# spinner aeris



## chopperhead (Apr 16, 2006)

How is your spinner aeris fork working?Good or bad?I have one also but have not had a chance to really use it because of winter.Any problems?thanks.


----------



## Slobberdoggy (Sep 26, 2005)

I have heard other peoples comments that are very positive but I am wondering about just how much flex it has. Now, I realize I am a heavier rider (185 lbs) but my fly weight 150lb bike friend was complaining about how the brake pads (vuelta arms alloy bolts) rub a lot when you shift weight or corner from one direction to another. The only other fork I have riden is the manitou mach 5 so my comments aren't all that relevant. I also have not taken it off road yet. I may not be very sensitive to this flex coming from an already flexy fork but I don't notice it other than the noise. In theory it should be stiffer then the sid and flexier then the fox, manitou, Marz, etc. but i would be interested in others comments too especially about how the spul valve is working. I am not in the position to provide a true review. Perhaps there is something wrong with my fork but I don't see how MBAction and Cycleingnews could provide the positive reviews they did w/o mentioning this flex unless it is normal and or not a bad kind of flex. BTW I was using steel bolt on skewers. I tried my new extralite wheels (beautiful on my bike) with ti - tune skewers and on the street ride I did last night could not tell a noticeable difference in pads rubbing.

If one were in the market I would wait for the new version with an alloy crown which may be lighter and perhaps stiffer.

One other note, the fork does not offer any on the fly tuning with a nob or anything. However, in terms of a light weight fork that works pretty good - I don't know what alternative would be better. The manitou R7 deserves a look but is heavier.


----------



## bhsavery (Aug 19, 2004)

Slobberdoggy said:


> I have heard other peoples comments that are very positive but I am wondering about just how much flex it has. Now, I realize I am a heavier rider (185 lbs) but my fly weight 150lb bike friend was complaining about how the brake pads (vuelta arms alloy bolts) rub a lot when you shift weight or corner from one direction to another. The only other fork I have riden is the manitou mach 5 so my comments aren't all that relevant. I also have not taken it off road yet. I may not be very sensitive to this flex coming from an already flexy fork but I don't notice it other than the noise. In theory it should be stiffer then the sid and flexier then the fox, manitou, Marz, etc. but i would be interested in others comments too especially about how the spul valve is working. I am not in the position to provide a true review. Perhaps there is something wrong with my fork but I don't see how MBAction and Cycleingnews could provide the positive reviews they did w/o mentioning this flex unless it is normal and or not a bad kind of flex. BTW I was using steel bolt on skewers. I tried my new extralite wheels (beautiful on my bike) with ti - tune skewers and on the street ride I did last night could not tell a noticeable difference in pads rubbing.
> 
> If one were in the market I would wait for the new version with an alloy crown which may be lighter and perhaps stiffer.
> 
> One other note, the fork does not offer any on the fly tuning with a nob or anything. However, in terms of a light weight fork that works pretty good - I don't know what alternative would be better. The manitou R7 deserves a look but is heavier.


thats sounds more like a flexy wheel problem!


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

bhsavery said:


> thats sounds more like a flexy wheel problem!


correct - no problem on my side. maybe it's also because he has the Vueltas set-up pretty close to the rim...i still haven't done much riding with the Spinner however it is much stiffer than the SID. not that i had any problems with the SID however the Spinner is much more solid feeling.maybe it's also because of the much stiffer setup with no bob.

if you do a search here you will find my riding impressions.i needed to do some modifications in base-setup but after these changes it really performed flawless.


----------



## Slobberdoggy (Sep 26, 2005)

Yeah . . . I was wondering that too, I think the wheels may be the problem NOT the fork. Wheelset 1 is Tune Mig 70, 32 spokes, Mavic 717 ceramic and aerolite spokes. Wheelset 2 is the Ultrahubs MTB with steel spokes/pillar and only 28 of'em. So that may be it but again my friend is pretty light too who rode the tune wheels.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Judging by the sounds of those names, I'm guessing the front hubs aren't exactly the stiffest ever made and there'd likely be pad buzzing flex on ANY fork if you were running rim brakes. Just because a hub is expensive and machined and has size XX diameter axle does not automatically guarantee its stiffer than some off the shelf shimano hub. 11 years ago Bicycling ran a front hub test for stiffness with suspension forks. They tested 16 aftermarket "suspension" hubs, 1 shimano XTR parallax hub (with the so-called suspension axle) and one standard shimano front hub (the kind all MTB's had used prior to 1995, and that the road groups STILL use to this day) was used as the baseline to compare the other 17 against. 

The standard hub (with a 9mm steel axle) scored a rigidity rating of 20.4 in the test, the XTR was a 20.7 (with an 11mm aluminium axle), and five hubs from TNT, Syncros, American Classic, WTB, and Ulterrain all scored lower than the standard hub. The syncros in particular is a standout example to me as it had a 15mm diameter aluminium axle, 21mm diameter end caps, weighed a mere 125 grams, and I own the very same one and use it on a ultralight wheel build (32h, Sun Sub IV rim, DT Revolution spokes/alloy nipples) and knowing how badly it faired, would only trust it not to make any flexing issues worse by using it in a linkage or rigid fork). The score of that model hub? 17.2 !!!


----------



## flipnidaho (Aug 10, 2004)

*Ss*

I have mine on my SS (replacing a SID Race). It definitely feels stiffer than the SID but it also has the fore and aft vibration when braking (disc brakes) which I only notice on pavement. The Spul valve works as advertised. It took a little while to get the proper pressure dialed in. Too little air pressure = plush on downhills but too much brake drive (there is no compression or rebound adjustment). Too much air pressure = too stiff (again, some external compression adjustment would be nice to have). I have it setup to get about 75mm of travel for regular trail riding. As others have said, hardly any bob when hammering off the saddle and the Spul valve activates when you hit a bump (but not seamlessly-I can sense the threshold).. Definitely a fork that does what it's intended to do better than the SID. It doesn't hurt that I got mine brand new for $50 at a bike swap. Weight is 1246 with uncut steerer and no star nut. A bonus is that it looks bad in all black...


----------



## chopperhead (Apr 16, 2006)

*spinner*

Anyone know when the aluminum version is due?Seems like it would be more flexy!I have been watching for it.


----------



## flipnidaho (Aug 10, 2004)

*Sticking*

Update: A couple of things that i've noticed with my Aeris is that when you press down on it, there is a thunk sound that you can't feel when you press down on the fork while riding (maybe it's the Spul valve opening). Another thing that I also notice is that when I'm braking and hitting bumps at the same time, the fork packs down (it compresses and sometimes takes a long time to rebound back up). I've been playing with the air pressure and right now I'm at 60lbs (I weigh 125 with gear). Maybe it just needs breaking in (I've been riding it for a couple of months). Anyone else experience the same thing AND what pressures are you running? 
I've emailed Spinner for instructions a few weeks ago but so far, no response....

Here is the bike with the Aeris...


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

*my settings...*



flipnidaho said:


> Update: A couple of things that i've noticed with my Aeris is that when you press down on it, there is a thunk sound that you can't feel when you press down on the fork while riding (maybe it's the Spul valve opening). Another thing that I also notice is that when I'm braking and hitting bumps at the same time, the fork packs down (it compresses and sometimes takes a long time to rebound back up). I've been playing with the air pressure and right now I'm at 60lbs (I weigh 125 with gear). Maybe it just needs breaking in (I've been riding it for a couple of months). Anyone else experience the same thing AND what pressures are you running?
> I've emailed Spinner for instructions a few weeks ago but so far, no response....
> 
> Here is the bike with the Aeris...


as i wrote in my 1st riding impressions:
replace the stock shock oil with a thinner oil to get faster rebound! the spinner has to slow rebound.that's why it "packs down". and at the same time you might also want to raise oil level since my fork needed too much pressure to resist bottoming.

standard my fork needed extremely high pressures to avoid bottoming. by adding oil you get more progression at the end of the stroke which means more damping.it reacts much better and allows lower pressure settings which help overall feel. the thinner oil makes it faster so it doesn't pack. i can't understand the stock setting at all!! those testers must have ridden it on smooth tarmac only...german magazines tested the fork and it got BAD ratings for the setup. the quick fix is what i suggest above to get a GREAT performing fork. however since there is no dials you need to work on it. its not so complicated though: open the top cap, measure stock oil level by compressing the fork and then measure the distance from top of the stanchions to the oil. i had about 65mm if i remember right. then let all the oil out, replace it with 2,5 weight fork oil and fill it up some more.i think i have 50mm right now. close the cap , put some pressure - ready!


----------



## flipnidaho (Aug 10, 2004)

nino said:


> standard my fork needed extremely high pressures to avoid bottoming. by adding oil you get more progression at the end of the stroke which means more damping.it reacts much better and allows lower pressure settings which help overall feel. the thinner oil makes it faster so it doesn't pack. i can't understand the stock setting at all!! those testers must have ridden it on smooth tarmac only...german magazines tested the fork and it got BAD ratings for the setup. the quick fix is what i suggest above to get a GREAT performing fork. however since there is no dials you need to work on it. its not so complicated though: open the top cap, measure stock oil level by compressing the fork and then measure the distance from top of the stanchions to the oil. i had about 65mm if i remember right. then let all the oil out, replace it with 2,5 weight fork oil and fill it up some more.i think i have 50mm right now. close the cap , put some pressure - ready!


Thanks Nino. I think I'll give your settings a shot. But just for clarification, the following steps are what you recommend (please correct me if I'm wrong)
1. Let all air pressure out of right leg.
2. Remove left top cap with 24mm socket
3. Compress fork and measure the amount of stock oil (should be about 65mm from top of stanchion to oil).
4. Turn fork upside down to drain the oil from the left leg.
5. Refill with 2.5 weight oil (I'm thinking Rockshox oil or any moto fork oil should do). Run 50mm (about 2" from top of stanchion/crown to oil level inside stanchion)
6. Reinstall left top cap , pressurize and test ride.
Does that sound about right?


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

*absolutely correct....*



flipnidaho said:


> Thanks Nino. I think I'll give your settings a shot. But just for clarification, the following steps are what you recommend (please correct me if I'm wrong)
> 1. Let all air pressure out of right leg.
> 2. Remove left top cap with 24mm socket
> 3. Compress fork and measure the amount of stock oil (should be about 65mm from top of stanchion to oil).
> ...


make sure there are no bubbles in the oil when you measure those 50mm! also give the fork a couple of strokes so the oil goes everywhere. if you don't do that some air might be trapped inside and your measurement will be wrong.

Motorcycle fork oil is MUCH cheaper than those tiny bottles you get from Rock-Shox and other bicycle brands.Finish line also come to my mind where 200cl cost as much as a full liter of quality motorcycle fork oil...

good luck!


----------



## flipnidaho (Aug 10, 2004)

nino said:


> make sure there are no bubble in the oil when you measure those 50mm! also give the fork a couple of strokes so the oils goes everywhere. if you don't do that some air might be trapped inside and your measurement will be wrong.
> 
> Motorcycle fork oil is MUCH cheaper than those tiny bottles you get from Rock-shox and other bicycle brands.Finish line also come to my mind where 200cl cost as much as a fill liter of quality motorcycle fork oil...
> 
> good luck!


thanks nino... i also got off the phone with lance from spinner and he added that since mine is an earlier version (has a prototype sticker), there is possibly a foam piece in the right leg that can cause it to perform badly. he advised to take that out and put in the 2.5 weight oil (like you recommended). I decided to go with a moto fork oil (PJ1 in 2.5 weight) as a replacement. 
thanks again for your help!
G


----------



## Slobberdoggy (Sep 26, 2005)

nino said:


> make sure there are no bubbles in the oil when you measure those 50mm! also give the fork a couple of strokes so the oil goes everywhere. if you don't do that some air might be trapped inside and your measurement will be wrong.
> 
> Motorcycle fork oil is MUCH cheaper than those tiny bottles you get from Rock-Shox and other bicycle brands.Finish line also come to my mind where 200cl cost as much as a full liter of quality motorcycle fork oil...
> 
> good luck!


So will switching to the thinner oil allow the fork to absorb small to medium bumps in xc riding better? I havn't even checked my air pressure but it seems really stiff however I am getting almost all of the travel when I examine my stanchion tubes. I have never hit a bump and realized I had bottomed out thou. I would like a little better absorption for medium to small bumps.

I went on a long xc ride on flat grippy dirt with lots of tree roots and the fork seemed plenty stiff (not flexy - different aspect then my above comments) - swerving violently to avoid dog poop in the last second in corners. Of course my last fork was 10 years old. I was surprised a UK magazine, What Mountain Bike, had some negative comments about the spinner - simply saying it was flexy compared to the competition  and they were not even testing the fork - just pointing out a new product.


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

*much better...*



Slobberdoggy said:


> So will switching to the thinner oil allow the fork to absorb small to medium bumps in xc riding better? I havn't even checked my air pressure but it seems really stiff however I am getting almost all of the travel when I examine my stanchion tubes. I have never hit a bump and realized I had bottomed out thou. I would like a little better absorption for medium to small bumps.
> 
> I went on a long xc ride on flat grippy dirt with lots of tree roots and the fork seemed plenty stiff (not flexy - different aspect then my above comments) - swerving violently to avoid dog poop in the last second in corners. Of course my last fork was 10 years old. I was surprised a UK magazine, What Mountain Bike, had some negative comments about the spinner - simply saying it was flexy compared to the competition  and they were not even testing the fork - just pointing out a new product.


as it comes standard it has too much rebound and too little progression towards the end of the travel. it blows throught the travel too easily which makes it unsensible when you hit the next bumb...

in order to avoid it from sitting too deep you alter the pressure and as a result get a bonehard fork.

definitely go for a thinner oil. it is done real easy as described above. just measure the oil level before you pour it out. oil level is measured with the fork upright, "bottomed out" which means fork fully compresses until it bottoms. then measure from the topcap to the top of the oil which should be about 60-70mm. write it down somewhere because this is your reference. now change the oil and to do so pump the fork a couple of times to get all the oil out. replace with the same amount to start with. check oil level once again and then screw back on the topcaps and put pressure according to your liking. i found i could use a little less than with the standard oil which makes it "plusher". now the spinner isn't plush by any means. this is a racer fork which doesn't bob around. it feels almost like a rigid fork but soaks up everything when the going gets tough.

i found a perfect setting in combination with my tires:
let the tires absorb the smallest stuff by running low pressure! small ripples or gravel gets soaked up by the tires and then the fork starts moving.

then check for maximum travel and adjust your pressure accordingly.

enjoy!


----------



## Slobberdoggy (Sep 26, 2005)

Sounds good thanks!


----------



## chopperhead (Apr 16, 2006)

*spinner*

I just used my aeris in a 21mile xc race in wisconsin and so far i am not impressed.!st of all my local bike shop went to change the oil to a lighter weight but there was no oil in the fork to begin with.He added 2.5 weight oil.
At the race i tried adjusting the air pressure up and down from around 60lbs.I weigh 140lbs.If you have just a little too much air it is very rigid.Too little and it blows thru the travel too fast.Also the clunking sound as it reaches the bottom of the travel.
Any suggestions what to try next?I don`t have the time to be spending hours messing with this fork.Hopefully i can get this to work.Maybe i should get in touch with spinner.thanks.


----------



## Slobberdoggy (Sep 26, 2005)

*Spinner Tuning Help - Please*

Okay, so I bought some 2.5 weight oil and I am about to replace it but first.

How do I tell if the SPUL valve is working? When I stand up to sprint up a hill the fork bobs like you would expect - no SPUL? The other thing concerning the oil change is that my fork seems to rebound quite quickly when I sprint. Also . . . Nino you mentioned increasing the pressure quite high to keep it from "packing up" well, I weigh 85 kilos and the fork seems really stiff and rebounds when I stand up to sprint so the air spring seem quite strong. I might just use a regular bike pump rather than a compressor w/readout which would mean tomorrow. I just checked the current pressure is only 45lbs! So I can only assume I am low on oil? Actually, I don't know if I will get into it now or wait till tomorrow so that is why I am posting, well, and, it's Friday.


----------



## Slobberdoggy (Sep 26, 2005)

Whoops! Okay I have learned a lot about these forks in the last hour. It should be clear that the left leg is intended to be empty and oil goes in the right side (as I scampered to edit my earlier post). My psi reading above is undoubtedly wrong because the small chamber will change rapidly with just a small amount leaked out. I noticed along the stanchion tube I am only getting 56mm of displacement - what's up with that.

I am now getting that clonk/loose headset feeling in the fork but it does seem to dampen better. 

Someone should have warned me the Spul valve really likes to shoot the oil out at the mechanic. Fork still bobs when I sprint however. A full diagram of this fork would be nice . . .


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

Slobberdoggy said:


> Whoops! Okay I have learned a lot about these forks in the last hour. It should be clear that the left leg is intended to be empty and oil goes in the right side (as I scampered to edit my earlier post). My psi reading above is undoubtedly wrong because the small chamber will change rapidly with just a small amount leaked out. I noticed along the stanchion tube I am only getting 56mm of displacement - what's up with that.
> 
> I am now getting that clonk/loose headset feeling in the fork but it does seem to dampen better.
> 
> Someone should have warned me the Spul valve really likes to shoot the oil out at the mechanic. Fork still bobs when I sprint however. A full diagram of this fork would be nice . . .


strange. my fork won't move unless i really try to make it bob. while sprinting hard it may move just a couple of mm. while climbing seated no movement at all.

since you get just 56mm of travel this means you have either too much oil which makes for too much progression towards the end of the stroke OR too much pressure which doesn't seem the case with your fork bobbing around. so i'd say check that oil level again:
remove the top caps and compress the fork all the way. then with the fork upright measure the distance from top of the stanchions to the oil which should be about 60mm standard. i went to 50mm thus adding 10mm of oil to get more progression. but you might even want to go the other way to allow the fork to go deeper into the travel? so you might be happier with 70mm.

good luck!


----------



## Slobberdoggy (Sep 26, 2005)

The 56mm is when all the air and oil is out. I might try to take some photos later today. Thanks for the reply.


----------



## jtc1 (Apr 13, 2004)

*Call Spinner and talk to Lance...*



chopperhead said:


> I just used my aeris in a 21mile xc race in wisconsin and so far i am not impressed.!st of all my local bike shop went to change the oil to a lighter weight but there was no oil in the fork to begin with.He added 2.5 weight oil.
> At the race i tried adjusting the air pressure up and down from around 60lbs.I weigh 140lbs.If you have just a little too much air it is very rigid.Too little and it blows thru the travel too fast.Also the clunking sound as it reaches the bottom of the travel.
> Any suggestions what to try next?I don`t have the time to be spending hours messing with this fork.Hopefully i can get this to work.Maybe i should get in touch with spinner.thanks.


I suspect your LBS probably did more harm than good - very few mechanics have true experience with the Aeris.


----------



## ChrisJ (Aug 15, 2005)

Anyone got a website for that company?


----------



## doccoraje (Jan 12, 2004)

www.spinner-usa.com


----------



## ferny (Sep 18, 2005)

nino, can you push pics of your spinner in your bike????are scale??or other..
Thanks!!


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

ferny said:


> nino, can you push pics of your spinner in your bike????are scale??or other..
> Thanks!!


push? does that mean show?

anyway - here's some pics in "Toscana-configuration". since i had no possibility to ride my bike prior to my biking holidays in Italy i removed every part that was "new" and unproved. i simply didn't want to have a technical problem on a day-long ride out in nowhere. you see my old ceramic-wheelset, hefty 2,25 Nobby Nic on the rear wheel, SLR saddle, Race Face Next LP cranks off my winterbike (my Powerarms made a strange noise...replacement is on the way)...etc. the way the bike is shown it weighed about 7,5 kilos. needles to say i didn't have a single problem all week long

back home i changed back to the specification listed on light-bikes.com again:
http://light-bikes.com/bikegallery/BikeListing.asp?id=774

right now i have my ceramic wheelset on it again since i like the brakepower the ceramic wheels provide with the Extralite brakes. mountzed are some 440g Nobby Nic 2,1s front and rear.


----------



## ferny (Sep 18, 2005)

Thanks to put the photo NIno, as much the other bikers speak of that fork, that never I saw that you put it, for that reason you put the photo. I now have a SID RACE 03, but I am interested in the Spinner. I want to trail, to train and to compete in XC(Under-23) My giant this in Light-bikes, with the light setup is 7,6 kg, but with the setup of races, changing pedals, cassette and little but, increase of weight in 600gr. I use the AX-Lightness saddle all year.only change cassette(12-27 kcnc to 11-32 XT) and pedals (exustar pm25ti to SH m540)..all other components are of light-bikes listings.....Is Spinner better fork globally to SId ???.
Thanks and happy "lights"
pd: sorry for my english, i need a traductor, because i hae little english..i´m speak spanish, little english and little greek.


----------



## doccoraje (Jan 12, 2004)

Fernie, check your PM, you got one in Spanish. 
Salu2.


----------



## ferny (Sep 18, 2005)

*doccoraje* Gracias!!


----------



## Slobberdoggy (Sep 26, 2005)

*Wierd contact with spinner*

So I emailed spinner twice and finally got a reply. I sent them the picture below asking why I only seem to be getting about 56mm of travel. Here is their response.



> Dear [SlobDog] ,
> 
> Don¡¦t worry !! Because it have a bummer , we call it "top out bummer"
> .
> ...


I wonder how I switch my fork to "Max trave". :madman:

The image below is a record of the stanchion travel after the pressure was completely released.


----------



## flipnidaho (Aug 10, 2004)

*Dang...*



Slobberdoggy said:


> So I emailed spinner twice and finally got a reply. I sent them the picture below asking why I only seem to be getting about 56mm of travel. Here is their response.
> 
> I wonder how I switch my fork to "Max trave". :madman:
> 
> The image below is a record of the stanchion travel after the pressure was completely released.


Lance must be out of town. The topout bumper should not restrict your fork travel. Try pulling your lowers from the uppers to see if it will extend another inch. I remember my Spinner had quite a bit more clearance between the bridge and the crown than your picture shows.


----------



## Axis II (May 10, 2004)

Slobberdoggy said:


> So I emailed spinner twice and finally got a reply. I sent them the picture below asking why I only seem to be getting about 56mm of travel. Here is their response.
> 
> I wonder how I switch my fork to "Max trave". :madman:
> 
> The image below is a record of the stanchion travel after the pressure was completely released.


Bwahahaha!!! LOL, I almost fell outa my chair laughing when I read that reponse. That's the best laugh I've had on this forum in a long time. Hillarious.:thumbsup:


----------



## Axis II (May 10, 2004)

_right now i have my ceramic wheelset on it again since i like the brakepower the ceramic wheels provide with the Extralite brakes. mountzed are some 440g Nobby Nic 2,1s front and rear.[/QUOTE]_

What! I can't believe it! Nino's riding the Ultrabrakes after all.:thumbsup: Good choice, Nino. Does this mean the Vueltas have been forsaken? BTW, did you ever try the red Ritchy pads on your non-ceramics w/the Ultrabrakes?


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

*hardcore WW...*



Axis II said:


> Does this mean the Vueltas have been forsaken? BTW, did you ever try the red Ritchy pads on your non-ceramics w/the Ultrabrakes?


the Vueltas are more powerful. but the Extralites are lighter - it's as easy as that!
for me the Vueltas are still 1st choice since they are just 20g "heavier" at 1/3 (!!!) the cost of the Extralites.

no - i still haven't tried the red Ritcheys. i used the red Kool Stops which i think are the same. as i said so far no pad was powerful enough on regular rims. however with the ceramic wheels the power is back.


----------



## Mr. RMB (Sep 7, 2005)

I havn't ridden this fork but have herd many good things about it and am considering buying it.

How does the stable platform system compare to the Fox F80X (which I have also never ridden)

Any thoughts? Thanks.


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

*do a search...*



Mr. RMB said:


> I havn't ridden this fork but have herd many good things about it and am considering buying it.
> 
> How does the stable platform system compare to the Fox F80X (which I have also never ridden)
> 
> Any thoughts? Thanks.


there's other threads about how it rides.do a search in this forum!


----------



## Ultra Magnus (Jan 13, 2004)

Welcome to Chinkgrish, the language American's have to learn when their companies start doing business in Taiwan and China.

BM


----------



## Slobberdoggy (Sep 26, 2005)

Everything is perfectly normal with my fork but I guess I still need luck. Here is the latest correspondence:

My message:

Should I not be getting more travel, more suspension? 
With the air-pressure released from the right
stanchion tube, the fork only moves aprox. 55mm. 
Shouldn't it be closer to 80mm?

Thanks,

[SlobDog]

And their reply:

Dear [SlobDog] ,

No , It can't move to 80 mm travel . 
But it can modeify to closer 80 mm .
You can cut the MCU 15-20 mm.
I think , it need by you .

Good luck !!

[Spinsters]

----------------------------------

No but I genuinely like this fork. It is stiff for my weight (196lbs) and its amazingly low weight. The spul valve will keep the fork totally stiff when climbing while giving decent absorption over big bumps.

Still, I'm a little perplexed by Spinner's response above. Can someone tell me what this is all about - The fork is not a 80mm fork unless you modify it? Is everyone else only getting around 55mm of travel along the stanchion tube? Am I overlooking something that should be more obvious?

I have a suspension pump/gauge on the way and I will experiment with pressures more accurately than I have, and when I get the time, I'll rip the thing apart in order to find the "MCU". Hmmm I guess I understand the luck part now.


----------



## Ultra Magnus (Jan 13, 2004)

I would think what they mean is for you to dissassemble your fork and cut your bottom out mcu yourself, and hope for the best ....

BM


----------



## Axis II (May 10, 2004)

*Very Uncool.....*



bmadau said:


> I would think what they mean is for you to dissassemble your fork and cut your bottom out mcu yourself, and hope for the best ....
> 
> BM


So it sounds pretty straight; it's a 55mm travel fork unless you take a saw to it!:madman: WTF, that's less travel them my '96 Judy XC. I know that it's prolly a mute point the way I would have it set up (really stiff) but, common...55mm???? I'd be pretty wary about hacking a chunk outa that bottom-out bumper. If it was really that viable one would think Spinner would have stocked that size to start with. Where's Nino anyway? He's the Spinner Aeris guru around here.


----------



## junkybum (Jul 2, 2006)

Besides adjusting the rebound and goofing around with the air pressure, is there anything else I can do to fine tune my Spinner Aeris? What abt the 2 knobs underneath the stanchions? What do those do?


----------



## Slobberdoggy (Sep 26, 2005)

Okay so here's the culprit!

Do I cut it down by 25mm to get a true 80mm fork like Spinner advertises?

What method of cutting should I use?

Is there anything else I should be aware of?


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

*whoa...*

that's an awful loong bumper you have ther

by the way- i just ride the Spinner Aeris again in my winterbike and get 73mm out of it. by looking at the long piece i'd say you can easily trim it down by 20mm. a SID for example has just 10mm worth of bottoming bumper in it!

but i went back to 65mm oil level and replaced all the oil with thin 2,5 weight.

i just spent some time in the forest...i got a incredible headlamp by a german "headlamp-weenie". forget everything you heard about those expensive lamps!! this is like riding with stadium lights!! my friends Lupine Edison (the top of the line Xenon light) seemed like a small candle in comparison...unreal!

anyway - you see why i need a winterbike oh , it was dry the last 3 days...no rain.


----------



## doccoraje (Jan 12, 2004)

*Good luck*

and please keep us posted on how it works.
Sorry I can't give you more than good wishes on this. I'm getting 60 mm myself on the spinner with 50/50 5-2.5 oil. I still think it's a better fork than the SID Race, but could be improved.


----------



## Slobberdoggy (Sep 26, 2005)

I plan to use a knife or razor to cut the bumper.

I guess the main risk is cutting too much and then having the tire contact the crown? 

I should have measured that distance before I took it all apart! :madman: 

I will report back with photos in the next few days.


----------



## Slobberdoggy (Sep 26, 2005)

*And the left side bumper.*

Pictured here is the left side internals which basically hold the fork together. However, this bumper is what you would call a top out bumper I think. I do not believe I need to trim it at all. I am getting circa 70mm now after trimming the right side bottom out bumper.

I tried for the life of me to get my flash to work so I could post a good picture of the spul valve which I cannot figure out how to remove. I don't think this is necessary but I can't figure out why the bolt under the right stanchion will not tighten - nor what it screws into  Only thing I can figure is it is held tight via compression. This bolt (right side) will not extract from the fork lowers anyway.

Look forward to riding it with a little more travel now.


----------



## doccoraje (Jan 12, 2004)

Slobberdoggy said:


> I am getting circa 70mm now after trimming the right side bottom out bumper.
> Look forward to riding it with a little more travel now.


How much did you trim off the right side?
I'm just about to start with mine.


----------



## Slobberdoggy (Sep 26, 2005)

I trimmed just 2-3mm over 20mm so about 22mm were removed. Cutting 20mm is probably safer - you can always do more latter. 

Also I should note the top out bumper I just posted fits inside the UPPER stanchions not the lower and thus with that rod going through it serves as a top out bumper when the fork springs back up/out. It will just fall out if you turn the fork upside down but watch out for oil coming out of the right side when you do this. 

The bottom out bumper on the right side is wedged into the bottom of the lowers and so requires some funny business to get out. Now that I think about it I think I did have the right side bolt out inorder to help push this bumper out with a long screw driver or allen wrench   Nevertheless you will then need to work it out from the top until finally getting to the seals and you just need some plyers and manipulate it around the seals. Be sure to measure your stuff travel (before & after) and bumpers. 

Take your time so you don't make the mistakes I have here already.  It's plenty cold out where I'm at so I shouldn't rush anyway.


----------



## Slobberdoggy (Sep 26, 2005)

Okay - now that I use an actual caliper and not a ruler - it looks *tentatively* I'm getting 78mm of travel but this is just looking at the marks on the stanchion tubes with the air out verses now with 55lbs of pressure. FWIW I also filled it with 55mm to the top of the compressed fork with 2.5 weight oil. 

So I wouldn't trim any more than 20mm - in fact you may want to start with 15mm.

It's cold and dark right now so I haven't ridden it. I gave it a few compressions and no leaks but my right lower stanchion bolt is still not tightening. Tomorrow will be cold but later this week it will moderate a bit - we will see . . . .


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Ummmm is the top out bumper is what you'd normally wanna trim to extend the fork and boost the travel. You shorten the negative spring spacers on old rockshox mag forks to increase the travel, remove the top-out spacers on Noleen MegaAirs, change the top-out spring, etc. Simply shaving a bottom out bumper puts the tire closer to the crown, but messing with top-out stuff increases the travel AND the clearance at the same time.


----------



## Slobberdoggy (Sep 26, 2005)

Deeeight what your describing would make the fork height longer wouldn't it. Making the tire come closer to the crown is exactly what I want because it's not traveling far enough in *that* direction. It's a 80mm fork only getting 55mm of travel. If I understand this stuff correctly what you describe will make the fork travel greater but alter the length of the fork and therefore geometry of the frame. If you look at the inner stanchion picture with my caliper there is a lot more room to slide i.e. the tire has plenty of room to travel towards the crown as well.

Nevertheless, what you describe is valid point because either way will give you more travel but I don't know why spinner would supply a fork with faulty axle to crown length. I suppose we should all measure the distance along the inner stanchion when extended. I know one person above (you?) commented that it looked like my lowers were not fully extended but I'm convinced that was just an optical effect and due to the curved crown interface with the stanchions.

Hopefully that makes sense along with my poor suspension terminology.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Well on Noleen MegaAirs for example, the travel adjustment is a negative-spring spacer that pulls the sliders up 25mm when installed, thus limiting travel before the bottom of the stanchions smack the bottom-out bumpers. But the top-out springs themselves (which are small steel coil springs, not elastomers) have also come in different lengths depending on the production batch to the fork, and later ones as sold on ebay thru ediscountbike got a longer spring which limited the actual wheel maximum travel by about 5mm. My oldest MegaAir has a shorter spring than my others, and I have bottomed out the fork at the full 100mm claimed travel. 

And yes, removing top out bumper/spacer/spring height does extend the fork and the geometry changes, but Aeris forks are not particularly tall forks to begin with, and yes the picture shows not enough stanchion exposed for a true 80mm travel fork unless the sliders are so long and heavy as to be acting as a physical bottom out stop when they hit the crown (unlikely as this would be heavier than just using a couple elastomers and shorter sliders). This IS a method some fork makers have used in the past as it happens.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

My 2007 Rockshox Dart 3 - 100mm fork, and 2001 Noleen MegaAirs set for 100mm are both 18.25" axle center to crown race, and both have 4.5" of exposed stanchion tube (except the one with the shorter topout spring which has 3/16 of an inch more length). Now I don't have an 80mm travel fork handy to measure, but as I recall from a 80mm Duke XC I had earlier this summer, it was 95mm of exposed stanchion tube, and Spinner is who made the Duke's for rockshox... so chances are you should have at least 95mm of stanchion showing also.


----------



## Slobberdoggy (Sep 26, 2005)

DeeEight said:


> And yes, removing top out bumper/spacer/spring height does extend the fork and the geometry changes, but Aeris forks are not particularly tall forks to begin with, *and yes the picture shows not enough stanchion exposed for a true 80mm travel* fork unless the sliders are so long and heavy as to be acting as a physical bottom out stop when they hit the crown (unlikely as this would be heavier than just using a couple elastomers and shorter sliders). This IS a method some fork makers have used in the past as it happens.


 I have 120mm of stanchion exposed measured from the lowest part on the crown (it's curved). That doesn't really matter so much because it depends on the tire and crown clearance.

I should have measured it before (I'm an idiot) there is only about 80mm of distanced between the crown and my 2.4 Nobby Nic. DeeEight I don't know what the overall fork length is or should be, but according to you the Aeris is a short fork.

On hindsight DeeEight you are right though. I think the ideal solution is trimming a little bit of both the bottom out mcu and top out bumper mcu. Looking back I would have trimmed the bottom out 10-15mm and then trimmed the top out 5-10mm. Does this sound like a better solution to you?

Trimming the top out bumper may make the fork flexier. I hope I don't kill myself when I test the fork out today because there could be a clearance issue. Does anybody know where I can buy a new bottom out mcu? I suppose I could just put part of the old one back in!

I wish I would have gotten your advice earlier when I asked  It's a light chassis but Spinner has no manual with diagrams or good advice. I think we have gotten to the bottom of this by trimming both bumpers to some extent. If we knew exactly how long the fork should be (axle to crown race?) we would know how much to trim from the top out mcu (lengthen fork travel/height) and then trim from the bottom out mcu (assuming one has a big bumper like I did down there and trim not so much the tire interferes with the crown).


----------



## Slobberdoggy (Sep 26, 2005)

FWIW,

I'm measuring 445mm length from crown race to axle center approximately. I just measured from the bottom of the headset to what appeared to be the axle center. Not super precise but pretty close. Anybody want to confirm? How does that compare to other 80mm forks?

Wasn't able to ride today - hopefully tomorrow. I'm getting almost 74mm of travel with the air pressure released. Unfortunately, I'm also getting contact however, with the air released and the lowers still extended, the remaining pressure kept it from bottoming even with 80% of my weight on the handlebars. Though not ideal, I don't see it interfering in practice with air pressure and oil. Also that contact is pushing into the bumper and the tire just buzzes the crown. I can't believe nino is getting 73mm of travel with the same fork he bought with mine with no bumper mods  In practice I'll be lucky if I get 70mm of travel on the trail. Very weird. 

After I ride it the question will be should I then cut the top out bumper lengthening the fork!


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Another thing you can measure the next time its apart is the length of that connecting rod you had a picture of above. Measure the total length, then measure how thick the base of the stanchion tubes are that it passes thru and subtract that. Whatever number you end up with is the total of 80mm of stroke + bottom out bumper length + top out bumper length. 

Noleen MegaAirs don't compare directly very well in length because they have two travel settings of 75mm and 100mm. So being 470mm at 100mm, its 445mm at 75mm. So yeah, your Aeris is kinda short for an 80mm fork, and I've always found the Noleens are pretty reasonable length for their travel. A Marzocchi of the same travel is a good quarter inch longer. And that's WITH clearance for 2.3" tires (real 2.3s no less, not "we claim 2.3 but its really a 2.1").

As to nino, well... either spinner (like noleen) spec'ed different bumpers between production batches (as Noleen did with its top out springs... indeed the 2000 version of the MegaAirs only had a single side bottom out bumper and had bottom out issues as a result) or he's displaying the typical "I spent a lot therefore I'll claim it does stuff better than yours" attitude that's so common in any technological upgrade driven sport. Considering how often he hypes up stuff I'd be inclined to think its probably a combination of the two.


----------



## Slobberdoggy (Sep 26, 2005)

DeeEight said:


> Another thing you can measure the next time its apart is the length of that connecting rod you had a picture of above. Measure the total length, then measure *how thick the base of the stanchion tubes are that it passes thru* and subtract that. Whatever number you end up with is the total of 80mm of stroke + bottom out bumper length + top out bumper length.


I guess I don't quite understand the bold part. Isn't that the thickness/width diameter of the inner/upper stanchion tubes. Or do you mean "the bumper it passes through".

If the fork is short it would be nice to have a little extra (a few mm's) of travel.

Thanks


----------



## Mads Kock (May 26, 2005)

Sorry - didn't read the complete post but I have cut mine bumper to 25mm and now I have 80mm of travel!

regards


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

*well....*



DeeEight said:


> As to nino, well... either spinner (like noleen) spec'ed different bumpers between production batches (as Noleen did with its top out springs... indeed the 2000 version of the MegaAirs only had a single side bottom out bumper and had bottom out issues as a result) or he's displaying the typical "I spent a lot therefore I'll claim it does stuff better than yours" attitude that's so common in any technological upgrade driven sport. Considering how often he hypes up stuff I'd be inclined to think its probably a combination of the two.


i get 73mm max travel AFTER i changed to the lower oil level as mentioned elsewhere. i initially had it set up with 50mm oil level, now i'm back at 65mm but with only 2,5 weight oil where before i used a mixture of the original oil and some 2,5 weight oil. now i changed all the oil and put some new 2,5 weight in.

no cheating going on here, that's as simple as measuring the max travel after riding. i never felt the fork bottoming out while riding so i guess there's even more travel to be had. BUT seeing the large amount of bottom-out bumper i guess you wouldn't be able to tell when it's bottoming anyway 

as a sidenote: when i changed the oil just recently i also measured the total travel when the fork was open. no air inside, just by sliding the legs together. then i also measured about 55mm only. that's because of this huge bumper which you can't compress by hand.

anyway - i think a huuge part of getting more travel is by setting the fork up for your needs. that's where some basic suspension knowledge is useful since there's no dials on the fork. you need to understand which modification might suit your needs:

lower air pressure: fork is softer overall
higher air pressure: fork is harder overall

lower oil level (less oil): fork is softer at the end of the travel (less bottoming resistance, less progression)
higher oil level: fork is harder at the end of the travel (more bottoming resistance, more progression)

thinner oil: fork is slightly softer overall and rebound becomes faster
thicker oil: fork is slightly harder overall, rebound is slower

so now you have to find out what your fork feels about. what is it doing wrong or which area needs some help.

if you don't get enough travel the problem might be: 
-too much air pressure. you don't get full travel because you have it set up too stiff
-too high oil level. too much oil might hinder the fork from using all the available

what could be done:
1. less air pressure
problems that might occur when lowering pressure: if you have to lower air pressure the fork might start bottoming out. that's when you have to alter oil level at the same time to fight bottoming. less air pressure also makes the fork rebound slower. so thinner oil might be needed to speed up rebound. too little air pressure might let he fork bob. also too little pressure might let the fork sink into the travel far too easy which actually reduces comfort. this might sound strange but if a fork dives too far into the travel already on small objects then there is not enough travel on hand when things get rougher or under braking. also the farther into the travel you are the more the progression comes into play. our suspension forks are designed to have more resistance versus the end of the travel. so a fork that sits too low will feel harder because it can't respond sensitive anymore as it would when sitting higher still.

2. less oil / lower oil level
lowering the oil level in the fork reduces the progression versus the end of the travel. we are talking about the last 3rd of the travel ONLY here. so less oil doesn't have any (or only minimal) effect on the initial and medium part of the stroke! this is very important to know. oil level only shows effect in the last part of the travel (over the bigger impacts for example). less oil means the fork can use more travel with ease. this might lead to bottoming out if air pressure at the same time is too low. you might want to adjust air pressure again when doing any modifications here. higher oil level on the other hand means more resistance at the end of the travel. thus you might be able to run less air pressure.

Slobberdoggy mentioned somewhere above he used only 55 psi....this is WAY TOO LOW air pressure! if i remember right you weigh 190 lbs or so, correct?

the suggested pressure settings written on the stanchions are the following:
...
160-180lbs: 80-90 psi
180-200 lbs: 90-100 psi
over 200 lbs: no more than 100 psi (Maximum pressure!)

so if you are running 55psi and still not getting enough travel this logically means there is too much oil! lower the oil level and try again!

so after reading everything here i would say i could also take benefit by cutting about 1cm of the bottom out bumper. this might give me more travel as well. i was also using only 73mm to date. if there is more travel available we should definitely be able to use that as well.

as a sidenote:
my first impressions when riding the Aeris were it was way too slow on rebound and would pack down over repeated bumps. so first i went with thinner oil to speed up rebound. then the fork was still sitting too low into the travel which made it unsensitive over braking bumps. so i altered pressure quite a bit but this made it very unforgiving over medium sized impacts. (forget about small ripples with the Spinner, there is no sensitivity over small stuff anyway). so i altered oil level which allowed me to go back a bit in air pressure. this setup worked very well during my biking vacation last spring in Italy. since then the fork sat in my garage collecting dust...now i mounted it on my new winterbike and wasn't all that happy. the rebound once again felt too slow. might be the cooler temperatures so i swapped all the oil for 2,5 weight.

anyway - i am riding full rigid right now. the spinner was only used during 2 weeks in spring and now about 10 days in my new winterbike.


----------



## Slobberdoggy (Sep 26, 2005)

*hmm . . .*

Finally, you release some info about your own fork to concur with my info (travel w/no pressure). I guess I really needed to be told to drop my oil level.

I tried oil level as low as 60mm with the thin 2.5 weight. I guess I should go lower. I don't see how a 50mm bumper can compress so much as to give you (quality) 1/3 of your travel. I've put all my weight on the bumper and it's pretty stiff. My fork just felt like my elastomer Mach 5 fork but stiffer (torsionally) - it took the edge of bumps but was still just getting 56mm of travel or so in practice.

I'm still very let down with Spinner's advice and instruction manual. What's his buckets, Erik at Spinner didn't give me any oil suggestions. It's peculiar they used to make Rockshox because they (Rockshox) provides so much info, specs and parts.

Anybody know what the right side bolt on the bottom of the lower stanchion threads into? Not the lower stanchion itself for heaven-sake!


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Oil doesn't compress... ergo you'll always need at least an oil level that equals the fork travel, regardless of what the bumper's doing.


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

DeeEight said:


> Oil doesn't compress... ergo you'll always need at least an oil level that equals the fork travel, regardless of what the bumper's doing.


oil level has nothing to do with travel.

oil level has to be sufficient not to allow air to enter into the damping system which usually sits in the oil bath dwon in the fork. usually you have some holes and shims or similar valves where the oil flows through. they need to be completely in the oil bath otherwise you loose damping. but this is completely isolated from the amount of travel.

but you are correct about the oil not beeing compressed. it's the air volume that can be compressed.

and the bumbers are a cheap trick to help in the bottoming resistance. used also in motocross where you bottom out on a regular basis. they help the damping system in raising the rate in the final amount of the travel.


----------



## Slobberdoggy (Sep 26, 2005)

*Intial impression of modifications*

I've done 2 20mile rides with 2 different settings although my settings are all approximations - measuring pressure and oil level is rather difficult plus I had some complications. Overall though the fork is vast improved with either dramatically different settings! Medium bumps now typically use up 40 - 50mm of travel so close to the MAX of my previous fork.

First ride I had way to much oil apparently circa 40mm from the top. I had filled the fork up from being completely empty then did a few strokes, let it sit over night and the next day it appeared to have a very low level and I added more oil until what I thought was 55mm. I must have done something wrong because in the end I had around 40mm from the top of the stanchion tube fully compressed.

Anyway, I used a lower air pressure for my 200lbs at 55 or so psi with this high oil level. The SPUL valve was not locking out very well but you could really feel the fork work differently. Medium bumps you could feel the fork soak up the bump and feel kind of thick or dense while a "spulge" noise occurred. I happened to find some old jumps and carefully rode over them w/o jumping but on some rapid rises the fork easily compressed 70mm. I thought to myself I need to add air pressure to stop this and improve the spul valve. With this setting a little oil was leaking out the right seals which scarred me until I realized I had so much oil.

Next ride I reduced the oil to around 55 or 60mm as recommended and increased the pressure to 65. Now the spul valve was really working but offered, again, good absorption of medium and large bumps maybe not quite as much dampening as I had before which I might like a little more of. No oil at leaked around the seals.

Next I think I will try reducing the air pressure. Then if I want some more tuning I might go back and add a little more oil and start testing air pressures again. It's been very good - it doesn't feel like an old elastomer fork anymore.

Picture depicts the evidence of the increased travel after the first ride with too much oil and it began leaking a little.

Cheers!

EDIT: This didn't post where I had hopped in the cascade of the thread.


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

*still too low pressure!*



Slobberdoggy said:


> I've done 2 20mile rides with 2 different settings although my settings are all approximations - measuring pressure and oil level is rather difficult plus I had some complications. Overall though the fork is vast improved with either dramatically different settings! Medium bumps now typically use up 40 - 50mm of travel so close to the MAX of my previous fork.
> 
> First ride I had way to much oil apparently circa 40mm from the top. I had filled the fork up from being completely empty then did a few strokes, let it sit over night and the next day it appeared to have a very low level and I added more oil until what I thought was 55mm. I must have done something wrong because in the end I had around 40mm from the top of the stanchion tube fully compressed.
> 
> ...


what you get by running such high oil levels is extreme pressure when the fork gets compresssed! as mentioned by D8 oil doesn't compress and therefore the oil tries to escape which made your fork leak...no good!

as mentioned in an earlier post the recommended pressure settings are the following:
160-180lbs: 80-90 psi
180-200 lbs: 90-100 psi

so i suggest you lower the oil level (which helpd in getting more travel because of less resistance towards the end of the stroke) but at the same time increase pressure to 80-100 psi at least.

at such low pressures like your 65 psi the fork will dive too easily giving away too much tavel on relatively small bumbs which then leaves it with no travel once things get really rough or while braking when more weight is transferred to the front.

i would suggest the following:
65mm oil level (using thin 2,5 weight oil) and 90psi pressure


----------



## Slobberdoggy (Sep 26, 2005)

That sounds good but with pressures over 70psi the fork is really stiff which is fine for some. I can get the spul valve to function well at 65psi even at my weight. I guess the other factor to consider is my trails are relatively smooth (some roots and erosion bumps here and there) with few if any out of saddle sprints (depending on your style). 

I guess the main thing is the fork is acting like a suspension fork now :thumbsup:

Edit: I should double check my pressures because my susy gauge has such a small dial it is hard to read. Usually though, with this fork I have always run strangely low pressures spul valve not quite totally locked out.


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

*avatar??*



Slobberdoggy said:


> That sounds good but with pressures over 70psi the fork is really stiff which is fine for some. I can get the spul valve to function well at 65psi even at my weight. I guess the other factor to consider is my trails are relatively smooth (some roots and erosion bumps here and there) with few if any out of saddle sprints (depending on your style).
> 
> I guess the main thing is the fork is acting like a suspension fork now :thumbsup:
> 
> Edit: I should double check my pressures because my susy gauge has such a small dial it is hard to read. Usually though, with this fork I have always run strangely low pressures spul valve not quite totally locked out.


completely offtopic:
why do you show us that arrogant a$$hole Briatore in your Avatar? if you are a formula 1 fan or like Renault why don't you put Alonso in his place?


----------



## Slobberdoggy (Sep 26, 2005)

Merry Christmas Nino.

I take it you don't see the humor or other reasoning that it could signify behind it. A lot of people here have silly avatars, mine is just another one. I'm kind of an arrogant arsehole aren't I? 

My ww avatar of him smoking a cigarette is a lot better - I might change it.


----------



## WeakMite (May 11, 2004)

*Interesting looking light!!*

Sorry to come to this thread to late... but I've got a quick question for Nino.

What can you tell us about this light? The one you pictured in an earlier post in this thread. - I'm in the middle of looking over *nightbiken.de* rght now but my ability to read german is pretty feeble. A light that can make a Lupine Edison look like a small candle in comparison... this sounds interesting!



nino said:


> i just spent some time in the forest...i got a incredible headlamp by a german "headlamp-weenie". forget everything you heard about those expensive lamps!! this is like riding with stadium lights!! my friends Lupine Edison (the top of the line Xenon light) seemed like a small candle in comparison...unreal!


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

WeakMite said:


> Sorry to come to this thread to late... but I've got a quick question for Nino.
> 
> What can you tell us about this light? The one you pictured in an earlier post in this thread. - I'm in the middle of looking over *nightbiken.de* rght now but my ability to read german is pretty feeble. A light that can make a Lupine Edison look like a small candle in comparison... this sounds interesting!


no exagerration!

this light is simply awesome.
it gets made by some german guy who is an absolute electronic-freak and has found a way to get everything together to make a lamp which simply blows away all existing bike-lights on the market.

i had a Lupine before, my friend has a Lupine Edison, i have a Nightpro Extreme as well....nothing comes even close! those lights really seem to be weak flashlights. no kidding. it has a 12V/35 watt spot. bigger size than those spots found on Lupines or Nightpros. the way i ordered it it does 150 minutes with full power. he can do you double lights with dimmer,bigger battery...whatever you want. this guy has his own website:
www.nightbiken.de

but at the moment it seems to be down??? i could get you in touch if you want. simply send me a PM.


----------



## dasboot03 (Aug 29, 2008)

I have one and works fantastic, but it´s weights 1.290 grs not 1.150 grs


----------



## Wheelspeed (Jan 12, 2006)

Quick question before I get ready for tonight's ride...

Were you guys measuring ~65mm from top of stanchion with the wipe-seals installed or without? The stock wipe-seals/dust-seals are 7mm.

Great thread. It's helping me a lot to set up these forks for my g/f's bike. :thumbsup:

EDIT: Okay, I assumed you had the wipe-seals off, so I chose 72mm from top of wipe-seal. We'll see how she likes it.


----------



## Slobberdoggy (Sep 26, 2005)

It's been awhile but I would have thought I had the wipe seals on but I'm not totally sure what you're talking about - 7mm seams pretty thick.

That said if your gf isn't big boned/tall/heavier/athletic it could be a great fork.


----------



## Wheelspeed (Jan 12, 2006)

We rode last night and she didn't have any complaints. But watching the fork, I didn't see it move over the smaller bumps, even with only 50psi in the fork. She's about 140 but not aggressive at all, so most bumps don't overcome that anti-bob valve (spule valve?). Also, there isn't any progression to it. She never bottomed it out anyway, but I'm thinking of an even thinner oil, like one of the Red Line oils here:
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/25933305/fork-oil-weights

I guess, from what I've learned here, that a thinner oil will pass through the spule valve easier, allowing better small bump absorption. I'll raise the oil level to only 65mm from top of wipe seal to help progression.


----------

