What's a better front shock for very aggressive trail riding

[mnman309]

I have checked around for the Float 2 upgrade kit and every Fox Dealer will do it for $350. But I choose to have mine re-valved. What was found inside was a .040 piston, which is the smallest orfice out there! Which means it doesnt compress unless it is getting beat all the time! I had a larger one installed- it was either a .050 or .060. 2nd part was the shim stack was a single stack, so a multi stack was put in. It will be interesting to see how they ride, but i suggest at the least if you have the stock Floats re-valved and a different shim stack.

 

[ahicks]

I have checked around for the Float 2 upgrade kit and every Fox Dealer will do it for $350. But I choose to have mine re-valved. What was found inside was a .040 piston, which is the smallest orfice out there! Which means it doesnt compress unless it is getting beat all the time! I had a larger one installed- it was either a .050 or .060. 2nd part was the shim stack was a single stack, so a multi stack was put in. It will be interesting to see how they ride, but i suggest at the least if you have the stock Floats re-valved and a different shim stack.

I think you're going to love the difference! Installing a multi stage (progressive) compresion stack in mine all but eliminated the nasty feed back coming up through the bars in the stutters - without affecting the shock's ability to take on the bigger stuff! Cost to do it myself was 8.00 (4 shims) plus a pint of shock oil.....

I think these "kits" are mostly hype. Most anyone comfortable playing with a valve stack can do a great job for 1/3 the price of that kit.

 

[Nitrousman1]

I have checked around for the Float 2 upgrade kit and every Fox Dealer will do it for $350. But I choose to have mine re-valved. What was found inside was a .040 piston, which is the smallest orfice out there! Which means it doesnt compress unless it is getting beat all the time! I had a larger one installed- it was either a .050 or .060. 2nd part was the shim stack was a single stack, so a multi stack was put in. It will be interesting to see how they ride, but i suggest at the least if you have the stock Floats re-valved and a different shim stack.

I think you're going to love the difference! Installing a multi stage (progressive) compresion stack in mine all but eliminated the nasty feed back coming up through the bars in the stutters - without affecting the shock's ability to take on the bigger stuff! Cost to do it myself was 8.00 (4 shims) plus a pint of shock oil.....

I think these "kits" are mostly hype. Most anyone comfortable playing with a valve stack can do a great job for 1/3 the price of that kit.

Where did you buy the parts from and did you need any special tools to disassemble the shocks?

 

[ahicks]

<<<<Where did you buy the parts from and did you need any special tools to disassemble the shocks>>>>

I bought the necessary equipment and sought help from people experienced in this type of work prior to ever taking a shock apart (something I should have done 20 years ago). I would not consider this a do it yourself project otherwise. Even with the help I've covered myself from head to foot with shock oil on a couple of different occasions (most recently, last night)! I wrote about the actual expense involved to illustrate the profit margin some of these guys are getting? Parts are available from numerous sources - including a lot of local dirt bike shops with a shock guy on staff. FWIW -Al

 

[AKrider]

I think these "kits" are mostly hype. Most anyone comfortable playing with a valve stack can do a great job for 1/3 the price of that kit.

I can't speak to the "kits" specifically, but when you have your shocks revalved by a reputable shop like Carver, part of the price pays for all the testing and R&D they did to determine what works.

If you have the specialized equipment, skills and knowledge to physically disassemble and assemble the shocks yourself, well, that is only part of the equation. You also need the time to test all kinds of set ups in all kinds of temperatures in all kinds of conditions and have the experience to know how to set up the shocks to get the results you want.

 

[Nitrousman1]

I've had shocks revalved before and was just wondering if it's worth while for me to attempt it or not. Seems like they get a lot of money to do them but I know if you find a good shop they have spent time to test what works best so in most cases they can get them dialed in for the type of riding you do on the first try. I had Dave Bowman's do my shocks once before out in Waterford Michigan but does anyone know of a place on the eastside to get them done that they would recommend? Thanks.

 

[ahicks]

I've had shocks revalved before and was just wondering if it's worth while for me to attempt it or not. Seems like they get a lot of money to do them but I know if you find a good shop they have spent time to test what works best so in most cases they can get them dialed in for the type of riding you do on the first try. I had Dave Bowman's do my shocks once before out in Waterford Michigan but does anyone know of a place on the eastside to get them done that they would recommend? Thanks.

I don't think Bowman's is even a mile from my house, is usually my first stop trying to track anything down. You might try Jerry at JBshocks.com. (13-14m & 75 area) Pretty popular among the Polaris crowd. Good guy in any case, might be able to give you a hand.

Regarding worthwhile - I don't want to take anything away from doing business with the top of the line shock builders, but it's really not that hard to make a very noticable difference for the better when working with the Yammi OEM valve stacks. I don't think there's much doubt. Revalving is very worthwhile. Try bringing up going with a "progressive" or "multi stage" valve stack when talking with your potential builder. I'm sold on them.... they flat work for me. -Al

 

[Alatalo]

I have checked around for the Float 2 upgrade kit and every Fox Dealer will do it for $350.

I think these "kits" are mostly hype. Most anyone comfortable playing with a valve stack can do a great job for 1/3 the price of that kit.

From what I understand, the main difference between Float and Float 2 is the "negative spring technology" and the bigger air volume found in Float 2. One should be careful to not confuse the outcome of this change with the outcome of a valving change, as one of them is position sensitive and the other one is velocity sensitive. Float 2 is certainly not a hype since it is aimed at reducing the obvious drawbacks (excessive body roll and lack of steering response) found in the overly progressive Float.

Also, there are a number of reasons why reputable suspension shops charge more money for modifications than the parts cost itself. Some of these reasons are not performance related at all, but more about getting profit out of their business in order to pay the loans and put dinner on the table every night. However, there are also some strictly performance related reasons like paying off education, experience, research and development. My impression is that these reasons are often forgotten. Too often. I have spent the better part of my life as a professional suspension technichian and suspension engineer and I tell you, I have spent way too much time sorting out problems caused by home made suspension gurus. That had never heard about shock absorber pressure balance. Or cavitation. Or damping force hysteresis. Or piston surface pitting damage. Or shim fatigue. Or seal drag. Or even seen a shock absorber dynamometer...

Furthermore, once again based on my own experience, I still insist that trying to set up an IFP-type shock absorber for very aggressive riding is nothing but a waste of time. The dynamic response as well as the maximum damping output is simply nowhere near the numbers needed for aggressive riding with any kind of performance related terrain application. If you are into very aggressive riding you better look at the GYT-R shocks or any of the other non-IFP options...

 

[ahicks]

I have checked around for the Float 2 upgrade kit and every Fox Dealer will do it for $350.

I think these "kits" are mostly hype. Most anyone comfortable playing with a valve stack can do a great job for 1/3 the price of that kit.

From what I understand, the main difference between Float and Float 2 is the "negative spring technology" and the bigger air volume found in Float 2. One should be careful to not confuse the outcome of this change with the outcome of a valving change, as one of them is position sensitive and the other one is velocity sensitive. Float 2 is certainly not a hype since it is aimed at reducing the obvious drawbacks (excessive body roll and lack of steering response) found in the overly progressive Float.

Also, there are a number of reasons why reputable suspension shops charge more money for modifications than the parts cost itself. Some of these reasons are not performance related at all, but more about getting profit out of their business in order to pay the loans and put dinner on the table every night. However, there are also some strictly performance related reasons like paying off education, experience, research and development. My impression is that these reasons are often forgotten. Too often. I have spent the better part of my life as a professional suspension technichian and suspension engineer and I tell you, I have spent way too much time sorting out problems caused by home made suspension gurus. That had never heard about shock absorber pressure balance. Or cavitation. Or damping force hysteresis. Or piston surface pitting damage. Or shim fatigue. Or seal drag. Or even seen a shock absorber dynamometer...

Furthermore, once again based on my own experience, I still insist that trying to set up an IFP-type shock absorber for very aggressive riding is nothing but a waste of time. The dynamic response as well as the maximum damping output is simply nowhere near the numbers needed for aggressive riding with any kind of performance related terrain application. If you are into very aggressive riding you better look at the GYT-R shocks or any of the other non-IFP options...

Alatalo
Not trying to be mean here, really. I just don't get why you keep going to the fact a resi equipped shock will outperform an IFP when discussing IFP shocks. I understand that, and why. Should people with Floats (or other IFP shocks) be discouraged from tuning for better performance because of the potential for cavitation? What's your point?

Should somebody with Floats be discouraged from doing anything to their shocks without first converting to the Float II specs? Why?

As somebody with an adjustable set of air resi's on my Floats, I'm very familiar with how changes to the air volume affect perfomance. Do I insist that capability be in place prior to suggesting that perfomance may be increased over OEM? C'mon, we both know better.

Sorry about the "hype" comment. I'm actually curious as all get out regarding this 350.00 kit. They just seem awfully vague, and specifics that support that kind of cost don't seem to exist? 2 different people have replied to this string with a list of components replaced during their Float to FloatII conversions, and neither have mentioned anything about a component that might alter the air volume? Do they remove an existing component when reassembling? I didn't see anything on their website that might suggest how the volume was being changed with a kit install either? Or maybe it does and I just missed it.

With all due respect for the pros that have been/are paying their dues and are trying to make a living, I don't see how taking a shock to a mom and pop shop down the street vs. sending out to one of the big name shops is any different than avoiding the cost of returning your car to a dealer when a competent repair can be made much more reasonably at a smaller shop? Are the mom and pop shops not entitled to make a living? Do they really need a shock dyno to make a shock perfom better? I think there is room for both the pro shops AND the mom and pop shops, even after recognizing the fact that a dealer may be much better equipped to handle complex issues.

Every one of your points are valid with regards to somebody needing, looking for, and willing to pay for 100% of available shock technology. I guess I'm wondering what the the rest of us are supposed to do? Is there not some sort of middle ground?

-Al

 

[Alatalo]

Alatalo
Not trying to be mean here, really. I just don't get why you keep going to the fact a resi equipped shock will outperform an IFP when discussing IFP shocks. I understand that, and why. Should people with Floats (or other IFP shocks) be discouraged from tuning for better performance because of the potential for cavitation? What's your point?

I am not trying to step any toes, offend anyone or start anything. But the thread name is "what's a better front shock for very aggressive trail riding" followed by the question "would the GYT-R be a better option...?". I am just answering this question from a theoretical point of view as well as my personal experience - any shock with an additional compression valve is clearly a better option for very aggressive trail riding. The IFP shock does not have the dynamic response or the maximum damping output required for snocross, for instance. No valving change (or even the Float 2 kit) is going to change this because this is all about the design concept itself. Again according to theory as well as personal experience. Been there tried that but failed, kind of...
My feeling is that this message is drowned in valving and setup advices not related to the original question, because of this I am repeating myself. I am sorry if this offended anyone.

 

[sheetwright]

I can corner like a train on my GYT clickers Sold my Fox floats for $50 less then I bought my dual clickers for

 

[ahicks]

mnman309 wrote:
I have checked around for the Float 2 upgrade kit and every Fox Dealer will do it for $350.

ahicks wrote:
I think these "kits" are mostly hype. Most anyone comfortable playing with a valve stack can do a great job for 1/3 the price of that kit.

Alatalo, your response, the one I was replying to, started with these quotes. I assumed these were the topic of your post. So you're right. I didn't see anything regarding either the original question or anything to do with the GYT shocks here, so I agree. This string has gone too far off topic, could be confusing or interpeted improperly. -Al

 

[shadow637]

I'm actually curious as all get out regarding this 350.00 kit. They just seem awfully vague, and specifics that support that kind of cost don't seem to exist? 2 different people have replied to this string with a list of components replaced during their Float to FloatII conversions, and neither have mentioned anything about a component that might alter the air volume? Do they remove an existing component when reassembling? I didn't see anything on their website that might suggest how the volume was being changed with a kit install either? Or maybe it does and I just missed it.

-Al

I believe the volume is increased by the use of a different bearing, they refer to it as a "max air volume bearing". I assume it is machined further to remove more unneeded material and allow for more air volume. I think they also include a different high flow piston and a re-valve.

Now back to the original topic...

 

[ruffryder]

any shock with an additional compression valve is clearly a better option for very aggressive trail riding. The IFP shock does not have the dynamic response or the maximum damping output required for snocross, for instance.

You mind describing what you mean by dynamic response and maximum damping output with respect to how it impacts the handling of a snowmobile?

Thanks

 

[Alatalo]

any shock with an additional compression valve is clearly a better option for very aggressive trail riding. The IFP shock does not have the dynamic response or the maximum damping output required for snocross, for instance.

You mind describing what you mean by dynamic response and maximum damping output with respect to how it impacts the handling of a snowmobile?

The IFP shock absorber has got a slower dynamic response than a well set up additional compression valve shock absorber. This means that the damping becomes more time delayed (= more out of phase with respect to the shock absorber stroke) when the shock absorber is forced to change direction. In general, this time delay (= phase shift between damping and stroke) becomes bigger as the frequency of the shock absorber direction changes becomes higher. In real world, this translates into reduced feedback as well as reduced bump absorption. Part because of the time delay / phase shift itself, part because the time delay / phase shift will require higher levels of damping force to achieve the same energy absorption as the additional compression valve shock absorber.

Since the IFP shock absorber is creating compression damping only by pressure reduction through the main valve, the maximum compression damping output is decided by the piston surface area and the nitrogen pressure level. This means that it is possible to calculate a maximum compression damping force out of every combination of piston size and nitrogen pressure level. Assuming reasonable piston size and nitrogen pressure level (a piston that at least will fit inside the snowmobile suspension and a nitrogen pressure that at least is possible to handle...) one will see that the maximum compression damping force is not enough compared to, for instance, the high speed compression damping forces used in modern snocross replicas. In real world, this translates into poor bottoming resistance. Either because the IFP shock absorber does not produce enough compression damping to stop bottoming OR because the IFP shock absorber is forced to exceed the maximum compression damping force and thereby cavitates and collapses.

Please note that the two descriptions above assumes a "well setup" additional compression valve shock absorber. This means that the creator of the valving must understand the shock absorber design concept from a pressure point of view and thereby be able to maintain the shock absorber pressure balance at all shock absorber velocities. If this is not the case, it is actually possible to make the additional compression valve shock absorber behave worse than the IFP shock absorber...According to my experience, reputable suspension shops with access to shock absorber dynamometers and top level race teams usually have a very good understanding about this. Unfortunately, this is not always the case with lower level suspension shops and home made suspension gurus...

Please also note that I am not trying to offend anyone by slagging the IFP concept off. But the thread is about shocks for "very aggressive trail riding", and in my opinion, the IFP shock absorber is not the concept you want for snocross, cross country racing or "very aggressive trail riding"...