# A Couple Black Market Frame Questions



## Toasted BLT (Feb 16, 2008)

Been riding AM mostly, but went to Ray's for the first time recently and had a blast. Thinking hard about building an urban/dj/park bike. Considering the Black Market Riot frame with an Argyle fork, and either a ss or 1x9 drivetrain. Still thinking through the details.

Had a couple questions on the Black Market Riot frame. Any difference in the 2008 vs 2009 models, other than the colors? How do the campy style hiddensets and head tubes hold up to the abuse?

Thanks for any input.


----------



## sittingduck (Apr 26, 2005)

The integrated headsets are well proved on bmx bikes....
It's hard to find frames without them now.


----------



## Bryguy17 (May 19, 2007)

just go for the 2008 model and save yourself some coin. riot+argyle is a good combo too, and I recommend dropping it to 80mm.

go SS first, and then decide whether it's worth the extra 150+ bucks to go 1x9. it's just more things to break.


----------



## BIKESerFUN (Sep 5, 2007)

Just to hammer in the point on why you shouldn't worry about model years, I don't think the geo has changed since black market became a legitimate company. It must be good. And every other company has jumped on their back and rode the wave( I think Carter should bust a cap in their ass).


----------



## Toasted BLT (Feb 16, 2008)

*Thanks for the comments*

Naw, I wasn't worried about geo changes. Sounds like the Black Market geo has been tried and true for a while, and much copied as was stated. Just wondering if there had been any other tweaks that might warrant a 2009 vs a 2008. Still a few discounts around on the 2008 frames, but really liking the new grey for the 2009 frames. Decisions, decisions... Thankfully there area couple good threads on Black Market builds in the forum to help.

Yeah, leaning heavily toward the ss with a proper ss wheel in the back. I will be cruising the forum some more to see who makes some descent ss wheels for some reasonable coin.

Didn't realize that BMX and most urban/dj/park bikes were running internal headsets. I would have thought that running the bearings directly on the frame instead of in cups would have tended to wear out the bearing lands in the head tube, especially given the higher level of abuse on these bikes. Easy to replace cups. Not so easy to replace head tubes. On the other hand, there does not seem to be a lot of negative feedback in the forum on integrated headsets, so maybe not the issue I thought it might be.


----------



## spazzy (Aug 15, 2004)

+2 for the argyle, i am running an 07 argyle 318 and love it! bombproof, stiff and still takes some pretty big hits when i am a hack, the only downside of it is, its alittle porky


----------



## Bryguy17 (May 19, 2007)

yeah, the argyle is a bit heavy, but it definitely makes up for it in strength. I've hit mine pretty hard a few times and its fine. my bike isn't exactly a porker either, at a hair under 29 lbs. sure, I could drop almost 2 pounds going to a velvet R, but then I like my 20mm axle :thumbsup:

Also, I say just go with a standard mtb wheel in back unless you're really going to be abusing it. if you're going to be beating up a rear wheel, you might benefit from the dishless wheel a SS build will give you, but you do lose some versatility. might suck if you decided that you're going to want gears in the future. my vote goes to outlaws or revolutions. both great wheelsets for a good price.


----------



## Toasted BLT (Feb 16, 2008)

Thanks for the thoughts on the rear wheel. I have the BLT for trails. Do you find the gears handy for urban/park/Ray's?

Yeah, I like the 20mm. I put a Pike coil on my BLT earlier this year. The 20mm made a world of difference on the front end and the coil is a lot plusher on the trail than the air spring that came with the bike

Definitely planning to stick with a 20mm on this build as well. The Argyle seems to get a lot of love. I am more interested in getting something that can take some abuse rather than worrying about a little weight. How is the coil on the Argyle? I understand it comes stock with the firmest spring available. Can it take the abuse of a 200 lb newbie that will certainly blow some landings?


----------



## Bryguy17 (May 19, 2007)

for me, the usefulness of a geared setup will be more apparent for things outside of urban/dj/park/rays type things. it's very useful if you move into any speed related branches like dual slalom or 4X. even though a blk mrkt isn't the ideal weapon for these courses, they do damn well by themselves. it's more a matter of having options in the future if you're unsure on what You're going to be doing. 

my fork is nice. I have the 318 with coil and MoCo damper. coil is super plush, but doesn't really suck up lips all too much. I'm 185ish and it's not a problem. also, the damper is really functional. 6 clicks, from super plush great for rough DJ's and 4x tracks, and full on for super stiff with enough squish to take off the edge. rebound works, just pull the knob off and stash it in a backpack before it takes itself off (like mine did). some heavier oil will help make the compression a bit stiffer for DJ purposes, and there's preload spacers included to help with you being a tad heavier than I.

also, drop it to 80mm. the blk mrkts handle nicely at that travel setting.


----------



## Toasted BLT (Feb 16, 2008)

Thanks for the tips. Not too many opportunities for dual slalom or 4X around here, but you never know, maybe someday.

Yeah, I really like the Motion Control on the Pike I put on the BLT. You can run it nice and squishy for the trails and firm it up a lot for urban/park. Not the ideal ride for urban/park, but it's all I got right now. For Ray's, I dial the floodgate up and set the compression near lock. It seems to hold the lips and works fairly well on the pump track. The rear end is a little more of a problem, the the Riot will fix that.

Was definitely leaning toward the 318 Argyle. It's not much more coin than the 302 and worth the slight weight penalty. Sounds like the 318 has the floodgate fixed at the stiff end, which is where I would leave it all the time for urban/park anyway. Nice to know it comes with spacers for more preload.

An 80mm fork seems to be a common theme for the Black Market geo, so I'll plan to do that up front.

Thanks again...


----------



## Toasted BLT (Feb 16, 2008)

Bryguy17 said:


> for me, the usefulness of a geared setup will be more apparent for things outside of urban/dj/park/rays type things. it's very useful if you move into any speed related branches like dual slalom or 4X. even though a blk mrkt isn't the ideal weapon for these courses, they do damn well by themselves. it's more a matter of having options in the future if you're unsure on what You're going to be doing.
> 
> my fork is nice. I have the 318 with coil and MoCo damper. coil is super plush, but doesn't really suck up lips all too much. I'm 185ish and it's not a problem. also, the damper is really functional. 6 clicks, from super plush great for rough DJ's and 4x tracks, and full on for super stiff with enough squish to take off the edge. rebound works, just pull the knob off and stash it in a backpack before it takes itself off (like mine did). some heavier oil will help make the compression a bit stiffer for DJ purposes, and there's preload spacers included to help with you being a tad heavier than I.
> 
> also, drop it to 80mm. the blk mrkts handle nicely at that travel setting.


Parts are coming together for the Riot build. Got the Argyle 318 today. Thinking about lowering it to 80mm while I wait for a few more parts to complete the build. I have done work on my Pike, so I am pretty comfortable opening up the fork. Just wondering what, if anything, I need to buy before opening it up. I may be blind, but I can't seem to find anything on the web or from RS about lowering the Argyle.

Can anyone point me to an obvious thread that I am missing, or provide a high level summary.

Thanks,


----------



## Bryguy17 (May 19, 2007)

i think you'll need new crush washers for the bottom bolt, and new oil if you want it. other than that I think it's just a matter of moving around the spacers from whatever place to another. I forget exactly right now though. still need to go do it to my fork...


----------



## Demo-9 (Mar 24, 2006)

Looks like most of your questions were already answered so I can back them up. Integrated headsets are fine. Just get a 45/45 angular contact version (not the 36/45). They hold up fine.

Argyle 318 has been awesome for me. Lowered to 80mm and the spring was perfect for me at 186lbs. Near locked with some give with the MoCo dialed and perfect plushness for DJ with it opened. It really is a great fork.

Lowering the Argyle is easy. Do a google search and you will find one that has a good picture step by step instructions. It takes about 10 minutes. All you need is an allen wrench and a socket (or adjustable) to get the top cap off.

Here is a good one:
https://rlee560.pinkbike.com/blog/lowerargyle.html

You will love the ride. I built a Riot and then swapped everything over to a Mob. It is by far THE best bike I have ever ridden.


----------



## sammysmc (Feb 13, 2007)

I have a reign x for trails and a singlespeed nightrain for jumps etc. I used the nightrain at rays and was fine with single speed, and didn't even feel an overwhelming need for a front brake either, but it would have been nice.

Only place that gears would have helped much is the cross country loop going up one of the hills, but that thing is somewhat boring anyways. I could still make it up, just a little slow.

If possible you could get 9spd wheels and singlespeed them for now, to have the option of gears in the future. I know nothing about blk market bikes so i don't know if they can even run gears.


----------



## Toasted BLT (Feb 16, 2008)

Yeah, after talking to a number of people, I ended up going the ss conversion route with a standard 9 spd cassette. Picked up a Transition Revolution 36 wheelset in the discontinued brown color on clearance. Going to run a 28x14 for starters with the Surly conversion kit.

Thanks for the pinkbike link. I searched all over mtbr, but should have hit google first. Surprised no one is making an aftermarket kit to lower the Argyle.

I will start a new thread to cover the build and throw up some pics.


----------



## Bryguy17 (May 19, 2007)

iirc, you should be able to just place that spacer that sits on top of the spring (the white one in the pinkbike pictures) between the top-out spring and the spring shaft stopper. then you just need one of the white preload spacers that comes with the fork to go on top of the spring to space it from the top cap.

I could be wrong though, but that's how I understood how things worked before I saw that pinkbike link.


----------



## Toasted BLT (Feb 16, 2008)

Swapping the factory spacer to the bottom of the stack will drop the Argyle travel to 70mm. Great, if that is what you want. But if you want an 80mm Argyle then you will need to swap the factory spacer for aftermarket spacers or cut up the factory spacer, leaving 10mm on top of the stack and putting the remaining 20mm on the bottome of the stack. The saw cuts will take a few mm out of the overall stack, so you may have to add an additional pre-load washer to get back to the original pre-load you were running.


----------



## Demo-9 (Mar 24, 2006)

A new fork comes with I think 4 pre-load spacers that you use to lower the fork. I think I used all 4 spacers and lowered it to 80mm. I may have used another spacer from another fork though.


----------



## Toasted BLT (Feb 16, 2008)

Demo-9 said:


> A new fork comes with I think 4 pre-load spacers that you use to lower the fork. I think I used all 4 spacers and lowered it to 80mm. I may have used another spacer from another fork though.


My Argyle came with 3 pre-load spacers. They are pretty thin, all 3 stacked together are only 10mm thick. I may be missing something, but just stacking pre-load washers on top on the spring sounds like it would increase the pre-load on the spring (lower sag), but I wouldn't think it would lower the fork. It would certainly lower the travel, but I think it would actually reduce sag, leaving you with a higher ride ht.

Did you mean that you took the factory spacer installed on the top of the spring stack, which is ~30mm thick and moved it to the bottom of the spring/spacer shaft with the bottom out spring, then added the 4 additional pre-load spacers on top of the spring stack?

This sounds like it would lower the fork 30mm and increase the pre-load by ~12mm (4 pre-load spacers) of spring compression, effectively taking 12mm out of the sag, so ride height would be 18mm lower and leaving 78mm of travel.

This is about the best/simplist solution I can come up with, so I will give it a try. I just plan to use the three pre-load spacers that came with my fork, so this should leave me with a fork lowered 30mm unloaded, with 10mm less sag, so only 20mm lowered when riding, and leaving 80mm of travel. I will post the results.

Man, I have gone through all the Google threads I can find along with all the drawings, parts lists and service instructions on the Rockshox site. There are a number of different "how-to" threads, some of them would work and some wouldn't. Rockshox advertises that the Argyle can be lowered to 80mm. Based on everything I have seen, it should be an easy mod with < $5 worth of parts, but Rockshox does not appear to sell a lowering kit, or even offer clear instructions on how to do it.


----------



## Endomaniac (Jan 6, 2004)

I lowered my Argyle this morning. I read all the threads you probably have and wasn’t completely sure what to expect. I wound up cutting the log spacer on top of the spring and putting ~20mm of it on top of the neg spring. It was amazingly simple to do and I highly recommend just cutting this spacer and be done with it. I used a pipe cutter to cut the plastic piece thus its square and didn’t get any smaller. It would be no big deal to set the pieces back in stock order to raise it back to 100mm if you ever wanted to in the future. 

The preload spacers won’t go on the lower shaft, the hole in the spacer is smaller than the shaft that the negative spring rides on so that suggestion isn’t really an option unless you dilled out their centers. My fork came with three of these spacers in the bag but there where 2 of them already inside the fork so that’s 5 total spacers you have to work with.


----------



## Bryguy17 (May 19, 2007)

anyone have any problems reusing the crush washer on the bottom? I wanna go lower mine, but I don't want to be stuck without my fork because it's leaking oil all over the place.


----------



## Demo-9 (Mar 24, 2006)

The pre-load spacers that come with the fork do indeed fit on the shaft. It is tight, but it fits perfectly. It almost "snaps" when you get it in, then they slide up. I now remember I used the 3 spacers and 1 from my Totem which is the same inner diameter.

No issues with the crush washer. Just re-used mine and I have no issues. In fact I did it twice (again to lower it less. Too much first round) and had no issues.


----------



## Bryguy17 (May 19, 2007)

thanks. just picked up some spacers from the hardware store for like 2 bucks, so I'm prepared. I think I'll go drop it right now


----------



## Toasted BLT (Feb 16, 2008)

Bryguy17 said:


> thanks. just picked up some spacers from the hardware store for like 2 bucks, so I'm prepared. I think I'll go drop it right now


What diameter spacers did you buy and how did they fit? -Thx


----------



## Bryguy17 (May 19, 2007)

i don't get it. took and removed the large spacer that sits on top of the spring (stack height 40mm), placed 20mm of spacers above the top-out spring, and placed 20mm more of spacers above the main spring to take up the slack of the removed spacer. still showing 95mm of stanchions  

definitely looks lower, but the ruler says 95mm from wiper to crown... as opposed to 80-83mm like I expected...

edit: I used something like 13/16 or something OD, and 1/2" inside diameter will fit. not sure on the specifics. picked them up at a local ace hardware


----------



## Toasted BLT (Feb 16, 2008)

Bryguy17 said:


> i don't get it. took and removed the large spacer that sits on top of the spring (stack height 40mm), placed 20mm of spacers above the top-out spring, and placed 20mm more of spacers above the main spring to take up the slack of the removed spacer. still showing 95mm of stanchions
> 
> definitely looks lower, but the ruler says 95mm from wiper to crown... as opposed to 80-83mm like I expected...
> 
> edit: I used something like 13/16 or something OD, and 1/2" inside diameter will fit. not sure on the specifics. picked them up at a local ace hardware


I am about to do mine, so I will see what I get. I will let you know if I figure anything out.


----------



## Bryguy17 (May 19, 2007)

Toasted BLT said:


> I am about to do mine, so I will see what I get. I will let you know if I figure anything out.


measure your wiper-crown distance before you lower it and see what it is for a 100mm fork


----------



## Toasted BLT (Feb 16, 2008)

Bryguy17 said:


> measure your wiper-crown distance before you lower it and see what it is for a 100mm fork


Yeah, I will measure axle to crown before and after. According to the RS spec sheet, it is supposed to be 491mm +/-5mm for 100mm travel, and 471mm +/-5mm for 80mm travel.


----------



## Toasted BLT (Feb 16, 2008)

Bry,

One thing to double check is that spacers you bought and placed on the top of the spring have to have a small enough OD to fit inside the top cap. 13/16 sounds like it should fit inside the top cap, so you should be okay.

I bought 7/8 OD before taking mine apart and measuring, and the 7/8 OD spacers are too big. Now I gotta wait until tomorrow morning to go back and see if they have 13/16 or 5/8 OD spacers.

Side note, I agree the "big" factory spacer on top of the spring was 40mm, which was bigger than the 30mm that was implied in all the other threads I read. All the spacers I found in the right OD/ID ran 3/8" thick, or just under 10mm. In a stack of 4 you almost loose the thickness of pre-load spacer, so I plan to add an extra one to the stack when I put it all back together tomorrow.

Also note, axle to crown before I lowered was 490mm, so pretty much bang on the spec. I will check the axle to crown again when I finish in the morning.


----------



## Toasted BLT (Feb 16, 2008)

Bry,

Even without the right spacers, I was able to trial fit the Argyle back up in the lowered configuration. Once you bolt the spring shaft back into the lower fork, and have some preload on the spring (I re-installed the 40mm spacer on the top and screwed the top cap half way on to get some preload), you have pretty much locked in the new axle to crown.

Note, I definitely had to push the fork in from where I started to seat the spring shaft back in the lower fork hole to bolt everything back together again.

So I measured up the new axle to crown and it is 475mm, which is ~15mm lower than what I started with. Pretty close to the 470mm I was expecting, but not quite there. Time to go back and look at the pictures again.

Not sure about your wiper to crown measurement. Are you sure you started with 100mm or was it maybe something more. Check your axle to crown measurement.

Later...


----------



## Toasted BLT (Feb 16, 2008)

Ok,I played with the sketches some more, and I think I figured out why I did not see the full 20mm decrease in axle to crown. Too much pre-load from forcing the 40mm spacer on top to check the trial fit compressed the negative spring a little. Once I get 20mm of the right OD spacers to fit under the top cap, the negative spring should uncompress and I should be sitting pretty at 470mm axle to crown.

I will let you know in the morning.


----------



## Toasted BLT (Feb 16, 2008)

For reference, attached is the Argyle drawing from the Rockshox website, illustrating the axle to crown measurement.


----------



## Bryguy17 (May 19, 2007)

yeah, I'm not sure what's up with it. nothing is changing between the two setups in terms of preload, it's just that the whole positive spring assembly (along with the spring support plunger) up 20mm. that should lower the fork 20mm.

I'm thinking, that maybe the spring didn't get seated on the plunger. that would increase positive preload and move things up a bit, possibly the 10-15mm I'm seeing...


----------



## Toasted BLT (Feb 16, 2008)

Bry,

Good morning! Got back to the hardware store this morning. Next size down nylon spacer they had was 3/4" OD x 1/2" ID x 3/8" thick. picked up a couple of them.

I still recommend running the 1" OD x 1/2" ID x 3/8" nylon spacers on the negative side. They fit well on that side.

The 3/4" OD spacers have a slightly smaller OD than the ID of the top cap, so I inverted one pre-load spacer (the lip fits nicely in the 1/2" ID of the aftermarket spacer) and put 2 pre-load spacers on top of the upper spacer stack. This whole package then fit nice and snug inside the top cap and gave the desired preload.

I put everything back together, cycled the fork a few times, then measured the axle to crown... 471mm... Success!

So here is the summary of what I found worked to lower my Argyle 318 by 19mm...

1) Remove all the pre-load spacers from the top of the spacer stack. Note that each pre-load spacer is ~3mm thick. My Argyle came with two stacked together. Set these aside, you will re-install them again shortly.

2) Remove the factory 40mm spacer that sits on top of the positive spring, Put it in a zip lock bag and save it for the day you want to change back to the stock configuration.

3) Install 2-1"ODx1/2"IDx3/8"thick nylon spacers on top of the negative spring at the bottom of the spring/spacer shaft. This lowers the fork 19mm. These spacers can be bought at most hardware stores for $1.50 for a bag of two.

3) Install the following stack on top of the positive spring. Note that this spacer stack fits inside the top cap and provides the the proper preload for the lowered fork. This stack, from top to bottom is:

a) All of the factory pre-load spacers removed in step (1) installed lip side down

b) 2-3/4"ODx1/2"IDx3/8"thick nylon spacers. These spacers can be bought at most hardware stores for $1.50 for a bag of two. Note that the lip on the pre-load spacers above fit nicely into the 1/2" ID of these aftermarket spacers.

c) 1-extra factory pre-load spacer (3mm thick) installed lip side up. Again the lip on the preload spacer will fit nicely in the 1/2" ID of the aftermarket spacers above it.

With this stack on top of the positive spring, you will be back at the same spring pre-load that the fork had at the beginning of the conversion. Note that the one additional pre-load spacer makes up for the fact that the 4-3/8" thick aftermarket nylon spacers only stack up to 38mm vs the 40mm factory spacer that was removed.

I made a pictoral diagram to help visualize how the fork configuration changes for the conversion. I can post it as well, if anyone would find it helpful.

Note that you can do the whole conversion without removing the lowers and without draining any of the oil from the lowers.

Hope this helps anyone else trying to lower their Argyle. Good luck...


----------



## Bryguy17 (May 19, 2007)

thanks BLT. that's exactly what I did, except I substituted one of the 3/8" thick spacers above the spring with 2 of the preload spacers. it's 1mm more preload by measuring everything. I'll go check the A2C and see where it stands first though...


----------

