First Ride: RockShox's Updated DebonAir Air Spring - Pond Beaver 2020

Apr 8, 2020 at 14:39
by Mike Kazimer  


The details of RockShox's 2021 Lyrik, Yari, Pike, and Revelation were announced today, and while the chassis and dampers are unchanged, all of the forks received a subtle but significant update: a new DebonAir air spring.

An updated air spring may not cause the same level of drooling as a completely new fork, especially one with oversized stanchions, but the fact that the new air spring makes a noticeable difference in performance, and can be retrofitted to previous RockShox forks, makes it worthy of closer look.
DebonAir Air Spring Details
• Compatible with Lyrik, Yari, Pike, and Revelation forks
• Updated seal head and foot nut
• Improves ride height and initial support
• MSRP: $42 USD / $25 USD for seal head & nut
sram.com/rockshox

When the old and new air springs are placed side by side the differences are clear. The new version has a taller seal head, as well as a longer foot nut. Those changes were made to move the spring higher in the stanchion; it now sits on the dimple that allows air to move from the positive to the negative air chamber. That 10mm change in height makes the fork sit higher in its travel then before, and it no longer feels like it wants to suck down into the first 5-10 millimeters of travel.

The complete air spring assembly can be purchased for $42, or riders with model year 2020 forks can purchase just the seal head and foot nut for $25. It's a pretty simple procedure to pull out the old air spring and install the new one, and realistically, now is probably the perfect time to perform a lower leg service. Budget around 30 minutes for the entire procedure, more if you're still trying to figure out the whole "lefty loosey, righty tighty" thing.

The air spring is available as a complete unit, or the seal head and foot nut nut can be purchased separately.

That's the previous generation air spring on the left, and the new on on the right.
There's more room on the underside of the new seal head in order to maintain the same amount of ramp up at the end of the stroke as before.


Ride Impressions

In order to see how much of a difference the new air spring makes I headed out for some back to back testing. I had two Lyrik Ultimate forks, both with 160mm of travel, and both with similar amounts of ride time on them before the back-to-back comparison began. Air pressures in both were set exactly the same, as were the rebound and compression settings.

On the trail, the increased ride height was much more noticeable than I'd anticipated. Yes, part of that ride height change is due to the diminished positive air chamber volume, which means that running the same air pressure as before will result in slightly less sag, but there's more to it than that.

With the new air spring, the fork no longer sinks into its travel when there isn’t any weight on it. It stays closer to the proper amount of sag on smoother sections of trail, which means there was more travel available when an obstacle was encountered. The fork was still nice and supple off the top, and its behavior at the end of the stroke was the same – the fun-o-meter was in the same location after bigger hits on both forks. The extra support is especially beneficial in steeper terrain, where the last thing you want is fork that's riding too low in its travel and steepening the bike's head angle.

Overall, I'd say that making the switch to the new air spring is a highly recommended upgrade. There aren't too many things you can do to your fork for less than $50 that will result in such a noticeable, and beneficial change.





Pinkbike Pond Beaver 2020






372 Comments

  • 376 4
 Props to Rockshox for continuing to make incremental upgrades like this backwards-compatible.
  • 169 2
 Yep, I'll buy one. It's got a bigger red thing. Take my money.
  • 82 0
 I think that's the biggest advantage of Rockshox at the moment. They're doing a great job making thing backwards compatible and it's hugely appreciated.
  • 13 2
 Will this work in my 2014 Pike?
  • 14 84
flag duzzi (Apr 9, 2020 at 8:20) (Below Threshold)
 Of course they make them backward compatible, how would they scum people into buying useless upgrades otherwise?
  • 13 71
flag downcountry (Apr 9, 2020 at 8:21) (Below Threshold)
 Props on the bad initial design and copy of Fox.
  • 27 18
 It is nice you can upgrade the older forks, good job rockshox, however can't help but feel this is more of a fix for a mistake on the older ones than a upgrade, bad job rockshox. I know you can argue all improvements take development time so it's never made perfect first time but surely something as simple as the position the negative and positive chambers equalize at is obvious it shouldn't happen 10mm into the travel as the fork will always want to sit in the position where the chambers are equal, loosing you that top travel.
  • 45 7
 Both Fox and Rockshox make great products, but I ride Rockshox because of ease of service and stuff like this.
It also bugs me how Fox is doing E-Bike specific forks when Rockshox is just like yep, all Yaris, Lyriks, and Boxxers are "E-Bike rated" (whatever that means) Simplicity for the win!
  • 6 0
 Good stuff. I like it.
  • 7 0
 @maglor: yeah, I am trying to figure out how this updated air spring would play out. The 2019/2020 air spring equalizes deeper into its travel, giving a higher negative spring pressure. I am guessing RS did this with a goal of making things as sensitive off the top as possible, with the fork not fully topping out as a byproduct.

The 2020 design reduces the negative spring pressure, which would result in less help from the negative spring to get the fork moving into its travel off the top, but the fact that it tops out higher means that the initial stroke is at a lower-pressure point in the positive spring's travel. So the sensitivity off the top may remain similar.

I guess this is a tricky thing to get right, and I understand what Rockshox was probably thinking with the 2019/2020 air spring design. I will say that the 2019/2020 air spring was a pretty big upgrade over the one before it.
  • 9 1
 @DMal: Yeah, this seems like a step back to me. Equalizing the negative chamber at top out means there will be more preload, and it does look like they've reduced the negative volume a tiny bit as well.

The real fix to the suck down problem would be bring back the old dual air springs, but unfortunately most people didn't understand how to set those up properly.
  • 2 0
 @honourablegeorge: Can't argue with that logic, sign me up too! Wink
  • 2 9
flag bohns1 (Apr 9, 2020 at 10:28) (Below Threshold)
 @cole-inman: except, servicing fox shocks is simple.
  • 6 1
 @maglor: You can test something until the cows come home but it’s not until it’s in the hands of the customers does the real testing begin. $20 upgrade can’t complain.
  • 2 0
 @duzzi: I mean they could just not make them backwards compatible and make you buy a whole new fork right?
  • 6 0
 @maglor: I ride a Lyrik Ultimate at the moment with the “bad” airspring from last year in it. It’s easily the best fork I’ve ridden. I’m sure this will improve on the former design, but I don’t know if it’s fair to call the last airspring “bad”.
  • 3 0
 Agreed. For $100 I can update my 2020 lyrik and pike to be the same as 2021. I just wish this was announced earlier as I just did the lower service on both this week with all my free time.
  • 4 1
 @SonofBovril: it sure will!
  • 4 0
 @dlxah: surely though they can't go around calling a fork 160mm when in actuality it sits at almost 150mm. Also, bike manufacturers must base their designs around a fixed measure for a fork, so when it turns out that the fork isnt the travel its supposed to be, all of their other measurements (head angle, wheelbase etc) that are based off of that fixed measurement are suddenly all wrong.

maybe they should've just increased stroke length to compensate and kept the sensitivity so its sucks down to 160mm (for example), but that wouldn't have been backwards compatible.
  • 4 0
 @maglor: Will it work on my rigid fork?
  • 5 3
 Would be nicer if they didn't make huge overcompensating changes only to then backtrack a bit the next year. DebonAir spring in forks is only 2 years old. They rushed it out to compete with Fox's EVOL, but went too far and ended up making many people's forks ride almost 10mm shorter and with less effective sag than they should have. Now they're finally done it right and are acting as if it's some awesome new development. No, it's just not a broken design like the existing spring.
  • 3 1
 @maglor: Most shocks equalized partway into the travel. There are other forces at play: IFP or bladder pressures, and on forks, the air in the lower-leg acting as a spring. The problem with DebonAir was they tried to make it too supple off the top with a giant negative spring volume, and went too far, probably trying to beat Fox's EVOL, and with obviously terrible testing. Making it equalize at top-out is not the actual fix, it's just convenient to kill 2 birds with one stone: the proper negative spring configuration, and easier setup without needing to cycle the spring to allow equalization. They could still have done it with the equalization happening at some small percentage travel. Fox and everyone else does, including RS on shocks.
  • 1 3
 @DMal: 2019 was only an upgrade in off-the-top suppleness. Trading that for losing travel and having an inaccurate sag (if you set 20% but it never extends past 10%, then your sag is really 10%, robbing you of traction-helping extending-travel when ripping through holes) is a terrible trade-off.

And does off-the-top really matter in most riding? You'll be around sag or past it most of the time. It usually takes (at least front wheel) air-time to let the fork fully extend, and that point does it matter if if takes a fraction of a pound more force to initiate the movement? Probably not, the rest of the landing is waiting for you. Does it matter if you also lost 10mm of travel to get it? Most likely yes!
  • 2 2
 @thenotoriousmic: For something completely subjective, like the feel of a saddle or grip, yes. But for something objective, like "does this stupid spring configuration cause partial stuck-down issues?", that 100% should be caught by quality control. Shit, that should have been caught in the design and prototype stage.
  • 2 1
 @BigE-Rosen: They could design and test properly and not make you spend $50 bucks and some time (which is money) to get the listed travel of your 8 month old fork. (I bought a 2019 model year bike, in Sept 2019, with a 2019 Pike, so not even 8 months yet).

Now the damper upgrade that is also available is a slightly different story, because Charger 2 works as advertised, and 2.1 is just a refinement/improvement/upgrade, not a fix for something that was broken from the start.
  • 1 0
 @just6979: I think that they are designing and testing an improvement that’s available for everyone
  • 2 1
 @just6979: buy old version in Sale, rct3 even, ditch air and put coil.. Forget about positive negative chamber bs and rely on an initial travel section that actually starts on a state of relaxation (you are not ready for this conversation jahahahah). Just kidding. Cheers. Coil for the win
  • 5 3
 Sounds more like a fix for a flawed initial design. It would have been nice if they offered this as a kind of recall item to fix all the forks that didn't have this.
  • 2 0
 @maglor: I always hate it when my travel loosens off.
  • 2 1
 @just6979: if it was a big issue I agree but we are talking about the bike sagging a couple of mm under it own weight. It’s a small welcome improvement that we can live without.
  • 2 0
 @dlxah: I had the same thought with the negative spring reduction. Interesting for them to reduce the neg spring volume given the recent fascination with increasing it. MegNeg's etc... Heck, I think Fox's new 2021 EVOL fork spring has more negative volume as well.
  • 1 0
 @jlbanta: I have seen the autosag in 2019 grip2 fancy kashima fox.. over fork that bike to compensate ahahha
  • 5 0
 Wow you guys really are mad!! I had 160mm, changed it for 170 and have about 165 because of Luftkappe. Small bump, mid stroke and bottom out is now wayyyy better! This new air spring, as I understand from forums and review here, is a bit worse for small bump and mid stroke but you've got your extra 5mm you wanted.... Really!?!?! What is wrong with you? lol If 5mm is the end of the world for you, just change your air shaft to have 10mm more and your geo won't change much + you'll keep a better small bump and mid stroke travel! Razz
  • 1 0
 @honourablegeorge: That's what she said!
  • 2 0
 @oatkinso: My feelings exactly. You cant tell me they didn't notice..? surely they rode the protos and did proper assessments of what was going on in there. As you mention. My bike is designed for a 150-160mm fork. So being conservative, I took the 150mm. Guess what. I have 140mm which is really soft off the top and now starts messing with my geo. I agree that its a great fork. I just don't like that they brought this out 2 years later as an upgrade, while it fixes an oversight from 2018.
  • 2 0
 @bosdude: it doesn’t work like that. The first 5mm of fork travel won’t effect where you set your sag so it won’t effect your geo.
  • 3 0
 Just installed this, big difference, thought my BB was low, but turns out it was the fork sagging too much. Dropped a few psi with the new one and it rides much better, how it should have originally!
  • 1 0
 @Carswell: I wonder if they'll have to review the recommended psi's in the trailhead app or whether they were recommended based on the fork being the actual travel its stated to be.
  • 1 0
 @thenotoriousmic: Sagging under its own weight isn't the problem. In fact most longer travel bikes _should_ sag a couple mm under their own weight: if you're setting a 150mm fork at 30mm (20%) sag under your own weight (let's say 170 lbs for an average estimate), then the weight of the bike (let's say 30lbs), is also going to push into that sag a bit. On average a bike is somewhere around 1/7th (taking the wheels out of the equation) of the total rider+bike system, so the bike alone should probably sag about 1/7th of the way: 30mm / 7 = ~4.3mm. Could be even more because the spring rate of a fork is at it's minimum at the top.
  • 4 0
 @Timo82: "a bit worse for small bump and mid stroke" - you nailed it! Small bump and midstroke are the main things that DebonAir (and EVOL, MegNeg, etc) was supposed to make better. Now all of a sudden, midstroke support is worth giving up for ease of inflation and always hitting mechanical top-out? Instead of pneumatic top-out which may "rob" a couple mm of "drop" travel (since it's above sag)... It still doesn't change the travel between sag and bottom out, and fact might make it feel worse in that aspect since midstroke support is less.
  • 1 0
 @tgent: screenshotting (spelt with two t's yeah?) and sending it to them. the world needs to hear it.
  • 59 0
 Don't see many negatives to this one
  • 26 17
 It’s just that they will be releasing a new one next year. I’m buying Luftkappe
  • 6 1
 They changed service instructions from 2019 onwards, where instead of just using grease on the o-rings they also say to drop oil on top of the air spring. Now if the new spring's o-ring sits right at the dimple in rest, how fast will the oil drain to the negative spring?
  • 1 0
 @WAKIdesigns: yeap I was thinking about the Vorsprung Luftkappe.
But on those new forks debonair the red cap seals shaft, you need to retrograde to the previous and first shaft, the one with the black end seal cap. Apparently... tbc
  • 1 0
 @enduro29jeff: I dont think you need the seal head unless you have this latest version. I only got the older air shaft for my debonair pike.
  • 1 0
 @enduro29jeff:

The Luftkappe A2 is for the debonair spring pike, I hope so anyways because I just bought one.
  • 2 0
 @Maverick18T: Did you also get a new air spring? It can't be installed on the debonair spring. You need the older springs. The p/n are listed on the site what spring to get for which type Luftkappe.
  • 1 0
 @Maverick18T:
Luftkappe Compatible with all debonair shafts 11.4018.026.00x (x=1,4,etc)

I got a shaft 00.4019.932.002 in my Lyrik apparently I can’t fit a luftkappe piston. I would have to use the older shafts 11.4018.026.004

Can someone confirm, please.
  • 2 0
 @mfoga:

I have a 2018 model year boost pike, I think it’s the first version of debonair not the red cap.
  • 3 1
 @mfoga: I am surely talking straight from my ass but I held them in my hands next to each other and standard shaft with Luftkappe seems to have much more volume than previous Debonair. .
  • 2 0
 @enduro29jeff: That is what the site says. You would need the A1 version of the Luftkappe.

For 2019+ Lyrik/Yari of ANY wheel size, use Luftkappe A1 variant with the following:
11.4018.026.001 - Air Shaft Solo Air - Lyrik/Yari(150mm)
11.4018.026.004 - Air Shaft Solo Air - Lyrik/Yari (160mm)
11.4018.026.002 - Air Shaft Solo Air - Lyrik/Yari (170mm)
11.4018.026.020 - Air Shaft Solo Air - Lyrik B1/Yari (180mm)
  • 2 0
 Didn't know there was a second version of Luktkappe but I bought a 160mm Lyrik (charger 2 and debonair) in July 2018 (so I guess a 2019 fork) and Rock Shox didn't have the 170mm air shaft yet. A world known EWS mechanic (working with Sram products) told me he had a Luftkappe with the old 170mm shaft so he send it to me and said I had to change everything so no more debonair. Still better than stock debonair!! I had 2 tokens and none now!

It seems there's now a version for 2019+ if mfoga is right...
  • 30 7
 So Rockshox now is making a red Vorsprung Luftkappe?
  • 9 0
 Nope. Just the opposite.
  • 12 140
flag duzzi (Apr 9, 2020 at 7:35) (Below Threshold)
 Pinkbike just publishes commercials for the industry ... using always the same predictable technique:

First paraphrasing the industry press release "That 10mm change in height makes the fork sit higher in its travel then before, and it no longer feels like it wants to suck down into the first 5-10 millimeters of travel."

and than repeating in a obvious further paraphrase of the press release "the fork no longer felt like it was sitting partway into its travel before any bumps were encountered. Instead, it was at full extension on smoother sections of trail; that means there was actually 160mm of travel available, instead of the 155 or 150mm that were available before."

You can look at every single "test" in the last year and you will never find Mike Kazimer complaining because his fork was "sucked down" and did not have full travel.

Commercials!
  • 236 1
 @duzzi, proof? Here you go, from my 36 vs Lyrik review: “The Lyrik does feel a little more supple off the top, but it also has a lower dynamic ride height than the 36 – the negative spring pressure really wants to pull it down into its travel, which means a few precious millimeters have already been used before you encounter a bump of any size.”


m.pinkbike.com/news/review-fox-36-grip2-vs-rockshox-lyrik-rc2-fork.html
  • 5 2
 Take a Debonair 2017 shaft which is 10mm longer and cut it 5mm, same effect together with Debonair2 seal head.
  • 11 2
 @Apfelsauce: It looks like they just shifted the whole spring up the stanchion so the negative volume stays the same, the positive gets smaller and the equalizing happens at a different spot.
  • 12 2
 @mikekazimer: thank u king
  • 17 0
 @mikekazimer: FINISH HIM (Mortal Kombat music playing in the background)

On a serious note, do you think this would help lighter riders who run lower pressure? My wife is a flyweight at her pike will often suck down due to the really low pressure she needs to get even close to 20% sag.
  • 3 1
 @OpeSorryAbootThat: It's pretty clear to me, from what I see in the side-by-side pic, that the negative spring volume is reduced. That would be the opposite of what the Luftkappe provides.
  • 1 0
 @coregrind: I figured the seal at the bottom of the negative side was moved up in line with the piston but yeah it does appear that the negative is smaller as well. Between the two chambers changing volume and equalization point changing I can't really guess at what this does without having one.
  • 4 0
 You’re right. Just by the look of it, they reduce the negative chamber.



@Apfelsauce:
  • 3 72
flag duzzi (Apr 9, 2020 at 8:25) (Below Threshold)
 @mikekazimer: You are funny ... a few millimeters!!!! (that now magically became 1 cm!) Here are more quotes from the same article directly contradicting the current one: "The level of small bump sensitivity both forks deliver is excellent, and they both initiate their travel with ease, with plenty of traction available for those slippery, slower speed moments."

Keep the commercials coming. This is rather shameless: an upgrade a year!
  • 1 6
flag kleinblake (Apr 9, 2020 at 8:53) (Below Threshold)
 @enduro29jeff: yeah I’m confused by this move. They feel they overdid it with the negative chamber? I also don’t know why Mike would think the dynamic ride height would be higher with a smaller negative, it should be the opposite
  • 21 3
 @duzzi: what's your point with those quotes? A fork can do all those things whether or not the negative spring is a bit too aggressive... Anyone who has ridden both brands knows they are each Excellent and everything has something that can be improved. For RS it was the tendency for negative spring to pull fork down in travel, and that's been addressed... As for the "few mm, and now a full cm". It depends on the travel of the fork as to how much so 150 will be less than a 180.... But of it's all commercials here no one is forcing you to read the articles so why do you bother?
  • 10 1
 @duzzi: mate, might sound like a commercial to you, but these are 1000$ top shelf racing products. It might sound like BS pr insignificant to you, but to the dedicated and pro riders it can mean an important upgrade to their riding. You can’t tell sensitivity and ride height apart apparently.

PS: Mikes’ the Technical Editor at the world’s largest MTB site and has been for a while. If he didn’t do his job right, he either wouldn’t be here or Pinkbike wouldn’t be where its at. Does it really seem like they’re a phony plug?
  • 1 0
 @coregrind: Looking at the Luftkappe though doesn't it also decrease the size of the positive air spring but with the piston head being tall and the seal at the bottom. It appears that this also emulates that slightly just by pushing the whole assembly up instead. Just observation though. The negative is smaller which would be worse small bump comparatively?
  • 33 0
 @duzzi: show us on the dolly where RockShox and Pinkbike hurt you.
  • 9 1
 @DrPete: I don't know about duzzi, but i'll show you where rockshox hurt me. With a trembling hand I point to the slight bulge in my pocket where my wallet is.
  • 5 0
 @quantumkooks: I think it's true both designs decrease the positive chamber volume. As for the smaller negative chamber size, my feel is it'll just have slightly less impact on the positive spring. Less ability to reduce the required breakaway force and less tendency to be set into the travel without rider weight. On it's own, I don't think this is necessarily a good or bad thing. It comes down to preference. Ultimately...choose your air volume and be a dick about it.
  • 1 0
 @kcy4130: LOL, that’s mountain biking in general. I do like the idea of cheap incremental upgrades though.
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer: or anybody, help me out here.

If I run a higher pressure and pull spacer(s) out while running the old spring, wouldn't I keep great sensitivity off the top, have plenty of mid stroke support and no harsh ramp at the end?

Not sure I see a benefit to the new spring, for me.
  • 2 0
 @duzzi: i guess u dont read.
  • 1 0
 @coregrind: Kazimer says @2:48 that it reduces the positive air spring chamber a little bit.
  • 2 0
 @Eatsdirt: You would typically get harshness off the top. The larger negative of the luftkappe prevents that harshness, and allows you to run more pressure with fewer spacers for other traits you desire
  • 1 0
 @kleinblake: Perhaps I glazed over a little to fast.. am I mistaken in thinking that the new spring reduces the neg chamber vol?
  • 2 0
 @tacklingdummy: i think he means it increases the pos volume. more volume = less pressure req'd for same sag.
  • 1 0
 @mm732: You might be correct.
  • 3 1
 @tacklingdummy: But he isn´t lol. Just think about it for a minute or two.
  • 19 0
 @coregrind: this is correct, the negative chamber volume is reduced, which is the opposite of what the Luftkappe does. If they were concerned about the fork not fully extending, it's basically because the overall shaft lengths necessary for the Debonair shafts were not quite correct to work with pneumatic force balancing at topout, but instead of directly addressing that (although the red footstud does take a step in that direction), they've gone back to a smaller negative chamber (meaning stiffer initial spring rate, less sag, poorer small bump compliance at the top of the travel) instead. This whole thing could have just been that red footbolt receiver at the end of the shaft to increase the shaft length, if their major concern was addressing reports of the forks sitting down too far in their travel.

But there is good news on the way on this front Smile
  • 6 0
 @VorsprungSuspension: Idiot here... but are you saying just replace the footbolt and you get the best of both worlds?
  • 2 0
 @VorsprungSuspension: Isn't the biggest thing the ratio of the positive : negative volumes? they decrease the positive chamber volume here so wouldn't it ultimately come down to how much volume they've take out of each?
  • 2 0
 @VorsprungSuspension: Wouldn´t that lead to overextension of the 180mm fork when front wheel leaves the ground? I don´t know how good or bad bushing overlap is but at 180mm is already pretty close to the limit, what´s your take Steve? Thanks
  • 2 0
 @mikekazimer: I’ve found that when you put more than one token in and run low pressures that the fork will sag 5mm under it’s own weight but I’ve been running mine with ether half a cut down token or one bit running higher pressures a bit more compression and less rebound and it won’t sag 5mm and stands up much better in steep terrain and it doesn’t feel any less sensitive but this was with the charger one.
  • 1 19
flag duzzi (Apr 9, 2020 at 12:26) (Below Threshold)
 @JaToledo: well mate ... If people cannot see how upgrading forks every single year for, what? a decade? are scumming them I do not know what to tell you. But you can be certain that there will be an upgrade next year that will correct the obvious flows of this year upgrade.

And look across the pond: Fox just released a whole line of forks with air bleeders! They do not seem to be capable to build a fork that does not suck in air and ruin your set up but this was praised as a great thing in this same pages!

What I find mesmerizing is that people read the absurdities reported in these thinly disguised commercials and believe them. And many get upset if you point out that the fork that last year was judged fantastic now somehow is missing one centimeter of travel and needs an upgrade.

It makes you realize how well consumerism works: people are literally craving self gratification by purchase and the industry takes good advantage of it.
  • 12 1
 @duzzi: give it a rest. This is your schtick in all the articles you post your trolling in. It's all commercials, we are all suckers, you are the only one smart enough to see through it, oh yhd shame.... Or maybe incremental improvements year after year are how all products evolve. How all the bikes are better by far than five years ago, and those better than the 5 before that... But yeah it's all smoke and mirrors and we are too foolish to see it.... Riiiiiiight
  • 15 0
 @Eatsdirt: that definitely could have been a simpler and better performing alternative, but doing that would be a "fix" not an "upgrade" which is obviously not quite as easy to market.
  • 5 0
 @duzzi: poor design that sucks air in? Are you dense (don't answer we already know)? Have you ever flown with a bike? Had massive altitude changes in a day? This all has an effect. Every fork ever made can have the internal pressure change and build up, and it's pretty common to see riders "burping" the air by sliding zip ties behind the seals on forks from multiple manufacturers in high alpine trails. Seriously come off your high horse about everything being a scam, or just leave and don't let the door hit you on the way out.
  • 1 11
flag duzzi (Apr 9, 2020 at 12:56) (Below Threshold)
 @davetrumpore: The negative spring might contribute to a "static sag" of the fork, but the "problem" (if there is such a problem) can also be associated with low pressure in the air chamber, a vacuum effect in the right leg, warn seals, and the interaction of those. Air forks are trouble. They are unreliable and they never hold their performance or settings for more than weeks of use (look at Fox: the whole lineup now has bleeders because the legs suck in air and mess up your settings!). The solution is to eventually get a coil fork ... or follow PinkBike advise and buy an upgrade for your air fork ... every year ... and never have it work properly!
  • 8 1
 @duzzi: fake news...
  • 1 0
 @Eatsdirt: no, you just increase fork travel by doing this. You also need a different seal head to compensate the increase shaft length.
  • 2 0
 @VorsprungSuspension: "This whole thing could have just been that red footbolt receiver at the end of the shaft to increase the shaft length, if their major concern was addressing reports of the forks sitting down too far in their travel."

Sure. However, SRAM from a marketing standpoint needed to bring more to the table and not just a shaft extender. Plus, they wouldn't be able to charge $25/$42 for that part alone.

"But there is good news on the way on this front Smile"

I haven't purchased an item from since my Corset back in the day. What do you have cooking up? If you need to keep it quiet for now, please send me a direct message. I'm definitely open to giving you folks some of my money again.
  • 2 0
 @duzzi: he called it a subtle difference that’s not going to change the world but is an improvement and you can get it for $25 dollars. What’s the problem here?
  • 1 0
 @sayrius: Does increased shaft length equate to substantially longer travel (then claimed), when static height is actually in a sucked down position? Perhaps because of this a negligible change in travel is what Steve is insinuating?
  • 3 0
 @VorsprungSuspension: so you are basically saying that the 'fix' could have been to buy a 180 air shaft of the current design if you're looking to get 170 mm travel.

One thing I'm confused about - the shaft was made longer, which advances the piston head upward, but the sealhead was also made thicker by the same amount. Wouldn't this new system have the same negative spring volume, just shifted upward in the fork?
  • 2 0
 @DMal: Yes, but if you look at the side-by-side photo, you can see that the old seal head was machined to provide a little extra negative chamber volume below the topout bumper. That is gone on the new seal head; it's just flat below the topout bumper.
  • 1 0
 @dlxah: you're right. Thanks for pointing that out.
  • 11 0
 @DMal: that'd be one equivalent way to achieve it yes.

Realistically though if you rely on pneumatic topout (like the Luftkappe does, and to a lesser extent as the previous Debonair shafts did, depending on pressure) the topout point is quite vague. This is because the pressure in the negative chamber can vary a bit due to the dynamic effects on pressure as the piston passes the transfer port, and the low net force near topout means it doesn't have much preload force to overcome friction or the weight of the bike itself. While this is great for sensitivity, it's not so good for people who look at their fork and think "oh my 150mm fork is only 140mm", even though in reality the range of motion still is actually 150mm. The major brands do have to cater to a lot of customer concerns like that - same reason Dual Air disappeared despite being a really good, tunable system. Rockshox are pretty good at recognising customer complaints and finding ways to address them, even if they don't necessarily agree with my opinions on the best way to make a fork perform.

It'd be pretty funny if people started complaining that their motorbikes didn't have the stated amount of travel because of how far the bike sags under its own weight and that led to motorbike manufacturers cranking the preload like crazy so that the bike didn't sag at all until the rider got on it. Nonzero weight should mean nonzero sag.
  • 1 0
 @VorsprungSuspension:

@VorsprungSuspension:

"...meaning stiffer initial spring rate, less sag, poorer small bump compliance at the top of the travel..."

I get that part of your explanation, which explains how this upgrade helps keep the fork up. But I also read that the mechanism just got shifted up, so ride height went higher, but fork performance isn't affected. That second one is what I'm hoping for, because my Pike is a little too stiff for me if I were to maintain a sag between 25% and 30%. I like to have the fork ride high to maintain as much of the bike's intended geo as possible. I think that's almost everyone's problem with most forks.
  • 6 0
 @uphill-blues: given the visible change in chamber volume, the idea that fork performance isn't affected at all is not possible. To what degree it's affected is more subjective. However, if you want your fork to be higher at a given spring rate, basically you want a longer axle to crown (meaning more travel) or you need to raise your bars. Bikes aren't intended to be ridden at zero sag, they just publish geometry at zero sag because it's less inconsistent than the alternatives.
  • 4 1
 @duzzi: @duzzi: What the hell man. Nobody here has ver said your 2019 fork NEEDS this upgrade, you can just make it better if you'd like. Nobody says something doesn't work anything less than fantastically. Nobody here is forcing you to buy jack shit. Not everbody upgrades their fork every single year, but enough people do so that over time they become alot better. These are not absurdities, every year a small improvement, all of a sudden you look back some years and theres a very large performance difference. There comes trickledown performance as well, now you can get a couples years ago top shelf dampers and springs in low end forks available to the masses.

These are not absurd. To a top athlete or top paying consumer, a small upgrade can have a big impact. This fork rides better than last years and that one better than the one before that. Suck it up if you don't care, but reconsider saying "belive them" as if it's fake.

I assume you do not get into an airplane and complain about the noise, or it's fuel efficiency. Or get a couple new headphones and complain the bass isn't immersive enough. Yet, you'll enjoy flying on a better plane or hearing music better.

So stop treating people like shit for working their asses off in making our products and riding better every single day. Stop treating consumers like stupid sheep for appreciating a continuous process that has made absolutley EVERYTHING better than what it has EVER been.

If we followed you lousy attitude we'd still be riding flexy rubber forks with no travel on 25 kilo bikes with brakes that hardly stand heat all for the sake of being against "consummerism". If RockShox wanted to do what you say they wouldn't activley invest money and engineer retrofitting upgrades at much lower prices than just making a new fork.
  • 1 0
 @subwaypanda: Don't get hung up on the sag percentage number. Start at 20% and run whatever makes her feel good. Maybe don't go below 10% sag though, that negative travel away from sag is useful for traction.

I'm running my Pike closer to 15%, and I'll bet I weigh twice what your wife does (100kg here). After some testing around 20%, I realized that it was the damper (boo to Charger RC, HC97 on the way!) and/or the fork riding deep into the travel and ramping up causing the spiky-ness and harshness I felt in small amplitude but high-shaft-speed bumps (think 1-2 inch exposed roots every couple few feet on a fast trail: DPX2 in back soaks them up like butter, Pike sends them all to my hands). Added some pressure, less sag but it didn't effect the small bump much at all (giant negative spring!), but also helped the fork stay high and ready for medium to big hits.
  • 1 0
 @thenotoriousmic: How much fork to you have? Many DH bikes will sag 4-7mm under their own weight, because they're setup properly (spring for support, damper for control). The 35-40 lbs of a DH bike is maybe 20-25% of the entire bike rider system, and that 4-7mm is maybe 15-20% of the sag on 200mm, so it makes sense. Not surprising at all that an enduro bike with a 180 fork would sag a bit under it's own weight.

But we're talking a couple few mm, where as most everyone has seen a 140-150mm Pike that won't extend much past the 10% sag marker even with the wheel off the ground; won't go full extension unless you pull on it. And that's shitty and shame on RockShox/SRAM for releasing that crap spring design.
  • 1 0
 @davetrumpore: Internet pro-tip: Don't feed the trolls. If you write "Shut up with your trolling", you don't get a shut up, you get a f*ck ton more trolling. Plus when the community negative props the shit-talker below the threshold, it just looks like you're talking to yourself. Which may not be unusual (it isn't over here!), but just saying...
  • 1 0
 @DMal: Except if by some crossroads of rebound speed, spring pressures effected by temperature, and air time, or someone just pulled on your wheel, or whatever, the fork could extend to 190 and potentially damage the damper or bushings or stanchions.
  • 3 0
 @VorsprungSuspension: I just read this and went "Damn, that's the perfect answer, especially the last sentence (which I'm stealing for the future). I should tell this commenter how great this answer is! Who is it?" Oh Vorsprung, well they know how great this answer is!

Note: this comment: www.pinkbike.com/news/first-ride-rockshoxs-updated-debonair-air-spring-pond-beaver-2020.html#cid2556279

Post Note: PB comments really need full threading!
  • 1 1
 @Eatsdirt: Better option would've been longer air shaft using old seal head and 10mm longer top out bumper
  • 1 0
 @subwaypanda: have you changed the tune and use a lighter oil could help get the fork performance better for someone light.
  • 4 0
 I trust vorsprung chat over any big brand tech mod or media review.
I’m a fox fan boy but it’s pretty much setup through vorsprung advice and the luftkappe is awesome.
  • 1 0
 @enduroFactory: not yet but was meant to be getting TF tuned to do that last week but will have to wait for the moment. I think that a lighter compression tune/oil is the way forward.
  • 1 0
 @Mondbiker: Please explain.
  • 1 0
 @VorsprungSuspension: I just don't understand what the benefit of having my fork ride higher in it's travel is. Can't I just increase the air pressure if I want it to do that?
  • 1 0
 @skelldify: without a large enough negative you will feel harshness/loss of traction at the initial part of the travel
  • 2 0
 @skelldify: Riding higher can help maintain the dynamic geometry when pushing the limit: heavy braking, steep terrain, etc. But doing it with just higher spring rate (air pressure) can make it feel harsh and stiff. A larger negative spring (Luftkappe, V1 DebonAir, EVOL) helps make the spring curve straighter (so the spring force in the middle can be relatively higher for a given starting force), while also reducing breakaway force (so the overall spring rate can be higher without feeling harsh at the beginning of movement).
  • 1 0
 @skelldify: as others have said, helping maintain a higher front end helps make sure your slack bike stays slack.
Under the previous Debonair, which had a larger negative spring than the new one, you could increase air pressure to get the support/ride height wanted, but doing so can make it hard to use full travel.

Having a slightly smaller negative spring, as RS has done with the Debonair C1, means that the fork is more willing to top out at lower pressures, giving that higher ride height at a positive spring pressure than can be bottomed out more easily.
  • 2 0
 @DMal: Rockshox said the upper part of the spring curve remains the same. So the bottom-out/full-travel factors you mentioned are not there.
  • 1 0
 @just6979: Rockshox has reduced the ratio of negative to positive spring volume and pressure. The negative spring gives less 'help' moving the fork into its travel. I don't see how it's possible for the upper part of the air spring curve to remain the same given these changes.

With the 19/20 Debonair, many people were setting up their forks 5-10 psi above pressures recommended by Rockshox to avoid having the fork riding too low as a result of the large negative spring. These high pressures make it more difficult to use full travel.

My bet is that people will end up running the Debonair C1 at pressures 5-10 psi below where they were running the 19/20 Debonair to get the same small bump sensitivity (i.e. the pressures people actually run will be closer to what Rockshox currently recommends for their weight). The fork will sit higher at these lower pressures as a result of the smaller/lower-pressure negative spring. However, the lower positive spring pressure will make it easier to use full travel on big hits, at the expense of some support in the middle of the stroke.

The negative spring tuning on the Meg Neg air can is a good starting point for how I'm thinking about this. The instructions are to add bands to the negative side if you can't get full travel, which reduces the positive spring pressure required to hit the desired sag point.
  • 1 0
 All I'm getting out of this is that suspension tuning really is black magic. So many conflicting statements. Aren't there any facts???
  • 1 0
 @DMal: The spring's "willingness to topout" has _nothing_ to do with dynamic ride height. Sag point and the spring rate curve immediately around sag point are the contributing factors there. And low-speed damping to slow down weight-shift induced fork dive (hard braking and steeps).

5-10 PSI extra is not going to matter in reaching bottom out for most people. It just means on the big drop you kinda nose-dived off, the bottom-out clunk will be quieter or maybe non-existant. Plus, that's what tokens are for: take some out. Or leave them in and have an extra 5-10mm for that time you almost died trying to clear the big log-to-log double and nose-cased that shit hard. Do you really want to it easier to bottom out?

"easier to use full travel on big hits, at the expense of some support in the middle of the stroke"

For yeas now, everyone has been telling us that their new stuff has more "midstroke support". It's been used so much as something that's just pain better and that we all want and need it Right Now (TM), it's literally become an almost laughable buzzword, like "longer, lower, slacker" or "nimble" or "flickable". Thus, I'm pretty sure no one wants to trade the fabled "midstroke support" for the ability to more easily bottom out their fork.
  • 1 0
 @skelldify: Some facts:

1. Springs support, dampers control.
2. Smaller volume air-springs are more progressive (spring rate increases with travel).
2a. But a relatively larger negative air spring volume makes the entire system less progressive.
3. Higher relative negative spring force (more pressure in negative chamber or a stronger negative coil) makes initial movement easier, particularly in air springs.
3a. Pneumatic top-out (the negative spring force stops the entire system from extending instead of a mechanical stop) is more likely with higher relative negative spring forces. This is NOT always a bad thing.
4. Given similar starting and ending rates, a linear spring will give more mid-stroke support than a progressive spring.
  • 2 0
 @just6979: I think we are mostly saying the same thing.

Check out the spreadsheet linked in this video, which allows you to play with air spring parameters: www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-l2l2kca0A&fbclid=IwAR3HF_HmPBEp3nmtlqWvCGtTc3BfTyocWhLtVBcEk7TPqK7VvyV-BFmnUio

If you compare a larger and smaller negative spring, the smaller negative spring has more ramp early in the stroke, followed by a reduction in spring rate increase in the middle of the stroke. The large negative string has a straighter spring curve through early and mid stroke, but requires more air pressure to avoid excessive sag. But as a result of the higher air pressure, the large negative spring version has a higher end of stroke spring rate.

The cynical person in me thinks the new air spring is designed for less aggressive riders who were failing to achieve full travel and who couldn't wrap their heads around the static sag associated with the pneumatic topout (particularly with heavy e-bikes). The new air spring will top out fully and will need to be run at a lower positive spring pressure to avoid an excessively harsh early stroke, which will help that sag indicator rubber band hit the crown on larger bumps.

That said, we may be talking about small differences here, and the actual feel on the trail may not be drastically altered.
  • 1 0
 @DMal: I think you are right, that cynical view. This spring is definitely an appeasement to make things easier to setup and understand for the masses.

I actually wish they had some kind of middle ground. I don't like the dead-zone feeling at the top of my DebonAir spring, but I also don't want the tiny negative spring of the new version making things harsher off the top (my 2019 Pike is already spiky whenever the front wheel comes down from being in the air, compared to my old 2016 Fox 36). I'm going to try shimming the hub first (maybe it's bushing bind from the stupid "squeeze everything!" 15mm axle), then a Push HC97, and if it still sucks, then a new Fox 36 will be the choice.
  • 1 0
 @just6979: For the middle ground you desire, just get a 10mm longer airshaft from MY2020. Or, get the MY2021 upgrade bits and only install the foot nut. This will give the increased ride height but keeps the spacious negative air chamber. Maybe you don't actually need a taller ride height. If that's the case, skip going longer. Regardless of the airshaft length, if the MY2020 negative chamber is slightly too large, get creative with volume reducing methods.
  • 1 0
 @coregrind: You can't use just the 2021 foot nut without the seal head as that will result in the seal head bottoming out. That's what the recess is for in the bottom of the 2021 seal head.
  • 18 2
 Only $42? Go home Sram you're drunk. Easily should have been $289.99
  • 12 2
 I have a 2020 pike so seeing that this isn’t some new fork that will make my 5 month old pike out of date is very nice. Thanks rockshox
  • 12 3
 Just wait 'till next week
  • 4 0
 @the-joe: Do you know something we don't?
  • 2 0
 @RockShox: it appears so
  • 2 0
 @the-joe: yeap the new forks stanchion DUB diameter of 38.99 millimetres on its way
  • 8 1
 Ah wait so they made both air chambers a tad smaller so they are just like the 2017 Debonair only with an aluminum head, and put a 5mm longer shaft in so it is more like a 165mm fork?
I thought that was exactly not what was to be achieved with the 2019 Debonair, so they are going backwards in a way now?

Anyhow, I did change mine by mixing Debonair with Debonair2 and drilling a hole in the 2017 shaft, did the same...
  • 10 0
 I literally just (two days ago) installed a new air shaft. Dammit.
  • 1 0
 Same here.
  • 1 0
 @CantClimb: me three. haha...
  • 1 0
 For me, about a month ago ... would have been good to know a new design was on the way.
  • 1 0
 Samesies
  • 3 1
 I went Push coil on a 19 Pike. Super happy. Air shaft in the bin Wink
  • 1 0
 @yannickbisson: I've tried the push coil. Feels really good. Don't like the extra weight up front though on trail bikes. Good solution for enduro bikes though for sure. IMO.
  • 2 0
 @devasolomon22: I get the weight point for sure, in my case it was a cheaper way to have the Pike be able to keep up with the rest of the bike’s (‘20 Optic) ability. The forks chassis is excellent. Never had that issue w Lyrik btw
  • 8 1
 As a bike shop employee, I am still figuring out the whole "righty tighty lefty loosey" thing. Do I have a screw and nut in my work bench to remind myself which the put back together way which is the pull apart way? Perhaps
  • 4 1
 Yikes
  • 7 0
 Will this new airspring also work on the 2018/19 forks?
  • 11 0
 oh yes!
  • 2 0
 @RockShox: Thanks. Is this all I need to change from a Dual Air to Solo setup? Or do I need more parts? I assume there's a version for the 180 airspring. (Say Hi to Tim for me)
  • 3 0
 @laksboy: there is a complete air spring assembly to change from a Dual Air to Solo setup. We'll pass along the message to Tim!
  • 2 0
 @RockShox: Thanks. Please say hi to Rafer and Devin too!
  • 1 0
 @laksboy: Hi again! Sorry, we wanted to make sure we understood your question... Sadly there is not a super easy way to convert a DPA (Dual Position Air) to a solo air. We have never made Dual Air for Pike or Lyrik...
  • 1 0
 @RockShox: dual position then. That's what I have in a 180 rct3 lyrik
  • 7 1
 Yearly air spring updates? Something about throw away society? Incremental upgrades? I'm outraged?
  • 1 45
flag duzzi (Apr 9, 2020 at 7:40) (Below Threshold)
 Nah, don't be ... they just found a bunch of suckers who buy whatever they and Pinkbike tell them to buy.
  • 4 0
 To be fair, the Luftkappe removes the top out bumper and you actually do lose a few mm to sag, so kinda different. This does seem to be a good and very reasonably priced upgrade.
  • 3 0
 Hey Mike will it fit a 2019 lyric rc2 debonair?,do I only need the 2 pieces? Cause for the money and what is supposed to do it might be great cause the lyric it really lacks that inicial softness on very small rocks and debris on smoth terrain ,thanks #iwantmylifeback
  • 7 0
 @oneheckler: you can either get the full debonair spring assembly, or just the new seal head kit that includes the updated seal head and foot nut for $25 USD to make the upgrade!
  • 1 0
 @RockShox: will this be added to the new air spring for older models as well? Was thinking of upgrading my 2014 Pike air spring with the next service.
  • 4 0
 @jzPV: yup! We have upgrade kits for Lyrik 2016+, Pike, 2014+ Revelation 2018+ and Yari 2016+ families
  • 4 0
 @oneheckler, yes, and it looks like you'll only need the two pieces. Here's the part number: 00.4020.573.000. AM UPGR DB C1- 35MM SEAL HEAD.
  • 1 0
 @RockShox: Hey RS, can we just do the foot nut if we are pleased with the initial suppleness, and not too freaked out about a bike settling a millimeter or two into its sag under its own weight? 2020 Lyrik Ultimate 160 mm 29er.
  • 1 0
 @herzalot: If it´s millimeter or two you don´t need anything. You must run crazy high pressure if that´s the case though.
  • 2 0
 @herzalot: you will increase your fork travel by 5mm by doing this. But keep the same negative spring volume as well.
  • 2 0
 @herzalot: Both the footnut and the sealhead are needed.
  • 1 0
 @RockShox: Thank you for the direct response! Love my Lyrik as is.
  • 1 0
 @Mondbiker: Au contraire. I run about 68-70 psi and I weigh 210 lbs. I am talking about sag with no rider on board. The fork settles a bit, like it has a Luftkappe in it already. I am good with that. I like plush and supple. I run 30% sag on my Lyrik.
  • 1 0
 @RockShox: really just that 2 things ,cause they speak of 2020 forks (mine is 2019 the first lyric rc2 debonair ,and I was not very impress with it(but I’m a coil lover ,my brother has the same and he is praising them,so .....,,),but they are not bad ,maybe the new stuff could make that lag that they have in the first contact with the ground ,that I thought it was not very nice ,thanks
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer: thanks Mike
  • 3 0
 This is very welcome, the previous gen spring shaft just felt like it reduced travel by 20mm. I wonder how many pros will switch back to a 160-170mm fork after using a 180 and/or tonnes of air with the old one? Or maybe it’s just me
  • 5 1
 Who else like me wishes Fox did the same with their products? 50 quid for an improvement is awesome. With Fox is all like..."nah...we will keep these small tweaks and wait for you to buy another fork for 1K"
  • 3 0
 Great! I love that RockShox keeps everything modular and compatible, so you don't have to buy a completely new fork to get performance gains. Good job RockShox on actually being a decent company! I'ma switch teams from my 36 Rhythm, once I have the money for a Lyrik. Don't really want to bother with special rebuild tools either.
  • 4 0
 We support your decisions.
  • 2 0
 So... isn’t that a smaller negative air chamber that’s somehow providing the benefits that are usually attributed to a larger negative air chamber? Freely admit that I’m a suspension idiot but I’m just trying to understand.
  • 2 0
 No, the whole assembly got moved up, so the location in the travel where the positive and negative chambers equalize changed. That means the negative chamber gets pressurized to a lower air pressure, exerting less force onto the piston at the start of the travel and thus preventing sagging into the travel.
  • 3 0
 @Primoz: it gets pressurized to the same pressure as before, just in different part of travel. forces in pos/neg side of piston have to be equal, otherwise the fork will sink more or extend more than it should where the forces actually will be equal.
  • 1 0
 Ah, so it’s not just the relative size of the chambers but of the position too? I guess that makes sense since they’re opposing forces in a way.
  • 1 0
 @DrPete: force is calculated by pressure and area, I don´t think they changed piston design so area will be the same and pressure will be the same just where it should be from the get go not 10mm into travel.
  • 1 0
 @Mondbiker: The different position does change the off-the-top pressure in the negative chamber. Previously the chambers equalized and then the fork continues extending (due to damper IFP/bladder pressure and lower-leg-kinda-air-spring pressure), thus increasing the negative pressure at top-out. This is why the the current gen forks were stupid soft off-the-top, because the negative spring is actively trying to push into the travel, fighting the other forces rather than just the positive spring. It's also why many forks got sucked down, because the damper and lower pressures weren't enough to beat the negative and allow full extension. The positive and negative pressures are only equal when the piston is right at the dimple, which was about 15% into the travel, IIRC. The damper and lower pressures are why forks didn't get sucked down all the way to the dimple.

By moving the piston to equalize chambers exactly at top-out, they've taken away a bit of the negative spring's power, and now it's pretty much there just reduce stiction by providing equal pressure to either side of the main air piston seal at top-out. Which means it will still feel pretty damn good in the parking lot (minimal air spring stiction), but won't be quite as supple as the old spring (where the negative was actively trying to pull the fork into the travel). Also should be way easier to get a good sag setting because the chambers don't fluctuate partway through the travel.
  • 1 0
 @Mondbiker: Nope. just6979 got the gist of it. If you equalize the pressure partway into the travel, when returning to the beginning of it, you compress the negative chamber and raise the pressure there. And lower it in the positive (extension and all).

As for the pressure and force, yeah, it is pressure times area. But the negativ spring has a smaller area to work with because you have to subtract the airshaft area. That's why you need or can have a higher negative chamber pressure and not have the spring move into the travel, if balanced correctly. RS misjudged it a bit with the old design.

Plus the dimple being slightly into the travel is why you have to cycle your fork/shock when you change the pressure before measuring the sag after the adjustment.
  • 2 0
 Why can 2020 MY forks be updated with only the sealhead and nut, but not the older ones? I don't see any changes in the Debonair spring between MY 2019 and MY 2020 Lyriks for example (RC2 becoming the Ultimate RC2 meant Charger 2 to Charger 2.1 upgrade though) and my MY 2019 Lyrik RC2 airspring looks very much the same as the 2020 version...

Does anyone have any more information?

EDIT: 25 USD doesn't seem that bad for an upgrade, but I don't see a reason to do a 45 USD upgrade.
  • 2 0
 Big differences between MY19 and MY20 Lyrik's were the Charger 2.1 (at the ultimate level), SKF Wiper Seals, the inclusion of Maxima Plush fluid, and new graphics! No DebonAir update at that point.

Since you have the latest DebonAir already, we made two upgrade "paths" - full assembly for those who may want to also change the travel at the same time, or the cheaper option - just the new Seal Head and foot nut!

Seal Head Upgrade Kit - DebonAir C1 35mm Seal Head (Includes seal head & specific nut) - LYRIK/YARI A1+ (2016+)/PIKE B1+/Revelation A1+ (2018+)
  • 1 0
 @RockShox: Every single article about this mentions the foot & seal package as only for MY20 forks. If even the MY19 (and MY18?) can also be upgraded with just the foot & seal package, then that's not at all clear.
  • 1 0
 @just6979: Enduro Mag got it right, they didn't mention MY20. But yeah, I got confused about this because of what Pinkbike said.
  • 2 0
 Hey RockShox... I'm pretty darn happy with my 2020 Lyric Ultimate. At 175# I do find I need a lot more psi to only get 25% sag than listed in your chart. In the past your charts have been spot on for me. I run 1 or 2 spacers. The fork is a 275 set to 150mm. And I don't recall the fork being sucked down into travel. The fork does move through the first 2/3rds of its travel a bit too easily, even with the dampers turned up. How would this new seal head change my ride? You know they say the enemy of good is better.
  • 1 0
 Thanks for being a fan! The updated DebonAir does pretty much as described. The intent is to eliminate the "divy" feel when things get super steep or when you find yourself in deep pockets on the trail. It allows your front wheel to stay more on top of the technical terrain. If you don't find yourself in these situations or feeling like your fork is sinking, then this may not be for you! and thats A-ok!
  • 3 1
 "There's more room on the underside of the new seal head in order to maintain the same amount of ramp up at the end of the stroke as before."

What? That extra room is not part of the spring, it faces down towards the lowers. It's just there because they moved the negative chamber's seal upwards in order to shrink the negative chamber.
  • 4 0
 That room means there's less lower leg air volume ramp up at the last part of the stroke. That, combined with the decreased positive volume means that the fork's behavior at the end of the stroke remains the same as before.
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer: are you SURE the pos volume decreased? not trolling, but i didn't get that from the vid or pics.
  • 1 0
 @mm732: The piston just sits higher in the stanchion, not that hard to imagine what it´s going to do with pos volume?
  • 2 0
 @mm732, yes, I am. It's almost as if you'd added a volume spacer, but from the bottom instead of the top. There's more to it than that, but hopefully that helps you envision what's going on.
  • 1 2
 @mikekazimer: Does it though? Is a leg with 14.7 psi really having that much effect on the spring curve?

Or 0 psi depending on how you look at it: because our pump gauges tell us the difference between what's in the thing and the atmosphere, which is ~14.7 psi at sea level. So, a gauge on the lower leg would read 0 psi at full extension. A reading of 0 psi on the main spring would feel pretty much empty in the context of actually riding it.

Why didn't they have to change the damper side? That side's lower-leg-kinda-air-spring is still going to ramp up just as much as it does right now, probably negating any tiny changes to the air side.
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer: you said you needed less pressure to maintain same sag/ride quality. why
  • 2 0
 @VorsprungSuspension: Is it not a case of you cannot run the foot stud with the old seal head as the new longer foot stud will hit the seal head at full compression and thats why they have had to move the seal block up in the new seal head?
  • 6 0
 Will it fit a 2016 pike?
  • 17 0
 Yes! Ride On!
  • 1 0
 @RockShox: So compared to the previous Debonair, this one is 1) more supportive, which means 2) more progressive due to reduced positive chamber volume?
  • 3 26
flag duzzi (Apr 9, 2020 at 7:41) (Below Threshold)
 Get an aftermarket coil conversion. These yearly "air spring" upgrade are a joke.
  • 1 0
 @RockShox: ! have a 2015 pike that I was about to pull the trigger on ugrading the airspring to the last model this week, great timing! But where is the list of different part numbers? 2015 pike 29er 160mm to be specific Smile
  • 2 0
 @RockShox: when are these available? I just checked all my usual suppliers from all over Europe - nothing, RS website: upgrade kit - 404 page not found! any news on where I can get one?
  • 2 0
 @simeon10: Might need to give folks a few extra days with all the shipping delays due to current events. We are in production, so hopefully retailers will get their shipments in soon! Ride On!
  • 1 0
 @Snowrydr01: full assembly : 00.4020.552.005 AM UPGR DB C1 PIKE A1- 16029
  • 1 0
 @RockShox: Thank you so much! Are there any preffered online vendors? All my local bike shops are closed
  • 2 0
 @Snowrydr01: World Wide Cyclery, Backcountry, and Jenson USA should have stock shortly!
  • 5 2
 So take and old lyric (say 201Cool , service it, install low friction seals, and install this new debon air spring and you got yourself a damn good fork?
  • 3 2
 You forgot the Charger2.1 with HC97.
  • 2 0
 @cxfahrer: do you have an HC97? I'm debating spending money I really shouldn't on one...
  • 2 0
 @mountainsofsussex: I added a HC97 and had my mind blown. Fork rode higher in it's travel, more support and added traction. Well worth it in my book.
  • 3 0
 @rodzilla13: I wish you'd said it was a waste of money, because now I'll be working on man maths to justify buying one. Thanks...
  • 1 0
 @rodzilla13: What did the HC97 replace? I'm debating between HC97 and Charger 2.1 to replace a Charger RC (basically Charger 1, or maybe 2.0, with only one compression dial with 11 clicks (low-speed?), and no open/med/firm).

I know the HC97 will be great, but I kinda don't want to deal with taking my damper apart, and I'm not sure how rapidly Push could get it back to me right now. Since I can get a Charger 2.1 for less then sending out for HC97 install... though the high-speed compression adjust and high-speed rebound tune would be nice... Shit, I'll probably got HC97, but still curious how it compares to a 2.1 (RCT3 preferably) and an RC.
  • 2 0
 @just6979: get their coil too
Awesome
  • 3 0
 @just6979: it went on a 2020 lyrik ultimate RC2 with charger 2.1. I did the damper install myself. Hardest part was filling the bladder as it was my first time doing that. If any of your local bike shops that handle suspension are open they can easily do the swap. I described in my original post what I felt the HC97 did for me. Some of it may be due to adjusting the shim stack for my weight when installing the HC97. I'm outside of the general weight range most off the shelf suspension is tuned for so this may have a huge part of why the fork feels so much better after the mod.
  • 1 0
 I'm slightly confused about something- the text of the article states:

"With the new air spring the fork no longer felt like it was sitting partway into its travel before any bumps were encountered. Instead, it was at full extension on smoother sections of trail; that means there was actually 160mm of travel available, instead of the 155 or 150mm that were available before."

This makes it sound as if the new air spring removes any sag from the fork at a given air pressure. Is this accurate?
  • 2 0
 I think his point is the fork would previously sag under bike weight alone, taking away a few millimeters of travel before the rider was even weighting the bike. You'll still have sag with the revised shaft, but it'll be less than with the previous version.
  • 1 0
 @coregrind: how will the sag be less? I'm still going to set it to around 20%...

@Bullit-Boy yeah the wording of that sentence is weird. It definitely does say there would be no sag: "Instead, it was at full extension on smoother sections of trail". Neither one would be at full extension with a rider on it on a smooth trail (obvi the rider is not doing a manual or something)...
  • 1 0
 @just6979: At the same pressure, the revised airshaft will have less sag than the previous design.
  • 2 0
 @coregrind: why would you put the same pressure in a different spring and then be done and start judging it? Should be setting the sag to match. Then adjusting from there because different springs are different. Then judging.
  • 1 0
 @just6979: I feel air pressure is a starting point. The owner's manuals tend to discuss sag percentage but what do they put on a sticker on the fork lowers? Pressure settings based on rider weight.

I tend to not pay attention to the static sag amount. My concern is focused more on dynamic sag. Regardless, sag alone won't determine the correct spring pressure/volume for all points within the travel range so I don't use it as my only setup criteria. With the previous version air shaft and desirable performance otherwise, the fork would likely have more sag than is ideal for some folks. The revised version will likely have folks sitting higher in the travel (less sag) at a pressure that provides ideal results at the end stroke. I'll try a different approach that hopefully will clear things up. If you insist on 20% sag as your setup criteria, the old spring layout would likely require higher pressure to achieve this and therefore you might not have desirable results as you approach the bottom of the travel. If this still doesn't work for an explanation, I don't know what will.

Is the 2021 update an automatic upgrade? Maybe. Maybe not. I have the 2020 fork/air shaft and am happily running slightly less than 20% sag at lower air pressure than recommended but with an added Token and plenty of LSC damping. Bottom line: ride whatever setup that works best for you.
  • 1 0
 @coregrind: you just made the same point I made. I don't insist on the same sag, I said it's just a starting point. You're the one who mentioned how they would be different with the same pressure, so you seem to be insisting on the same pressure. Of course they'll be different, they're different springs. You say I shouldn't stick to 20% sag, but I specifically said it's a starting point only. Maybe you use pressure as a starting point, and that isn't a bad thing since there are stickers for it, as you said. But mentioning the different springs will feel different at the same pressure is redundant/obvious. It implies that one should just set the same pressure and deal with the spring differences.
  • 3 0
 This review makes little sense? So now there's "160mm of travel available in a 160mm fork instead of 150mm". So you aren't running any sag? I don't understand...
  • 1 0
 @Frontrange: many Pikes would never extend that last 10ish mm, especially with the sag set to the recommended 20%. So that 160 fork would be more like a 150 fork with around 12% sag but still a really soft feel off-the-top.
  • 1 0
 I'm confused by "With the new air spring the fork no longer felt like it was sitting partway into its travel before any bumps were encountered. Instead, it was at full extension on smoother sections of trail..."
Don't you run your forks with sag? This makes it sound like you wanted to fork to be topped out. I would assume what you want from the fork is that it does a better job of remaining at sag height, and has more support in the initial parts of the travel...
  • 6 0
 Previously, the fork would sag even with no weight on it. That’s no longer the case.
  • 4 0
 @mikekazimer: Vorsprung would say that it’s supposed to sag a couple millimeters...
  • 2 0
 @DHhack: Unless your bike is made out of air that is. On the other hand 10mm for lighter riders or those running RUNT or AWK is just too much travel loss.
  • 1 0
 @Mondbiker: Well unless you're already running 180mm, you could just buy a longer spring shaft to get the best of both.
  • 1 0
 @DHhack: And Vorsprung is 110% correct. But the 2020 and before springs sagged way more than they should (10mm on a 140mm fork on a 28lbs trail bike... too much), and often wouldn't even extend all the way with the wheel off the ground, meaning actually negative weight: the weight of the wheel pulling down. Pneumatic top out is not always bad, it makes for super supple feel off-the-top, but since this was causing forks to literally not be able to use all their advertised travel, ever, SRAM had to fix it somehow.
  • 1 0
 @dlxah: Even if you got the full travel by using a longer air shaft, you still get the dead-zone right around the transfer port. My 2019 Pike sags a few mm under the bike's own weight, and even unweighted it extends to maybe within 1mm of where I can pull it out by hand, but there is still a little travel at the top where the negative spring is pushing a little too hard and it feels vague: drops into the first 8-10mm too easily. I think it leads to a rattly feeling when the front wheel slaps down, like when landing rear wheel first. It goes so fast through that dead spot that when the positive spring actually takes over it feels like a thousand PSI, relatively.
  • 5 0
 @Rockshox where is the link to actually buy this?
  • 3 0
 @RockShox - where can we buy this?
  • 2 0
 We are in production and shipping now! Retailers should have these available in the coming days.
  • 1 0
 "With the new air spring, the fork no longer sinks into its travel when there isn’t any weight on it. Instead, it stays closer to the proper amount of sag on smoother sections of trail; that means there was more travel available when an obstacle was encountered."

That doesn't make any sense. It doesn't sink when no weight is on it, but instead, when weight is on it, it stays closer to sag? Those are two completely different situations.

This spring doesn't change the recommended sag, which is the only thing that is going to change the amount of travel available. when riding along on smooth sections of trail.

If it has the same ramp from sag to full travel, then it's not going to change the available travel in normal riding situations.
  • 3 0
 SRAM says: "we increased the ride height from top-out to sag. This means more initial support and the use of every millimeter of travel available to stay on top of the terrain."

Initial support? But sag is the normal position when riding, why do you need much support below the sag point (Think bypass shocks on trophy trucks)?

What they really did was fix a f*ck up that took away overall travel, and specifically negative travel (relative to sag) which is needed for maximum traction. 20% sag on previous springs was really closer to 10% sag with 10mm less total travel.

This isn't something new and special, it's fixing a broken design that never should have been released.
  • 1 0
 @enduro29jeff: That photo is somewhat misleading in that regard, when the air spring is installed, the sealhead is not pressed up against the top out bumper like it is in the photo - adding a longer foot nut will push the sealhead up higher. If there were a picture showing that, the negative would look the same and the sealhead would sit higher (if the footnuts were lined up square.) It sounds like its only 1 cm longer/taller so there also shouldn't be any issues with the sealhead sitting close to the equalizer dimple (sits around 20% sag I think) which some folks on here seem to be concerned with. Overall, it seems like they've addressed two concerns that people have had with their previous product (showing less travel than available at full extension and lack of midstroke support) by making a small inexpensive change that you can choose to buy or not buy, and is retrofittable to previous models. Idk, I like my lyrik, and my last 36 was pretty good too...
  • 3 0
 PB for future reviews please run back to back blind tests on existing then "improved" product and report back.
Has PB ever done this ? If not why not.
  • 2 0
 I second this
  • 4 0
 @mikekazimer I'd love to see a head to head of this 2021 Lyrik vs a Lyrik with Luftkappe!
  • 1 0
 It seems like the longer negative spring of the Lyrik didn't play nice with the Debonair 's additional negative spring volume. This Lyrik up grade may be very similar to the original air spring prior to the Debonair. I bet the Pike still works better with the Debonair's additional negative spring volume.
  • 1 0
 So can we say RockShox released a Debonair air spring originally with incorrect negative air volume? Since, for example, 170mm travel fork would right off the bat have less travel than it supposed to have. That seems like a design flaw to me. I don't see any changes to MY2021 air spring other than displacing the position of where the negative air spring starts in relation to the seal head. This also begs the question of what's the negative air spring volume in comparison to pre- debonair air springs?
  • 1 0
 Two quick questions:
Does adding an xmm longer foot nut = to xmm longer shaft?
Does the top-out bumper ever really come into play? The negative chamber should have enough volume and hence pressure if that volume goes to zero to keep parts from contacting - no?
  • 1 0
 Part numbers for a Pike 2014 -2014 A1 Fork:
00.4020.552.007 Latest Debonair Air Spring 160mm - 27.5 upgrade with new seal head and foot nut
00.4020.573.000 New seal head and foot nut needed to upgrade the old Debonair upgrade 00.4019.931.007 (160mm- 27.5)
00.4020.573.000 New seal head and foot nut needed to upgrade the old Debonair upgrade 00.4019.931.008 (150mm- 27.5)
Have your retailer check with HLC and QBP for parts. These parts should be available now.
  • 1 0
 2017 Pike here, fitted the debonair air spring upgrade last year so I’m assuming I’d just need the seal head and foot nut to upgrade (again).

Although I might use this as an opportunity to just go for 10mm travel more on a new airshaft, 130mm travel (what was a “bad” 120mm actual) to a true 140mm.
  • 1 0
 @RockShox: I’d like to upgrade my MY 2020 Pike Ultimate but can’t find anyone who is actually selling either the full upgrade or the small parts upgrade kit (spent the good part of an hour scoring the web). Where/when can the upgrade kits be purchased?!?
  • 1 0
 @RockShox: I changed my air spring to 160mm in my Pike RC B2 about a year ago. Can I just get the $25 sealhead and foot nut upgrade kit #00.4020.573.000 to upgrade my current DebonAir 160mm air spring assembly; #00.4019.931.000? Or do I need to get the whole assembly #00.4020.552.000 for the 2021 upgrade? Thanks.
  • 1 0
 Anyone who understands how these forks work will immediately realise that this provides zero performance benefit. The ride height of a fork without a rider on it is completely irrelevant to how it performs on trail. The fact that this tester put the same pressure in both test forks, and not set them both at the same sag, is ridiculous. Do these journos actually have any idea what they're talking about?
  • 1 0
 Hi @RockShox. Just installed the upgrade on a 2018 Yari. The o-rings and spacing on the old one that was in the fork lined up with the new one. Installed it and it is sitting in the same position as originally with 5 to 10mm sag with no weight on it. What am I missing? Thanks.
  • 4 0
 What is the part number for this bad boy?
  • 1 0
 depends on the fork/travel/year! but if you have a current DebonAir here is the seal/nut kit:
00.4020.573.000 AM UPGR DB C1- 35MM SEAL HEAD
  • 1 0
 Nice to see.

@RockShox will the seal head and foot nut upgrade work on the previous 170mm debonair spring RS00.4019.932.002 ?

Also does this alter the number of tokens you can run?
  • 2 0
 no alteration of tokens!

Seal Head Upgrade Kit - DebonAir C1 35mm Seal Head (Includes seal head & specific nut) - LYRIK/YARI A1+ (2016+)/PIKE B1+/Revelation A1+ (2018+) : 00.4020.573.000
  • 1 0
 @RockShox: Thanks ????
  • 3 0
 Pinkbike, let's see a thorough review between the new improved Rockshox air spring and Vorsprung Luftkappe.
  • 2 0
 That's subjective, completely a preference. The LuftKappe should feel very similar to the first DebonAir for forks, while the v2 DebonAir will feel a bit closer to the old Solo Air, or a Dual air with exactly equal pressures (Luftkappe and v1 DebonAir are more like a Dual Air with a bit more in the bottom/negative chamber). I personally like the Luftkappe/v1-DebonAir feel, but some don't. Especially those that got a shitty DebonAir setup that pulled their 140mm fork in by 10mm even with no weight on it. Seems SRAM's Quality Control dropped the ball a bit, because my DebonAir v1 feels great: tops out within 1mm of the full 150mm, sags just a few mm under the bike weight, and feels great at ~22% sag with me on it. (I'm ~7x the bike's weight in riding gear, and 22%/33mm sag is pretty close to 7-8x the bike sag, makes sense.)
  • 2 0
 @just6979: I was thinking the same. That the V2 Debonair may feel stiffer like the old Solo Air. Never really cared for the Pike 160 Solo Air feel. So, I installed the Luftkappe and definitely made an improvement on the fork plushness feel.

I also have 2017 Pike Debonair V1 150 and do like it, but going to increase the travel to 160. I may just buy the V1 Debonair air shaft instead, because V1 is very good. Will see if more people do comprehensive reviews of the V2 Debonair.
  • 1 0
 so this "upgrade" will reduce negative spring volume and stop your fork loosing a couple of mm when the bike is unweighted. so I'm unsure how this actually increases performance?
  • 1 0
 I want to know how far back you can upgrade an older, say 2009 (35mm) Lyrik with any recent upgrades without resorting to hacking, sawing and or gluing. Thread pitches and internal diameters are still the same right?
  • 1 0
 @Rockshox: I’d like to purchase the seal head & nut upgrade kit for my MY2020 Pike Ultimate but can’t find anyone who is actually selling them. When/where can these be purchased?!?
  • 1 0
 @RockShox when will the new debonair springs be included in RockShox Pike fork? If I order a new bike with a Pike Ultimate will it include this upgrade or will I need to buy separately?
  • 3 0
 Didn't RS release a better Debonair already last year ?
  • 2 0
 Can i just get the seal head and foot nut upgrade for my 2019 Lyrik with debonAir?
  • 1 0
 it´s in the article..
  • 1 0
 @Mondbiker: it only says “model 2020” in the article. But RockShox have given me an answer over on instagram
  • 1 0
 you can! 00.4020.573.000 Seal Head Upgrade Kit - DebonAir C1 35mm Seal Head (Includes seal head & specific nut) - LYRIK/YARI A1+ (2016+)/PIKE B1+/Revelation A1+ (2018+)
  • 2 0
 @RockShox will the new spring affect the amount of tokens, like available space?
  • 1 0
 no effect on tokens!
  • 1 0
 Dang it!! I just upped dropped in the previous debonair into my fork last week! But thank you Rockshox for keeping it backwards compatible!
  • 2 0
 $25 holla! you only need the Seal Head and Nut!
  • 2 0
 @RockShox the link on this page: www.sram.com/en/rockshox/series/lyrik for the upgrade kit is giving a 404 error
  • 2 0
 fixed!
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer any chance you could drop the part numbers for both the whole unit and seal head and foot nut into the info box? Thanks
  • 1 0
 what is going on with the 2021 prices? i could buy 2020 ultimate for 720 euros before this release and now 2021 model ultimate is 928
  • 1 0
 no you couldn´t when it was released as it was pretty much exactly the same price back then, you can buy 2020 ultimate for 650 now, buy this "upgrade for another 40 and save some 230quids compared to 2021, pretty sweet deal I would say.
  • 1 0
 @Mondbiker: price was the same 7 months ago...
  • 3 0
 @Noeserd: Yes, but not when it was released, just like today when they release new model year. Are you new to this dance?
  • 1 0
 @Mondbiker: the 2020 Lyrik Ultimate could be had for 730€ in Germany within a month of its release. A friend bought one.
  • 1 0
 @jzPV: Wait for a month then? It´s not like you are missing some crazy innovation with 2020 model either.
  • 1 0
 @RockShox / Clever people - Can this upgrade kit be used to increase travel as well - I have the Pike Ultimate 130 and would like to go to 140
  • 1 0
 Yes! You would just want to get that desired travel full DebonAir assembly.
  • 2 0
 Wondering if I should spring into this spring upgrade this spring, or wait till next.
  • 1 0
 With a 2018 Lyrik RCT3 would I just need to buy this airspring to upgrade it or do I need anything else?

(Sorry if it seems like a dumb question just a bit lost haha)
  • 1 0
 You can get by with just the Seal Head Upgrade Kit - DebonAir C1 35mm Seal Head (Includes seal head & specific nut) - LYRIK/YARI A1+ (2016+)/PIKE B1+/Revelation A1+ (2018+)
  • 2 0
 What's the best way to remove the old footnut? Do you need some kind of soft-jaw shaft clamp?
  • 1 0
 When will this become available and where can we buy them? I need to convert my 180 lyrik to 170 anyways so I might as well get the newest upgrade if it's only $40
  • 1 0
 In production and shipping now! Check in with your favorite retailer for more info.
  • 1 0
 But this will make a 170 feel like a 180.. Are you sure you want that or maybe just get the older 170 debonair which will feel 10mm lower than your current?
  • 1 0
 @Jukis: Yeah because I want the extra travel and keep the same head angle plus the performance gains are worth the $42. Also I really really don't need 180 mm travel.
  • 1 0
 @hallj2: There are no gains, only downsides to performance.. Less sensitivity at the start of travel and less support in midstroke.. Your ride height will stay the same as your current 180mm debonair so your angles will also stay the same. If you feel like you dont need as much travel as you have now you should get the older 170mm debonair. Dont buy into the advertise talk, read what Vorsprungs Steve and other people who realise what they are talking about say.. The newest design has less negative space. Only upside I can find about that is that you'll be able to pop a wheelie slightly easier with a higher riding 170 than a good 180, but is your enduro bike for wheelies or going fast with superb traction?
  • 1 0
 And all RS and Fox air springs continue to be second rate compared to Manitou's IRT or any other similar dual positive chamber design or upgrade such as the Diaz Runt.
  • 1 0
 Ohh very nice. Have loved my debonair lyrik but since sticking it on my hardtail had thought a bit more support would be nice. WIll grab one of these for sure.
  • 1 0
 Sorry but I think that was planned from the begining - firs thet sell you solo air back in 2016, then the plastic debonair comes, them the aluminium and now that one.
  • 1 0
 Just installed it and the way the fork sits at the top of the travel is immediately noticeable!! Very nice job RockShox and why I continue to trend towards there squish!!
  • 3 0
 Precious millimeters!
  • 2 0
 still waiting for the new fork... crack the beavers den Smile )
  • 1 0
 is there a 160mm pike air shaft upgrade for the 2019 29er fork? if so whats the part number?
  • 1 0
 00.4020.552.000

Air Spring Upgrade Kit - DebonAir C1 160mm (Includes DebonAir C1Assembly, seal head) - PIKE B1+/Revelation A1+ (2018+)
  • 1 1
 Seems like this just increases the effective axle to crown length of your fork by 7.5mm. Does't really provide a performance upgrade.
  • 1 0
 I'm planning to bump the travel on my Lyric up a bit at first 50 hour service, so this is very welcome news.
  • 1 0
 Ride On! Be sure to get the full assembly in the desired travel when you do! Have fun!
  • 1 0
 hmmm was thinking about boosting my 160mm 2018 lyrik to 170mm. Seems like this is the right move now with this air spring.
  • 2 3
 Quality Management Team: "Ah sooo guys we have a issue with the new debonair Lyrik"
Marketing Team: "NO WAY! You mean to say we have an exciting opportunity for an AMAZING performance upgrade?!"
  • 2 0
 EXACTLY THAT
  • 1 1
 This looks exactly like the Fox air-spring for 2018+, When Fox fixed a similar problem with their old spring, if you can't beat them join them.
  • 1 0
 "especially one with oversized stanchions"

didn't fawn over manitou when they released the mezzer did ya pinkbike
  • 1 0
 I like the Rockshox uses more metal parts than Fox does. But feel wise, I prefer Fox suspension.
  • 2 4
 the 2019 spring update was such a piece of shit. my 180mm fork should get 180mm travel. but it will only ever get 172mm max actual travel. i tried all these suck down fixes n whatnot wasting hours and hours of my time. one of the largest companies in the bike world really should have no excuse for taking such a shitty design to market. Sram Rockshox - You owe me a new air spring shaft.
  • 9 1
 It’s people like you that cause Rockshox to release shitty updates like this that literally reduces performance in every conceivable way because their marketing and R&D department are the same thing. The original solo air from 2013 would be an upgrade over this crap. Loosing the 8mm means your fork is sensitive enough to sag under the weight of your bike, which means it’s performing well. And everyone likes things that performs better, unless you’re stupid.
  • 1 6
flag getsomesy (Apr 9, 2020 at 12:10) (Below Threshold)
 @TheSlayer99: hahaha your a fukin idiot. Not gonna argue with you.
  • 4 2
 @getsomesy: I’m the smart one here bud. I’m not the one that thinks sram and any of its subsidiaries make products worth spending any amount of money on. You’d have to be pretty stupid to do that.
  • 1 0
 I was going to bump my 150 Lyrik up to 160 anyway. So this is good timing, might as well pick up the new air shaft!
  • 1 0
 Why is the GoPro footage of just the fork’n front wheel so satisfying to watch…? And the side-by-side ftw!
  • 1 0
 I installed the debonair spring yesterday.... and today I read it's already old.... seriously wtf
  • 1 0
 @RockShox how is the foot-nut removed and replaced? Does it require a soft-jaws clamp or is there another method?
  • 4 4
 Wasn’t this the same thing they did last year from the rc2 to the ultimate?
  • 1 11
flag duzzi (Apr 9, 2020 at 7:39) (Below Threshold)
 ...
  • 2 0
 This is fantastic!
  • 3 2
 Is there a chance of fitting this debonAir inside a suntour axon?
  • 2 0
 @Notmeatall the DebonAir air spring will not fit inside a Suntour Axon.
  • 9 10
 So last year the Lyric was "ground breaking, better than ever, maybe the best fork available" and now "this new update fixes a severe flaw in the old model" got it
  • 3 1
 @honourablegeorge:
Even lamborghini's ferrari's gets little updates
There is no perfect in this world
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer Are they going to have this upgrade for the boxxer aswell?
  • 2 0
 Nope! Based on a lot of testing and athlete's feedback, we held off on changes for the BoXXer models. Rides sweet as is!
  • 2 0
 @RockShox: Good to know! thanks for the reply! also just curious how come your forks don't have bleed ports on the lowers? Everytime I drive up the mountain and get to the bike park I have to use the zip tie trick! everyone Ive talked to wishes your forks had them.
  • 2 0
 In other words, pro downhillers don't get hung up on 20% sag numbers and understand that the bike having its own sag is completely normal.
  • 1 0
 Does anyone know the part number for the 35mm seal head/foot nut kit?
Thx
  • 1 0
 we do! Seal Head Upgrade Kit - DebonAir C1 35mm Seal Head (Includes seal head & specific nut) - LYRIK/YARI A1+ (2016+)/PIKE B1+/Revelation A1+ (2018+)
  • 1 0
 Is this compatible with any Yari/Lyrik model since 2016?
  • 1 0
 True Story!
  • 1 0
 Will this fit in a 35 Gold, @RockShox ?
  • 1 0
 @dontcoast the updated DebonAir air spring does not fit into the 35 Gold.
  • 1 0
 @RockShox: dat is sad, but thank you for your quick reply!
  • 1 0
 When will these available for retail?
  • 1 0
 In production and shipping now!
  • 1 0
 I looks like the old fox air spring
  • 1 0
 Will this work on a pike DJ? My forks have a few mm dead at the top too.
  • 1 0
 Que me paren el autobús por favor
Yo ya me bajo aquí,????????
  • 1 0
 Que paren el autobús porfavor
Yo me bajo aquí...
  • 1 0
 That reminds me gmbn hacks and bodges
  • 1 0
 Couldn't we just turn the old head upside down, (moving the seal up)..?
  • 1 0
 Shoulda commented on how it feels in chattery terrain. Bleh.
  • 1 0
 when is it available?
  • 4 0
 Right Now! Check in with your favorite RockShox retailer!
  • 2 1
 @RockShox: What is the part number please? (Just for the seal head & nut.)
  • 2 0
 @RockShox: I am not seeing this on some of the online stores yet - am I missing something?
  • 4 0
 @eddlessride: 00.4020.573.000 - AM UPGR DB C1- 35MM SEAL HEAD
  • 1 0
 @RockShox: what is the part. Number for the air shaft upgrade for a lyrik and a pike please, and when will they be available in the UK?
  • 1 0
 @jerseyjinx: Happy to help, to know what part number you need, we need to know Model, Year, and travel! These will be available in the UK ASAP!
  • 1 0
 @RockShox: the lyrik is 2016 already upgraded to original debonair, the pike i think is 2017
  • 1 0
 @RockShox: the lyrik is 170mm and the pike is 160mm
  • 1 0
 foot nut
  • 4 5
 Anyone who thinks this is an upgrade over the previous air spring is delusional.
  • 1 0
 Yeah.. Luckily I have 170mm Lyrik so If I ever feel like I'd need it to ride higher I can just get the 180mm shaft, or maybe just the foot stud now.
  • 1 2
 Lmao. Just stop fucking around and make it right before you charge consumers to test it. SRAM is such a crock or shit
  • 1 0
 I'll probably get one
  • 5 6
 Weird, with every change they make it look more and more like a Luftkappe.
  • 6 4
 The Luftkappe is a copy of Fox's 40 EvoL airspring that came out in 2015 (model year 2016).
  • 4 7
 so my 2020 lyrik ultimate I just bought one week ago, is already outdated?
  • 9 0
 is my 2015 also outdated? kappa

i dont get it, stuff changes quite often in all industries, why is that a big deal??
  • 10 2
 Your Lyrik Ultimate is going to be awesome just the way it is. IF after a couple rides you feel like you need a little more initial support, then the DebonAir air spring can easily be updated with a couple small parts. Otherwise everything else is the same!
  • 7 0
 @RockShox: Part numbers for the upgrade kits?
  • 1 0
 I’ve got one on the way too. Haha. With the price difference it’s still cheaper than Fox even if you grab the new air shaft. Smile
  • 3 0
 @DrPete: Well you can always sell the debonair v1 (let's call it) to someone not upgraded to debonair at all, like a 2007 Lyrik fork.

I really like the upgrade paths for the forks right now.
You can buy a cheaper bike with a lower spec fork and upgrade it over time when you find you have a need for more adjustments.
  • 1 0
 @kbh: 00.4020.573.000 AM UPGR DB C1- 35MM SEAL HEAD (Only the Seal Head/Nut)
  • 2 0
 @kbh: 00.4020.573.000 for the upgrade kit, I just got one from Fluid Function in Squamish.
  • 1 0
 I have the same fork and am looking forward to a little upgrade...
  • 1 0
 @RockShox: sorry are the new SKF seals available for the 2019 lyric rc2 debonair,will they make a real big difference?more then the new air spring,thanks
  • 2 4
 Meh
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



You must login to Pinkbike.
Don't have an account? Sign up

Join Pinkbike  Login
Copyright © 2000 - 2020. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.045866
Mobile Version of Website