled out enough to swap travel spacers.
No plastic pieces are required for air volume adjustments.
The red spacers are used to adjust the travel in 10mm increments.
Setup
As I mentioned, setting up the Helm is a little more time consuming than it is on a fork with a self-equalizing air chamber. I experimented with running a few pounds more pressure in the negative chamber than the positive, but I ended up preferring how the fork felt with equal air pressure in both.
At 160 pounds, I ended up running 70 psi, slightly above the 40% of body weight that Cane Creek recommends starting with. I started with the volume spacer in the highest (least progressive) position, and after some experimentation settled on positioning it two slots down. As far as compression settings go, I typically ran 6-clicks of LSC and 4-clicks of HSC, both numbers from fully open.
Performance
Many of the changes that Cane Creek made to the Helm were done to make it feel more responsive and less over-damped compared to the original. The previous generation received praise for the support it delivered, but it worked best at higher speeds and under bigger riders. With the new version, there's a very usable range of compression adjustments, and the overall ride should suit a much wider range of setup preferences. It's still possible to make it extra-stiff and supportive – the high-speed compression adjustment is very effective – but it's now easier to get it moving into its travel, and it does a good job at smoothing out small bumps on chattery sections of trail.
It's the Helm MKII's composure when faced with repeated sharp impacts that impressed me the most. Even with only 140mm of travel, it stayed right in the sweet spot, comfortably sucking up those potentially jarring hits without blowing through all of its travel. There wasn't any harshness, and if anything it feels better the harder it's pushed into obstacles; it felt nice and open in those moments, able to suck up whatever got in the way next.
Let's take a moment to compare the Helm to a RockShox Pike, especially since I've spent time with both forks on the front of my Optic. Compared to a Pike, the Helm's low-speed compression range isn't as wide – it's possible to get a slightly firmer or slightly softer setup on the Pike – but on the flip side the Helm has a wider high-speed compression range. Given the overlap between those adjustments, I'd call it a draw. I didn't notice any significant stiffness difference between the two, but I'm also on the lighter side of the spectrum.
Honestly, other than the fact that the Helm weighs 150 grams more than a Pike, there isn't one standout feature that elevates one over the other on the trail – it's possible to get a very similar feeling setup on both forks. The prices are nearly identical as well; I'd say that at the end of the day it really comes down to personal preference. If I was going to nitpick, I prefer the feel of the Pike's compression dials over the Helm's, and the Pike is also slightly quieter during rebound, but those are minor details.
With the Helm, you do get the nifty volume adjustment feature, and the ability to independently tweak the negative and positive air pressures, something that riders who are extra-finicky about their setup will appreciate.
Issues
I did run into an issue partway through testing – the fork developed a knock at the beginning of the stroke during compression. Luckily it was more noticeable in the parking lot than on the trail, but it still wasn't ideal. I sent the fork back to Cane Creek for a diagnosis, and they traced the noise down to an out-of-spec part in the rebound circuit. With that part replaced, the noise was eliminated. I'll update this review if the issue arises again, but so far that fix seems to have worked.
Pros
+ Wide range of effective adjustments
+ Changing travel doesn't require a whole new air spring
+ Very good responsiveness to bigger impacts
Cons
- Slightly more involved setup process
Pinkbike's Take
 | Cane Creek's updates to the Helm make it a more viable option than ever, whether you're building up a burly little trail bike or a longer travel all-mountain rig. The ability to easily adjust the travel and the fact that the air volume adjustments don't require any additional parts only add to its appeal. |
Author Info:
Must Read This Week
[UPDATED] Final Elite XC Results & Overall Standings from the Mairiporã XC World Cup 2024
42199 views
42199 views
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup
Well done CC, took an already incredible fork, and made it even better, and not charging an armload at that. It's always awesome when a top level company get's it. Listening to your customers get's you a double thumbs up.
Fork just went on my future upgrade list, and that's over RS, Fox, SR, DVO, ect. Can't wait to see them on the used market, in a few years...
I’m waiting on the EXT fork now.
Would like to see a split crown race on the 110 headsets.
Usually solves it.
PS: I still have a straight 1&1/8th external bearing Chris King headset in my parts bin just waiting for a worthy retro MTB or BMX build...winter 2020 project.
I don't ever do headset "maintenance." If it's creaking, I buy one that doesn't creak, which is how I started using King headsets back in the late 90s. I've never had to replace a King headset and the only time they've ever gotten any thought at all is that when I move them to a new frame I put new grease on them.
Chris King parts are worth the money because you don't have to replace them...in my experience.
Man, i'm totally sold (fistpump).
OTT when you dial in too much with low pressure on positive chamber. Will suffer travel suckdown as well.
I was under the impression that SR Suntour manufactured the fork components for Cane Creek and they assembled the forks in NC. Curious to learn how it's actually done.
It would be nice if Cane Creek added some bleeder valves (like on some newer Fox models) to make this easier. A lot of people travel back and forth from sea level to the mountains...
Apples and Oranges here man. Can't compare your trailer to a steer tube. For one, your trailer spindles are likely solid steel. Second, the load case scenarios are completely different. It's all about wall thickness and material that's going to determine shear characteristics. I'd put money that if I ran a few calcs on a steer tube, it's not on the "hairy" edge of failing. You can bet the engineers that design these things build in a safety factor. But, they are optimizing for strength to weight.
The 1.8 that just came out though, laughable. Last thing you want is your bearings to have to get smaller. Already happened with 1.5!
I get there will be lemons in every batch of products. But, having seen the guys actually at CC applying locking compound by hand, with my own eyes, I feel compelled to mention it. To me, that's worth something. My sympathies if your experience has not been the same.
If that 5mm is significant or not is a different discussion.
Far as I can tell, they had one product that had issues, and they fixed that years ago. I've been in the Cane Creek assembly factory for a tour last year and the place was great. I can tell you with the forks, they go though steps RS and FOX don't, like using proper press compounds on stanchions crowns and steers, so forks don't develop a creak. Everything gets dyno'ed. Those guys have a great operation going.
The CCDB inline failures were a blip. CC is past it, as far as I can tell. Way past it!
The other two failures were the threaded air spring seal head flaring the stanchion. There's a big warning in the manual about not overtightening it, however the first fork that failed hadn't been touched since leaving the factory and the second had such severe expansion of the stanchion with the correct torque that it was difficult to assemble and needed to be pulled HARD to get it to move to full extension. This was solved by.... getting the coil version of the fork instead.
And speaking from owning 4, they have been much more reliable than either of the RockShoxs we have had in our stable over the last 5-6 years.
Every company has a lemon or two. I've gotten too many from pretty much every brand but CC. That's just been my luck.
Unfortunately, this review kinda shows the problem with reviews. Mine were a review set too, and within the review period of around two months, I had the damper issue which I said was small and was repaired quickly. Just like this one. I otherwise gave them a great review because I REALLY liked the performance. I bought the review set, pulled it apart for a lowers service to find the destroyed stanchion thanks to the air spring, and then proceeded to have either a broken fork or no fork for a while after that, with the fork either being DOA or developing the damper issue within a small handful of rides.
I'm very aware of my personal bias towards Fox, because their stuff has been considerably less of a pain in my arse than anything else I've owned. Luck? I dunno. I do just kinda wish that stuff was more reliable so that when my stuff doesn't break it's not called "luck".
I haven't had any Fox failure like Rockshox. Have had some creaking 34's, girlfriend has creaking 32's, but at least they didn't spew oil out of the damper, or have an exploding air spring like RS. Fox tolerances seem to be much better than RS.
MRP and Cane Creek have been good for me. Fingers crossed the continue to be!
To me the helm feels just as stiff as my lyrik and rides better.
I normal talk to Colin Reis as my point of contact (POC).
Hoping they have a new bigger fork on the Horizon?!? I run a 170mm 27.5 Helm, it’s been great. I would not compare it to the Pike, feels stouter to me, but maybe that comparison is a foreshadow of things to come.
That's stupid. They're different adjustments, having more of one or the other doesn't balance anything.
And how do you know the damping range is greater? Number of clicks? That doesn't mean a f*cking thing about range. Did you put them on a dyno and measure damping force at each end of the adjustment for each fork for a variety of shaft speeds? No? You just counted clicks and assumed that more clicks meant more range, didn't you? Well, you're doing it wrong.
``
So I just assume if you were on a boat and someone said Helm you would start giggling yeah? lol
Frankly my dear, I don’t Riverdance’ - Alan Partridge.
There’s a very British and no doubt to anyone from any other country, a very confusing reference about Lord of the Rings.
One thing of importance, long term reliability given Cane Creek past, is not addressed other than noticing a clank. And it cannot be. These "tests" are basically press releases and are no longer than a "spin around the block" ...