Static Sag v Rider Sag
Discussion
Mr OCD said:
theshrew said:
Ok so I've just taken the measurements again.
Rear
Wheel off the ground 620mm
Bike on it's own 613mm
Me on the bike 557mm
Front
Wheel off the ground 130mm
Bike on it's own 101mm
Me on the bike 89mm
Lard ass! Rear
Wheel off the ground 620mm
Bike on it's own 613mm
Me on the bike 557mm
Front
Wheel off the ground 130mm
Bike on it's own 101mm
Me on the bike 89mm
Put settings back to standard and measure rider sag again ...
Basically your numbers are pap.
Front at 30mm static and 41 dynamic is wrong, and lets not even mention the rear!! 63mm isn't sag, it's a suspension collapse!
theshrew said:
I'm about 13.5 / 14 stone.
Tbf this time it was my Mrs doing the measuring. I give up.
Going to pop to Scott's at some point at least I will have someone who can bloody measure.
Thanks for the help :-)
You could always swing by over here. Only in the next town.Tbf this time it was my Mrs doing the measuring. I give up.
Going to pop to Scott's at some point at least I will have someone who can bloody measure.
Thanks for the help :-)
Edited by theshrew on Sunday 5th April 15:32
From a very well known UK tuner...
The standard springs are 11Nmm in the front and 116Nmm on the rear, we would say that they are not far off for you at all. The only thing I would say is we don't work to rider say too much because you don't sit in one position while riding the bike, static sag is a better measurement to work to the number you want to see are 25-30mm in the front and 10-15 in the rear.
Interesting...
The standard springs are 11Nmm in the front and 116Nmm on the rear, we would say that they are not far off for you at all. The only thing I would say is we don't work to rider say too much because you don't sit in one position while riding the bike, static sag is a better measurement to work to the number you want to see are 25-30mm in the front and 10-15 in the rear.
Interesting...
Mr OCD said:
From a very well known UK tuner...
The standard springs are 11Nmm in the front and 116Nmm on the rear, we would say that they are not far off for you at all. The only thing I would say is we don't work to rider say too much because you don't sit in one position while riding the bike, static sag is a better measurement to work to the number you want to see are 25-30mm in the front and 10-15 in the rear.
Interesting...
Is this on the Blade?? The standard springs are that heavy?? Seriously???????The standard springs are 11Nmm in the front and 116Nmm on the rear, we would say that they are not far off for you at all. The only thing I would say is we don't work to rider say too much because you don't sit in one position while riding the bike, static sag is a better measurement to work to the number you want to see are 25-30mm in the front and 10-15 in the rear.
Interesting...
As for the excuse for not setting rider sag, sorry, that's b
ks. Setting the static sag and then having a 20 stone bloke climb on is going to be a world away from the same bike and a 9 stone rider. fking charlatans!Give you an idea, I'm 95kginmy gear and I run 10nm springs and they are very stiff, even though the bike is light. The give very little static sag but good dynamic for track only.....
bass gt3 said:
Is this on the Blade?? The standard springs are that heavy?? Seriously???????
As for the excuse for not setting rider sag, sorry, that's bks. Setting the static sag and then having a 20 stone bloke climb on is going to be a world away from the same bike and a 9 stone rider. fking charlatans!
Give you an idea, I'm 95kginmy gear and I run 10nm springs and they are very stiff, even though the bike is light. The give very little static sag but good dynamic for track only.....
Yep, for the Blade... hence said 'Interesting'... As for the excuse for not setting rider sag, sorry, that's b
ks. Setting the static sag and then having a 20 stone bloke climb on is going to be a world away from the same bike and a 9 stone rider. fking charlatans!Give you an idea, I'm 95kginmy gear and I run 10nm springs and they are very stiff, even though the bike is light. The give very little static sag but good dynamic for track only.....
If I worked to those static sag measurements I would see 35-40mm sag rear, 45-50mm sag front at a rough guess... that's with me on it ... add another 2 stone and you'll be using over 50% of travel just sat on the bike!
I've been a bit naughty and messed about the 'ride height' on the blade... I've raised the rear around 3-4mm and it feels 'better' to me ...
Read the book I bought and it drums in you about 'experimenting' so you can feel the differences. So I'm doing just that...
Wish there was a way of preventing marking of the preload nuts on the forks! - Managed to mark them slightly despite using tape to try and prevent it ...
Considering buying preload adjusters to stick on but look a bit chavvy lol bass gt3 said:
Mr OCD said:
From a very well known UK tuner...
The standard springs are 11Nmm in the front and 116Nmm on the rear, we would say that they are not far off for you at all. The only thing I would say is we don't work to rider say too much because you don't sit in one position while riding the bike, static sag is a better measurement to work to the number you want to see are 25-30mm in the front and 10-15 in the rear.
Interesting...
Is this on the Blade?? The standard springs are that heavy?? Seriously???????The standard springs are 11Nmm in the front and 116Nmm on the rear, we would say that they are not far off for you at all. The only thing I would say is we don't work to rider say too much because you don't sit in one position while riding the bike, static sag is a better measurement to work to the number you want to see are 25-30mm in the front and 10-15 in the rear.
Interesting...
As for the excuse for not setting rider sag, sorry, that's b
ks. Setting the static sag and then having a 20 stone bloke climb on is going to be a world away from the same bike and a 9 stone rider. fking charlatans!Give you an idea, I'm 95kginmy gear and I run 10nm springs and they are very stiff, even though the bike is light. The give very little static sag but good dynamic for track only.....
You could get the same static sag with almost any spring weight fitted as long as there is sufficient preload adjustment available!
Which "tuner" was this out of interest? Hopefully not a "suspension specialist"?
fergus said:
+1
You could get the same static sag with almost any spring weight fitted as long as there is sufficient preload adjustment available!
Which "tuner" was this out of interest? Hopefully not a "suspension specialist"?
... afraid so... You could get the same static sag with almost any spring weight fitted as long as there is sufficient preload adjustment available!
Which "tuner" was this out of interest? Hopefully not a "suspension specialist"?
http://tinyurl.com/3vnzmop
Mr OCD said:
bass gt3 said:
Is this on the Blade?? The standard springs are that heavy?? Seriously???????
As for the excuse for not setting rider sag, sorry, that's bks. Setting the static sag and then having a 20 stone bloke climb on is going to be a world away from the same bike and a 9 stone rider. fking charlatans!
Give you an idea, I'm 95kginmy gear and I run 10nm springs and they are very stiff, even though the bike is light. The give very little static sag but good dynamic for track only.....
Yep, for the Blade... hence said 'Interesting'... As for the excuse for not setting rider sag, sorry, that's b
ks. Setting the static sag and then having a 20 stone bloke climb on is going to be a world away from the same bike and a 9 stone rider. fking charlatans!Give you an idea, I'm 95kginmy gear and I run 10nm springs and they are very stiff, even though the bike is light. The give very little static sag but good dynamic for track only.....
If I worked to those static sag measurements I would see 35-40mm sag rear, 45-50mm sag front at a rough guess... that's with me on it ... add another 2 stone and you'll be using over 50% of travel just sat on the bike!
I've been a bit naughty and messed about the 'ride height' on the blade... I've raised the rear around 3-4mm and it feels 'better' to me ...
Read the book I bought and it drums in you about 'experimenting' so you can feel the differences. So I'm doing just that...
Wish there was a way of preventing marking of the preload nuts on the forks! - Managed to mark them slightly despite using tape to try and prevent it ...
Considering buying preload adjusters to stick on but look a bit chavvy lol As for not marking the preload adjusters, pop a surgical glove over the fork to act as a barrier between the nit and the socket. Works nicely.
And if that advice came from the people in the link, I'm amazed. Every time I discussed this they said to ignore static and always measure to dynamic. Strange indeed. As for moving about on the bike, unless you're sitting on the number plate or the headlight that's rubbish!
Trick is to set the sag with you in your gear in your average riding position. If you're a track monkey, get down and dirty behind the screen. If you're a road warrior, maybe sit up a bit. But it's about setting an average. But the average is with YOUR weight!
Edited by bass gt3 on Tuesday 7th April 11:34
Mr OCD said:
bass gt3 said:
Experimentation is vital, as long as you keep a note.
As for not marking the preload adjusters, pop a surgical glove over the fork to act as a barrier between the nit and the socket. Works nicely
Cheers for the tip As for not marking the preload adjusters, pop a surgical glove over the fork to act as a barrier between the nit and the socket. Works nicely
Current front preload setting (8 turns in from 15) just doesn't feel right ... I preferred the bike with more sag at the front as it felt more planted and responsive.
But using 38mm front and with the rear set at 33mm 'should' in theory be close to ideal. In reality it feels too 'hard' on the road which is ironic given reducing the sag shouldn't affect the spring rate but I suspect it does a little.
So I'm thinking of going back to (6 turns in from 15) which felt good and increasing rear sag to 35mm (5th notch of 10) which will keep the bike balanced. Probably increasing the trail slightly but given it's on a 190/50 tyre that is not going to be an issue.
Looking at the range of travel I am using on the front fork I've a lot of travel available at current setting and my thought is you want to use as much as possible without bottoming out the fork so increasing the front sag will not hurt?
But using 38mm front and with the rear set at 33mm 'should' in theory be close to ideal. In reality it feels too 'hard' on the road which is ironic given reducing the sag shouldn't affect the spring rate but I suspect it does a little.
So I'm thinking of going back to (6 turns in from 15) which felt good and increasing rear sag to 35mm (5th notch of 10) which will keep the bike balanced. Probably increasing the trail slightly but given it's on a 190/50 tyre that is not going to be an issue.
Looking at the range of travel I am using on the front fork I've a lot of travel available at current setting and my thought is you want to use as much as possible without bottoming out the fork so increasing the front sag will not hurt?
Biker's Nemesis said:
After all this and you're still not happy?
It's an interesting technical subject John... something I enjoy learning and experimenting about. How have you set your blade up?
... And yes, to answer the question I'm very happy with the changes but definitely prefer more sag at the front, the bike feels 'flighty' at the front with similar sag figures to the rear - this might explain why several suspension specialists run more sag in the front than the rear although I'm still experimenting!
Edited by Mr OCD on Wednesday 8th April 20:21
Gassing Station | Biker Banter | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff