# Rockshox Debonair 2021



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

So Rockshox are at it again with air spring changes. Here's a recap.

The 2015 Rockshox Pike A1 and 2016 Lyrik B1 used self balancing air springs where positive and negative chambers were equalised by a notch inside the stanchion. This notch met the air seal near top-out which filled the negative chamber but didn't pressurise it higher than the positive.

These early forks were plagued with air leaks from the negative chamber into the lower legs. Caused mostly by too much clearance between the air shaft and the black plastic seal-head. So shaft deflection could burp the seal and pressurise the lower legs.

This is why people were sliding zip-ties down past fork seals.

Rockshox released a new seal-head with bigger seal to counter this leakage. It worked and came in most 200H service kits. Vorsprung have identifying pictures here: https://vorsprungsuspension.com/pages/luftkappe-installation-setup

A very good and popular upgrade for these was the Vorsprung Luftkappe. This replacement piston does three things.
1. It moves the piston seal down relative to the equalisation port to create a higher negative compression ratio. This reduces top-out forces to zero.
2. It increases negative volume through a domed cap (which reduces positive volume as a side-effect) so the negative spring effect extends deeper into travel.
3. It removes the need for a top-out bumper which further increases negative air volume.

The net result of these changes was a straighter air-spring curve. The first half of the stroke became a lot more linear from top-out through the midstroke. Using higher air pressure but getting better small bump response and mid-stroke support.

At this point in time the Debonair name was being used by Rockshox in their rear shocks (with high volume, dual layer, positive and negative air-cans) and also for the Lyrik and Yari (same chassis) which had longer stanchions and 10mm longer negative air chamber than the A1 Pike.

Rockshox took this opportunity around 2018 to release their first Debonair upgrade.









They replaced the, previously removable, air piston with a riveted on plastic moulding with air channels to allow negative air to flow into the shaft. Using that internal volume to increase negative air volume. The air seal position stayed in much the same location keeping the compression ratio and positive/negative balance pretty much the same (near zero at top-out).

The big engineering change was the stanchion end-cap seal-head. It was now machined aluminium (more precise than moulded plastic) and featured a DU guide bushing to keep shaft/seal alignment and prevent leaks to negative. This allowed less seal crush which reduced friction.

All round a good upgrade. Doesn't have the same volume increase or compression ratio as a Luftkappe but was a drop-in upgrade that people bought in huge volumes to solve their forks previous problems. Solid win for Rockshox.

The big criticism of this Debonair was the forks wouldn't sit at top-out. Just the weight of the bike would sag it and Rockshox own sag indicator stanchions had their customers getting concerned they'd got less than they paid for.

Roll on today with Debonair 3 (that's my name, not RS's).
https://www.pinkbike.com/news/first-ride-rockshoxs-updated-debonair-air-spring-pond-beaver-2020.html









There are two physical changes to this air shaft over Debonair 2.
1. Longer shaft foot.
2. Higher end-cap seal-head.

The longer shaft foot does exactly one thing. It makes the shaft longer to move the lower legs down. This fixes the customer concern that their zero point has eaten a few mm of travel.

The higher placed end-cap seal-head is required to fit the longer shaft foot. Without that the longer shaft foot would hit the end-cap at bottom-out. Causing damage, shock and noise. In addition RS have taken more negative volume. Ostensibly to reduce positive pressure ramp up in the lowers during deep compression.

The downside to the higher end-cap is a reduced negative chamber volume. Expect this to be ignored or glossed over in initial releases.

The expected ride changes:
1. The fork will sit higher on it's travel indicators solely because the lowers have been spaced down.
2. The lower negative volume will make the fork firmer off the top and ride higher still.
3. Softer mid stroke (less support) due to the reduced negative volume.
4. Less progressive due to lower leg pressure build-up? That's going to be hard to isolate on ride tests.


----------



## austink26 (Jun 24, 2019)

Looking at the pinkbike initial impressions, it looks like something I am going to get. I would love for my forks to ride a little higher than they currently do without having to over pressurize them. 

The bummer is I just did the lower service for both my lyrik and pike so when I order these I will have to pull them again. Maybe I can put some tape or something on the bottom holes so all the oil doesn’t run out and I can just swap this part. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## dan l (Oct 16, 2015)

I have a "2019" pike with the grey air piston and red anodized seal head. I'm assuming this is version 2 but would require the whole kit?

Probably going to see if I can install a Luftkappe on a 2016 air shaft that I have lying around.


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

Maybe this will get rid of the ~5mm worth of dead travel on my Yari. I recently did the DebonAir upgrade on my A1 Yari. The fork would never return to full extension. I was always able to pull the fork up another few mm's. I juuust replaced the Yari with a DVO Diamond. The DVO always returns to full extension and has no dead travel. The DVO also rides higher in its travel.

Maybe I'll hang onto the Yari and get the upgrade to my upgrade.


----------



## dlxah (Nov 5, 2014)

If you want more travel and aren't already running 180mm, you could just try to get your hands on one of the previous Debonair springs in the next size up if they're still available.


----------



## PhillipJ (Aug 23, 2013)

This is kinda funny because the previous Debonair spring was quite similar to the Luftkappe and Vorsprung have this in point 10 of the FAQ: Who is this NOT suited for?

" If you're anal about your fork having an exact (but rounded-to-the-nearest-10mm) amount of travel. "


Sounds like Rockshox have made things worse because so many customers don't understand their fork. Kinda like when they went to solo air over separate positive and negative.


----------



## austink26 (Jun 24, 2019)

Just ordered 2 of the foot nut/seal head kit. 

That is an interesting idea of just bumping up the travel by 10mm to account for the lower ride height. But since the price of the 2 upgrade kits was almost the same as a new air spring, I figured the new kit was the way to go. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Trinimon (Aug 6, 2019)

Damn it. I recently installed a 150mm debonair.


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

Trinimon said:


> Damn it. I recently installed a 150mm debonair.


The good this is that you can get the footnut and lower seal head separate.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## dlxah (Nov 5, 2014)

Or just keep the old debonair since it seems like it’s probably the better spring anyway.


----------



## Trinimon (Aug 6, 2019)

RS VR6 said:


> The good this is that you can get the footnut and lower seal head separate.


Yeah, I may get around to just buying the seal/nut kit and giving it a go since it's not expensive.

I'll wait and see what real world experience/reviews are later on.


----------



## kevin_sbay (Sep 26, 2018)

RS VR6 said:


> Maybe this will get rid of the ~5mm worth of dead travel on my Yari. I recently did the DebonAir upgrade on my A1 Yari. The fork would never return to full extension. I was always able to pull the fork up another few mm's. I juuust replaced the Yari with a DVO Diamond. The DVO always returns to full extension and has no dead travel. The DVO also rides higher in its travel.
> 
> Maybe I'll hang onto the Yari and get the upgrade to my upgrade.


Similar situation w/me with recent upgrade re: the dead travel.
Also, explains why the height of my bike's front end/handlebars didn't really change when I put in the Debonair for 130mm, vs my orig 120mm.

BUT, I'm very happy with my Yari now, on my hardtail. Love it, despite my original confusion.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Dougal said:


> So Rockshox are at it again with air spring changes. Here's a recap.
> 
> The 2015 Rockshox Pike A1 and 2016 Lyrik B1 used self balancing air springs where positive and negative chambers were equalised by a notch inside the stanchion. This notch met the air seal near top-out which filled the negative chamber but didn't pressurise it higher than the positive.
> 
> ...


What a great explanation that is easy to understand. Thank you for that.

From my perspective, I'll stick with my Debonair. I did remove the negative chamber bump stop and that combined with the addition of low friction Push seals (already has a great Avy cartridge) made the fork down right coil like. I mean it has no stiction, but it has better mid- travel support too.

Don't care about the 5mm of fork sag, it doesn't matter to me and I still run the same 22% sag based off the full 160mm travel.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


----------



## Jesse Hill (Dec 29, 2006)

At 25.00 and an easy change back if I am not impressed I figure I’ll give it a try. I ordered one today but who knows when they’ll actually be available. I still think this may just be a “fix” for people obsessed with looking at their fork topped out stationary but I’ll see what my own opinion is after trying it.


----------



## mike156 (Jul 10, 2017)

Seems like a down grade, hope they keep making the current version (debonair 2) and not just the new one.

If not, maybe there is room in the market for an aluminum piston version of the debonair 2. Seems like there might be some opportunity for reducing friction a bit over the plastic piston?


----------



## chyu89 (Sep 26, 2009)

My LBS suggested me to upsize my fork so the dead travel doesnt matter anymore. Lyrik loses 7-9mm of travel; Pike around 3-5mm.

I took 170 Lyrik for my bronson. After dead travel, I get around 163mm.


----------



## POAH (Apr 29, 2009)

given we ride with sag who cares if there is a few mm of travel lost when the bike is leaning against a wall or am I missing something?


----------



## dan l (Oct 16, 2015)

POAH said:


> given we ride with sag who cares if there is a few mm of travel lost when the bike is leaning against a wall or am I missing something?


You are probably correct. If you are 25% sagged when you initiate travel who cares where your starting point it from. People try to understand things in static terms because that is easier to understand but your starting travel and even your sag % is just a static number. The dynamic ride height is probably most important.


----------



## CCS86 (Jan 6, 2020)

Dougal said:


> So Rockshox are at it again with air spring changes. Here's a recap.
> 
> ...
> 
> ...


I know it's still speculation at this point, but you don't sound excited about it.

Sitting topped out few a few mm sagged doesn't sound like any kind of performance gain. If anything, it would make top out while riding more harsh, right?

As far as the negative volume reduction, I'm curious what kind of % change this will be. Hard to get an accurate figure without a very accurate CAD model, since the negative volume isn't a simple shape.

Equalizing the negative chamber at top out vs sag? It's hard to see a benefit from that either, besides removing the need to bounce the fork while adding air.


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

https://www.bicycling.com/bikes-gear/mountain-bike/a32058013/rockshox-2021-debonair-updates/

"With previous generation air springs, there would have been a small but noticeable downwards spike in the spring curve where the air changes across the dimple"

Not sure if this is a problem but decreasing negative chamber seems to be questionable.

On a negative chamber where the pressure cannot be chosen, i also think it was designed about a specific travel (160) and weight. On heavier persons it might be too small. I got an calc sheet where you can see the optimum of the air spring curve close to a steel spring is at an specific psi and amount of token.


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

I ordered the nut and sealhead, but reading this has me doubting whether I should install it.

I am thinking about how the new system works. The negative spring helps push the fork into its travel, and the two variables, pressure at equalization and volume affect how hard it pushes and the curve of that push. With the new air spring equalizing at a lower positive pressure, it will exert less force against the friction at the onset of movement, but will sit higher at equilibrium.

Having a higher negative spring volume means a more linear spring curve for the negative spring, meaning it maintains higher pressure for longer in the stroke. Reducing the volume of the negative spring means that there is less help in moving the suspension once it gets going.

Is it possible that having a high-pressure, high volume negative spring results in a funny overall spring curve? I would think that, in a ideal world, you would reduce friction to the point where you rely less on the negative spring to get things moving, which is basically how a coil shock works.


----------



## POAH (Apr 29, 2009)

D(C) said:


> I ordered the nut and sealhead, but reading this has me doubting whether I should install it.


Why did you order it in the first place?


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

POAH said:


> Why did you order it in the first place?


Seemed like a relatively inexpensive thing to try out, and I assumed newer = better.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

x-rated said:


> https://www.bicycling.com/bikes-gear/mountain-bike/a32058013/rockshox-2021-debonair-updates/
> 
> "With previous generation air springs, there would have been a small but noticeable downwards spike in the spring curve where the air changes across the dimple"
> 
> ...


The two changes (less negative and bigger air pocket in the lower legs) make me think they had people struggling to get full travel.

Both their changes will make the fork softer through mid to end stroke for the same sag.


----------



## Jesse Hill (Dec 29, 2006)

Dougal said:


> The two changes (less negative and bigger air pocket in the lower legs) make me think they had people struggling to get full travel.
> 
> Both their changes will make the fork softer through mid to end stroke for the same sag.


I'm one who doesn't use full travel. I'll get to 3/4 an inch or so most times. If I remove the one token I have then my travel seems to stay the same yet the ride is noticeably less smooth (like it's packing in the mid strike) so I've left the one token. So I'll give this a go and see if it's better or worse for me. Didn't really have any complaints in current setup but if it does ride higher in steeps (always appreciated) without noticeable less sensitivity and a more linear stroke then maybe it's the right path for me.


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

How does all of this compare to Fox’s air spring? 

I have the 36 on my hardtail and a Lyrik on my full-suspension, and the 36 feels like it sits a bit higher.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

Jesse Hill said:


> I'm one who doesn't use full travel. I'll get to 3/4 an inch or so most times. If I remove the one token I have then my travel seems to stay the same yet the ride is noticeably less smooth (like it's packing in the mid strike) so I've left the one token. So I'll give this a go and see if it's better or worse for me. Didn't really have any complaints in current setup but if it does ride higher in steeps (always appreciated) without noticeable less sensitivity and a more linear stroke then maybe it's the right path for me.


This is the opposite of a coil.

I feel like it's been developed for E-bikes. If "acoustic" bikes are suffering 5mm travel loss due to sag under self-weight then E-bikes would be losing double.



D(C) said:


> How does all of this compare to Fox's air spring?
> 
> I have the 36 on my hardtail and a Lyrik on my full-suspension, and the 36 feels like it sits a bit higher.


I'm almost done collecting info for the F36 to compare it to the previous Lyrik Debonair. But I'm not sure when I'll get my hands on Debonair 3 to measure up.


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

Dougal said:


> I'm almost done collecting info for the F36 to compare it to the previous Lyrik Debonair. But I'm not sure when I'll get my hands on Debonair 3 to measure up.


Nice, I would be interested to hear about your findings.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

D(C) said:


> Nice, I would be interested to hear about your findings.


The plan is to create an online calculator so people can enter their fork, air pressure, volume tokens etc and spit out spring curves.

But we'll see how big a mission that turns out to be and how long it takes us to actually get done.


----------



## Jesse Hill (Dec 29, 2006)

Dougal said:


> This is the opposite of a coil.
> 
> I feel like it's been developed for E-bikes. If "acoustic" bikes are suffering 5mm travel loss due to sag under self-weight then E-bikes would be losing double.
> 
> I'm almost done collecting info for the F36 to compare it to the previous Lyrik Debonair. But I'm not sure when I'll get my hands on Debonair 3 to measure up.


Well guess I'll find out. Cheap enough to try out anyway and debonair was an improvement over solo air so hopefully RS didn't screw it up and just improved on an improvement. Ideally I'd have a luftkappe initial stroke (which I'm suspecting would require a false piston attached to the rod to have equal force on both sides) but somehow doing so without the sacrifice in the positive volume side so it's not as progressive. Yes I know the luftkappe also sits into its travel, but I don't quite think it felt as dead (been a while since I tested my friend pike with one). Well see, there is always gonna be a compromise somewhere with an air spring it seems.


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

D(C) said:


> How does all of this compare to Fox's air spring?
> 
> I have the 36 on my hardtail and a Lyrik on my full-suspension, and the 36 feels like it sits a bit higher.


I have a Yari, Fox 34, and a DVO Diamond. The Fox and DVO both ride higher in its travel than the Yari. The Fox 34 does have some dead travel...but not nearly as much as the Yari. The DVO has none. The Yari riding a bit lower isn't some ride breaking deal...but it is noticeable.

I also wanted to add that at full bottom out...the the Rockshox pretty much uses all the stanchion...while the Fox will have about 7mm exposed (right above the Kashima logo) and the DVO about 3mm.


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

Okay, so here’s a question - it’s changing the equalization point that likely ‘fixes’ the Debonair 2’s lack of complete top-out. They could have made the neg spring volume larger while moving the equalization point, which would have still allowed the fork to return to full top-out. In fact, with the thicker sealhead, they had even more real-estate than before for the negative spring, if they wished to make it bigger.

Why wouldn’t they have made the negative spring bigger than they did?

Just thinking further, this supports the theory of their goal being to make it easier to use full travel.


----------



## Jesse Hill (Dec 29, 2006)

So I’m now sitting here shaking my head in disbelief. So either the bikeradar article is wrong or RS is doing one really confusing change. In the bikeradar article they say the pistons now sits in the dimple at top out so you also no longer need to compress the fork to equalize the chambers. If this is true then we are back to pre pike solo air and might as well be using the old design with the schradder valve built into the piston that opens at top out. I thought the whole point of moving to the dimple was to allow the piston to sit below the dimple to allow an increased negative psi which combined with the less area under the piston will allow a closer to equal force on the piston causing it to be more sensitive and have a less top out sensation.

I can see them moving the piston up closer to the dimple but if it’s accurate in the article that it actually sits at the dimple then we have just gone full circle back to classic solo air.


----------



## s-master (May 15, 2018)

Yes, I don't think that it sits at the dimple. It probably just sits closer to the dimple. Like you said, that would be full circle back to solo air.
And some people are saying, that now negative chamber is smaller. I don't think this is necessarily the case. When you have them side by side, it certainly looks like it, but you have to take to the account, that the footnut is longer, so in the fork, piston will be offset higher and volume will stay the same.


----------



## cxfahrer (Jun 20, 2008)

Jesse Hill said:


> So I'm now sitting here shaking my head in disbelief. So either the bikeradar article is wrong or RS is doing one really confusing change. In the bikeradar article they say the pistons now sits in the dimple at top out so you also no longer need to compress the fork to equalize the chambers. If this is true then we are back to pre pike solo air and might as well be using the old design with the schradder valve built into the piston that opens at top out. I thought the whole point of moving to the dimple was to allow the piston to sit below the dimple to allow an increased negative psi which combined with the less area under the piston will allow a closer to equal force on the piston causing it to be more sensitive and have a less top out sensation.
> 
> I can see them moving the piston up closer to the dimple but if it's accurate in the article that it actually sits at the dimple then we have just gone full circle back to classic solo air.


I cant see how the piston should sit at the dimple when the bike is unloaded and the pressure is equalized. 
The negative chamber side of the piston is smaller than the postive side due to the attached air shaft, and so the same pressure on both sides can put a greater force on the positive side and will always push it down ever so little.

The design of the Debonair3 seems a little bit overcomplex, maybe because they wanted it to be retrofitted on Debonair2. Otherwise they could have dumped that silly delrin piston with the connection to the inner of the shaft and just make a conventional shaft that is a little longer, so you can ride with a 185mm fork instead of 180mm to feel that it sits higher in travel ..

Remembers me of my 2013 Fox 36 with a way too soft negative coil spring, had about 195mm travel.


----------



## romphaia (Sep 7, 2014)

Jesse Hill said:


> In the bikeradar article they say the pistons now sits in the dimple at top out so you also no longer need to compress the fork to equalize the chambers.


That would be nonsense, basically it would have a strong preload at topout. They don't know what they're talking about.

They made the air shaft about 10mm longer so the A2C is increased that much.
The negative chamber reduction decreases that amount a tiny bit, and it makes the fork less divey in the first half of travel.
The hollow seal head... I'm just surprised it wasn't used since the beginning. Otherwise the air chamber in the lowers is very progressive and makes it hard to bottom out even with little progression in the air chamber. I've never measured it but a compression ratio well over 10x seems plausible. This fix makes much easier to tune the end stroke with tokens. This is at least from my experience from my experiments with my formocchi frankenfork.

The thing is, this is not an "upgrade" but a "fixgrade" and should come free with escuses for taking so long.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

D(C) said:


> Okay, so here's a question - it's changing the equalization point that likely 'fixes' the Debonair 2's lack of complete top-out. They could have made the neg spring volume larger while moving the equalization point, which would have still allowed the fork to return to full top-out. In fact, with the thicker sealhead, they had even more real-estate than before for the negative spring, if they wished to make it bigger.
> 
> Why wouldn't they have made the negative spring bigger than they did?
> 
> Just thinking further, this supports the theory of their goal being to make it easier to use full travel.


They haven't changed the equalisation point. Because they can't.

All they did was make the shaft longer. Which pushes the lower legs lower and exposes more of the travel/sag indicators.

See this picture:









Normally the one on the left (debonair 2) has the end-cap slid down further and an air gap between the bumper and cap. It sits in that far that the cap lower edges line up.


----------



## nikon255 (Dec 27, 2015)

D(C) said:


> How does all of this compare to Fox's air spring?
> 
> I have the 36 on my hardtail and a Lyrik on my full-suspension, and the 36 feels like it sits a bit higher.


36 evol na2 air spring is spot on.


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

If end compression would play such high role then why psi recommendation is nearly unchanged?

I really would like to see a spring curve of the original DebonAir.

Also keep in mind, a larger negative chamber also reduces spring rate starting around 50mm of travel quite a lot but in many cases this is not wanted. Especially on lower psi.


----------



## POAH (Apr 29, 2009)

s-master said:


> Yes, I don't think that it sits at the dimple. It probably just sits closer to the dimple. Like you said, that would be full circle back to solo air.
> And some people are saying, that now negative chamber is smaller. I don't think this is necessarily the case. When you have them side by side, it certainly looks like it, but you have to take to the account, that the footnut is longer, so in the fork, piston will be offset higher and volume will stay the same.


The end seal sits higher up in the leg which is why the foot nut has to be longer. The negative air spring is smaller.


----------



## alexbn921 (Mar 31, 2009)

Bravo Dougal :thumbsup:
When I first saw this announcement it felt like a step backwards in air spring tech. I like that my fox with vorsprung luftkappe has a pneumatic top out. It makes the fork buttery smooth in the transition of wheel on/off the ground. This zero preload at the loss of a couple mm of travel is a worthwhile tradeoff. Also the increase in mid stroke support and better overall spring curve is a huge plus.
Seems like rockshox is just pandering to people that don't understand a superior spring setup.


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

alexbn921 said:


> Seems like rockshox is just pandering to people that don't understand a superior spring setup.


It would be interesting to know what their pro athletes are running. Sadly, we will never know that.


----------



## dlxah (Nov 5, 2014)

alexbn921 said:


> Bravo Dougal :thumbsup:
> When I first saw this announcement it felt like a step backwards in air spring tech. I like that my fox with vorsprung luftkappe has a pneumatic top out. It makes the fork buttery smooth in the transition of wheel on/off the ground. This zero preload at the loss of a couple mm of travel is a worthwhile tradeoff. Also the increase in mid stroke support and better overall spring curve is a huge plus.
> Seems like rockshox is just pandering to people that don't understand a superior spring setup.


Yeah, the whole solo air design is already just appealing to the lowest common denominator. The old dual air spring design would allow you to get the best of both worlds when properly tuned, and it also eliminates the small dead spot in the travel where the piston passes over the dimple and the spring rate drops to near zero for a couple mm.


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

Its interesting to see judging without ever using it.

As for the position of piston for compensation between chambers through dimple, its only 1cm difference. That may not have an huge effect. At 10mm travel the negative chamber doesnt have equal pressure as positive chamber, rather it has 30% less. At 20mm its already 63% less, 30mm = 99%. On old DebonAir the whole thing just shifts 10mm.


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

alexbn921 said:


> Bravo Dougal :thumbsup:
> When I first saw this announcement it felt like a step backwards in air spring tech. I like that my fox with vorsprung luftkappe has a pneumatic top out. It makes the fork buttery smooth in the transition of wheel on/off the ground. This zero preload at the loss of a couple mm of travel is a worthwhile tradeoff. Also the increase in mid stroke support and better overall spring curve is a huge plus.
> Seems like rockshox is just pandering to people that don't understand a superior spring setup.


I'm willing to bet that most people aren't into spring curves and dimples inside a fork. They just set their suspension up to where it feels good to them...and its more than "a couple mm"...more like 5 to 10mm. If your new 130mm air spring sits at the same height as your old 120mm...you would think that something is wrong. I mean if Rockshox noted a disclaimer of some kind on the new DB spring that the 5 to 10mm of dead travel is normal...then maybe they wouldn't have to pander to the masses.

None of my forks from Fox or older Rockshox and Marzocchi had this behavior...at least not this much. At first I thought I installed the air spring wrong...which is kind of hard to do.


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

RS VR6 said:


> None of my forks from Fox or older Rockshox and Marzocchi had this behavior...at least not this much. At first I thought I installed the air spring wrong...which is kind of hard to do.


That is what I was getting at with my earlier question about the Fox air spring. My 36 with NA2 Evol returns to full height. Is its equalization point higher up and/or neg spring volume smaller than the 19/20 Debonair?

I wouldn't say my 36 is any less sensitive than my Lyrik. If the 2021 Debonair is closer to what Fox has done, I think it should work out fine.

It's also curious that Vorsprung makes a Luftkappe for NA2 Evol but both for Debonair 19/20. This makes me suspect that the NA2 Evol in its stock configuration has smaller neg spring volume. Either that or Vorsprung just hasn't gotten around to/can't make a Luftkappe for the Debonair 19/20.

That said, it sounds like Fox has taken the exact opposite approach to RS with their latest 36, increasing the size of the neg spring by making the stanchion longer on the air side.


----------



## Rick Draper (Dec 1, 2009)

D(C) said:


> That is what I was getting at with my earlier question about the Fox air spring. My 36 with NA2 Evol returns to full height. Is its equalization point higher up and/or neg spring volume smaller than the 19/20 Debonair?
> 
> I wouldn't say my 36 is any less sensitive than my Lyrik. If the 2021 Debonair is closer to what Fox has done, I think it should work out fine.
> 
> ...


Vorsprung cannot make a Luftkappe for the newer debonair air springs as the pistons are riveted onto the air shaft.


----------



## Strattoa (Sep 22, 2018)

Will this change ride height under sag (with rider), or just free "sag"? I have the 2019/20 spring on the workbench to upgrade my 2018 lyric from 160mm to 170mm, but don't want to lose most of the change to sag...

Thanks,

Drew


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

Rick Draper said:


> Vorsprung cannot make a Luftkappe for the newer debonair air springs as the pistons are riveted onto the air shaft.


They'd just need to supply the top part of the shaft with the cap. Vorsprung certainly have the capability to do that. But there are a whole heap of other considerations as to whether a product is viable.



Strattoa said:


> Will this change ride height under sag (with rider), or just free "sag"? I have the 2019/20 spring on the workbench to upgrade my 2018 lyric from 160mm to 170mm, but don't want to lose most of the change to sag...
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Drew


Yes. The fork will sit more than 10mm higher with the same pressure and volume setup as last year.


----------



## Jesse Hill (Dec 29, 2006)

So thinking to myself again (trying not to hurt) there may be some potential to this. If we remember that suspension job is not only to take an impact but also to fill in holes then if the fork were sitting into their travel at static and to some extent staying “sucked down” when lifted (which they do, it’s minor but there). So if just using some generic numbers and say both forks you run a dynamic sag of 20% but one will only extend to 10% while the other will fully extend then than is an additional amount of droop that the front wheel can use to fill holes in the terrain which may have a smoother overall ride. So I’m doubting this thing is as firm as the original air spring (otherwise what the point) but if it sits between the original and the current then that might actually be a good place to be. Never really paid attention to it riding but the current first 5-10mm is rather “dead” so if they can keep it plush and active for traction without it becoming “dead” then that could be a win.


----------



## ccinpa (Jun 26, 2007)

POAH said:


> The end seal sits higher up in the leg which is why the foot nut has to be longer. The negative air spring is smaller.
> View attachment 1323747


Couldn't you just buy a 10mm longer air spring and add a 10mm spacer under the top out bumper to push the seal head up closer to the equalization dimple? Would that enlarge the negative spring while taking advantage of the higher ride height.


----------



## alexbn921 (Mar 31, 2009)

RS VR6 said:


> I'm willing to bet that most people aren't into spring curves and dimples inside a fork. They just set their suspension up to where it feels good to them...and its more than "a couple mm"...more like 5 to 10mm. If your new 130mm air spring sits at the same height as your old 120mm...you would think that something is wrong. I mean if Rockshox noted a disclaimer of some kind on the new DB spring that the 5 to 10mm of dead travel is normal...then maybe they wouldn't have to pander to the masses.
> 
> None of my forks from Fox or older Rockshox and Marzocchi had this behavior...at least not this much. At first I thought I installed the air spring wrong...which is kind of hard to do.


5mm of sag from bike weight is about perfect. It will top out on air and have zero preload. 10mm is more than you need for sure. Having a hard top out is a bad design.

Maybe the "Fixed" a problem, but in my opinion more less negative volume is a bad thing. The larger leg volume is an upgrade. Basically they should have had longer air shafts to begin with, even with the old seal head, but it looks like there is not enough clearance to just use the bottom nut.

My stock fox 36 160 had a hard top out. With the vorsprung luftkappe installed I "lost" 3-5mm of top out and the fork is better everywhere in it's travel.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

ccinpa said:


> Couldn't you just buy a 10mm longer air spring and add a 10mm spacer under the top out bumper to push the seal head up closer to the equalization dimple? Would that enlarge the negative spring while taking advantage of the higher ride height.


Sure could. But then you've got 10mm less travel. So only matters if that worries you.



alexbn921 said:


> 5mm of sag from bike weight is about perfect. It will top out on air and have zero preload. 10mm is more than you need for sure. Having a hard top out is a bad design.


But a heavy E bike will have 10mm of sag from bike weight. So guess which market segment is heavily driving components right now?



alexbn921 said:


> My stock fox 36 160 had a hard top out. With the vorsprung luftkappe installed I "lost" 3-5mm of top out and the fork is better everywhere in it's travel.


Was that the first year NA2? They fixed that top-out shock later on. Looks like the bumper compressed too far so they put a collar around the top of the bumper to limit it's compression.


----------



## alexbn921 (Mar 31, 2009)

Dougal said:


> Was that the first year NA2? They fixed that top-out shock later on. Looks like the bumper compressed too far so they put a collar around the top of the bumper to limit it's compression.


It's a 2019, so the newest air spring. By hard top out I meant a ridged stop on the rubber bumper. It was silent and smooth but had preload and no bike sag.


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

Dougal said:


> Sure could. But then you've got 10mm less travel.


No it wouldnt. It works, but the higher casting volume is lost.

You could add a "old" +10mm longer air shaft in general. Matters only if you need true 180mm, right?
But on a fully compressed fork, the negative chamber is only like 1bar so it has nearly no influence. So the +10mm ride heigtht is only changed on the beginning and is decreasing further into the travel.

It would be interesting if sag is changed on the new air shaft.


----------



## cacatous (Dec 1, 2013)

Does the Sektor and Revelation use Debonair 2?


----------



## s-master (May 15, 2018)

Revelation uses same air spring as pike and sektor uses different air spring. It doesn't have equalisation dimple in the stanchion but it equalises at topout via valve in the piston. They still call it debonair, because they enlarged the negative chamber.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

x-rated said:


> No it wouldnt. It works, but the higher casting volume is lost.
> 
> You could add a "old" +10mm longer air shaft in general. Matters only if you need true 180mm, right?
> But on a fully compressed fork, the negative chamber is only like 1bar so it has nearly no influence. So the +10mm ride heigtht is only changed on the beginning and is decreasing further into the travel.
> ...


I misread your one the last time. Using a longer shaft and spacer under means you might not get the seal to the equalisation dimple.

The first pike/lyrik shafts and debonair 2 shafts are the same length. But the Pike A2 got weird and I haven't checked the dimple position in that stanchion. Here's a pic of the Pike A2 original shaft next to the Luftkappe (with A2 adapter) and an A2 debonair shaft:


__
http://instagr.am/p/Bjn_SGIhyHj/

When Debonair 2 hit the A1/A2 and B1 pike (in 27" format) used the exact same shafts:


__
http://instagr.am/p/Bki8XIfBR00/

I unfortunately don't have a CAD model or photo of the original Pike or Lyrik shaft next to it's debonair 2 replacement. I've got CAD models of the originals but no Debonair 2 shafts in stock right now and no forks with them in the queue (because I pushed them all through before we hit lockdown).


----------



## B52U (Jun 6, 2019)

So I just did a 50hr service on my 2019 yari 170mm debonair and my debonair shaft has no end nut at all like they show in all these photos. What's up with that?


----------



## Jesse Hill (Dec 29, 2006)

B52U said:


> So I just did a 50hr service on my 2019 yari 170mm debonair and my debonair shaft has no end nut at all like they show in all these photos. What's up with that?


definitely not a 2019. 2019 would also have the sag indicator on the other leg. check your fork serial number but that's an older yari.


----------



## B52U (Jun 6, 2019)

Jesse Hill said:


> definitely not a 2019. 2019 would also have the sag indicator on the other leg. check your fork serial number but that's an older yari.


Ah hah! That must be it. The bottom of that air spring where the retaining ring is was black, not red as well. Must have been a 2018. Thanks! Guess if I upgrade I will need the whole $42 spring assembly. That's helpful.


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

Dougal said:


> I misread your one the last time. Using a longer shaft and spacer under means you might not get the seal to the equalisation dimple.


If its too long yes, but 1cm or sorts about should be fine a guess. In the end this may need some tampering to get the right max. distance.


----------



## Jukis (Sep 26, 2016)

These are my own design and cnc machined just before debonair was released.. I could've made thousands in couple weeks.. Well I made about 30 and like 15 of them are in use still.









Oh, obviously they needed a plug in the low end of the shaft..


----------



## Jukis (Sep 26, 2016)

x-rated said:


> If its too long yes, but 1cm or sorts about should be fine a guess. In the end this may need some tampering to get the right max. distance.


You will be better off without a spacer, actually if its not a 180mm then you'll be better without the bumber too, its just a waste of negative spring space. Pneumatic topout is fine.


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

B52U said:


> So I just did a 50hr service on my 2019 yari 170mm debonair and my debonair shaft has no end nut at all like they show in all these photos. What's up with that?


The newer Yaris have "DebonAir" on the upper part of the air side of the stanchion. Yours is probably an A1 model.


----------



## Jukis (Sep 26, 2016)

I think Rockshox had to make Lyrik and Pike a little worse before they release the new 37/38/38.99 or whatever fork that is.. So that people will compare it to a lyrik and say ooh it feels so supportive. Just like Lyrik did compared to Pike when it was released with 10mm longer negative chamber.


----------



## B52U (Jun 6, 2019)

RS VR6 said:


> The newer Yaris have "DebonAir" on the upper part of the air side of the stanchion. Yours is probably an A1 model.


I looked up the serial at https://trailhead.rockshox.com/en/search/

Looks to be the B1 model.


----------



## Gman086 (Jul 4, 2004)

I'm not getting the "reduced negative chamber" thing... they simply moved the whole piston assembly up so as the piston sits at the dimple at top-out. They reduced the POSITIVE chamber, not the negative chamber! Most articles discussing it say the same thing. I think the only downsides to this are:
1. If you've over-forked your bike, having 3-5mm pulldown isn't necessarily a bad thing when it comes to handling; new design may make it too tall now.
2. If you already don't run volume spacers and don't reach full travel - this will be even worse now.

Comments?

Have FUN!

G


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

Gman086 said:


> I'm not getting the "reduced negative chamber" thing... they simply moved the whole piston assembly up so as the piston sits at the dimple at top-out. They reduced the POSITIVE chamber, not the negative chamber! Most articles discussing it say the same thing. I think the only downsides to this are:
> 1. If you've over-forked your bike, having 3-5mm pulldown isn't necessarily a bad thing when it comes to handling; new design may make it too tall now.
> 2. If you already don't run volume spacers and don't reach full travel - this will be even worse now.
> 
> ...


Look at the side by side photos. The Debonair 2 sealhead is recessed above the seal. That negative spring volume is lost with Debonair 3.


----------



## 294037 (Jun 30, 2006)

Gman086 said:


> I'm not getting the "reduced negative chamber" thing... they simply moved the whole piston assembly up so as the piston sits at the dimple at top-out. They reduced the POSITIVE chamber, not the negative chamber! Most articles discussing it say the same thing. I think the only downsides to this are:
> 1. If you've over-forked your bike, having 3-5mm pulldown isn't necessarily a bad thing when it comes to handling; new design may make it too tall now.
> 2. If you already don't run volume spacers and don't reach full travel - this will be even worse now.
> 
> ...


The amount of air in the negative chamber has decreased. Previously the fork would equalise, then extend another 5-10mm, raising the neg pressure until the forces balance. This pneumatic top out was great for compliance but made an inconsistent total fork length. Now having a hard stop at the equalisation point means you have The same volume at top out but less neg pressure, as it doesn't extend that extra bit


----------



## kestrel242 (Jul 11, 2008)

I'm trying to figure out what would be my best strategy here. I have a new MY2019/2020 Lyrik in 160mm. My target travel is ~160mm. Getting extra support is good because my (older) Lyrik tends to ride too low in its travel on steeper stuff. I don't want it to dive, but I want to keep it plush on flatter parts.

Would I be better off getting the parts to update it to a 2021 Debonair 3 equivalent or a get 170mm Debonair 2 spring and try to figure out a 10mm spacer somehow?


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

kestrel242 said:


> I'm trying to figure out what would be my best strategy here. I have a new MY2019/2020 Lyrik in 160mm. My target travel is ~160mm. Getting extra support is good because my (older) Lyrik tends to ride too low in its travel on steeper stuff. I don't want it to dive, but I want to keep it plush on flatter parts.
> 
> Would I be better off getting the parts to update it to a 2021 Debonair 3 equivalent or a get 170mm Debonair 2 spring and try to figure out a 10mm spacer somehow?


Get Debonair 2 at 170mm.


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

kestrel242 said:


> I'm trying to figure out what would be my best strategy here. I have a new MY2019/2020 Lyrik in 160mm. My target travel is ~160mm. Getting extra support is good because my (older) Lyrik tends to ride too low in its travel on steeper stuff. I don't want it to dive, but I want to keep it plush on flatter parts.
> 
> Would I be better off getting the parts to update it to a 2021 Debonair 3 equivalent or a get 170mm Debonair 2 spring and try to figure out a 10mm spacer somehow?


It's funny, I don't find that my 2019 Lyrik dives. I am about 10 psi above what RS recommends for my weight, though. I ended up taking out a token since it was hard to use full travel at the air pressure that gave me the ride height I wanted.

So you could try running more air, or move your bars higher.


----------



## dlocki (Mar 30, 2017)

I don’t see why you couldn’t just put this new foot not on with the old seal head?

The amount the shaft is going to travel is no different, just longer past the part that was originally there?

it doesn’t hit the nut with the old design so putting this new nut on the important distance should stay the same and just push the lower 10mm away from the crown?

i might be wrong but I’m going to try it before I put the new seal head in


----------



## areks (Jan 30, 2016)

at full bottom out sealhead will collide with nut, the result might look like this:


----------



## Strattoa (Sep 22, 2018)

Good conversation all. This has me researching the effects of the 2019 air spring on my 2018 Lyrik now and debating the 2021 upgrade.

I'm currently running at 160mm with no tokens, and was planning to move to 170mm with the 2019 spring, but now I'm reading that may make it more progressive (less positive air space). Since I have no more tokens to remove, would I be better off with the 2021 spring?


----------



## Gman086 (Jul 4, 2004)

JohnnyC7 said:


> The amount of air in the negative chamber has decreased.


Okay but so has the amount in the positive chamber so... if the ratio is still the same then you wouldn't notice anything other than a taller fork (and potentially more ramp up at end stroke), correct?

Thanks,

G


----------



## 294037 (Jun 30, 2006)

Gman086 said:


> Okay but so has the amount in the positive chamber so... if the ratio is still the same then you wouldn't notice anything other than a taller fork (and potentially more ramp up at end stroke), correct?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> G


No the amount of air in the positive chamber is the same. The 2 designs still equalise and seal off at the same point so there isn't any change to the positive side.

With the old system, because the fork kept extending after top out not only did the neg pressure increase but positive pressure decreased. Now we have lower neg pressure and higher pos pressure at top out. Hence sitting higher in the stroke


----------



## Dice8 (Jun 18, 2019)

So is the Debonair3 recommended or is it better to stay at Debonair2 if everything works?
Or if i want 160mm, buying a 170mm Deb2 and adding a 10mm Spacer under the bumper (for more neg. Spring)?


----------



## Gman086 (Jul 4, 2004)

JohnnyC7 said:


> No the amount of air in the positive chamber is the same. The 2 designs still equalise and seal off at the same point so there isn't any change to the positive side.
> 
> With the old system, because the fork kept extending after top out not only did the neg pressure increase but positive pressure decreased. Now we have lower neg pressure and higher pos pressure at top out. Hence sitting higher in the stroke


I understand the "sitting higher in the stroke" thing because of the equalization at top out but moving the piston up 10mm in the stanchion reduces the volume of air on top of the piston (positive air). I see the recession on the old sealhead that D(C) mentions and that resultant loss of negative air volume but that looks to be about 10mm so... again, the positive and negative chambers appear to be reduced by 10mm, no? RS is also saying that there WOULD be increased ramp up BUT since the new sealhead is hollow, the volume in the lowers increases and doesn't have as much of an effect on bottom out force (who knew that was such a big thing?!). I'm not trying to be a pain, Johnny, just trying to fully understand this from an engineering standpoint.

Cheers,

G


----------



## Gman086 (Jul 4, 2004)

ccinpa said:


> Couldn't you just buy a 10mm longer air spring and add a 10mm spacer under the top out bumper to push the seal head up closer to the equalization dimple? Would that enlarge the negative spring while taking advantage of the higher ride height.
> 
> View attachment 1323863


I like the comparison pics, thanks for posting! As for your question, you could but the new sealhead is hollow so as to have less of a ramp up at bottom out from the air in the lowers (volume is now larger) vs the increased ramp up you would experience because of the smaller positive chamber volume of the higher piston in the new design. Shorter travel forks you sure could as you can just remove a volume spacer to make up for it; just need a 10mm longer shaft like you state.

Have FUN!

G MAN


----------



## 294037 (Jun 30, 2006)

Gman086 said:


> I understand the "sitting higher in the stroke" thing because of the equalization at top out but moving the piston up 10mm in the stanchion reduces the volume of air on top of the piston (positive air). I see the recession on the old sealhead that D(C) mentions and that resultant loss of negative air volume but that looks to be about 10mm so... again, the positive and negative chambers appear to be reduced by 10mm, no? RS is also saying that there WOULD be increased ramp up BUT since the new sealhead is hollow, the volume in the lowers increases and doesn't have as much of an effect on bottom out force (who knew that was such a big thing?!). I'm not trying to be a pain, Johnny, just trying to fully understand this from an engineering standpoint.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> G


Sorry, yes you would experience a higher spring force at the end of the stroke, as well as a higher force at the top. Its the amount of air in the positive chamber that hasn't changed
This is a picture of the positive chamber portion of the air spring curve (so you can see just the contribution from the positive side), blue lines are the start and finish of a 160mm Debonair 2, and red is debonair 3. You basically just shifted the start and finish along 10mm.


----------



## eshew (Jan 30, 2004)

So if the piston is moved up 10mm and there is roughly 10mm less sag, does the positive air volume really change that much? Seams minimal.


----------



## miles of pain (Sep 11, 2009)

Does anyone know when the 2021 forks are shipping?


----------



## Gman086 (Jul 4, 2004)

eshew said:


> So if the piston is moved up 10mm and there is roughly 10mm less sag, does the positive air volume really change that much? Seams minimal.


Positive chamber would reduce by about 2/3'rds of a token so... yeah, not too noticeable. Sag won't be 10mm higher tho... you simply get back the "pull down" the negative gradient was causing before which will only be 3-5mm depending on stroke length. I really don't think this is going to be such a big deal except for maybe the lower stroke lengths (140, 150, maybe 160) where you want to make sure you're getting/using full stroke. Anyone over-forking their bikes... not so much as you are already riding high in the travel for what your frame was designed for unless you really want to rake her out.

Have FUN!

G MAN


----------



## Bosbefok (Oct 23, 2018)

JohnnyC7 said:


> Sorry, yes you would experience a higher spring force at the end of the stroke, as well as a higher force at the top. Its the amount of air in the positive chamber that hasn't changed
> This is a picture of the positive chamber portion of the air spring curve (so you can see just the contribution from the positive side), blue lines are the start and finish of a 160mm Debonair 2, and red is debonair 3. You basically just shifted the start and finish along 10mm.


Hi Johnny
Thanks for a graph.

It seems RS are claiming that apart from the 10mm higher ride height, the spring would make better use of the last half of the travel as well. They claim the hollowed out sealhead is to accomplish this.. But that aside, I cant see how raising the equalizing point and decreasing the negative spring is going to help me access the last inch of travel? In fact it will do the opposite?

My experience of my 2019 150mm Pike (It sits at 142mm) For me to set the middle part of the suspension up supportive the last third is very hard to access (the last inch nearly impossible) when I set sag in attack mode at 15-20%.

I picked up(read) that Fox's 38 has a air sleeve inside the leg to reduce the air piston size and that It actually uses a FOX34 airpiston? Apparently to reduce friction, but I suspect its because of the relation between the air volume and the area of the seal-head during compression which draws the compression curve out a making the 2nd half of the travel (when the negative spring has no more effect) more accessible.

What bottomless tokens seem to do is cause the progression curve to kick up 2/3 into the travel, but making the last bit of travel almost unattainable which is why a tunable volume spacer is very useful.


----------



## B52U (Jun 6, 2019)

Generic question on the debonair spring history. 

What made v2 better than the early first version, was it a friction reduction and increase in negative air capacity? 

Also a change from delrin to aluminum for the piston?


----------



## digev (Mar 7, 2019)

A bit of history about all this

https://bikerumor.com/2017/06/28/suspension-tech-negative-spring-works-size-matters/


----------



## cxfahrer (Jun 20, 2008)

B52U said:


> Generic question on the debonair spring history.
> 
> What made v2 better than the early first version, was it a friction reduction and increase in negative air capacity?
> 
> Also a change from delrin to aluminum for the piston?


Increase in negative air capacity (better if you like it), and a better sealhead made from aluminum. 
The piston changed from aluminum to delrin, BTW. Not better.



Bosbefok said:


> Hi Johnny
> Thanks for a graph.
> 
> It seems RS are claiming that apart from the 10mm higher ride height, the spring would make better use of the last half of the travel as well. They claim the hollowed out sealhead is to accomplish this.. But that aside, I cant see how raising the equalizing point and decreasing the negative spring is going to help me access the last inch of travel? In fact it will do the opposite?
> ...


The size of the positive air chamber is very important in relation to travel, riders weight and preferences. So a tunability like Manitou has would be quite nice.

I had to hacksaw the airchamber of my old 2013 Fox36, because it was too small, and now I had to drill a hole into the airshaft of my Lyrik, for the same reason. 
It is always easier to reduce the size of an airchamber than maikng it bigger, maybe some day the people at RS find that out too. 
I hope Fox made the 38´s big enough with that small 34 air chamber, but I will never know as I have no need for a 38 fork.


----------



## romphaia (Sep 7, 2014)

Bosbefok said:


> It seems RS are claiming that apart from the 10mm higher ride height, the spring would make better use of the last half of the travel as well. They claim the hollowed out sealhead is to accomplish this.. But that aside, I cant see how raising the equalizing point and decreasing the negative spring is going to help me access the last inch of travel? In fact it will do the opposite?
> 
> My experience of my 2019 150mm Pike (It sits at 142mm) For me to set the middle part of the suspension up supportive the last third is very hard to access (the last inch nearly impossible) when I set sag in attack mode at 15-20%.


The decrease in negative volume has no effect on the end of travel; the hollowed seal head has a great impact on that. The relocation of the equalization point has a minor effect, and that could be countered by decreasing air pressure. 
It sounds like in your case the new debonair would bring only advantages.



Bosbefok said:


> I picked up(read) that Fox's 38 has a air sleeve inside the leg to reduce the air piston size and that It actually uses a FOX34 airpiston? Apparently to reduce friction, but I suspect its because of the relation between the air volume and the area of the seal-head during compression which draws the compression curve out a making the 2nd half of the travel (when the negative spring has no more effect) more accessible.


That relation only affects the amount the piston extends after the +/- chambers are equalized. Both spring curves are a result of the chamber lenght, not diameter.


----------



## Miker J (Nov 4, 2003)

How does one get the foot nut on/off the rod with out damaging the shaft?

Like, is it thread-locked on? Or, is it pretty loose.


Any link on a "how to"?

I'm due for a lowers service on my 2020 Lyric and am tempted to try the new seal head. I mean for $25, I think its worth a shot.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

Miker J said:


> How does one get the foot nut on/off the rod with out damaging the shaft?
> 
> Like, is it thread-locked on? Or, is it pretty loose.
> 
> ...


10mm shaft clamp. Vosprung ones are a good price but hidden in the luftkappe drop-down menu: https://vorsprungsuspension.com/col...ng-luftkappe-fox-34-36?variant=16503834542114


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

Miker J said:


> How does one get the foot nut on/off the rod with out damaging the shaft?
> 
> Like, is it thread-locked on? Or, is it pretty loose.
> 
> ...


There's an 8 mm hex fitting at the top of the piston on the 19/20 Debonair shaft. So the tools needed are an 8 mm hex wrench and an adjustable wrench for the nut. No need for shaft clamps.


----------



## digev (Mar 7, 2019)




----------



## Miker J (Nov 4, 2003)

Thanks guys. Appreciate it.

As long as we'er at it, I presume this would work for my 2020 Lyric Ultimate 275, 150mm ?

https://www.worldwidecyclery.com/pr...lyrik-yari-a1-2016-pike-b1-revelation-a1-2018


----------



## digev (Mar 7, 2019)

Miker J said:


> Thanks guys. Appreciate it.
> 
> As long as we'er at it, I presume this would work for my 2020 Lyric Ultimate 275, 150mm ?
> 
> https://www.worldwidecyclery.com/pr...lyrik-yari-a1-2016-pike-b1-revelation-a1-2018


https://www.worldwidecyclery.com/pr...debonairassembly-seal-head-lyrik-yari-a1-2016

PN: 00.4020.572.003

source: https://trailhead.rockshox.com/en/upgrade-kits/FS-LYRK-ULT-C3/150/DEBONAIR

Or check the fork serial number on the RS trailhead website to be 100% sure.

https://trailhead.rockshox.com/en/search/


----------



## jasonp22 (Oct 5, 2016)

Perhaps a repetitive question:
I have a 2019 Lyric with the V2 air spring. Do I need the full air spring assembly to upgrade to V3 or just the seal head + foot nut upgrade kit?


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

jasonp22 said:


> Perhaps a repetitive question:
> I have a 2019 Lyric with the V2 air spring. Do I need the full air spring assembly to upgrade to V3 or just the seal head + foot nut upgrade kit?


If your air spring has the red sealhead (it should if your fork is a 2019), then you just need the sealhead and nut. Otherwise you need the full air spring.


----------



## jasonp22 (Oct 5, 2016)

Thanks D(C). For that $25 or so price of entry, I figure I'll give it a shot since I'm about to service my air spring soon anyway. Currently the fork feels divey to me so I'm interested to see if this upgrade improves that aspect. :thumbsup:


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

I removed the negative bump stop on my '19 Debonair to increase negative volume and added Push fork seals to go along with my Avy cartridge and my modified Yari is amazing honestly. Took some dialing in, and requires 100 psi (180# rider). It uses up a solid 10mm of travel just sitting there, however I set sag as if it was showing the full 160mm travel. 
It's positively coil like sensitive now, really good midrange support, and very controlled. 
Won't be changing a thing at this time. 


Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


----------



## Jukis (Sep 26, 2016)

Suns_PSD said:


> I removed the negative bump stop on my '19 Debonair to increase negative volume and added Push fork seals to go along with my Avy cartridge and my modified Yari is amazing honestly. Took some dialing in, and requires 100 psi (180# rider). It uses up a solid 10mm of travel just sitting there, however I set sag as if it was showing the full 160mm travel.
> It's positively coil like sensitive now, really good midrange support, and very controlled.
> Won't be changing a thing at this time.


I installed my own air piston for the first time with the 2019 sealhead and also without the topout bumber, damn I'd forgotten how awesome it makes the fork. Its like there is no starting friction for movement in the first 30% of travel, yet it is still supportive. Also measured and the 170mm my19 debonair shaft is actually 180mm from the sealhead to the nut, so there could be extra room to fit the my21 foot nut without the sealhead.


----------



## elsinore (Jun 10, 2005)

Jukis said:


> I installed my own air piston for the first time with the 2019 sealhead and also without the topout bumber, damn I'd forgotten how awesome it makes the fork. Its like there is no starting friction for movement in the first 30% of travel, yet it is still supportive. Also measured and the 170mm my19 debonair shaft is actually 180mm from the sealhead to the nut, so there could be extra room to fit the my21 foot nut without the sealhead.


You guys aren't having problems with top out clunk after removing the bumper?


----------



## Jesse Hill (Dec 29, 2006)

elsinore said:


> You guys aren't having problems with top out clunk after removing the bumper?


With current debonair that is extremely unlikely as it already tops out pneumatically (hence the "sucked down" comments). The new debonair would likely have issues.


----------



## B52U (Jun 6, 2019)

Welp, I pulled the trigger on a 2.1 rc2 damper and this new C1 spring for my 2018 yari that had the motion control damper and original debonair spring. 

I hope it makes the fork amaze-balls!

Would it be worth going to maxima oil as well?


----------



## Jesse Hill (Dec 29, 2006)

B52U said:


> Welp, I pulled the trigger on a 2.1 rc2 damper and this new C1 spring for my 2018 yari that had the motion control damper and original debonair spring.
> 
> I hope it makes the fork amaze-balls!
> 
> Would it be worth going to maxima oil as well?


Your 2.1 rc2 already has the maxima oil. The debonair was a big improvement over the original air springs, hopefully this update improves on that even more.


----------



## PJJ205 (Aug 9, 2018)

I just got done putting the updated Rockshox Debonair air spring into my Yari and hope to get an actual ride on it tomorrow... I have also put in a Charger 2.1 RC2 so it's basically already a Lyrik. Since this Coronavirus thing broke out, I haven't been riding but I'm itching to get out on a secluded, chill ride now that I've tossed this in.

I did a quick lap around the neighborhood and the midstroke support is immediately noticeable, and the fork rides higher in the travel. It definitely reminds me of the feel that the MegNeg gave me when I put it on my Super Deluxe and I am hoping it provides the same sort of feel. I'll report back after I get done riding it.

When pulliing on the fork, I've found that it doesn't extend anymore because the new air spring is forcing the fork to use all 160mm as intended. With my old air spring, I noticed that it was already sucked down closer to the 10mm sag marking on the fork.


----------



## petercarm (Nov 5, 2007)

I've got three Lyriks running 2019/2020 Debonair2 springs.

- 2x 170mm 2020 Ultimates on his'n'hers e-bikes. I find they ride a little low.
- 1x 160mm 2018 RCT3 (upgraded) on my enduro bike (that I race). I run this with "supportive" pressures and don't get full travel and it is better on rocky vs sloppy.

The scenarios I'm starting with seem to be the design targets for Debonair3 (ebikes and compromised support/full travel) that are getting discussed on this thread.

It won't be a lot of expenditure for a lot of experimentation to just go out and get a sealhead and footnut kit.


----------



## Jesse Hill (Dec 29, 2006)

PJJ205 said:


> I just got done putting the updated Rockshox Debonair air spring into my Yari and hope to get an actual ride on it tomorrow... I have also put in a Charger 2.1 RC2 so it's basically already a Lyrik. Since this Coronavirus thing broke out, I haven't been riding but I'm itching to get out on a secluded, chill ride now that I've tossed this in.
> 
> I did a quick lap around the neighborhood and the midstroke support is immediately noticeable, and the fork rides higher in the travel. It definitely reminds me of the feel that the MegNeg gave me when I put it on my Super Deluxe and I am hoping it provides the same sort of feel. I'll report back after I get done riding it.
> 
> ...


Any noticeable difference in initial sensitivity or did that remain unchanged?


----------



## Trinimon (Aug 6, 2019)

Are there 3 versions of Debonair? I know there was Solo Air then Debonair and I now the revised Debonair 2021 with the new seal and nut. Did I miss one because I see people referring to the 2021 version as Debonair 3?


----------



## Jukis (Sep 26, 2016)

2018 debonair = soloair shaft and piston with slight optimization of the topout bumber and sealhead to get little more negative volume. 2019 debonair = totally new shaft and piston and sealhead. 2021 debonair = new sealhead and footnut for the 2019 shaft.


----------



## B52U (Jun 6, 2019)

Trinimon said:


> Are there 3 versions of Debonair? I know there was Solo Air then Debonair and I now the revised Debonair 2021 with the new seal and nut. Did I miss one because I see people referring to the 2021 version as Debonair 3?


Yes, I have the first version in my 2018 yari at the moment. It has no foot nut on the shaft and has all black piston parts. It also has about 5mm of sag into travel like the v2.


----------



## Jukis (Sep 26, 2016)

petercarm said:


> I've got three Lyriks running 2019/2020 Debonair2 springs.
> 
> - 2x 170mm 2020 Ultimates on his'n'hers e-bikes. I find they ride a little low.
> - 1x 160mm 2018 RCT3 (upgraded) on my enduro bike (that I race). I run this with "supportive" pressures and don't get full travel and it is better on rocky vs sloppy.
> ...


Hey. What you typed originally seems to make a lot of sense, get the 180mm debonair 3 and use the footnut make your enduro bike 170mm, other e-bike 170mm with the longer footnut and second e-bike 180mm debonair2.


----------



## Trinimon (Aug 6, 2019)

Jukis said:


> 2018 debonair = soloair shaft and piston with slight optimization of the topout bumber and sealhead to get little more negative volume. 2019 debonair = totally new shaft and piston and sealhead. 2021 debonair = new sealhead and footnut for the 2019 shaft.


Ahhhh! I didn't know about the solo air upgrade option. Thanks for clearing that up.



B52U said:


> Yes, I have the first version in my 2018 yari at the moment. It has no foot nut on the shaft and has all black piston parts. It also has about 5mm of sag into travel like the v2.


Thanks. Makes sense now after Jukis explained it.


----------



## L. Ron Hoover (Feb 1, 2006)

I just spent the last hour reading this thread when I should be working... Lots of excellent contributions and now I have a question.

I have a 2017 Pike RC, 150mm solo air. I don't have any complaints about how the fork behaves but I'm about to do the 1 year service on it and had ordered a 160mm solo air spring to go into it, which arrived today. Is it worth my while to send that one back and get the 2021 Debonair upgrade or the 2019 one? Or something else?

Bike is a 2017 Devinci Troy, and came with the 150mm version, so it sitting a bit into the travel at rest with a 160mm shaft wouldnt be too much of an issue.


----------



## eshew (Jan 30, 2004)

I would send that '19 one back and get the '21 air spring. Otherwise I'd guess you'd be installing the 19 and later this summer the '21. But both should be a big improvement.


----------



## Gman086 (Jul 4, 2004)

L. Ron Hoover said:


> I just spent the last hour reading this thread when I should be working... Lots of excellent contributions and now I have a question.
> 
> I have a 2017 Pike RC, 150mm solo air. I don't have any complaints about how the fork behaves but I'm about to do the 1 year service on it and had ordered a 160mm solo air spring to go into it, which arrived today. Is it worth my while to send that one back and get the 2021 Debonair upgrade or the 2019 one? Or something else?
> 
> Bike is a 2017 Devinci Troy, and came with the 150mm version, so it sitting a bit into the travel at rest with a 160mm shaft wouldnt be too much of an issue.


Depends on when they changed from the A1/A2 to the B1/B2 version of the Pike because the equalization dimple position actually changed (unlike on the Lyrik/Yari) on the Pikes! Personally I would go with the '19 version Debonaire for that reason alone and to get the extra negative chamber volume for a smoother ride over small chatter. Overforking has less of an issue with air pressure gradient pull-back too as you stay closer to the geometry the bike was designed for.

My 2 cents,

G MAN


----------



## leecarey212 (Aug 19, 2017)

Gman086 said:


> Depends on when they changed from the A1 to the B1 version of the Pike because the equalization dimple position actually changed (unlike on the Lyrik/Yari) on the Pikes! Personally I would go with the '19 version Debonaire for that reason alone and to get the extra negative chamber volume for a smoother ride over small chatter. Overforking has less of an issue with air pressure gradient pull-back too as you stay closer to the geometry the bike was designed for.
> 
> My 2 cents,
> 
> G MAN


Hi g man, Does that mean the 2019 pikes shouldn't have the issue of resting a few mil into their travel ? Just prior models and lyrics etc that will need the new upgrade

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## L. Ron Hoover (Feb 1, 2006)

Gman086 said:


> Depends on when they changed from the A1 to the B1 version of the Pike because the equalization dimple position actually changed (unlike on the Lyrik/Yari) on the Pikes! Personally I would go with the '19 version Debonaire for that reason alone and to get the extra negative chamber volume for a smoother ride over small chatter. Overforking has less of an issue with air pressure gradient pull-back too as you stay closer to the geometry the bike was designed for.
> 
> My 2 cents,
> 
> G MAN


Thanks for your response! Mine's an A2 but they spec all the same service kits and stuff as for the A1. I hedged my bets and ordered the 19 version of the Debonair air shaft but also ordered the 21 seal head and foot nut. Just going to send the Solo Air shaft back.

Now, do I wait until the new shaft arrives to do the 1 year service, which is well overdue or do it now with the knowledge that I'll have to take it apart again in a couple of weeks? lol We're still in snow season but that's coming to a close and with the ludicrous amount of snow we got this winter, dirt season won't be starting until mid-May at best so I will probably hold off until the parts come.


----------



## woodsbiker (May 20, 2008)

Installed the upgrade on my Yari which already had the updated Debonair from last year. First ride tonight for a bit over 2hrs. I am sold so far for the single fact that the top end feels more put together. No more dead almost sloppy feeling that existed prior. Obviously will need more seat time to get a full run down but so far so good.


----------



## PJJ205 (Aug 9, 2018)

Jesse Hill said:


> Any noticeable difference in initial sensitivity or did that remain unchanged?


 If you mean small bump sensitivity, I feel like the fork is a lot smoother over the small chop, but that also could be related to fresh oil for all I know. All I know is that the fork feels a lot more predictable and planted, in general. So far, I'm completely happy with it, but only time will tell if that opinion changes. It definitely improved the feel of things that made me uncomfortable before, especially when the trail gets steep.


----------



## Gman086 (Jul 4, 2004)

leecarey212 said:


> Hi g man, Does that mean the 2019 pikes shouldn't have the issue of resting a few mil into their travel ? Just prior models and lyrics etc that will need the new upgrade
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


No, with the older 2014-2017 A1/A2 Pike/Revelation the piston was already sitting at the transfer port and didn't suck down travel. In fact if you did the C1 upgrade, you would have to compress the bottom out bumper to actually equalize the chambers! The B1/B2 Pike/Revelations 2018-2020 have the same port location as the Lyrik/Yaris and all of those could potentially benefit... that is if you want a taller ride height; YMMV.

Have FUN!

G MAN


----------



## leecarey212 (Aug 19, 2017)

Gman086 said:


> No, with the older 2014-2017 A1/A2 Pike/Revelation the piston was already sitting at the transfer port and didn't suck down travel. In fact if you did the C1 upgrade, you would have to compress the bottom out bumper to actually equalize the chambers! The B1/B2 Pike/Revelations 2018-2020 have the same port location as the Lyrik/Yaris and all of those could potentially benefit... that is if you want a taller ride height; YMMV.
> 
> Have FUN!
> 
> G MAN


Ahhh. Right I see thanks for the response mate

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CCS86 (Jan 6, 2020)

PJJ205 said:


> If you mean small bump sensitivity, I feel like the fork is a lot smoother over the small chop, but that also could be related to fresh oil for all I know. All I know is that the fork feels a lot more predictable and planted, in general. So far, I'm completely happy with it, but only time will tell if that opinion changes. It definitely improved the feel of things that made me uncomfortable before, especially when the trail gets steep.


A lower leg service with fresh grease and oil can have a very big impact on the feel of things your are reporting.

Unless you did the new Debonair on a freshly serviced fork, you can't really draw any conclusions on the feel.


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

Have you ever compared sag, new vs. old Debonair? 
I think they should differ a lot.
New Debonair 160mm = old DebonAir 170mm because 1st 10mm are dead.
Probably old spring has more progression too.
Why dont they show us spring curves?


----------



## eshew (Jan 30, 2004)

This guy mimes a spring curve for you.


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

Really need to know how the fork behaves in the last third, there are some occasions where you dont want higher travel. Think of bikes with boosted travel on the front (too low HTA and too high BB height).


----------



## eshew (Jan 30, 2004)

It behaves the same, you just don't have 10mm of unsupported sag. Makes for a more consistent feel.

Sag is still set the same way unless you prefer to change it. Which you might or maybe you won't. That's up to the end user. 

Heck, they might even consider dropping a few psi, it's up to them, go crazy! The world is your oyster and this air spring is your shucker! Get shucked!


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

If you change 1 parameter there is also at least 1 other which changes too.


----------



## eshew (Jan 30, 2004)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analysis_paralysis


----------



## Graveltattoo (Sep 14, 2017)

eshew said:


> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analysis_paralysis


That's funny!!

It's an upgrade that the Engineers at Rockshox have developed, I don't think they'd promote something that wasn't an improvement. I've talked to an independent suspension expert, his "opinion" was that Rockshox might've had had too much negative air pressure and they're just correcting it.

I know very little about suspension compared to the expert/engineer, I trust their analysis...this is an upgraded.


----------



## POAH (Apr 29, 2009)

Graveltattoo said:


> That's funny!!
> 
> It's an upgrade that the Engineers at Rockshox have developed, I don't think they'd promote something that wasn't an improvement. I've talked to an independent suspension expert, his "opinion" was that Rockshox might've had had too much negative air pressure and they're just correcting it.
> 
> I know very little about suspension compared to the expert/engineer, I trust their analysis...this is an upgraded.


Its a fix to correct a poorly designed air spring resulting in less negative and positive air spring volume. It isn't an upgrade.


----------



## Graveltattoo (Sep 14, 2017)

POAH said:


> Its a fix to correct a poorly designed air spring resulting in less negative and positive air spring volume. It isn't an upgrade.


You're correct, my bad!
Wrong terminology, substitute fix or correction for upgrade.


----------



## dlocki (Mar 30, 2017)

I fitted the new air spring to my forks last night. I put the same pressure in as The previous 
Spring. I’m going to ride it properly today but it’s riding up the road they feel very different, obviously the front end is higher but the fork feels way more firm off the top


----------



## Graveltattoo (Sep 14, 2017)

dlocki said:


> I fitted the new air spring to my forks last night. I put the same pressure in as The previous
> Spring. I'm going to ride it properly today but it's riding up the road they feel very different, obviously the front end is higher but the fork feels way more firm.


Out of curiosity, is your sag % the same as before or slightly less?


----------



## dlocki (Mar 30, 2017)

Sag was 20% using the same pressure which gave my 25% with the old spring

So just got back from a good 3 hour - if you want to go downhill from point A2B quicker and are willing to give up some suppleness for a very firm fork off the bottom into the mid stroke then this is for you. 

It’s very stiff compared to the old air spring, 

my fork has a HC97 fitted aswel so for me as a first impression I prefer the old one. 
I think with a stock damper this might not be as dramatic? 

I either need to drop 5psi or put the old one back in. I did use all the travel it’s just the first bit of travel I felt is too hard. 

Hope this makes sense.

Dave


----------



## digev (Mar 7, 2019)

dlocki said:


> So just got back from a good 3 hour - if you want to go downhill from point A2B quicker and are willing to give up some suppleness for a very firm fork off the bottom into the mid stroke then this is for you.
> 
> It's very stiff compared to the old air spring,
> 
> ...


You got the air spring + HC97 installed at the same time?


----------



## dlocki (Mar 30, 2017)

No had the Hc97 since last may. I never rode the forks with the stock damper


----------



## digev (Mar 7, 2019)

dlocki said:


> No had the Hc97 since last may. I never rode the forks with the stock damper


Oh OK


----------



## Graveltattoo (Sep 14, 2017)

I just installed the new sealhead and footnut in my 2020 Lyrik Ultimate. Obviously it sits 10mm higher in it's travel at rest and standing in attack position. Just bouncing in the back lane it's feels the same, seems very smooth (same as before). When I hammer on the fork the o-ring is in the same spot as before. Sag has gone from25% to about 21% with same psi.


----------



## Strattoa (Sep 22, 2018)

Graveltattoo said:


> I just installed the new sealhead and footnut in my 2020 Lyrik Ultimate. Obviously it sits 10mm higher in it's travel at rest and standing in attack position. Just bouncing in the back lane it's feels the same, seems very smooth (same as before). When I hammer on the fork the o-ring is in the same spot as before. Sag has gone from25% to about 21% with same psi.


Where did you find the seal head kit? It's out of stock everywhere I've looked. I have a brand new 2019 spring (+10mm over stock) I was about to install, but would add the new seal head at the same time if I can find it.


----------



## Graveltattoo (Sep 14, 2017)

Strattoa said:


> Where did you find the seal head kit? It's out of stock everywhere I've looked. I have a brand new 2019 spring (+10mm over stock) I was about to install, but would add the new seal head at the same time if I can find it.


My LBS(North Vancouver) had some, I had phoned some other shops previous but was told they wouldn't have any in stock until mid May, another was early June. Maybe I lucked out!


----------



## dlocki (Mar 30, 2017)

I’ve just put the old one back in my forks and will do the same ride tomorrow and see how it feels in comparison. 

If you are in the Uk I will probably be selling mine on Monday


----------



## BrokenLyrik (Apr 25, 2020)

I'm having a problem with my new airspring and I'm wondering if you guys have run into simillar issues.

I bought a 2021 airspring to put in my 2020 170mm Lyrik Ultimate. I acidentally bought a 160mm airspring, so I just put the new air seal and footnut on my old airshatf. Installed my updated airspring and performed a lower leg service at the same time with no issues (that I know of...). I put the same air pressure that I had in before (80 psi) to get a feel for how the new airpspring felt. Riding around in the street afterwards it felt good and I could immediately notice that the fork was sitting higher in its travel.

Fast forward a week (because I'm a weekend warrior) and the fork felt good on the trails, especially in the steeps. After riding for a little bit, I decide to drop the air pressure a little because the forks did feel a little stiff. This is where my problems began:

-I attach my (Rockshox) shock pump to the forks and it reads 40 psi. Seemed weird because I remembered pumping them up to 80 psi before. I take the shock pump off and feel the forks and they feel fine.

-I put the shock pump back on and it still reads 40 psi. I decide to pump the forks up to 80 psi (what I had in them before). Now the forks feel extremely stiff (like they have way more than 80 psi).

-I decide to let all the air out and pump them back up to 40 psi (what the shock pump was reading at first). I did notice that when I released all the air the forks didn't sag all the way down (they only sagged to ~50%). When I put 40 psi in, they feel stiffer then before and also seem to be rebounding faster (I didn't touch the rebound setting).

-I tried removing all the air again and compressing the forks with "no air". At "0 psi" according to my shock pump, the forks still feel like they have air in them. I pumped them back up to 40 psi and now the forks feel like they're locked out. If I put all my weight on them, they compress ~5 mm. Also, when looking at the sag indicator, they look like they're sitting at 180mm instead of 170mm.

I'm going to pull the forks apart in a little bit, but I'm wondering if anyone has experienced anything like this? Am I an idiot and does it sound like I screwed up the lower leg service (I've done it twice before on Lyriks with no problems)? Or could this be a problem with the new seal head and foot nut I installed on my 2020 airshaft?


----------



## Graveltattoo (Sep 14, 2017)

BrokenLyrik said:


> I'm having a problem with my new airspring and I'm wondering if you guys have run into simillar issues.
> 
> I bought a 2021 airspring to put in my 2020 170mm Lyrik Ultimate. I acidentally bought a 160mm airspring, so I just put the new air seal and footnut on my old airshatf. Installed my updated airspring and performed a lower leg service at the same time with no issues (that I know of...). I put the same air pressure that I had in before (80 psi) to get a feel for how the new airpspring felt. Riding around in the street afterwards it felt good and I could immediately notice that the fork was sitting higher in its travel.
> 
> ...


Just to confirm you put the sealhead on the right way and not upside down?
I've heard several people making this mistake.


----------



## BrokenLyrik (Apr 25, 2020)

Graveltattoo said:


> Just to confirm you put the sealhead on the right way and not upside down?
> I've heard several people making this mistake.


Yep, I made sure to match the sealhead to all the photos we've been seeing online.


----------



## fresh tracks (Feb 25, 2005)

Does any retailer have stock of the sealhead upgrade kit? Part#00.4020.573.000
So far everywhere I've looked (online) it's been out of stock.
cheers


----------



## eshew (Jan 30, 2004)

BrokenLyrik

Try a different shock pump. I've had the gauges go bad before.


----------



## two-one (Aug 7, 2008)

BrokenLyrik said:


> -I tried removing all the air again and compressing the forks with "no air". At "0 psi" according to my shock pump, the forks still feel like they have air in them. I pumped them back up to 40 psi and now the forks feel like they're locked out. If I put all my weight on them, they compress ~5 mm. Also, when looking at the sag indicator, they look like they're sitting at 180mm instead of 170mm.


I'm fairly sure that you are leaking air into the lower legs, probably from a less-than-airtight airshaft (which extends the negative chamber)

My advice: empty the airspring by pressing the schrader valve with an allen wrench, then do the zip-tie wiperseal-burp trick, then see how it feels. If everything compresses normally again, you probably have a negative chamber leak into the lower legs.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

fresh tracks said:


> Does any retailer have stock of the sealhead upgrade kit? Part#00.4020.573.000
> So far everywhere I've looked (online) it's been out of stock.
> cheers


I think mine arrived Friday. But I'm probably in the wrong hemisphere for you.


----------



## dlocki (Mar 30, 2017)

Ok so I went and did the same ride as yesterday, back on the old air spring. 

The old spring is more supple on the small stuff and gives tons more front end feel, i didn’t use full travel - probably 15mm left.

So from the two rides back to back. New spring - sits higher, not as supple, gives up full travel easier. 

Personally I prefer the old - I must add I have a hc97 and not a stock damper


----------



## Strattoa (Sep 22, 2018)

I keep reading about people removing the top out bumper on the 19/20 spring to add even more negative volume. Is there no risk in this? 

Could removing the bumper from the C1 ('21) spring be a sort of middle ground between the two designs?


----------



## dlocki (Mar 30, 2017)

I think it would probably top out without it in now?


----------



## Strattoa (Sep 22, 2018)

dlocki said:


> I think it would probably top out without it in now


Is that not the case with the 19/20 spring? Just trying to understand why RS included the bumper if it wasn't needed, but they were trying to add negative volume.

Thanks,

Drew


----------



## BrokenLyrik (Apr 25, 2020)

two-one said:


> I'm fairly sure that you are leaking air into the lower legs, probably from a less-than-airtight airshaft (which extends the negative chamber)
> 
> My advice: empty the airspring by pressing the schrader valve with an allen wrench, then do the zip-tie wiperseal-burp trick, then see how it feels. If everything compresses normally again, you probably have a negative chamber leak into the lower legs.


Yep, you are correct. I found that out the hard way when I pulled my forks apart and had oil and air explode out of the lower leg. I inspected the inside of the air chamber and didn't see any scratches or marks, so I'm thinking its a problem with the o-ring on the seal head. I'm going to order a larger o-ring and see what that does.


----------



## CCS86 (Jan 6, 2020)

BrokenLyrik said:


> Yep, you are correct. I found that out the hard way when I pulled my forks apart and had oil and air explode out of the lower leg. I inspected the inside of the air chamber and didn't see any scratches or marks, so I'm thinking its a problem with the o-ring on the seal head. I'm going to order a larger o-ring and see what that does.


That's not a good idea. The correct part is the correct part. They didn't spec the wrong size.

Sent from my Pixel 4 using Tapatalk


----------



## Graveltattoo (Sep 14, 2017)

CCS86 said:


> That's not a good idea. The correct part is the correct part. They didn't spec the wrong size.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 4 using Tapatalk


Completely agree!!!

I would inspect the o-ring and if it looks good, then I would clean everything thing again and re-grease the seals and o-rings then reassemble.


----------



## Jukis (Sep 26, 2016)

Strattoa said:


> I keep reading about people removing the top out bumper on the 19/20 spring to add even more negative volume. Is there no risk in this?
> 
> Could removing the bumper from the C1 ('21) spring be a sort of middle ground between the two designs?





Strattoa said:


> Is that not the case with the 19/20 spring? Just trying to understand why RS included the bumper if it wasn't needed, but they were trying to add negative volume.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Drew


My19 debonair balances air chambers 10mm earlier than my21 debonair (think about it as 30mm top out travel instead of 20mm). 
It results in a lot more pressure in the negative chamber for the last 20mm when removing the top out bumber( note that you should not remove the top out bumber if your fork is at max spec travel aka 180lyrik/160pike)
So pneumatic top out spring wouldnt be very strong with the my21 debonair upgrade, also it would ruin the idea of no dead spring stroke at the balance port because it would be able to go higher in travel than the port.


----------



## PJJ205 (Aug 9, 2018)

Spent a full day on it out at Greer Ranch today and I can confidently say that this improved my comfort on my bike. I used to feel very uncomfortable on steep trails because I always felt like I was going to go over the bars, especially if there were drops or big rocks to hang up on. The feel of the bike being able to hold itself up feels great in the steep and rocky so the trails there that used to make me nervous felt normal and way easier/predictable to ride. 

Another place that I really felt the improvement was in rock gardens. The bike feels way more composed when the trail get choppy and rough, especially when there are drops involved.

I have dropped 5 PSI in comparison to the previous generation Debonair and I sped up my rebound 3 clicks. Overall, I'm really happy with it and am looking forward to spending more time in other riding areas after this Coronavirus stuff lets up to get a full grasp on it..


----------



## whatshubdoc (Oct 8, 2015)

POAH said:


> Its a fix to correct a poorly designed air spring resulting in less negative and positive air spring volume. It isn't an upgrade.


Hey POAH,

Your understanding of this recently released (I hesitate to say "new" as someone on here said they assumed new = better) air spring seems to align with what my thoughts are. The only difference is that I believe the 2021 spring produces a firmer initial stroke as well as a firmer mid stroke. I say this based on putting a band into my Debonair rear shock's negative spring; I was able to run the same pressure but get 2% less sag, resulting in the shock sitting higher in the stroke and the same end stroke ramp.

I'm currently running a 150mm air shaft + Luftkappe which I love. I am thinking about going to 160mm, but am concerned that the Luftkappe design might make it too progressive. Even Steve @ Vorsprung acknowledges on the product page that 160mm might be too progressive.

Question 1:

Does it really just come down to

2021 air spring vs 2018-2020 air spring
1. less supple initial stroke vs more supple initial stroke
2. more supportive mid stroke vs - (I have not ridden this config so I can't say how supportive it is, and refrain from saying "less supportive" because "less" implies it is compared against a reference)
3. more progressive end stroke vs -

I honesty don't care about the 3-4mm "loss". The Luftkappe already has this effect and it's all part of the package to get a super sweet initial stroke. When you put your weight on the bike those initial 20mm's disappear anyway and as long as the fork rides the way you want, that's all that matters.

All I'm looking for is to run my fork at 160mm with the same characteristics as the LK, without insane end stroke ramp.

Question 2:

Can anyone comment on 2021 Debonair vs Luftkappe? It seems like 2018-2020 vs Luftkappe, LK wins out more than half the time.


----------



## dlocki (Mar 30, 2017)

Having ridden the new air spring. 

it is less supple, the mid stroke is softer and personally feel it is less progressive. 
If I was keeping the 21 spring I would have to add another token to get the ramp I wanted


----------



## Graveltattoo (Sep 14, 2017)

dlocki said:


> Having ridden the new air spring.
> 
> it is less supple, the mid stroke is softer and personally feel it is less progressive.
> If I was keeping the 21 spring I would have to add another token to get the ramp I wanted


But you have a different damper(not stock) don't you?


----------



## two-one (Aug 7, 2008)

BrokenLyrik said:


> Yep, you are correct. I found that out the hard way when I pulled my forks apart and had oil and air explode out of the lower leg. I inspected the inside of the air chamber and didn't see any scratches or marks, so I'm thinking its a problem with the o-ring on the seal head. I'm going to order a larger o-ring and see what that does.


doesnt that new footnut seal the air chamber in the airshaft interior? my money is on a problem during the footnut switch...


----------



## dlocki (Mar 30, 2017)

Graveltattoo said:


> But you have a different damper(not stock) don't you?


Yes I have a HC97 which firms the fork up anyway.


----------



## carlhulit (Sep 13, 2005)

I have a 2018 Lyric RC 160mm on a transition sentinel that needs a service and I am looking at options to improve mid stroke support and increase dynamic ride height. I basically want it to feel more like a 36 support wise and am willing to give up some plushness. Currently has the stock 2 tokens and bottom out if fine but it is more divey than I want unless I add a ton of LSC making it too harsh. 
Option 1: Rebuild with new seals current config, add pressure maybe remove a token ~$150
Option 2: Rebuild with a new airspring (maybe a 170) as the 21 version is marketed to do what I want ~$200
Option 3: Send to vorsprung for a luftkappe and tune ~$300 (inc shipping)
Option 4: Send to push for a rebuild and hc97 ~$500
Option 5: Sell it and buy a takeoff 36 grip2 if I can find one ~$500

Any comparisons performance wise between these options? I don't really want to go to a coil so I can alter spring rate more easily for different riding (trail vs enduro vs park and using my mac-ride with a 40lb kid).

Also interested in suggested shops in New England.


----------



## Strattoa (Sep 22, 2018)

carlhulit said:


> I have a 2018 Lyric RC 160mm on a transition sentinel that needs a service and I am looking at options to improve mid stroke support and increase dynamic ride height. I basically want it to feel more like a 36 support wise and am willing to give up some plushness. Currently has the stock 2 tokens and bottom out if fine but it is more divey than I want unless I add a ton of LSC making it too harsh.
> Option 1: Rebuild with new seals current config, add pressure maybe remove a token ~$150
> Option 2: Rebuild with a new airspring (maybe a 170) as the 21 version is marketed to do what I want ~$200
> Option 3: Send to vorsprung for a luftkappe and tune ~$300 (inc shipping)
> ...


If you do it yourself, option 1 is about $50 if buying new seals and lube, and option 2 $100. Pretty affordable experiment.


----------



## Miker J (Nov 4, 2003)

So how much travel off the top are we talking about gaining with the new seal head?

As far as I can tell, on my Lyric, 2019 I think, looks to me like I'm loosing probably 3-5mm at most.

Interesting how reports are all over the place with how the new seal head changes the feel of the fork.


----------



## B52U (Jun 6, 2019)

Miker J said:


> So how much travel off the top are we talking about gaining with the new seal head?
> 
> As far as I can tell, on my Lyric, 2019 I think, looks to me like I'm loosing probably 3-5mm at most.
> 
> Interesting how reports are all over the place with how the new seal head changes the feel of the fork.


Outside observation: Suspension performance "feel" seems highly subjective to me as there are so many variables involved.


----------



## carlhulit (Sep 13, 2005)

Strattoa said:


> If you do it yourself, option 1 is about $50 if buying new seals and lube, and option 2 $100. Pretty affordable experiment.


I have a 3yo so time is scarce and don't have all the tools to do this properly so I would rather pay a shop for the full service. Mostly looking to decide what upgrades are worthwhile.


----------



## dlocki (Mar 30, 2017)

Miker J said:


> So how much travel off the top are we talking about gaining with the new seal head?
> 
> As far as I can tell, on my Lyric, 2019 I think, looks to me like I'm loosing probably 3-5mm at most.
> 
> Interesting how reports are all over the place with how the new seal head changes the feel of the fork.


My 170mm lyrik sits at 168mm with the Deb spring, with the deb3 it was a tad over 170


----------



## mykel (Jul 31, 2006)

2019 150mm airspring. 
210lb on bike
90 psi stock air-cap
87 / 160psi using DSD RUNT
Avy damper
~12mm suckdown.

Suckdown does not change if stock air-cap or DSD RUNT.


----------



## Graveltattoo (Sep 14, 2017)

Miker J said:


> So how much travel off the top are we talking about gaining with the new seal head?
> 
> As far as I can tell, on my Lyric, 2019 I think, looks to me like I'm loosing probably 3-5mm at most.
> 
> Interesting how reports are all over the place with how the new seal head changes the feel of the fork.


My 160mm Lyrik was sitting at 153mm, with the new Debonair C1, it's sitting at 161mm. Same psi.


----------



## EatsDirt (Jan 20, 2014)

Miker J said:


> So how much travel off the top are we talking about gaining with the new seal head?
> 
> As far as I can tell, on my Lyric, 2019 I think, looks to me like I'm loosing probably 3-5mm at most.
> 
> Interesting how reports are all over the place with how the new seal head changes the feel of the fork.


My '19 170 Lyrik sits neutral at 0mm suckdown according to stanchion marks.

If the suckdown issue is a confirmed issue across the board, perhaps I have a little air trapped in the lowers or something but things have been working great so I'm not messing with it.


----------



## Jesse Hill (Dec 29, 2006)

dlocki said:


> Yes I have a HC97 which firms the fork up anyway.


I think more accurate would be to say it can firm the fork up. As Darren stated in another post you can make the hc97 have the same amount of damper force as stock. So I imagine with new air spring if you wanted to run less damping to see how that compares you could do so.

I'd imagine if the new one is firmer off the top without losing mid stroke then I'd interpret that as more linear since I think it's a bit progressive right now with the beginning stroke being fairly soft and then a fairly quick ramp up. So that would make the new one more like a coil which I'm going to guess the hc97 was truly designed around to go with the acs3. That's just an assumption though.


----------



## CCS86 (Jan 6, 2020)

Graveltattoo said:


> My 160mm Lyrik was sitting at 153mm, with the new Debonair C1, it's sitting at 161mm. Same psi.


The suck down is affected by friction in the seals and wipers. So, if you serviced the fork during the air spring change, and it had been a little while since the last one, it's hard to say how much of the difference is the new part and how much is the service.

Sent from my 2PZC5 using Tapatalk


----------



## Graveltattoo (Sep 14, 2017)

CCS86 said:


> The suck down is affected by friction in the seals and wipers. So, if you serviced the fork during the air spring change, and it had been a little while since the last one, it's hard to say how much of the difference is the new part and how much is the service.
> 
> Sent from my 2PZC5 using Tapatalk


It's a 2020 Lyrik Ultimate with 6 rides on it, so basically brand new, so the improvement is all air shaft(new sealhead and footnut) related.


----------



## CCS86 (Jan 6, 2020)

Graveltattoo said:


> It's a 2020 Lyrik Ultimate with 6 rides on it, so basically brand new, so the improvement is all air shaft(new sealhead and footnut) related.


That is good context to have.


----------



## POAH (Apr 29, 2009)

carlhulit said:


> I have a 2018 Lyric RC 160mm on a transition sentinel
> 
> Option 3: Send to vorsprung for a luftkappe and tune ~$300 (inc shipping)
> 
> Also interested in suggested shops in New England.


 I had the exact same sensation with pikes and the luftkappe changed the fork totally.

took tokens out and put more air in but made the fork stiffer for small stuff.


----------



## mgertz (Jan 3, 2020)

I have the 2021 airspring installed in my 160mm pike together with the HC97. Yes, it is now much firmer of the top but the progression is more gradual if this makes sense. However I do not feel it harsh of the top or so. I am using 2.5wt in the damper instead off 5wt if this somehow relates to this? Honestly, I feel my bike is more balanced now because my rear shock (deluxe rt) has not much to adjust and I never could get them balanced. My fork always felt more divey than my rear shock. This is now gone and nicely balanced. Furthermore, i feel that the geometry of my Jeffsy has improved as I am now sitting more upright, but in a pleasant way. So even if 2021 Debonair has less compliance of the top, in my case the comfort and balance increased. I will try for a while but currently I am surprised how well it fits my bike (and riding skill). Cheers to everyone!


Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk


----------



## whatshubdoc (Oct 8, 2015)

Also, this is not Debonair related but if you are feeling divey and/or lacking balance, run your fork sag at 2/3 of your shock sag. ie. Fork 20% if shock is 30%. Steve from Vorsprung recommends this, and I can confirm the same with >50 documented pre-ride/post-ride checks (which I did before seeing Steve's suggestion).

This is done with 0 LCS on a level surface. Then dial LSC to taste. I ride undulating/rolling terrain, so no steep faces or huge drops, so LSC = 0 at both ends for me.


----------



## mgertz (Jan 3, 2020)

Interesting! Thanks for the info. I‘ll take that into account an give it a try next time I service my fork. However I’m still quite happy at the moment. Maybe I’am just a little biased towards „new = better product“. Who knows...


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

So I created a drawing showing the differences in shafts.

All 170mm Lyrik/Yari shafts.

Solo air (original debonair)
Solo air with Vorsprung Luftkappe
Debonair 2 (2018)
Debonair 3 (2020)

As you can see. The seal heights are all over the place. The notch place in stanchion I need to confirm before putting that relative location in. Because the location I have right now doesn't look right.

The drawing has two groupings.
View 1 has the shafts aligned by base-plate location and top-out bumpers engaged.
View 2 has the shafts and base-plates aligned to show differences in length.

Debonair 3 foot is 8mm longer than Debonair 2. Running that foot with the Debonair base-plate risks chewing up the scaper seal at bottom-out.

http://www.shockcraft.co.nz/media/pdfs/Shockcraft Debonair Comparison - Rev 0 - Copy.PDF


----------



## CCS86 (Jan 6, 2020)

> _You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Dougal again._


Great drawing!

Has anyone had success smoothing out the dimple and adding a negative port?


----------



## Jesse Hill (Dec 29, 2006)

Dougal said:


> So I created a drawing showing the differences in shafts.
> 
> All 170mm Lyrik/Yari shafts.
> 
> ...


Nice drawings. So I think the second set where they're leveled by shaft ends is the most relevant to where they would actually match up to each other. That's kind of interesting the solo air and debonair the pistons end up even and then the luftkappe actually ends up lower so maybe not as much of a positive volume loss as I had always thought. Now the new debonair actually sits higher than even original solo air did. Not sure what all this will mean in actual use but it's interesting how two are fairly similar to each other and two are completely opposite.


----------



## jetrick07 (May 29, 2019)

I have a 2020 Lyrik Ultimate and the dead travel actually never bothered me. Sag to me is more important and if set your sag properly you already lost some travel. If I'm not sitting on the bike who cares if it uses 5mm of travel.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

Jesse Hill said:


> Nice drawings. So I think the second set where they're leveled by shaft ends is the most relevant to where they would actually match up to each other. That's kind of interesting the solo air and debonair the pistons end up even and then the luftkappe actually ends up lower so maybe not as much of a positive volume loss as I had always thought. Now the new debonair actually sits higher than even original solo air did. Not sure what all this will mean in actual use but it's interesting how two are fairly similar to each other and two are completely opposite.


The most relevant is the equalisation point where pos and neg forces balance. But that takes more work than I had time for today.


----------



## Jesse Hill (Dec 29, 2006)

Dougal said:


> The most relevant is the equalisation point where pos and neg forces balance. But that takes more work than I had time for today.


Right but the piston location is relative to that as well right? They're all going to have the same dimple location in the stanchion so the piston heights will be the change to where the equalization point is.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

Jesse Hill said:


> Right but the piston location is relative to that as well right? They're all going to have the same dimple location in the stanchion so the piston heights will be the change to where the equalization point is.


It'll be driven by notch vs seal height and negative compression ratio. Which is impacted again by negative volume.

It's a fun game working all that out.


----------



## s-master (May 15, 2018)

Hey guys,
What about the fox 36 piston in 2021? I believe it also has a bigger negative chamber. Does anybody have any information on that one? Could be 2021 spring fited in older forks?


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

After some riding, under pressure is establising on the bottom of the casting which is further sucking down the fork.



dlocki said:


> Ok so I went and did the same ride as yesterday, back on the old air spring.
> 
> The old spring is more supple on the small stuff and gives tons more front end feel, i didn't use full travel - probably 15mm left.
> 
> ...


So it has less progression because of more space in room i mentioned above.
Less subtle because of smaller negative chamber and less sag.
Maybe compare the 2 with +1 token in DebonAir3.

On a 160mm fork it would be interesting to see results of an 170mm DebonAir3 shaft with 10mm spacer and running DualAir with another valve.
Obviously this will reduce nr. of max. installed tokens by 1/2.


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

Dougal said:


> Debonair 3 foot is 8mm longer than Debonair 2. Running that foot with the Debonair base-plate risks chewing up the scaper seal at bottom-out.


What seal ?


----------



## k-addicted (Aug 1, 2011)

I have a Lyric Select Plus at 170mm. I’m 185 and running 90psi. 

I’m finding that it transmits a lot of force on quick hard hits. It feels good on successive hits at high speed. I notice it more on our local trails that are tech and slow speed with a lot of abrupt square edges. 

I’m going to play with less PSI and lowering the compression adjuster(I think it’s an LCS so unsure how much that will affect the hard abrupt hits?) 

Any thoughts on if this new spring would affect the fork in these hard quick impacts and allow me to tune for better performance in these situations? 

Trying to decide if it’s best to deal with what I have, add the 21’ RS seal head, add a luftkappe(had this on an old pike and it was a big upgrade), add a push HC97 or add a Smashpot( I had this on a Fox 36 and it was a solid upgrade). 

There seems to be tons of options and loads of experience on this thread. I appreciate your thoughts on this.


----------



## mike156 (Jul 10, 2017)

Servicing my fork yesterday, I noticed that with the air cap off, I still couldn't compress the fork to the internal stops. Between the pressure in the open bath damper and the spring negative/lower leg pressure, there's enough pressure build up to support about 200lbs with 10mm of travel left on a 170mm Lyrik.

Wonder how much of a difference that seal head volume that's moved into the lowers would change this?


----------



## petercarm (Nov 5, 2007)

Dougal said:


> It'll be driven by notch vs seal height and negative compression ratio. Which is impacted again by negative volume.
> 
> It's a fun game working all that out.


I worked that all out for you: https://www.desmos.com/calculator/dnpvbyatsn

Well not really. I cheated and simplified. The above link takes you to a generalised model for a debonair spring.


x=0 is "at the dimple"
y is force, with 1 matching the load at sag. If the y force goes up to 4 at bottom out, that is 4 times the force at sag.
The x-axis goes from -10 to 100. The graph plots 100 units on the x-axis starting from the zero force (topout) position which is always "above the dimple" so negative on the x-axis.
The cross-section area of the piston is normalised to 1
The cross-section acting for the negative is a ratio, An, calculated from nominal values 

The maths means the shape of the curve is correct for opposed negative and positive springs. To alter the particular curve you get to flex three values via sliders:


 Xp - The size of the positive chamber (from the dimple). This is in units of the x-axis, so a value of 150 is close but not exactly a 3:1 compression ratio (CR = 150/~50).
Xn - The size of the negative chamber in the same normalised units
Xsag - Sag position in normalised units relative to the dimple position. If topout is at -3, a Xsag of 22 is something like 25% sag in traditional terms

All the formulae are on show so you can tell me if I've made any errors.

It's just a model. Don't shoot me. The normalisations (for simplicity) mean it doesn't directly answer the questions being asked in this thread but it does correctly boil the model down to three variable parameters.

As Xp is the volume above the dimple, we can just substitute in the measurement for the Lyrik stanchions.

As Xsag is down to the psi you set with your shock pump it isn't a design parameter; it is a user choice.

The only design variable left is the negative chamber size, Xn. The footnut length just adjusts how the spring curve meets the limit states at each end of the travel.


----------



## 294037 (Jun 30, 2006)

I calculated something like a 5lb difference between the 2, so combined with the lower pressure needed for the new debonair it will definitely be easier to bottom the new forks!


----------



## 294037 (Jun 30, 2006)

I finished modelling up the springs earlier this week, can certainly see how this will ride much higher in its travel, and I estimate roughly 10psi less required pressure for the average person, so getting full travel will be much easier for sure.

It doesn't seem like it will be my cup of tea, but it may pair well with the stock damper since it is pretty low on support

We shall see if I can convince myself to remove the smashpot and take it for a test (don't hold your breath)


----------



## dlocki (Mar 30, 2017)

JohnnyC7 said:


> I calculated something like a 5lb difference between the 2, so combined with the lower pressure needed for the new debonair it will definitely be easier to bottom the new forks!


Totally agree - it gives up the travel loads easier, once you get past the first 1/3rd


----------



## mike156 (Jul 10, 2017)

Hrm, couple work out with the Runt. Relative to the debonair 2, you could run the main chamber softer to help out on the steeper initial curve but run a higher pressure ratio in the Runt to help mid-stroke and bottoming force. Goal being too match the Debonair 2 curve with the Runt at a lower pressure ratio but get rid of the dead travel.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

x-rated said:


> What seal ?


All these air springs have a shaft scraper seal in the end-cap. That's the one that'll have a bad time if you run Debonair 2 to full travel with the Debonair 3 shaft foot.



mike156 said:


> Hrm, couple work out with the Runt. Relative to the debonair 2, you could run the main chamber softer to help out on the steeper initial curve but run a higher pressure ratio in the Runt to help mid-stroke and bottoming force. Goal being too match the Debonair 2 curve with the Runt at a lower pressure ratio but get rid of the dead travel.


Or you could buy a 5 year old Manitou Mattoc which has all this already. Plus a better damper.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

petercarm said:


> I worked that all out for you: https://www.desmos.com/calculator/dnpvbyatsn
> 
> Well not really. I cheated and simplified. The above link takes you to a generalised model for a debonair spring.
> 
> ...


Nice work. I haven't seen that webapp before.

The upshot of all the negative air variations is simply how much you cut off the start of the S curve. Lots of negative and you can cut off all of it. But then you've still got the other end getting closer and you're probably running out of stanchion length to flatten that out.

Plus the differences in air spring curves between static and dynamic compression.

Here's Rulezman with a Dorado air graph or two:

__
http://instagr.am/p/B_nA1Geilo5/


----------



## Jesse Hill (Dec 29, 2006)

JohnnyC7 said:


> I finished modelling up the springs earlier this week, can certainly see how this will ride much higher in its travel, and I estimate roughly 10psi less required pressure for the average person, so getting full travel will be much easier for sure.
> 
> It doesn't seem like it will be my cup of tea, but it may pair well with the stock damper since it is pretty low on support
> 
> ...


So if I'm looking at it correct then the debonair 2 has a firmer beginning and a softer end vs the other two? So this would actually be a more linear spring? Never realized the original debonair was so progressive I thought it was more focused on raising the mid stroke vs softening the beginning. I just install mine today and you can tell it's different right away but not necessarily bad. I know the graph says it's firmer than solo air but I'm not so sure I'm feeling that, solo air also felt it had a high resistance to move an I don't think I'm getting that with this. Tomorrow will be a real ride to see what's what.


----------



## mike156 (Jul 10, 2017)

Dougal said:


> Or you could buy a 5 year old Manitou Mattoc which has all this already. Plus a better damper.


When you can pick up a new take off for 40% of retail in the US, like you can with a Lyrik, I'll definitely consider it.

I think a Mezzer is the next fork I'll own though. Or a boxer hybrid, just because I'm curious.


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

mike156 said:


> When you can pick up a new take off for 40% of retail in the US, like you can with a Lyrik, I'll definitely consider it.
> 
> I think a Mezzer is the next fork I'll own though. Or a boxer hybrid, just because I'm curious.


Where are you seeing these 40% off takeoffs? I want one!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mike156 (Jul 10, 2017)

I grabbed a new low-offset Lyrik take off from pinkbike last fall for $400 shipped. It took a few weeks of searching to get it, but that was just because it was the low offset version I was after. Normal offset ones were constantly popping up for that price.


----------



## 294037 (Jun 30, 2006)

Jesse Hill said:


> So if I'm looking at it correct then the debonair 2 has a firmer beginning and a softer end vs the other two? So this would actually be a more linear spring? Never realized the original debonair was so progressive I thought it was more focused on raising the mid stroke vs softening the beginning. I just install mine today and you can tell it's different right away but not necessarily bad. I know the graph says it's firmer than solo air but I'm not so sure I'm feeling that, solo air also felt it had a high resistance to move an I don't think I'm getting that with this. Tomorrow will be a real ride to see what's what.


Depends how you define progression, debonair had a large increase in FORCE (as in ramp) but actually less change in RATE than the 2021 spring.

When talking about instantaneous rate(or derivative), solo air starts slightly high, drops a little bit then increases at the end. Debonair 2 starts higher, drops lower and then finishes higher again


----------



## Jesse Hill (Dec 29, 2006)

JohnnyC7 said:


> Depends how you define progression, debonair had a large increase in FORCE (as in ramp) but actually less change in RATE than the 2021 spring.
> 
> When talking about instantaneous rate(or derivative), solo air starts slightly high, drops a little bit then increases at the end. Debonair 2 starts higher, drops lower and then finishes higher again


Hmm well I guess I'll see. It seems odd to go to all that trouble just to end up almost identical to solo air. I'm wondering if there is more going on once the lowers air space is calculated as well?


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

mike156 said:


> I grabbed a new low-offset Lyrik take off from pinkbike last fall for $400 shipped. It took a few weeks of searching to get it, but that was just because it was the low offset version I was after. Normal offset ones were constantly popping up for that price.


Nice, gonna have to start looking for these. Just need to find one with an uncut steerer

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

All of this analysis has me looking at the Luftkappe, which looks like it might be more of an improvement over the Debonair 2.

The Luftkappe works with the solo air air spring. Given that I have a Debonair 2 spring in my fork, can I use the red metal sealhead with the solo air shaft to take advantage of the friction reduction?


----------



## 294037 (Jun 30, 2006)

D(C) said:


> All of this analysis has me looking at the Luftkappe, which looks like it might be more of an improvement over the Debonair 2.
> 
> The Luftkappe works with the solo air air spring. Given that I have a Debonair 2 spring in my fork, can I use the red metal sealhead with the solo air shaft to take advantage of the friction reduction?


Yes


----------



## Jesse Hill (Dec 29, 2006)

Ok first ride done and hit a mix of forest with slower tech roll in and some dips and then also another trail with high speed rock chunk. I’m gonna day for me this is an improvement. I don’t know why the graph makes it look similar to solo air because it doesn’t ride like choppy solo air at all. Overall ride feel I think is smoother. Also it’s more lively and isn’t as hard to get the front wheel up when trying to pop off stuff. I’m actually running slightly higher psi since before when I ran the recommended psi on old debonair it had a rougher feeling. 

So my perceived difference is the old would be really soft initially but then ramp really fast and almost just sit solid in mid travel and feel like it was packing. This cause me to run my rebound faster than desired for g out returns but if slower then the fork felt really dead.

New spring sits higher, noticeable right from the very first descent. It still goes through travel and absorbs bumps but it rides higher in the softer part of travel and is also more lively. I wouldn’t say it’s like a coil because no air spring is (even though it’s been a while since I’ve been on a coil) but it has that initial instant support like a coil without being harsh just like a coil. I need to do another couple rides one with the token taken out and same psi and another with token in (current was with a token in) and reduced by like 5psi just to compare because it may be ramping up more than I need but overall I was pretty happy with the change.

Before one says it’s because you just rebuilt it, this fork was rebuilt fairly recently (like late feb) to install the charger 2.1 seal head onto my hc97 2.0.

It may not be for everyone but if you have the 25.00 to try it may be worth it for you. I’m happier with it.


----------



## cegli (Nov 6, 2018)

I'm having some analysis paralysis here... Hopefully someone can help me out! I've got a 170mm Lyrik with a Charger 2.0 in it, and the old Solo Air air spring.

I'm trying to decide between the following
170mm - 2020 Debonair
180mm - 2020 Debonair
170mm - 2021 Debonair

I'm about 160 lbs, and ride a lot of steep technical trails, but slowly because I'm not that good. Max size drop I'd hit is about 6 to 8 feet.

It seems, from the air spring graph, that the 2020 Debonair could provide more mid-stroke support, while still being supple at the beginning of the stroke, if you gave it a bit more pressure than used in the chart. You could compensate for the end of the travel being hard to use by removing a token. That seems like it might be the winner, based on people's assertion that the 2020 Debonair sits too low in its travel?

Is there any point to running a 180mm spring with a bit more sag, to compensate for the lower ride height? I don't feel like I need more travel, but it seems like some people were considering that. Does that make the travel feel more like a plusher 170mm solo air spring, with less friction?


----------



## B52U (Jun 6, 2019)

cegli said:


> I'm having some analysis paralysis here... Hopefully someone can help me out! I've got a 170mm Lyrik with a Charger 2.0 in it, and the old Solo Air air spring.
> 
> I'm trying to decide between the following
> 170mm - 2020 Debonair
> ...


I had the same decision to make and decided I didn't want to mess with climbing geometry so I stuck with 170. I don't know that 180 would have tweaked it much but decided to err on the side of what the bike was originally spec'ed with.


----------



## Jesse Hill (Dec 29, 2006)

cegli said:


> I'm having some analysis paralysis here... Hopefully someone can help me out! I've got a 170mm Lyrik with a Charger 2.0 in it, and the old Solo Air air spring.
> 
> I'm trying to decide between the following
> 170mm - 2020 Debonair
> ...


after my ride today I think you'd like the 2021 especially if your riding steep tech slower.


----------



## SA77 (May 21, 2019)

Trying to decide what to do with my 2020 pike 140, from what it sounds like the '21 spring might not be the way to go? 

My issues been that in order to keep the fork high in its travel to stay supple on medium-big, and repeated smaller square edge hits, I need to run higher pressure, which makes small bump and traction worse, so i run more tokens than i need to be able to lower the air pressure and still keep the fork high, which means now im never using full travel because its got so much ramp up.

If the new debonair uses its mid travel more easily I would think thats the opposite of what i want? unless it doesnt hit the harsh end of stroke ramp up as easily as my '20 debonair?


----------



## Fuse6F (Jul 5, 2017)

Suns_PSD said:


> What a great explanation that is easy to understand. Thank you for that.
> 
> From my perspective, I'll stick with my Debonair. I did remove the negative chamber bump stop and that combined with the addition of low friction Push seals (already has a great Avy cartridge) made the fork down right coil like. I mean it has no stiction, but it has better mid- travel support too.
> 
> ...


exactly! where it sits on the trailer and where it sits when you ride are two diff things.

seems like this was a patch to address perception.

we all want to measure our em travel dont we!


----------



## Graveltattoo (Sep 14, 2017)

Those poor Engineers at Rockshox must be incompetent. Their self-esteem must be shattered, put all that research and testing into improving their suspension. Only to have theoretical data prove them wrong!

With the stock damper, I've noticed an improvement with the new sealhead and footnut. No negatives.


----------



## 294037 (Jun 30, 2006)

If riders decide they prefer the new spring them I’m fine with that, I’m not going to try and force people one way or the other. But it is an interesting case because the development has clearly gone in the opposite direction to what was quite well like already


----------



## Graveltattoo (Sep 14, 2017)

JohnnyC7 said:


> If riders decide they prefer the new spring them I'm fine with that, I'm not going to try and force people one way or the other. But it is an interesting case because the development has clearly gone in the opposite direction to what was quite well like already


It sounds like people had problems with the previous air spring as well? Would you not be in agreement, that they went a little too far with the negative chamber and that this was a correction with the new air shaft? I've seen a bunch of reviews, comparing a stock Lyrik from 2020 to the new sealhead and footnut, and all state it was an improvement, without giving up initial suppleness. I'm sure you can't test ride every suspension system, but have you ridden the airshafts to compare?
Thoughts based on that?

Just to clarify, I'm not questioning your expertise! It just that these theoretical analysis doesn't seem as relevant as actually riding these different airshafts to compare. For us regular folks that have a minimal understanding.
Cheers


----------



## petercarm (Nov 5, 2007)

Dougal said:


> Nice work. I haven't seen that webapp before.


I've done a bit more work on the model. It is still more a curiosity than an analysis of any forks existing in the real world. Still, I've wanted for a long time to move beyond spring force and spring rate and analyse the stored energy in the spring (area under the curve). That was relatively easy to do:








Be warned it is now animated: https://www.desmos.com/calculator/rghcl5bvvt

Notes:


There is a pause button at the top left to stop the animation
You can drag a couple of settings around with drag handles on the diagram
The model is set up for a 170 fork with three "pretend" variations of negative chamber size, medium (32), small (22) and large (42), giving three curves
The curves are compensated by running different tokens in the positive: med (2), small (3), large (1)
Sag is for a nominal load of 1 - dotted vertical purple lines mark the intersect point where each of the curves pass 1
You can set (drag) the sag position for the first curve (medium) between 20% and 30%
The other curves are normalised (i.e. pressure adjusted by ~10%) for equal area under the Force curve (stored energy) at a point you can set (drag)
hint: try moving _equal energy_ to coincide with "sag" or "bottom out" for different results
Sag for the _small_ and _large_ is calculated, but with the compensated tokens count, it more or less stays in the same place

The upshot of all this analysis is nothing we don't already know. Springs with higher compression ratios have more of an _S_ shape with less midstroke support.

If we run the model again and use the same number of positive chamber tokens (2) for all sizes of negative chamber:

the sag positions for each spring become quite different
as overall energy in the springs is held to be the same, it means each spring configuration is shifting energy capacity from "above sag" to "below sag"
pressure normalisation for this comparison is +/-3%
https://www.desmos.com/calculator/qelwrc6fam


----------



## Jesse Hill (Dec 29, 2006)

Graveltattoo said:


> It sounds like people had problems with the previous air spring as well? Would you not be in agreement, that they went a little too far with the negative chamber and that this was a correction with the new air shaft? I've seen a bunch of reviews, comparing a stock Lyrik from 2020 to the new sealhead and footnut, and all state it was an improvement, without giving up initial suppleness. I'm sure you can't test ride every suspension system, but have you ridden the airshafts to compare?
> Thoughts based on that?
> 
> Just to clarify, I'm not questioning your expertise! It just that these theoretical analysis doesn't seem as relevant as actually riding these different airshafts to compare. For us regular folks that have a minimal understanding.
> Cheers


Yea I'm curious as to the graph not matching real world test. I have had this fork since 2018 with all three spring now and each has been an improvement over the other. So when the calculated feel says this is nearly identical to solo air I'm thinking something is missing because solo air sucked. It had no small bump sensitivity and is the reason people were doing the whole lower psi and add tokens thing to try and get some form of sensitivity (I was one of em). This is not like that at all.

I'd say it feels closest to my boxxer wc (which some will say sucked I'm sure) and I'm going of memory from about a year now since I missed last DH season. But that fork once dialed and with low drag seals felt really good to me and was smoother on same trails vs Lyrik even though travel usage was about the same. It kind of makes sense to me that it would since the boxxer wc also equalized at top out but the boxxers got bigger negative chambers than single crown solo air forks since it was a dual crown and more room to work with. So newest debonair equalizes at top out and yet gain a bit bigger negative spring through the shaft sounds similar.

Maybe I just don't prefer a super squishy beginning stroke and like it more supportive but at same time still reacts, I don't know to me it's better.


----------



## cegli (Nov 6, 2018)

Jesse Hill said:


> Yea I'm curious as to the graph not matching real world test. I have had this fork since 2018 with all three spring now and each has been an improvement over the other. So when the calculated feel says this is nearly identical to solo air I'm thinking something is missing because solo air sucked. It had no small bump sensitivity and is the reason people were doing the whole lower psi and add tokens thing to try and get some form of sensitivity (I was one of em). This is not like that at all.


You're probably feeling the difference in friction between the old solo air and the 2021 debonair. If I understand correctly, those graphs are just modeling the air pressures and volumes. Besides adding more negative air, the debonair springs changed the plastic seal head for aluminum, which supposedly reduced the friction considerably by keeping things in alignment better.

I think everyone will agree less friction is better in an air-spring. How much negative air/positive air might be more personal preference, rider weight, riding style, fork length, etc.


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

Graveltattoo said:


> Those poor Engineers at Rockshox must be incompetent. Their self-esteem must be shattered, put all that research and testing into improving their suspension. Only to have theoretical data prove them wrong!
> 
> With the stock damper, I've noticed an improvement with the new sealhead and footnut. No negatives.


It would be interesting to know what RS' pro athletes have inside their forks.

The larger the negative spring, the higher the positive spring pressure required to avoid excessive sag. As such, a large negative spring should work well for more aggressive riders but could result in a fork that feels harsh on medium and large hits for regular people. It's possible that Rockshox went a bit overboard for most mortals with the 19/20 Debonair, but I would think it would be the better system for their pros.

Most mortals who don't hit stuff as hard and fast may be better suited to the Debonair C3.

It's the same way the negative chamber volume is tuneable on the Meg Neg air can. If you're not using full travel or finding things a bit harsh, the instructions are to add volume reducers to the negative side. The largest possible negative spring isn't always the best for all riders.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Fuse6F said:


> exactly! where it sits on the trailer and where it sits when you ride are two diff things.
> 
> seems like this was a patch to address perception.
> 
> we all want to measure our em travel dont we!


Do you ever look down between your legs and think, 'I feel like it should be longer, pretty sure some of the length is just sucked up inside. ' Well if so, do we have the product for you...

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


----------



## CCS86 (Jan 6, 2020)

petercarm said:


> I've done a bit more work on the model. It is still more a curiosity than an analysis of any forks existing in the real world. Still, I've wanted for a long time to move beyond spring force and spring rate and analyse the stored energy in the spring (area under the curve). That was relatively easy to do:
> View attachment 1329599
> 
> 
> ...


Awesome post!

Sent from my 2PZC5 using Tapatalk


----------



## Fuse6F (Jul 5, 2017)

really cool graphs

can you plot the negative volume change with a different equalization point for each. 

i think this would be more informative


----------



## Gman086 (Jul 4, 2004)

cegli said:


> I'm having some analysis paralysis here... Hopefully someone can help me out! I've got a 170mm Lyrik with a Charger 2.0 in it, and the old Solo Air air spring.
> 
> I'm trying to decide between the following
> 170mm - 2020 Debonair
> ...


180mm '20 Debonaire gives you the best of both worlds IMHO because ride height is similar to the 170 your bike was designed for so you keep the same handling/geometry yet you get the smoother initial stroke response and 180mm of damping when the fork unweights. Exactly what I did with my older Lyrik.

Have FUN!

G MAN


----------



## 294037 (Jun 30, 2006)

Jesse Hill said:


> Yea I'm curious as to the graph not matching real world test. I have had this fork since 2018 with all three spring now and each has been an improvement over the other. So when the calculated feel says this is nearly identical to solo air I'm thinking something is missing because solo air sucked. It had no small bump sensitivity and is the reason people were doing the whole lower psi and add tokens thing to try and get some form of sensitivity (I was one of em). This is not like that at all.
> 
> I'd say it feels closest to my boxxer wc (which some will say sucked I'm sure) and I'm going of memory from about a year now since I missed last DH season. But that fork once dialed and with low drag seals felt really good to me and was smoother on same trails vs Lyrik even though travel usage was about the same. It kind of makes sense to me that it would since the boxxer wc also equalized at top out but the boxxers got bigger negative chambers than single crown solo air forks since it was a dual crown and more room to work with. So newest debonair equalizes at top out and yet gain a bit bigger negative spring through the shaft sounds similar.
> 
> Maybe I just don't prefer a super squishy beginning stroke and like it more supportive but at same time still reacts, I don't know to me it's better.


Have you still got your old solo air spring? If the fork has had 2 or 3 years of riding the bushings will have worn in nicely and combined with the new seal head there will be significantly less friction


----------



## petercarm (Nov 5, 2007)

Fuse6F said:


> can you plot the negative volume change with a different equalization point for each.
> 
> i think this would be more informative


Here you go: https://www.desmos.com/calculator/w9tcc3upuh

The scenarios are now a table up at the top, allowing different equalisation points. You can edit in values and produce new scenarios.









The scenarios I've set up are like the last ones. There are medium, small and large negative chambers. Positive is compensated with tokens. The _large_ negative chamber is offset an extra 5mm.

The _equal energy_ slider is set for full bottom out, which means the sag positions more or less coincide. The large negative chamber needs 20% higher pressure to achieve this. The small chamber needs 12% less. I've got those calculations in a table now:









The _large_ scenario (with the 10mm offset and higher pressure) has the highest spring rate at sag (most support), and doesn't ramp up as much (most linear). However it has the same amount of total stored energy at full bottom out; because it has less area under the curve to the left of the sag position, it therefore must store more energy in compression between sag and bottom out; the spring will be harder to bottom out, but without getting rampy. The lower energy stored at sag will make the spring feel less poppy and it has more suckdown so it will have an effective pneumatic top out.









These scenarios aren't pretending to be any specific Debonair version but are intended to demonstrate design possibilities.


----------



## Micky_G (May 6, 2020)

Lot's of great info in this thread!

I've been eyeing off the C1 spring since it was released and for the money, I thought it was a no brainer for my 2016 Pike RCT3. I got it second-hand, in really great shape, with a fresh lower service. However, the first time I let the air out of it, it stuck down on me and I became curious about it. After pulling it to pieces, I discovered a few things. I bought a 150mm travel fork but based on the existing solo air spring, it's quite clearly a 160mm spring (markings on the side of the shaft don't lie). Measuring the stanchions confirmed this. I also discovered the bumper had been put back on upside down. I don't think that'd have a major impact, but it was certainly a head scratcher. I got it all back together and the "stuck-down" condition was nicely resolved afterward.

On my Giant Trance 3, 160mm is probably OK especially given the SX version comes with a 160 fork. However, I would prefer to keep the A-C height as closer to what a 150mm fork would give me.

TLDR
After reading through this thread, if I want to go to 150mm anyway, I'm stumped: Debonair 2 or 3? And to get reasonably close to 150mm, should I go 150mm or 160mm? The pricing is about 50 for a version 2 and 65 for a version 3 (in AUD), so there's really not much in it.


----------



## cegli (Nov 6, 2018)

Micky_G said:


> After reading through this thread, if I want to go to 150mm anyway, I'm stumped: Debonair 2 or 3? And to get reasonably close to 150mm, should I go 150mm or 160mm? The pricing is about 50 for a version 2 and 65 for a version 3 (in AUD), so there's really not much in it.


I'm in the same situation as you. After doing a lot of pondering and looking at spring curves to me it seems:

--160mm Debonair 2 would get you more midstroke support, because you can run higher pressure, and a plusher start due to more negative spring.

--150mm Debonair 3 would get you a more "supportive" feel at the beginning of the stroke, because there's less negative air.

I'm leaning towards sizing up 10mm and going with the Debonair 2, because I really like lots of sensitivity at the beginning of the stroke. The extra 10mm should make up for the extra sag, and keep the bike geometry.


----------



## Jesse Hill (Dec 29, 2006)

cegli said:


> I'm in the same situation as you. After doing a lot of pondering and looking at spring curves to me it seems:
> 
> --160mm Debonair 2 would get you more midstroke support, because you can run higher pressure, and a plusher start due to more negative spring.
> 
> ...


Sizing up just to compensate for an extra sagged out beginning seems an odd route to me and will further increase the dead feel that it can have. Only one ride so far on the new but I'm glad to have some lively ness back to my front end


----------



## Micky_G (May 6, 2020)

I went from the stock 140mm Sektor that I only rode for a couple of rides, straight to a 160mm Pike, which I think had some issues till I stripped it down and put it back together again. I'm literally going on just a few rides with it properly working to base any impressions on. I would gladly stick with what I've got and get used to how it feels before doing anything else, where it not for the desire to get my A-C down just a touch for the sake of geometry that's closer to stock.


----------



## keho (Dec 11, 2016)

I have a lyrik Charger 2 rc2 180mm. I weigh 68kg and have 67psi in the fork. I have ridden one time, and it feels like a new fork, I really like it.

Sag was about 27% before and now about 20%.

I have the same psi, and the front is noticeably higher when riding on flat terrain, and it's easier to lift the front over stuff(more supportive in the first third of the travel, so it pushes back more).

The middle part of travel gives up travel easier so it feels as if there is more travel when riding rougher terrain(actually feel like I will be able too use some HSC now)

The last part feels about the same, but I haven't done any bigger drops yet, so I can't say that much about it yet.

Just wanted too give my first feeling about the new upgrade.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk


----------



## cunningstunts (Sep 1, 2011)

new Slayer C70 with Lyrik Ultimate. had a few rides. bike and fork are awesome. took delivery of the foot nut and seal head, insalled, had a few rides. 

prefer the higher ride, fork otherwise feels the same but uses travel a bit differently. very pleased.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

I've run some experiments and created a new drawing view. I also found a shaft length error in the original drawing and fixed that.

The experiment was pretty simple. Measure all the shafts equalised at 60psi.
Then put a known weight on them and see how much they sag (initial rate).

The equalisation points were really interesting, see how the seal heights are close to aligned: https://shockcraft.co.nz/media/pdfs/Shockcraft Debonair Comparison - Rev 1.PDF








Debonair 2 (2018 version) is almost identical in equalisation point and initial sensitivity to the Debonair 1 with Luftkappe. So just like rear suspension, the front suspension guys are trying to achieve the same result with a totally different look.

Debonair 3. Well it barely flinched from top-out when the weight was applied. Much, much, stiffer off the top than the other 3.


----------



## cunningstunts (Sep 1, 2011)

whoa......


----------



## Jesse Hill (Dec 29, 2006)

Dougal said:


> I've run some experiments and created a new drawing view. I also found a shaft length error in the original drawing and fixed that.
> 
> The experiment was pretty simple. Measure all the shafts equalised at 60psi.
> Then put a known weight on them and see how much they sag (initial rate).
> ...


interesting but kind of odd too since I don't really think debonair 2 (2018) rode the same as the luftkappe although I have limited time on a luftkappe but even Vorsprung I think was saying they don't ride the same. And according to your findings the new spring should be the same as the original and again I can say they do not ride the same as more are also reporting in this post that it isn't harsh and its looking like more are preferring it than not. I for one am liking it, it has brought back a lot of the playfulness I had lost and yet it isn't stiff or harsh feeling.


----------



## Yetichon (May 30, 2018)

So, if I want to change my Lyrik from 160 to 170 mm and I don't care about the few eaten mm, I'm way better off with the Debonair 2 than the 3, right ?

The Lyrik of my previous bike had the Debonair 2 and I loved how it felt, the suppleness, the support. Didn't think about it at all when I was riding.


----------



## petercarm (Nov 5, 2007)

Dougal said:


> I've run some experiments and created a new drawing view. I also found a shaft length error in the original drawing and fixed that.
> 
> The experiment was pretty simple. Measure all the shafts equalised at 60psi.
> Then put a known weight on them and see how much they sag (initial rate).
> ...


Your corrections confirm what the mathematical modelling was telling me. Equalisation should be with the seals in about the same place relative to the dimple.

From your diagram, it looks like Debonair 3 is loading up the bump stop. That may imply a different topout characteristic - maybe a bit poppier/livelier

My take: you can finagle the pressures and volumes on these things pretty much to match but... you should think about raising your bar height on Debonair 2 vs lowering it on Debonair 3. If you don't like the topout on Debonair 3, you might fancy a Debonair 2 with 10mm more travel.

It does appear that all setup is compromise. I wonder where I've heard that before.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

Jesse Hill said:


> interesting but kind of odd too since I don't really think debonair 2 (2018) rode the same as the luftkappe although I have limited time on a luftkappe but even Vorsprung I think was saying they don't ride the same. And according to your findings the new spring should be the same as the original and again I can say they do not ride the same as more are also reporting in this post that it isn't harsh and its looking like more are preferring it than not. I for one am liking it, it has brought back a lot of the playfulness I had lost and yet it isn't stiff or harsh feeling.


You're reading words that aren't there. This test was only about equalisation and preload (sensitivity off the top). Not the whole curve. I haven't said anything about how they ride.



Yetichon said:


> So, if I want to change my Lyrik from 160 to 170 mm and I don't care about the few eaten mm, I'm way better off with the Debonair 2 than the 3, right ?
> 
> The Lyrik of my previous bike had the Debonair 2 and I loved how it felt, the suppleness, the support. Didn't think about it at all when I was riding.


Yes I think the Debonair 2 feels a lot better off the top. But if you have a heavy E-bike.........



petercarm said:


> Your corrections confirm what the mathematical modelling was telling me. Equalisation should be with the seals in about the same place relative to the dimple.
> 
> From your diagram, it looks like Debonair 3 is loading up the bump stop. That may imply a different topout characteristic - maybe a bit poppier/livelier
> 
> ...


Yes huge preload in the Debonair 3. It is clear that the Deb 3 would extend until the seal was level with the others if it could. But the top-out bumper stops it and this is the preload. I still think that poppyness is more about damper than air spring. But either being wrong can mess it up.

Also. The revised drawing shows you should be able to run the Debonair 3 shaft foot (+8mm) on the Debonair 2 shaft without eating anything.


----------



## CCS86 (Jan 6, 2020)

Kinda seems like just the new shaft foot on a D2 spring is the best way to reclaim travel without a preloaded top out.

Great analysis Dougal.

Sent from my Pixel 4 using Tapatalk


----------



## Graveltattoo (Sep 14, 2017)

CCS86 said:


> Kinda seems like just the new shaft foot on a D2 spring is the best way to reclaim travel without a preloaded top out.
> 
> Great analysis Dougal.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 4 using Tapatalk


I thought I saw warning from Rockshox, not to install the new footnut with the D2 seal head? Something about causing damage?


----------



## POAH (Apr 29, 2009)

Dougal said:


> I've run some experiments and created a new drawing view. I also found a shaft length error in the original drawing and fixed that.
> 
> The experiment was pretty simple. Measure all the shafts equalised at 60psi.
> Then put a known weight on them and see how much they sag (initial rate).


how much pressure would you have to put in to the luftkappe to get the same results as the Deb3 air spring.

Are people thinking their forks are better because their original set up was poor?


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

POAH said:


> how much pressure would you have to put in to the luftkappe to get the same results as the Deb3 air spring.
> 
> Are people thinking their forks are better because their original set up was poor?


Luftkappe goes to zero preload so it's never going to feel the same off the top. No matter how much pressure it gets. I haven't checked full compression ratios and spring curves yet.


----------



## fresh tracks (Feb 25, 2005)

I've had a couple of rides with the D3 and it is an improvement over the D2, when using a runt. Fork is a Lyrik RC 2.1 170. 
When I started off with the Lyrik I had no runt and D2. I had to use about 95psi to get the support early/mid stroke. This setup wasn't bad but I felt it could be improved. Then I swapped over to the runt when using the D2 and found that keeping the 2:1 ratio between H/L chambers was way too progressive when I was using enough pressure to avoid blowing through the initial travel.Fast forward to now with D3 and runt, I'm running 140/70 psi H/L and it's feeling really good. Lots of mid stroke support,reasonably supple early travel. Weight 75kg, most of the riding I do is on very rocky trails.


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

I couldn’t help myself and put in a Debonair C1 during a lowers service this week. As a starting point, I dropped 5 psi and flipped a 5 mm headset spacer to lower the bars. I left compression damping settings the same (Charger 2 RC2 - HSC full open, LSC somewhere in the middle). I stayed with 1 token at the 170 mm travel.

The fork most definitely rides with less sag and feels more reluctant to move. It’s mostly noticeable at very low speeds, where the fork feels firmer over roots and rocks. At high speeds, the fork feels like it sucks up small bumps just fine, but feels more ‘sporty’ than the Debonair 2, which I would describe as more plush feeling. I do like the extra support in corners, and the bike rides a bit more predictably since the bars stay closer to their static height. On bigger hits, the high pressures I had to run with the Debonair 2 made things feel a bit harsh, whereas I feel like the Debonair C1 transmits a bit less feedback deeper in its travel.

Overall, I am a bit surprised RS moved in this direction, since I would think plush, compliant forks are what the people want. I do think the new air spring has some benefits (and drawbacks) over the previous one, but it is a very different feeling fork now.


----------



## alexbn921 (Mar 31, 2009)

Having any suspension with a lot of preloaded top out is almost never the best solution. All it does is add harshness everytime your wheel leaves the ground.
Rockshox could and should have kept the air top out and changed the spring curve to whatever they wanted to. They could have given you a slightly longer shaft so that no "travel" was lost.


----------



## Bosbefok (Oct 23, 2018)

Graveltattoo said:


> I thought I saw warning from Rockshox, not to install the new footnut with the D2 seal head? Something about causing damage?


Has anyone verified? It should be as easy as installing and compressing the fork all the way. I m guessing you will only pick up problems if running more than 2 tokens.. 
I should get my D3 Thursday.


----------



## Rick Draper (Dec 1, 2009)

Bosbefok said:


> Has anyone verified? It should be as easy as installing and compressing the fork all the way. I m guessing you will only pick up problems if running more than 2 tokens..
> I should get my D3 Thursday.


It's more to do with the footnote hitting the seal head at full compression I believe.


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

Rick Draper said:


> It's more to do with the footnote hitting the seal head at full compression I believe.


I don't see why the longer D3 red foot nut would have any impact on that. You're adding length to the bottom of the foot nut, but the air shaft (sliding surface) above it has not changed in length.


----------



## Rick Draper (Dec 1, 2009)

D(C) said:


> I don't see why the longer D3 red foot nut would have any impact on that. You're adding length to the bottom of the foot nut, but the air shaft (sliding surface) above it has not changed in length.


The whole airshaft has moved up in the fork using the new foot bolt and the seal head on the C1 has been altered to account for this, the other version it hasn't.


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

Rick Draper said:


> The whole airshaft has moved up in the fork using the new foot bolt and the seal head on the C1 has been altered to account for this, the other version it hasn't.


I see that now.

So what is meant to contact first when a fork bottoms out? Is it the stanchions bumping against something in the lowers?


----------



## Nuno Machuqueiro (May 14, 2016)

anybody here on 160 pike with the upgrade to give some feedback. 

my pike is fine but the idea of running my pike higher int the travel looks perfect


----------



## skifishbum (Mar 29, 2018)

ELIF5 - If I am happy with 85 PSI (12 over recommended) and 1 volume spacer with the 2020 ultimate, should I run the same settings with new air shaft?

Wanting to give it a shot since its so cheap to try


----------



## Nick_M2R (Oct 18, 2008)

Installed the new C1 DebonAir Spring into my 160mm Lyrik Ultimate with a Push HC97. Having read these observations, I was curious to see if the performance was a step back. I had liked the supple feeling of the B1 DebonAir and was thinking id likely end up switching back to it.

Over all I was rather pleasantly surprised. I feel it was improved the feel of my fork with my settings. There is a slight reduction in plushness off the top. I can feel this while riding more in the smaller hits, but its not a very large reduction and something I can live with (Note this was with the same Air Pressure/Tokens as the B1 DA spring) In addition, It feels more controlled in the mid part of the travel with less of a "divey" feel. Backed off a few clicks on the LSC and this helped with that initial decrease in plushness.

Then tried reducing air pressure slightly and adding back a few LSC clicks, and feel Ive found near the sweet spot. More plush (Not B1 Level but very close) but feels more supportive in the mid stroke, I can certainly feel the fork riding higher (which I found I like). Im running 2 tokens and this gives good bottom out resistance, may trying cutting down a spacer, then trying with 1.5 and then 1 spacer. I feel 1.5 will be my sweet spot.

Overall I like this change. Trade-offs compared to the B1 but for my riding I prefer it. If it was on a longer travel fork (180mm) that I was riding predominately more gravity focused such as bike parks or DH, Id stay with the B1. For my riding in Australia, I like the C1 and will keep it. 

Will give some more feedback when I try the different spacer combinations.


----------



## cunningstunts (Sep 1, 2011)

i have a 170mm travel Ultimate with the new bits installed. 1 token and 1 Nepos air salmon sponge. 

wondering what others use for tokens. i'm about 220 in full riding kit. consistently using 150 travel, rarely dipping into the last bit. loving the set up so far. would expect to use full travel on a hard front end impact that would be on the edge of control but haven't done so yet in the few weeks i've owned the fork.


----------



## mike156 (Jul 10, 2017)

D(C) said:


> I see that now.
> 
> So what is meant to contact first when a fork bottoms out? Is it the stanchions bumping against something in the lowers?


There are bottom it bumpers in the bottom of the lowers that hit the stanchion.


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

cunningstunts said:


> i have a 170mm travel Ultimate with the new bits installed. 1 token and 1 Nepos air salmon sponge.
> 
> wondering what others use for tokens. i'm about 220 in full riding kit. consistently using 150 travel, rarely dipping into the last bit. loving the set up so far. would expect to use full travel on a hard front end impact that would be on the edge of control but haven't done so yet in the few weeks i've owned the fork.


1 Rockshox token feels good to me with my 170 Lyrik. I still only use full travel on the biggest of hits. 2 tokens left quite a bit of travel on the table.


----------



## Jesse Hill (Dec 29, 2006)

cunningstunts said:


> i have a 170mm travel Ultimate with the new bits installed. 1 token and 1 Nepos air salmon sponge.
> 
> wondering what others use for tokens. i'm about 220 in full riding kit. consistently using 150 travel, rarely dipping into the last bit. loving the set up so far. would expect to use full travel on a hard front end impact that would be on the edge of control but haven't done so yet in the few weeks i've owned the fork.


So far I've tried my 170 Lyrik with one token at 75psi and 70psi (180lbs rider fully geared). So at 75 I like the support on steep stuff but it's way hard to use travel and feels a bit harsh in rough like I'm hitting a wall of progression and then just stops, at 70psi the ride is smoother but I loose some of the playful character I had gained going to the new spring (still better than old but I think I like the 75 character more). 75psi brings me to 20% sag and 70psi brings me to 25% so I could go either way. Next will be trying 75psi with no tokens and see if that gives me the support without the ramping. All in all I prefer it over the old but just need to find the balance I want.


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

Somebody tried the new airshaft +20mm with an 20mm spacer already? With separate air valve because its above dimple.

- pressure of negative chamber can be tuned
- better lubrication of air chamber because it doesnt drop down into casting
- more sensible beginning stroke
- more progression


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

- I want 160mm of travel on my Lyrik
- I've currently got a DSD Runt and V2 Debonair airshaft installed

I have a V1 Debonair airshaft with 160 or 170 options - I'd prefer to find a way to run the V1 with the red alloy V2 baseplate

(Anthony at DSD recommended the V1 air shaft because the quad ring seal sits closer to the dimple than the V2 Debonair)

Or should I just pay the $25 and get the V3 foot nut and seal head for my 160 V2 shaft, knowing I can tune small bump and mid stroke through the DSD Runt?


----------



## fresh tracks (Feb 25, 2005)

06HokieMTB said:


> - I want 160mm of travel on my Lyrik
> - I've currently got a DSD Runt and V2 Debonair airshaft installed
> 
> I have a V1 Debonair airshaft with 160 or 170 options - I'd prefer to find a way to run the V1 with the red alloy V2 baseplate
> ...


I have the DSD runt in a 170 lyrik, now with V3. Much prefer it over the V2. Never tried the V1. V2 gave me issues - to get the support early in the stroke, I had to run higher pressure than I wanted, which caused too much progression later in the stroke at anywhere near 2:1 H/L ratios in the runt. I'd just get the V3, works well


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

fresh tracks said:


> I have the DSD runt in a 170 lyrik, now with V3. Much prefer it over the V2. Never tried the V1. V2 gave me issues - to get the support early in the stroke, I had to run higher pressure than I wanted, which caused too much progression later in the stroke at anywhere near 2:1 H/L ratios in the runt. I'd just get the V3, works well


Welp. That's about all I needed. Thanks!


----------



## POAH (Apr 29, 2009)

fresh tracks said:


> I have the DSD runt in a 170 lyrik, now with V3. Much prefer it over the V2. Never tried the V1. V2 gave me issues - to get the support early in the stroke, I had to run higher pressure than I wanted, which caused too much progression later in the stroke at anywhere near 2:1 H/L ratios in the runt. I'd just get the V3, works well


out of interest what is your weight?


----------



## fresh tracks (Feb 25, 2005)

POAH said:


> out of interest what is your weight?


75kg.


----------



## skifishbum (Mar 29, 2018)

Installed the new seal head / foot nut on a 2020 lyrik ultimate. I am pretty sold on the new version. Weight 155 pounds.

I dont notice it being any rougher, enjoy how it uses the travel more now. handlebars seem noticeably higher. Might drop a spacer there.


----------



## B52U (Jun 6, 2019)

Just got back from Moab and did some pretty gnarley riding on the new air spring and a 2.1 charger damper (upgraded yari). I definitely used all 170mm of travel at times and I am glad I had the extra 5-10mm provided as Moab is rough terrain.


----------



## Nuno Machuqueiro (May 14, 2016)

just installed latest debonair shaft on my 160 pike
im 80kg not much of a jumper. 

almost 10 psi less than before to make 25-27% sag, 1 token, 6 click rebound, and 3 clicks lsc from fully open.

first ride on steep and smooth terrain was great, the second ride on really fast rocky trails and the suspension feels very stiff like it did not absorb the bigger rocks, kicks, and ramps to fast and not in control (before was buttery smooth)

any suggestions


----------



## Haggis (Jan 21, 2004)

Put old shaft back in?


----------



## POAH (Apr 29, 2009)

Nuno Machuqueiro said:


> just installed latest debonair shaft on my 160 pike
> im 80kg not much of a jumper.
> 
> almost 10 psi less than before to make 25-27% sag, 1 token, 6 click rebound, and 3 clicks lsc from fully open.
> ...


Because the negative air spring is smaller you don't need as much air. The downside to this is you need more force to move the positive spring which is why is "stays higher" in its travel and doesn't react as well over small bumps. But the upside is that when your bike is leaning against a wall it will won't sag a few mm.


----------



## Nuno Machuqueiro (May 14, 2016)

the less mm with the "old" shaft don't bother me. 
and love the "rides much higher" of the new one, it feels a confidence booster on steeper terrain. 

maybe with zero tokens and maybe a less slower rebound will improve!


----------



## nikon255 (Dec 27, 2015)

Newest spring has more hollow mid stroke and easier to bottom. Generally it should absorb better big bumps. Older has extremely soft begining and then super supprtive mid and end.


----------



## paris (Mar 14, 2006)

Has anyone actually run Deb 3 nut on a Deb 2 airshaft
Same experience many above with deb 3
Pro
Rode high
Neg
Harsh even with less psi and less lsc
Blow through travel
Not as plush off the top and less ramp up

options
put deb 2 back in
try deb 3 with even less psi and one more token so 3
try deb 2 with deb 3 nut just want to make sure not going to cause problems
150 pike ultimate


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

fresh tracks said:


> I have the DSD runt in a 170 lyrik, now with V3. Much prefer it over the V2. Never tried the V1. V2 gave me issues - to get the support early in the stroke, I had to run higher pressure than I wanted, which caused too much progression later in the stroke at anywhere near 2:1 H/L ratios in the runt. I'd just get the V3, works well


1 ride review on my 2019 Runt'd Lyric (with DSD compression tune) + V3 160mm DebonAir

I like it. Agree with you that the Runt plays better with the V3. Like you, previously I was not able to run 2:1 H/L ratios. (Something like 1.6-1.7:1)

Tonight's ride (lots of mid/trail speed square edged New Mexico chunky rock) was at 75/150, but will try it bumped up 2-3 PSI.

Felt super smooth.
Ride height is noticeable.


----------



## Xizor1 (Aug 27, 2010)

paris said:


> Has anyone actually run Deb 3 nut on a Deb 2 airshaft
> Same experience many above with deb 3
> Pro
> Rode high
> ...


I have a 2016 Pike (140mm) with Luftkappe and I've been wondering whether I should try Deb3 but reading these kind of comments makes me want to forget the whole thing :-D


----------



## squasher (Jun 4, 2020)

fresh tracks said:


> I have the DSD runt in a 170 lyrik, now with V3. Much prefer it over the V2. Never tried the V1. V2 gave me issues - to get the support early in the stroke, I had to run higher pressure than I wanted, which caused too much progression later in the stroke at anywhere near 2:1 H/L ratios in the runt. I'd just get the V3, works well


I'm roughly 79kg. I have a 140mm Pike with the Runt. Like you, I could never run it at the recommended 2:1 ratio. I had to run way less psi in the H. Otherwise it would ramp up way too hard.

After installing the Debonair v3, I could get close to 2:1. But had to run waaaay less air in the L and H to get anywhere close to 25-30% sag. 45psi in the L and 105psi in the H gave me 25%! I thought I maybe messed something up during my shaft swap. So I did a complete rebuild. Nope, same thing. Plus the Runt just felt like **** with the new shaft now no matter what I did.

I put back in the normal air cap with one token. For my weight, Rockshox recommends ̶9̶3̶p̶s̶i̶ 88psi for the new air shaft. That gave my like 8% sag :-/ I am down to 72psi now and 25% sag. Feels pretty good now, and the ride height is much better, but still harsher off the top than before. In a normal ride, I use about 80% of my travel. On a really big hit, or **** up on my end, and I get full travel.

I have a 150mm v2 shaft that I bought right before they announced v3. I may put that in and see what it does, cause I like the suppleness of v2, but the ride height of v3.


----------



## paris (Mar 14, 2006)

mines for sale is anyone wants it
pike 150 deb 3, went back to the 2


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

squasher said:


> After installing the Debonair v3, I could get close to 2:1. But had to run waaaay less air in the L and H to get anywhere close to 25-30% sag.


I'll be honest, since installing the Runt last October, I haven't ever checked sag. I just set the recommended low pressure and went for it. Now you're going to make me walk out and check sag on my Lyrik as I have no idea where 75/150 puts me... other than it's sooo supple I wouldn't mind trying an additional 2-3PSI in the low side.


----------



## SA77 (May 21, 2019)

Just installed the new debonair in my new 2020 pike ultimate 140, I used the push rebuild kit with their wipers and motorex 10wt oil.

I actually only got one ride with the old debonair on a mellow trail and I had too much air pressure so i cant really compare the two, but i've had a bit of time on a 2018 pike 140 with a hc97, and a ton of time on my 2017 lyrik 160 with luftkappe. 

I'm 175-180 kitted up, started with 79 psi, 1 token, LSC and HSC fully open, rebound 5 clicks from fully open. 
First impressions seem along the lines of what others are saying, a bit harsh off the top, but good mid stroke support. The first trail i rode has a lot of medium/slow speed chunky, big square edge rocks low traction gravel/marbels. I wasnt too stoked on it there, compared to my lyrik(i know probably an unfair comparison) it felt like the fork just wasnt active, felt bouncy, especially at slower (bike not suspension) speeds. 

On my lyrik in those sections where you're doing maybe 5 mph, so pretty slow, technical slow corners, and dealing with lots of 6" to 20" tall rocks, with loose gravel littering everything else, it feels like you hit those big rocks and the wheel just sucks up out of the way, rolls down the backside, pretty minimal feedback through the bars for how rough it is, basically it tracks all the undulations very well, stays composed and ready.

The pike seemed like you hit those same rocks and rather than the wheel sucking up out of the way, the whole front end bounced up, if there were multiple repeated big but slow speed hits it would lose its composure on the first and be nowhere near ready for the second hit, which made it super sketchy with everything in between being super low traction gravel. To be fair though that 2018 pike/hc97 after being dialed in well felt about the same there. 

Next trail was mostly high speed, medium chunky rocks and dry roots, mostly loose over hardpack and some fine gravel, and i went to 1 click from open on LSC, fully open HSC, and 6 clicks from full open rebound. 
It felt MUCH better here than the old pike/hc97. in some ways better than my 160 lyrik. didnt feel harsh initially on high speed repeated chunky hits sectons, like that first 30-50% of travel was super active, but didnt use more travel than it needed so it was always ready for the next hit, super efficient with its travel. mid stroke support was awesome, better than the lyrik, you could push on the front without it diving and it would remain active. 

one section in particular, a high speed rough off camber rock around a slight corner, the best line is to 
stay as high as possible. to do that you need to maintain good front traction and really stay over the front, otherwise you lose the front pretty easy, usually on my lyrik and what should be a more capable bike. Ill hit that rock and the fork dives and kind of hangs up, feels sketchy but it'll still make it. First time through on the pike, being pretty heavy over the front, almost no dive, took the small impacts, and on top of that i had enough traction and confidence in the front to push off the front to "hop" up an over the rest of that. was pretty damn impressed. 

Slow speed corners/sections on that trail though it went back to how it felt on the previous trail, got bounced/knocked around, felt sketchy and unpredictable. 

I also had about 3mm of unused travel, which on a 140 i think using all the travel on those trails is appropriate. so air pressure seems at least very close. If I could fix this low speed tech terribleness Id be super happy with it.


----------



## squasher (Jun 4, 2020)

SA77 said:


> If I could fix this low speed tech terribleness Id be super happy with it.


That seems to be the consensus from everything I've read. At speed, mine feels pretty good too. You being 180, https://trailhead.rockshox.com/ recommends 90psi. Mine was 88, I was wrong above. But you running 79 and me 72, at least we are on par for what feels right for us. 88psi was ridiculously stiff.


----------



## SA77 (May 21, 2019)

squasher said:


> That seems to be the consensus from everything I've read. At speed, mine feels pretty good too. You being 180, https://trailhead.rockshox.com/ recommends 90psi. Mine was 88, I was wrong above. But you running 79 and me 72, at least we are on par for what feels right for us. 88psi was ridiculously stiff.


Yeah I just went off what I ran with 1 token on my old pike. With how much support I felt I had I don't see a reason to run more. Id almost go less if anything. Only thing I could potentially see happening with running (apparently) pretty low pressure, on those slow speed techy trails, is maybe the fork is using up its travel immediately, hits the ramp up and THEN that's the bounce off the hit that im feeling. But I really doubt that.


----------



## squasher (Jun 4, 2020)

SA77 said:


> maybe the fork is using up its travel immediately, hits the ramp up and THEN that's the bounce off the hit that im feeling. But I really doubt that.


I would think you would feel the fork dive really hard if that was the case. But if you think that may be happening, slower rebound would solve that. But then you run the risk of it packing up on higher speeds.

I'm pretty much over Rockshox. If we get a 2nd round of stimulus checks, Ohlins here I come, lol.


----------



## fresh tracks (Feb 25, 2005)

squasher said:


> After installing the Debonair v3, I could get close to 2:1. But had to run waaaay less air in the L and H to get anywhere close to 25-30% sag. 45psi in the L and 105psi in the H gave me 25%! I thought I maybe messed something up during my shaft swap. So I did a complete rebuild. Nope, same thing. Plus the Runt just felt like **** with the new shaft now no matter what I did.


Do you reckon the runt is not a good upgrade on shorter travel forks? On 170mm travel it supports the mid-stroke really well. Sag - rockshox recommends 70psi for my weight and travel. I've ended up within 1psi of that recommendation and getting ~ 20% sag standing on the pedals. V3 initial travel probably every so slightly harsher at low speed. On rough trails at high speed, I don't notice it and mid travel is about right and I'm using about 85% of travel outside of "oh ****" moments.
Compared to my son's 36 at 160 travel with MRP ramp + airspring mod (separate pos and neg air - 64psi in pos, 68psi in neg, 3ml of oil sitting on top of piston for great lubrication), his is super supple off the top without being divey. My Lyrik can't compare with that.


----------



## squasher (Jun 4, 2020)

fresh tracks said:


> Do you reckon the runt is not a good upgrade on shorter travel forks? On 170mm travel it supports the mid-stroke really well. Sag - rockshox recommends 70psi for my weight and travel. I've ended up within 1psi of that recommendation and getting ~ 20% sag standing on the pedals. V3 initial travel probably every so slightly harsher at low speed. On rough trails at high speed, I don't notice it and mid travel is about right and I'm using about 85% of travel outside of "oh ****" moments.
> Compared to my son's 36 at 160 travel with MRP ramp + airspring mod (separate pos and neg air - 64psi in pos, 68psi in neg, 3ml of oil sitting on top of piston for great lubrication), his is super supple off the top without being divey. My Lyrik can't compare with that.


To be honest. I have no idea if it works better on longer travel forks. I just know that with the v2 shaft, it was very supple off the top. I would roll over a 2 inch root and barely feel it. With v3, I can definitely feel that same root a lot more. And no matter what I do, I can't get that suppleness back. With the stock air cap, it's a lot better than the runt, but still not as supple as v2. Only reason I'm keeping v3 for now is I really like the ride height.

I'll probably wind up putting in the 150mm v2 I have during my next lower service. Won't be able to use the runt though.


----------



## Nuno Machuqueiro (May 14, 2016)

For me no luck with this upgrade. 
84 kg 160mm A1 pike

after my 3 ride, 0 token, 25+/- sag. more rebound, from 0 lsc to 4 lsc and NO 
at high speed the fork bounces and kicks hard at the first bigger stone 
will miss the ride height, but going back to db2 
for steep and smooth trails its 5 star upgrade 
in my case for fast, rocky and square edge no.


at least my pike gets 2 maintenance in less than a month

almost forgot! hand pain start again with db3


----------



## MaksK (Oct 30, 2019)

This comments about new spring are so confusing, some love it, some hate it. Its really hard for me as I am looking to change my Fox 34 with Pike/Lyrik. I need 140mm of travel and ride height to keep geo intact. Found new Lyriks with B1 debonair/150mm for same price as new C1 Pike's with 140mm. Weight difference is 150g so it does not matter to me. What should I go with?


----------



## Nuno Machuqueiro (May 14, 2016)

standart Pike is a realy realy great fork
just get a standard one 
and enjoy the ride


----------



## CCS86 (Jan 6, 2020)

Nuno Machuqueiro said:


> standart Pike is a realy realy great fork
> just get a standard one
> and enjoy the ride


There is no such thing as a "standard" Pike. They come in different configurations and model years. From my experience with a 2019 Pike RCT3, no, it is not a really great fork.

Sent from my Pixel 4 using Tapatalk


----------



## petercarm (Nov 5, 2007)

MaksK said:


> This comments about new spring are so confusing, some love it, some hate it. Its really hard for me as I am looking to change my Fox 34 with Pike/Lyrik. I need 140mm of travel and ride height to keep geo intact. Found new Lyriks with B1 debonair/150mm for same price as new C1 Pike's with 140mm. Weight difference is 150g so it does not matter to me. What should I go with?


I'm pretty convinced that most of the "25% sag gang" are making failure with this new spring a self-fulfilling prophesy.

If you ran Deb2 and Deb3 back to back at the same air pressures but swapped a spacer out from under your stem you would be much closer to holding all things equal between the two.

The point is that the air pressure *is* the spring behaviour nearasdammit (tm). The positive chamber is exactly the same. The negative is smaller, yes, but in the greater scheme of things it is a big fat "so what". Instead of a pneumatic topout, the bumpstop comes into play.

If you drop 10-20psi to get your sag back to a nominal 25% you have completely buggered up the air spring characteristic because... ghost of @Dougal whispers in my ear... you need to set up for support, not sag.

So instead, move a headset spacer. Your brain will feel like the sag is lower even though it is higher. Into the bargain you will now have a slacker head tube angle. Support will be where it should be. You'll then have a sporting chance of forming a subjective opinion on whether you really value pneumatic topout over the action of a bumpstop.

[It is a slow day in lockdown and my furlough beard is beginning to itch]


----------



## CCS86 (Jan 6, 2020)

It sounds like many are reducing pressure to reduce harshness bear top of stroke, more than to change bar height. 

Sent from my Pixel 4 using Tapatalk


----------



## Nuno Machuqueiro (May 14, 2016)

in my case, 
tried different air pressure, to 1 token to zero token, from 0 to my 6 lsc, from under the stem spacer to above the stem spacers 12,5 mm change. 

nothing works 

the only thing that hi didn't do to my pike was a charger bleed. because its good.


----------



## squasher (Jun 4, 2020)

CCS86 said:


> It sounds like many are reducing pressure to reduce harshness bear top of stroke, more than to change bar height.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 4 using Tapatalk


This ^ ^


----------



## tkdbboy (Jan 31, 2019)

I just replaced the old debonair with the new one and I've got a very odd feeling from my forks.

When I compress them hard I can feel a dull vibration through the bars and a bit more resistance/ stickyness in the forks? Slow compression seems ok.

Off the top its not as supple but I was expecting that.

I installed the prior debonair with no issues. Did the same procedure for this one. Used slickoleum to lube o-rings on the seals, light lube on the shaft, lubed 150mm inside the stanchions using smooth plastic pipe, replaced foam rings and seals, soaked rings and lubed inside of seals, put the airspring back in, circlip clicked into position and oriented correctly. 10cc of 0-30 on each side of the lowers (Lyriks).

No pressure loss over 24 hours in the garage.

Anyone experienced these symptoms in a fork before?


----------



## dlocki (Mar 30, 2017)

Yes, take the seal head off and make sure it’s got plenty of grease on it.


----------



## Nuno Machuqueiro (May 14, 2016)

same here (sram grease + drops of 0/30w) 
after 2º ride it disappear


----------



## TheHeez (Apr 1, 2018)

I just added the 2021 spring to my 2016 Pike A2 with the solo air spring. Also took the opportunity to increase travel from 130 to 150 on my Intense Spider. 

I’m not a suspension guru or anything close, but this upgrade is fantastic. I decreased my air pressure by about 10 psi and added a token(using 2 now). The initial stroke is so much better, I’m just able to rip through chunder. My lines have changed because I know I can just float over the small/medium chunk at speed.

If anyone is still running an old solo air I strongly recommend the upgrade. It’s like a new bike and well worth it.


----------



## tkdbboy (Jan 31, 2019)

Nuno Machuqueiro said:


> same here (sram grease + drops of 0/30w)
> after 2º ride it disappear


Drops of 0-30 where?

On page 16 of the SRAM guide it says:
RockShox Dynamic Seal Grease only: If RockShox Dynamic SealGrease was applied to the piston seal, inject or pour RockShoxsuspension oil into the air spring upper tube (3ml).

I've never before seen instructions to add fluid to the uppers of the air side.



dlocki said:


> Yes, take the seal head off and make sure it's got plenty of grease on it.


Hmm I was pretty generous with it already. I guess I'll top it up.
Liberal grease on the shaft too?


----------



## Nuno Machuqueiro (May 14, 2016)

on assembly a few drops 2 or 3 on negative and a few on the positive chamber
doing this for last 4 maintenances and its fine
plus some oil in the orings before applying the grease.

not on the manual but theres a SRAM Germany (think!) video doing this.


----------



## austink26 (Jun 24, 2019)

Converted both my 2020 130mm pike and 170mm lyrik today to the new air spring. As instructed I kept the same pressure and settings on the lyrik and dropped 4ish psi on the pike. 

Initial impressions riding around the block and jumping some curbs. 

I can definitely notice the higher ride height. I like that and see it being a benefit for the loose/rocky terrain here. I don’t plan on dropping any spacers. The other thing I noticed was how much better it felt while sprinting over the front. Previously both forks would dive hard into the travel, but it felt much more stable with the new air spring. I can accept a little more initial feedback as trade off. 

I will get in some park days this upcoming week and see how it feels there. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tkdbboy (Jan 31, 2019)

So I pulled the air spring out. Both seals were well lubed.

One thing I noticed is that the debonair seal head was quite hard to move up and down the shaft, even after the shaft was lightly greased.

I added a few drops of 0-30 onto the shaft plus some more slickoleum and cycled the seal head up and down the shaft about 20 times and its smoother.

Also added 3ml of 0-30 to the top of the air spring side.

Re-assembled and it feels smoother. 
On the first assembly and test, I didn't hear the air chambers equalize. This time I did. Never noticed it with forks before, only rear shocks.

One odd thing is that I can feel light points of resistance on the shaft through the seal head when cycling it up. Did the same for the old spring and it felt similar. 
I guess when pushing the seal head down, I'm not applying equal force with both fingers so it could be pushing down on a fraction of an angle.

Anyways, thanks for the tips!


----------



## MaksK (Oct 30, 2019)

I have just ordered 2021 Pike's Ultimate 140mm and "old" B1 150mm air spring to go along so I will have both at hand to decide which is better. Btw, can you take foot nut and seal head from B1 to C1 so I have 140mm & 150mm to try in both configurations?

My thinking is that a properly sprung fork/shock should sit into its travel under the weight of the bike. Think of a car’s suspension? You wouldn’t like the ride if it sat at the top of it’s travel. Another way to think of it is that you gain a hell of lot more confidence when stiction is easily broken and wheel is in contact with the trail. A higher sitting fork means it’s taking more force to keep the wheel down and planted. 

I would say reduced negative air chamber in the new setup is more noticeable on short travel setups.


----------



## codahale (Oct 6, 2018)

MaksK said:


> My thinking is that a properly sprung fork/shock should sit into its travel under the weight of the bike. Think of a car's suspension? You wouldn't like the ride if it sat at the top of it's travel. Another way to think of it is that you gain a hell of lot more confidence when stiction is easily broken and wheel is in contact with the trail. A higher sitting fork means it's taking more force to keep the wheel down and planted.


All forks will sag a bit into their travel when the bike is unloaded, but keep in mind that a car weighs easily ten times as much as its driver whereas a bike weighs three to eight times less than its rider. If the ~30lbs of a bike's sprung weight compresses the fork more than a few percent, then either the spring rate is so light that it'll have an unusably high sag when ridden or the spring rate is so progressive that the rider will only be able to use a small portion of the travel regardless of terrain.

A better comparison would be the leaf springs on a trailer, which don't noticeably compress under the chassis's weight because they're sprung to handle significantly higher loads.


----------



## SA77 (May 21, 2019)

tkdbboy said:


> So I pulled the air spring out. Both seals were well lubed.
> 
> One thing I noticed is that the debonair seal head was quite hard to move up and down the shaft, even after the shaft was lightly greased.
> 
> ...


Damn now i feel like I didnt quite reassemble my fork as well as i could have. The guide i was going off didnt mention anything about greasing the 150mm inside of the air spring side of the upper tube. I used plenty of grease on the air spring seal head but cant be near enough after looking at the proper rock shox guide.

So since im re-doing it anyway.. can someone link me to the appropriate guide to follow? im not seeing anything about adding oil to the air spring uppers in this guide..

https://www.servicearchive.sram.com...anual_2019-2021_pike_revelation_english_0.pdf


----------



## austink26 (Jun 24, 2019)

SA77 said:


> Damn now i feel like I didnt quite reassemble my fork as well as i could have. The guide i was going off didnt mention anything about greasing the 150mm inside of the air spring side of the upper tube. I used plenty of grease on the air spring seal head but cant be near enough after looking at the proper rock shox guide.
> 
> So since im re-doing it anyway.. can someone link me to the appropriate guide to follow? im not seeing anything about adding oil to the air spring uppers in this guide..
> 
> https://www.servicearchive.sram.com...anual_2019-2021_pike_revelation_english_0.pdf


If your fork isn't feeling draggy like the person who needed to regrease theirs, I am guessing yours is ok. Did you wipe out all of the old grease that was in the stanchion?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SA77 (May 21, 2019)

yeah i wiped and cleaned it, then didnt add any grease at all after that. so the only grease inside the upper tube is what i put on the airspring seal.

Im just wondering if that plus not putting any oil into the top of the airspring side might part of the slow speed harshness im feeling. on the air spring i only greased the shaft, and both seals/o rings. sounds like i could add a few drops of oil between both seals as well? 

I also barely used any grease to the wiper seals, basically applied a tiny bit of grease wiped it off so it just had a super thin layer on the rubber, but lubed it up well with a bit of oil. thats something else it said to do in whatever other guide i was following, i think it even said no grease on the wiper seals?

lubing these things in the right places is a damn science haha


----------



## Trinimon (Aug 6, 2019)

I've seen an online vid that said to put like 5ml of oil in the air chamber. Couldn't find any Rockshox service guide that said that for my current forks. I just clean out the inner stanchions, relube lightly with some Slickoleum or Sram Butter. 

Clean out the wipers and foam rings, replace if needed. Resaturate the foam rings, fill the inside cup of the wipers with a liberal amount of Sram butter.

Liberally (not a huge gob like you see some folks doing) add a layer of butter on the seals and air shaft, work the seal head and that egg shaped rubber thingy so that they're coated on the inside then reassemble the fork. Add 10ml of oil in each lower leg for my Pike and torque down the bolts. I don't add oil to the air chamber.


----------



## CCS86 (Jan 6, 2020)

SA77 said:


> Damn now i feel like I didnt quite reassemble my fork as well as i could have. The guide i was going off didnt mention anything about greasing the 150mm inside of the air spring side of the upper tube. I used plenty of grease on the air spring seal head but cant be near enough after looking at the proper rock shox guide.
> 
> So since im re-doing it anyway.. can someone link me to the appropriate guide to follow? im not seeing anything about adding oil to the air spring uppers in this guide..
> 
> https://www.servicearchive.sram.com...anual_2019-2021_pike_revelation_english_0.pdf


You need to read more carefully, I guess.

Page 35 of that document shows a lot of grease applied inside the stanchion tube.

Page 37 shows grease and 0.5 mL of oil applied to the seal head before installing.

Page 38 shows oil added into the upper tube.


----------



## SA77 (May 21, 2019)

Yep you’re right, I was swapping back and forth between that and another guide specific to the debonair upgrade. Sounds like there’s a shorter sram guide that doesn’t have so many pages going over the damper rebuild as well


----------



## Trinimon (Aug 6, 2019)

Damn, I think I was using an older guide as well that didn't show adding 3ml of oil to the air side.


----------



## Gman086 (Jul 4, 2004)

Trinimon said:


> Damn, I think I was using an older guide as well that didn't show adding 3ml of oil to the air side.


Don't sweat it, this isn't rocket science... as long as you don't have noticeable stiction you are good to go. The 3ml's of oil just winds up in the negative chamber anyway. Personally I don't use any and just use a small amount of Slickoleum on the air seal piston.

Have FUN!

G MAN


----------



## tkdbboy (Jan 31, 2019)

Yeah first time I've ever seen fluid to be added on top of air side. Only owned Lyriks though.

Did 2 days at the bike park and the Air Spring behaves as most have reported.

Most noticeable was less brake dive and bike felt more balanced in berms.

Felt less draggy after the regrease recommended above plus a solid ride on it.


----------



## Trinimon (Aug 6, 2019)

Gman086 said:


> Don't sweat it, this isn't rocket science... as long as you don't have noticeable stiction you are good to go. The 3ml's of oil just winds up in the negative chamber anyway. Personally I don't use any and just use a small amount of Slickoleum on the air seal piston.
> 
> Have FUN!
> 
> G MAN


I did two rides after I did the new seal head/foot install and service and didn't notice anything different in performance. I did trickle 3mil of oil into the air chamber before reading your post. Good to know.


----------



## SA77 (May 21, 2019)

where are people running their clickers? I'm about 175-180 geared up, 140 travel, 79 psi, 1 token, fully open on HSC/LSC, and been trying between 5-7 clicks from open with rebound. I'll add a click of LSC depending on the trail. Im doing this purely based off past experience with my old lyrik, needing to run as little compression damping as i could to keep it reasonably supple. 

To try and get better performance on those low speed big hits without losing the support and high speed performance.. wonder if it'd be worth trying less pressure, but dialing in more compression? Or less pressure, add a token, and add compression?


----------



## Trinimon (Aug 6, 2019)

I'm about 155lbs with my kit on. Running a 150mm Debonair Revelation upgraded with a Charger 2.1 with upgraded seal head/foot nut on a 32lb Nukeproof Reactor 275.

For my trails, I'm running the following:
PSI: 75psi
Rebound: 5clicks from slow
LSC: 8 clicks from closed
Spacers: 0 to 1 depending on trail

So far, it's nice and plush on the rock gardens and rooty sections. I'm using up about 95% of my travel on some of the trails and haven't felt the fork diving on the berms.


----------



## CCS86 (Jan 6, 2020)

This is interesting. In an official Mattoc service video, they also show 3 mL semi-bath oil on top of the air piston. But there is a graphic overlay saying not to do this:


----------



## SA77 (May 21, 2019)

So rebuilt mine again with grease in the right places, a small amount of oil between the two seals, and 3ml oil on the top of the air piston. also discovered one of my foam rings was dislodged and squeezed between the stanchion/lowers:skep:, i used the push seals/foam rings and guess i didnt stretch them out enough, im sure that wasnt helping...

Anyway running the same settings same air pressure 78-79 right off the bat it was MUCH more supple overall but mostly the first 1/3 of its travel, to the point it was using too much travel, and ended up going from fully open on both HSC and LSC, to 1 click of HSC and 3 of LSC, still used all my travel, and felt a little on the soft side. 

but what i liked is for how soft it felt and how good it was in terms of slow speed tech/traction, it wasnt that divey, not as much support as i'd like but it was still decent. Wondering if I should keep air pressure the same and dial in more compression. or try to get back that support from air pressure. 

Regardless its a big improvement from a poorly greased install, and a huge improvement in every way over my old pike.


----------



## dreicha (Aug 16, 2005)

3ml oil through the dimple can go to negative camber and decrease the volume of camber that results in loss of small bump sensitivity. Mattoc does not have a dimple.


----------



## MaksK (Oct 30, 2019)

This is the reply I got from DIAZ suspension when I was asking them about RUNT for my Lyrik;



> The best combination is the Debonair C1 with the RUNT for the most linear spring rate, but you need to tune the damper because RockShox has a lot of compression damping stock on the Charger 2 and 2.1 dampers. With a more supportive spring, you don't need nearly as much compression damping, so the fork will feel harsher with the C1 until the damper is tuned. Then it will be supportive and supple.


So it seams the tune of the damper is in order to "release" compression and made C1 debonair supple as B1?


----------



## islander (Jan 21, 2004)

Am I the only one who found this 2021 air spring upgrade results in a weird noise when compressing the fork. Oh, and I'm about to start dropping air pressure as the top of stroke is on the harsh side.


----------



## austink26 (Jun 24, 2019)

islander said:


> Am I the only one who found this 2021 air spring upgrade results in a weird noise when compressing the fork. Oh, and I'm about to start dropping air pressure as the top of stroke is on the harsh side.


Did you lube up the new air spring enough when putting it in? I don't have any weird noises.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## islander (Jan 21, 2004)

austink26 said:


> Did you lube up the new air spring enough when putting it in? I don't have any weird noises.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Plenty of lube.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

CCS86 said:


> This is interesting. In an official Mattoc service video, they also show 3 mL semi-bath oil on top of the air piston. But there is a graphic overlay saying not to do this:


Manitou used to use Prep M grease in assembly and oil on top of air pistons. That Mattoc video must be about 5 years old now. They changed to Slickoleum grease shortly after that and no longer use oil.

It's a fine line between oil adding to lubrication and acting as a solvent to strip grease films away and migrate to the lowest point.


----------



## defiets (Sep 28, 2018)

Do you benefit more from the Debonair 2021 if you're lighter in weight? This is because the air pressure is lower and the fork is more responsive?


----------



## austink26 (Jun 24, 2019)

defiets said:


> Do you benefit more from the Debonair 2021 if you're lighter in weight? This is because the air pressure is lower and the fork is more responsive?


So for the lyrik they don't recommend dropping pressure. I kept the same pressure and it feels great. The pressures dropped a bit on the pike but it doesn't make the fork discernibly more active imo.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Ju Dan (Jul 13, 2020)

Here's an anecdotal assessment from a v3 user, for those that are interested. No graphs here, just my personal take. 

So my fork was originally a 2018 Yari 160mm. I then upgraded to the Charger 2.1 damper and v2 air spring (170mm). So far so awesome. When it came time to do a service I experimented with removing the top out bumper - bad idea. Given my ride weight of around 90kg, I was running 84psi and that gave me around 20% sag; however when I removed the top out bumper I had to run 110psi just to get to sag and the fork felt awful. I immediately pulled the fork apart and went back to stock. 

Roll on the v3 - I picked one up from Shockcraft (thanks for being straight with people on your website, big thumbs up). Looking at the new seal head I knew I wasn't going to use the top out bumper - I took a guess that I could regain the lost negative spring volume and put the compression ratio pretty much back where it was. This turned out to be the way to go, as 84psi gave me around 20% again. 

For me it's been an upgrade. I now have the full 170mm to play with, I'm getting pretty much full travel (which despite my best efforts was hard to achieve before) and the bike sits higher on the trail and there's no noticeable loss of sensitivity or traction (I'm running slightly lower pressure now - 81psi). Now I wasn't too bothered about losing a few mm before, but for me if the fork can't reach full extension then it's not going to reach the ground as quickly when you, for example, slide off a root. That's arse-saving traction you're leaving on the table, as now your sag might say 20% but actually it's 15%.

A note on removing the top out bumper - I can grab the crown and brace and pull the fork to top out, but under normal riding it won't top out as the negative spring acts as a pneumatic top out. Those running 180mm might have a different experience, especially if you don't use rebound damping. (We all know that one guy...)

So, if your circumstances are similar to mine, I'd say give it a shot without the top out bumper and you might get the best of the v2 and v3 springs. Or you might not. Happy fettling.


----------



## flavio-san (Apr 18, 2013)

mgertz said:


> I have the 2021 airspring installed in my 160mm pike together with the HC97. Yes, it is now much firmer of the top but the progression is more gradual if this makes sense. However I do not feel it harsh of the top or so. I am using 2.5wt in the damper instead off 5wt if this somehow relates to this? Honestly, I feel my bike is more balanced now because my rear shock (deluxe rt) has not much to adjust and I never could get them balanced. My fork always felt more divey than my rear shock. This is now gone and nicely balanced. Furthermore, i feel that the geometry of my Jeffsy has improved as I am now sitting more upright, but in a pleasant way. So even if 2021 Debonair has less compliance of the top, in my case the comfort and balance increased. I will try for a while but currently I am surprised how well it fits my bike (and riding skill). Cheers to everyone!
> 
> Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk


Thank you very very much, this is what I was looking for since I have a Jeffsy with deluxe-RT in the rear.
F


----------



## L. Ron Hoover (Feb 1, 2006)

Ju Dan said:


> Here's an anecdotal assessment from a v3 user, for those that are interested. No graphs here, just my personal take.
> 
> So my fork was originally a 2018 Yari 160mm. I then upgraded to the Charger 2.1 damper and v2 air spring (170mm). So far so awesome. When it came time to do a service I experimented with removing the top out bumper - bad idea. Given my ride weight of around 90kg, I was running 84psi and that gave me around 20% sag; however when I removed the top out bumper I had to run 110psi just to get to sag and the fork felt awful. I immediately pulled the fork apart and went back to stock.
> 
> ...


Your experience with the v3 air spring more or less mirrors mine. I posted a good while back about upgrading my 150mm A2 (2017) Solo Air Pike to 160mm with the v2 or v3 springs. I actually ordered both air springs. The first change was to the v2 spring with the increase in travel. I ran it for about a month before installing the v3 one. I'm glad I did this so I had the data point for reference. It was definitely an upgrade from solo air. The fork did sit a bit into the initial travel once the new seals broke in but it was sort of a zero sum because it meant the bike's (2017 Devinci Troy alloy) geometry didn't change much. At the same pressure as I used in the orignal (75psi) it sagged about 30% (including the unweighted sag) which was about where it was before. It felt a bit more supple on the really small stuff than the solo air but still sat low in the travel and felt a bit wallowy in the mid stroke. Progression made it nice and firm towards the end of the stroke and with one token in the air chamber I wasn't bottoming out.

When I changed to the v3 spring, the first thing I noticed was that the fork didn't sink into the travel at all unweighted and this did make the static geometry feel a bit slacker. At the same pressure as before (75psi) it felt really stiff in the inital part of the stroke but good elsewhere. Could only get about 15% sag. I fooled around with the pressure a bit and settled on 70psi. This gave me 20% static sag and still felt stiffer on street bounces/noodling around in the driveway. Strangely enough, this didn't seem to translate to the trail. It still felt nice on the small stuff yet rode a bit higher. In this configuration, the fork felt pretty linear, really. More like a coil. However, I found that I was bottoming the fork out out hard on bigger drops, where I never did before. Back to 75 psi solved that problem but felt harsh on small stuff. So last week I popped the cap off the air spring, put another token in it and pumped it up to 70psi and BAM! that seems to be the sweet spot. It still feels good on the small stuff but isn't bottoming out harshly any more though I do use pretty much all the travel on the largest drops I do. Midstroke is nice and supportive, no diveyness at all.

Tl;dr: I tried both air springs and like the v3 one best in an A1/A2 Pike.


----------



## rusty904 (Apr 25, 2008)

If anybody has a 120mm c1 for a pike lemme know! They are out of stock everywhere it seems.


----------



## POAH (Apr 29, 2009)

rusty904 said:


> If anybody has a 120mm c1 for a pike lemme know! They are out of stock everywhere it seems.


remember you can change the air shaft so you don't have to just get a 120mm pike.


----------



## AKRCD47 (Sep 5, 2019)

How easy is it to remove the top out bumper on the new springs? What do you feel you gain from doing this. I upsized 10mm on a V2 spring because the V3 felt really harsh to me, but I did like the support in some areas and how it felt in the middle of its travel.



Ju Dan said:


> Here's an anecdotal assessment from a v3 user, for those that are interested. No graphs here, just my personal take.
> 
> So my fork was originally a 2018 Yari 160mm. I then upgraded to the Charger 2.1 damper and v2 air spring (170mm). So far so awesome. When it came time to do a service I experimented with removing the top out bumper - bad idea. Given my ride weight of around 90kg, I was running 84psi and that gave me around 20% sag; however when I removed the top out bumper I had to run 110psi just to get to sag and the fork felt awful. I immediately pulled the fork apart and went back to stock.
> 
> ...


----------



## Bosbefok (Oct 23, 2018)

Just rode around the house on mine now and definately feels more linear which is probably why people say its more coil like. Less sag, more linear, not sure how high it will ride though Will add 1x token and perhaps a Formula Neopos soft token to get the mistroke progression slightly more. I wasn't using any tokens with the D2 previous spring (150mm pike)


----------



## tkdbboy (Jan 31, 2019)

After installing the new Debonair ... anytime I inflate it from zero, I find I have to pull on the fork to make it go to full extension to equalize it. I hear a hiss when I do this and the fork feels noticeably smoother

On the prior debonair I didn't have to.

Only ever had to equalise my rear shock.

Is it just me or is this normal?


----------



## crembz (Feb 25, 2019)

tkdbboy said:


> After installing the new Debonair ... anytime I inflate it from zero, I find I have to pull on the fork to make it go to full extension to equalize it. I hear a hiss when I do this and the fork feels noticeably smoother
> 
> On the prior debonair I didn't have to.
> 
> ...


I experienced the same thing and from what I know it is perfectly normal to need to equalise. Happy to stand corrected.

I bought a 2020 Pike Ultimate and opted for a C1 upgrade from the seller who installed it prior to sending. I absolutely hate the thing. Quick chattery ground (even a gravel road) seems to be super harsh. Could be my lack of adequate setup skills. I have a 2019 Lyrik Select and that fork is simply beautiful to ride, I just set the sag and it feels great. Also have a mattoc, Bomber Z1, Sektor, Fox 34 ... Can't say any of these feel anything like this fork, almost feels like it's locked out.

I pulled the lowers today and nothing seemed out of place, grease in the right places ... if anything I thought it seemed a little dry, a few drops of oil dripped out of the lowers when I cracked them open, was expecting more tbh.

I cleaned, lubed uppers and air spring seals etc with sram butter and put everything back together (sans 3ml in the top ... I didn't use the dynamic seal grease and the service manual specifically states the oil to be added when using the seal grease (not sram butter). Hopefully tomorrows ride will be smoother.

Question: I have the stock air spring, how would it feel compared to a lyrik running the same generation spring?


----------



## crembz (Feb 25, 2019)

crembz said:


> I experienced the same thing and from what I know it is perfectly normal to need to equalise. Happy to stand corrected.
> 
> I bought a 2020 Pike Ultimate and opted for a C1 upgrade from the seller who installed it prior to sending. I absolutely hate the thing. Quick chattery ground (even a gravel road) seems to be super harsh. Could be my lack of adequate setup skills. I have a 2019 Lyrik Select and that fork is simply beautiful to ride, I just set the sag and it feels great. Also have a mattoc, Bomber Z1, Sektor, Fox 34 ... Can't say any of these feel anything like this fork, almost feels like it's locked out.
> 
> ...


So I put the original debonair spring back in and boom, supple and controlled without much tuning at all. Not sure what's the deal, are the new Pikes just complete garbage or is this an issue with 'upgraded' pikes? For the record mine is a 130mm 2020 Ultimate.


----------



## Yetichon (May 30, 2018)

crembz said:


> So I put the original debonair spring back in and boom, supple and controlled without much tuning at all. Not sure what's the deal, are the new Pikes just complete garbage or is this an issue with 'upgraded' pikes? For the record mine is a 130mm 2020 Ultimate.


Not surprising, with the new air spring, either you get support, or you get small bump sensitivity, in comparison with the B debonair. The neg air chamber is smaller, so you get less progressivity, and you have to compromise somewhere.

That's why most people think it's a downgrade.

I love my Select Lyrik too, the 2020 one with the new charger RC, I got it for 450 bucks, it's stupid-proof to set up, supra smooth, great support for my little weight and tons of progressivity with the B spring.
I will maybe look at a Mezzer later, but I'm not even sure it's worth it for me, I just don't think about the Lyrik at all, it's transparent.
Seing the effect of the C spring, it gave me Solo air vibes, which I absolutly hated, the compromise between decent support or small bump. Haven't tried tho... Maybe for science later.


----------



## austink26 (Jun 24, 2019)

crembz said:


> So I put the original debonair spring back in and boom, supple and controlled without much tuning at all. Not sure what's the deal, are the new Pikes just complete garbage or is this an issue with 'upgraded' pikes? For the record mine is a 130mm 2020 Ultimate.


The increased "harshness " is more pronounced in the pike vs the lyrik. Rockshoxs recommends like 5psi less pressure in the pike when changing to the new air spring. The lyrik doesn't change pressure. I have a 130mm pike ultimate and 170mm lyrik ultimate (both 2020) that I upgraded to the new air spring. When running the old pressure the pike was a bit harsh, that went away when I dropped some pressure. It is still more noticeable than the lyrik but I still see it as an upgrade.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## crembz (Feb 25, 2019)

Yetichon said:


> Not surprising, with the new air spring, either you get support, or you get small bump sensitivity, in comparison with the B debonair. The neg air chamber is smaller, so you get less progressivity, and you have to compromise somewhere.
> 
> That's why most people think it's a downgrade.
> 
> ...


Yeah I bought the Pike because I love the Lyrik so much but I don't need that much travel on this bike. I was expecting that plush but controlled feeling the Lyrik provides. Thought what the hell I'll upgrade the air spring ... and seriously first ride out with 5psi less as per rockshox recommendation and I'm thinking what the hell is this crap? The Sektor on my daughters bike feels better than this thing. The new Pike replaced a 2019 Marzocchi Bomber Z1 and imo it is a downgrade in every possible way except for weight. Tried removing spacers, dropping and increasing pressure, slowing rebound ... over chatter it feels like a rigid fork.

I $h!t you not, my gravel bike is more supple over gravel than my pike with the updated air spring.


----------



## crembz (Feb 25, 2019)

One other thing I noticed swapping between air springs, with the older design, after removing air you could easily cycle the fork through its travel. With the new spring it takes quite a bit of muscle, as though it doesn't want to equalise.

I bring this up because I find it hard to believe that the new springs are so rubbish. There must be something not right with this setup.


----------



## Bosbefok (Oct 23, 2018)

*deb 2 with deb 3 nut*



paris said:


> Has anyone actually run Deb 3 nut on a Deb 2 airshaft
> Same experience many above with deb 3
> Pro
> Rode high
> ...


@ Paris Did you ever try this? My experience is much the same as others, There are some things I like, but some that I dont. I dont like The topout for one..

I want to run the D3 Footnut with D2 sealhead, so It will be like having a 160mm airshaft if the travel sits 10mm in, I will be back at 150mm, with my suppleness off the top and ramp at the end. The Pike maxes at 160mm, so it should be ok right?


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

I have two bikes with 130mm Pikes. One is a 2018/2019 Pike Debonair and the other is a 2021 Pike Ultimate. I love the new air spring. I'm running nearly the same pressure but the 2021 sits higher in the travel (~18% vs 24%) and has much more midstroke support. I'm 215 lbs and running 112 psi with 3 tokens btw.


----------



## ocnLogan (Aug 15, 2018)

So, what is the consensus here on the B1 vs C1 debonair springs?

I'm on a 2018 160mm Rockshox Yari with Soloair and motion control damper. I've decided to upgrade to a debonair spring and I'm not sure which one to buy.

Sounds like the C1 has a smaller negative air volume, and the same size positive, and as such, its a got a bit less initial suppleness, but more mid stroke support? Is that about the size of it?

Sounds like on the Pike/shorter travel springs people are feeling like the C1's are harsher than the B1's. But maybe less issue on the longer travel springs?

Is the consensus that "most" people like the C1's, or are "most" people keeping the B1's?

If it helps, I'm about 185-190lbs without gear, and run ~100psi and two tokens in my Yari soloair.


----------



## shlotch (Nov 7, 2017)

Seems subjective. Some like it, some don't. 

I'm in the latter camp. I appreciate the added ride height but I find the new spring quite divey under hard braking. I tend to run my fork pretty stiff, so I'm not overly put off by added harshness, but any added brake dive is a bit of a concern. It's a non-issue if you ride flowier, lower grade trails, but ours are quite steep and require a lot of heavy front-end braking to get down the mountain. For me, if I wanted to increase the ride height or usable travel, the fix would be to run my Lyrik at 180 instead of 170. With the old spring. 

As with most things in mountain biking, it's all trail-subjectivity.


----------



## AKRCD47 (Sep 5, 2019)

ocnLogan said:


> So, what is the consensus here on the B1 vs C1 debonair springs?
> 
> I'm on a 2018 160mm Rockshox Yari with Soloair and motion control damper. I've decided to upgrade to a debonair spring and I'm not sure which one to buy.
> 
> ...


It seems that most experienced people are saying the former spring is better. People who are upset about the bike sagging under its own weight, seem to like the new spring.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## shlotch (Nov 7, 2017)

AKRCD47 said:


> It seems that most experienced people are saying the former spring is better. People who are upset about the bike sagging under its own weight, seem to like the new spring.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


What's really wild is when people say that they have better mid-stroke support with the new spring. Especially when they couple that statement with having reduced air pressure to combat the reduced sensitivity. Kind of the opposite of what is physically happening in the fork. Really showcases how the marketing creates our expectations.


----------



## crembz (Feb 25, 2019)

I went back to the original spring.

90 psi 2 token in the c1 was harsh and horrible.
110psi no tokens in the B1 smooth smooth smooth.


----------



## austink26 (Jun 24, 2019)

AKRCD47 said:


> It seems that most experienced people are saying the former spring is better. People who are upset about the bike sagging under its own weight, seem to like the new spring.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Lol define "experienced" in this case. For me the new air spring is better because it rides higher in the travel when on the trail. I have never cared about the static unweighted sag, but didn't like how the old air spring would dive too easily.

The way I see it, the old air spring feels smoother. So if all out comfort is your goal, get that air spring. The newer one stands up better and offers what feels like a stiffer but more supportive ride. If you are an aggressive rider who likes their bikes a bit on the stiff side, go with the newer air spring.

Neither is "better" they are just different and will appeal to different riders.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ocnLogan (Aug 15, 2018)

I thought the official recommendation from Rockshox was that they said to use the same air pressure (for the Lyrik at least)? So if people are reducing air pressure to get the old small bump sensitivity back, then they'll be getting even more ramp up at the end of the stroke, correct?

So then is the "best of both worlds", to go up in travel with the old air spring? IE, should I be shopping for a 170mm B1? And theoretically that would give me more small bump sensitivity than my 160mm soloair, and would ride just a few mm higher up, and would have better mid stroke support/bottom out resistance?

Again, sorry, I'm still pretty new to the world of suspension, so maybe I'm understanding it wrong?

I'm a relatively new rider, but for the trails I know, I'm on the faster end of the spectrum (according to trailforks... which maybe isn't as "competitive" as strava), with a few top 10 times for the year. And, I'm a bit on the heavier side (~185-190lbs before gear, so maybe ~200lbs loaded). Maybe that means I'm "agressive"?

And, I hear my current soloair is pretty awful, but I don't have any real complaints about it. Id assume the B1 or C1 would be better pretty much everywhere right?


----------



## shlotch (Nov 7, 2017)

austink26 said:


> Lol define "experienced" in this case. For me the new air spring is better because it rides higher in the travel when on the trail. I have never cared about the static unweighted sag, but didn't like how the old air spring would dive too easily.
> 
> The way I see it, the old air spring feels smoother. So if all out comfort is your goal, get that air spring. The newer one stands up better and offers what feels like a stiffer but more supportive ride. If you are an aggressive rider who likes their bikes a bit on the stiff side, go with the newer air spring.
> 
> ...


Except that's not the case, right? The new spring rides higher (which is nice) except actually offers LESS mid-stroke support due to the reduction in negative spring volume. Now it's 100% possible that this doesn't matter if a person isn't riding trails where hard-braking is common or the grades aren't too steep. With the exception of those cases, the new spring could absolutely feel like it's overall a better choice and it holds the rider up better.

But if a person is riding trails that result in the typical 'divey' behaviour from forks, particularly under braking, this new spring will be worse. It's just the nature of how it's constructed.

Steve from Vorsprung had a good explanation of how and why this occurs in the PB comments. It corrects static ride height but not without sacrifices elsewhere.

Too each their own. It'll be better for some, worse for others.


----------



## crembz (Feb 25, 2019)

Not sure I appreciate the 'lack of support' on the older spring. Isn't that what the LSC is for?


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

shlotch said:


> Except that's not the case, right? The new spring rides higher (which is nice) except actually offers LESS mid-stroke support due to the reduction in negative spring volume.


Except it feels like the new spring has better midstroke and I have both versions in 130mm travel right now. I actually didn't expect the new version to make a difference except for a few mm of ride height. I wasn't looking for improved midstroke but to me that's the most noticeable difference.


----------



## shlotch (Nov 7, 2017)

Cool - goes to show how subjective it all is . Either way, it's a cheap part to try out and see if it helps. If not, no real harm.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

So I'm not sure what to think about the B1 at this point. I was told initially that I'd probably be able to run more pressure (ok, upped it a little) and remove the token, but I seem to use too much travel on really big hits, like into the ABS. After a few rides like this, I put the token back in. I still need some more pressure, so I'm getting closer, but I don't feel a hands-down better feeling with the B1 over the A1 that I had previously. Still going to do some testing. Part of this may be due to how satisfied I am overall and how well damped the fork is with the Avy cart. In short, it's real good. I wanted to see if this made any difference, since it was relatively inexpensive. So far, I'm not really sold.


----------



## Bosbefok (Oct 23, 2018)

shlotch said:


> Except that's not the case, right? The new spring rides higher (which is nice) except actually offers LESS mid-stroke support due to the reduction in negative spring volume. Now it's 100% possible that this doesn't matter if a person isn't riding trails where hard-braking is common or the grades aren't too steep. With the exception of those cases, the new spring could absolutely feel like it's overall a better choice and it holds the rider up better.
> 
> But if a person is riding trails that result in the typical 'divey' behaviour from forks, particularly under braking, this new spring will be worse. It's just the nature of how it's constructed.
> 
> ...





jeremy3220 said:


> Except it feels like the new spring has better midstroke and I have both versions in 130mm travel right now. I actually didn't expect the new version to make a difference except for a few mm of ride height. I wasn't looking for improved midstroke but to me that's the most noticeable difference.


My Experience has been the same as @ Slotch's this far. But I'm still to play around with it much.
I ran the B1 (2019)spring @108PSI no tokens with the LSC all the way in. This gave me good small bump sensitivity as I live in a very rocky area, but also support in the steeper dive prone stuff.

The C1(new spring), at that same pressure has less sensitivity off the top, but a flatter more linear curve through the rest of the stroke making it feel nicer in the parking lot test, but in actual fact, that ramp up (in my opinion) is what keeps the fork from blowing through its travel. I have a suspicion, that many folk are running to many bottomless tokens in the previous spring which makes the last 1/4 of the stroke very hard to access.
Tokens are great for the more linear air springs where one had to run lower pressures to get the small-bump compliance off the top, but needed the tokens for ramp and more support in the middle and the end. It could be that one could manipulate the New spring like that( Add tokens and drop pressure) I have not done that yet, but those affect the initial and end of the stroke, while the middle of the stroke is what we really need to work for us, and is much harder to tune.


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

Bosbefok said:


> a flatter more linear curve through the rest of the stroke


Isn't that the definition of midstroke support... filling in the middle of the curve to make it more linear ('coil like').

Also, people are pointing out the reduction in negative volume but not mentioning the reduction in positive air volume. Like I said, I run both versions within a couple psi of each other (110-112). It's not like they greatly reduced the negative volume in proportion so you have to run less psi. I actually run a couple psi higher in the new fork.


----------



## crembz (Feb 25, 2019)

I haven't ruled out something is wrong with my newer spring. I mean it feels TERRIBLE. Given how many people like the new spring mine must be stuffed or something.


----------



## jeremy3220 (Jul 5, 2017)

crembz said:


> I haven't ruled out something is wrong with my newer spring. I mean it feels TERRIBLE. Given how many people like the new spring mine must be stuffed or something.


I think either way, it shouldn't be wildy different than the old one. It's a noticeable difference but if you find one spring is ok/good and the other terrible then something might be wrong.


----------



## Bosbefok (Oct 23, 2018)

jeremy3220 said:


> Isn't that the definition of midstroke support... filling in the middle of the curve to make it more linear ('coil like').
> 
> Also, people are pointing out the reduction in negative volume but not mentioning the reduction in positive air volume. Like I said, I run both versions within a couple psi of each other (110-112). It's not like they greatly reduced the negative volume in proportion so you have to run less psi. I actually run a couple psi higher in the new fork.


Sure, 100%. The problem is that the start and end points in the curve move when you get the mid stroke to the place you want it, you might not be able to tweak the beginning of the stroke anymore, the end stroke can be adjusted via tokens. Im saying the previous spring was good for that.

Anyway, each to his own, and it will be highly subjective and dependent on weight.. It depends what you need from the fork. If you need some degree of sensitivity off the top for traction, it may be hard to keep the midstroke support you'd like. I will be experimenting further as I want it to be true


----------



## AKRCD47 (Sep 5, 2019)

Best thing I did was went up 10mm in travel on the old spring. Im pretty sensitive to ride height and bar height and it feels like the same ride height as the new spring but handles bumps of any size way better. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## crembz (Feb 25, 2019)

jeremy3220 said:


> I think either way, it shouldn't be wildy different than the old one. It's a noticeable difference but if you find one spring is ok/good and the other terrible then something might be wrong.


It's a night and day difference, the only fork I've ridden worse than the c1 pike was some crap suntour coil fork that's how bad it felt. I though the damper was busted that's why I swapped the spring out to the B1, and problem solved. I had thought maybe the c1 wasn't equalising, but again the older spring doesn't seem to have an issue.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

jeremy3220 said:


> Isn't that the definition of midstroke support... filling in the middle of the curve to make it more linear ('coil like').
> 
> Also, people are pointing out the reduction in negative volume but not mentioning the reduction in positive air volume. Like I said, I run both versions within a couple psi of each other (110-112). It's not like they greatly reduced the negative volume in proportion so you have to run less psi. I actually run a couple psi higher in the new fork.


Not quite, but it doesn't quite make sense either. Flatter means less support and more wallow, linear would be more of a straight line, which is what you'd want.


----------



## Miker J (Nov 4, 2003)

Just to add to the overall discussion...

Recently swapped out a Pike RCT3 2.1 with the prior air spring for one with the RC2 and the new air spring. The fork feels real good all around. Much better actually. I’m still on my Lyric RC2 with the prior air spring and really dig that fork too.

Believe it or not RS seems to know what they are doing.


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

I'm liking the new air spring in my Lyrik 170. At 165 lbs., my B1 setup was 85 PSI with 1 token. I had been running my C1 at 75 psi and 1 token, which I thought felt good. But for the sake of experimenting, I went up to 80 psi and pulled out the token. I only had 1 ride like that and think I like the result, but wouldn't have minded a tad more support deep in the stroke. So I sawed a token in half and kept it at 80 psi. I still have to ride it like that and am curious whether the half token is noticeable (I saw some pros are running half a token).

edit: the ride height is feeling a bit tall when cornering with 80 psi and half a token, and I’m not using a full 2-3 cm of travel. 80 psi and no tokens was better, but I think 75 psi + 1 token is the winner. Having that ramp late in the stoke gives a bit more pop, whereas the more linear feel of no tokens is a bit more glued to the ground.

The C1 is maybe slightly less eager to move off the top of the travel, but at the same time I felt like the B1 would use up that initial stroke a bit too easily, so the small bumps would be working with a portion of the air spring deeper in its travel. The C1, sitting higher, feels like it deals with small bumps closer to topout, giving a lighter, less rampy feeling. On medium hits, I also felt like the B1 was a bit harsh and ramped up fast, whereas the C1 has a slightly more accessible middle of stroke without feeling unsupportive. I am not noticing any increased brake dive with the C1, though I run my bars pretty high.

That said, now that I have been on the C1 for a bit over 2 months, it would be interesting to go back to the B1 to confirm.


----------



## ocnLogan (Aug 15, 2018)

Decided to grab the B1 in 170mm for the time being, and am fine if it sucks down a bit when I'm not on the bike. Hoping it should be an upgrade from my Soloair. Should be arriving next week.

Mostly because I'm not sure how much longer I'll be able to find B1's in stock, while I can get the C1 anytime I please from pretty much anywhere at this point, if I decide I want to change later.


----------



## crembz (Feb 25, 2019)

I wouldn't be surprised if next year's model comes with a 'new and improved air spring with larger negative chamber'


----------



## EatsDirt (Jan 20, 2014)

crembz said:


> I wouldn't be surprised if next year's model comes with a 'new and improved air spring with larger negative chamber'


Yep.

I find this new spring offering confusing. Seems as it should be strictly targeted at the E market but WTF do I know.


----------



## codahale (Oct 6, 2018)

It’s wild to see that so many people’s reaction to a $20 upgrade for a $45 air spring is “not today, Satan”.

I got the upgrade the last time I had my fork lowers serviced, and I will give anyone who can tell the difference in a randomized, double-blind test $40. The fork feels different, sure, but 99% of that is just fresh oil and clean seals.

The only difference that any of us will actually notice is that you don’t have to cycle your fork when changing the pressure. Negative springs weren’t added to air shocks for “mid-stroke support”, they were added to reduce the extremely high breakaway forces required relative to rider and vehicle weights. RockShox tweaked the positive/negative spring ratios and hit send on a press release, and y’all are acting like they just announced a new wheel size.


----------



## EatsDirt (Jan 20, 2014)

codahale said:


> It's wild to see that so many people's reaction to a $20 upgrade for a $45 air spring is "not today, Satan".
> 
> I got the upgrade the last time I had my fork lowers serviced, and I will give anyone who can tell the difference in a randomized, double-blind test $40. The fork feels different, sure, but 99% of that is just fresh oil and clean seals.
> 
> The only difference that any of us will actually notice is that you don't have to cycle your fork when changing the pressure. Negative springs weren't added to air shocks for "mid-stroke support", they were added to reduce the extremely high breakaway forces required relative to rider and vehicle weights. RockShox tweaked the positive/negative spring ratios and hit send on a press release, and y'all are acting like they just announced a new wheel size.


Wait, so... this is something being touted as an "upgrade" that doesn't really do anything, there's really no benefit aside from the relative service, and nobody will notice anything?

I'll take two.


----------



## codahale (Oct 6, 2018)

EatsDirt said:


> Wait, so... this is something being touted as an "upgrade" that doesn't really do anything, there's really no benefit aside from the relative service, and nobody will notice anything?
> 
> I'll take two.


I didn't say it doesn't do anything.

RockShox has dynos and racers and I'm sure they used the former to make the latter faster and happier. But none of these mugs in here up in arms about how the thing they don't have is either too different or not different enough from the thing they already have will ever notice the difference.

I mean, it's a $25 part. What sort of revolutionary improvements do you expect for $25? I paid $25 and now I don't have to cycle my fork when I change the pressure. How entitled would I have to be to feel ripped off?


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

codahale said:


> I got the upgrade the last time I had my fork lowers serviced, and I will give anyone who can tell the difference in a randomized, double-blind test $40.


The difference in off-the-top behaviour is huge. I can tell that blindfolded easily.

I'll send you my paypal account.:thumbsup:


----------



## codahale (Oct 6, 2018)

Dougal said:


> The difference in off-the-top behaviour is huge. I can tell that blindfolded easily.
> 
> I'll send you my paypal account.:thumbsup:


I can't tell if you don't know what RCTs are or how bets work, but best of luck in life.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

codahale said:


> I can't tell if you don't know what RCTs are or how bets work, but best of luck in life.


You can randomise the test as much as you want. Debonair V2 (B1) vs V3 (C1) air spring curves are very different off the top and easily distinguished in a blind test.

V2 tapers off to zero force before full stroke.
V3 has definite starting preload.

I knew you were bluffing and wouldn't pay up.


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

Edit: deleted. Not useful.


----------



## jack_steel (May 17, 2013)

JohnnyC7 said:


> Yes


Are any special tools needet to put the red seal head to the old solo air air spring?


----------



## 294037 (Jun 30, 2006)

jack_steel said:


> Are any special tools needet to put the red seal head to the old solo air air spring?


No, if you have the tools to remove the lowers and air spring it is just a case of sliding the old seal head (and circlip/wave washer) off and new one one


----------



## jack_steel (May 17, 2013)

JohnnyC7 said:


> No, if you have the tools to remove the lowers and air spring it is just a case of sliding the old seal head (and circlip/wave washer) off and new one one


Looking at the size of the piston and the seal head (and the bumper) it looks like there is some kind of spacer needed to achieve the same size of the negative chamber - right?


----------



## Trinimon (Aug 6, 2019)

The orig debonair red seal head works on the Solo Air shaft?


----------



## jack_steel (May 17, 2013)

Trinimon said:


> The orig debonair red seal head works on the Solo Air shaft?


Apparently - yes...

https://forums.mtbr.com/shocks-suspension/rockshox-debonair-2021-a-1133399-2.html#post14716477


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

Trinimon said:


> The orig debonair red seal head works on the Solo Air shaft?


Say I have a DSD Runt'd Lyrik and install a 150mm Solo Air (V1) shaft with the upgraded V2 red aluminum seal head (not the V3 nonesense that reduces negative air volume). Remove the top out bumper (increasing Solo Air/Debonair V1 negative volume).

That's 30mm short of max travel and more negative volume/spring force than stock.

From a pneumatic top-out lens, this setup should be just fine for trail riding, no? (I'm over the V3/C1 "upgrade"... and I am moving the fork to a bike that can't handle more than 150 front)


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

codahale said:


> It's wild to see that so many people's reaction to a $20 upgrade for a $45 air spring is "not today, Satan".
> 
> I got the upgrade the last time I had my fork lowers serviced, and I will give anyone who can tell the difference in a randomized, double-blind test $40. The fork feels different, sure, but 99% of that is just fresh oil and clean seals.
> 
> The only difference that any of us will actually notice is that you don't have to cycle your fork when changing the pressure. Negative springs weren't added to air shocks for "mid-stroke support", they were added to reduce the extremely high breakaway forces required relative to rider and vehicle weights. RockShox tweaked the positive/negative spring ratios and hit send on a press release, and y'all are acting like they just announced a new wheel size.


I'm not entirely warmed up to it. I can notice the difference off the top. It's not huge. Noticing the greater mid-stroke support is much more difficult. Part of this is my damper, it's so good I never felt this was an issue or that I was lacking, so there might be a few situations where I notice a little better support, but it's less noticeable than the off-the-top travel/movement. Then there's the end-stroke. I'm having problems there. I'm already up around 10psi and I'm not finding the same end-stroke ramp-up that I had with A1. I have some protection in the form of the hydraulic ABS, but that's more of a safety-stop that works in addition to the air progression and it seems like I'm missing some of the air progression with B1. I'm still tuning this, but I keep having to up the pressure.


----------



## defiets (Sep 28, 2018)

Is the ultimate solution: Airshaft A1 + Debonair red seal head B1 + Luftkappe?


----------



## jack_steel (May 17, 2013)

defiets said:


> Is the ultimate solution: Airshaft A1 + Debonair red seal head B1 + Luftkappe?


That's what I would like to find out. The only problem is, you need a self made spacer between the top out bumper and the seal head or between the piston and the top out bumper to push the negative chamber to the correct size because of the different lengths of seal heads and pistons between A1/B1.


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

[HR][/HR]


defiets said:


> Is the ultimate solution: Airshaft A1 + Debonair red seal head B1 + Luftkappe?


Seems that would work very well


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

ccinpa said:


> Couldn't you just buy a 10mm longer air spring and add a 10mm spacer under the top out bumper to push the seal head up closer to the equalization dimple? Would that enlarge the negative spring while taking advantage of the higher ride height.
> 
> View attachment 1323863


I wanna ask this question again, but in a slightly different way.

What would be the impact of adding the spacer between the red V2 seal head and the top out bumper on a V2 airshaft?

Impact meaning: what exactly would it do to/for the fork and fork's travel?

For the sake of argument, let's assume the spacer is the same length as the difference between the V2 silver footnut and the V3 red footnut.


----------



## andrew236 (Aug 18, 2020)

*Enduro w/ 170mm lyrik - Pro's and cons to upgrading to the 180mm spring?*

Trying to decide if I should get the 180mm upgrade to my Lyrik. I really like doing downhill and park jumps and I am worried that the extra travel will hurt me on park jumps. If not then I would love the extra travel for bumpy DH sections. - Also will the extra 10mm make climbing much harder?


----------



## Gman086 (Jul 4, 2004)

jack_steel said:


> That's what I would like to find out. The only problem is, you need a self made spacer between the top out bumper and the seal head or between the piston and the top out bumper to push the negative chamber to the correct size because of the different lengths of seal heads and pistons between A1/B1.


You're making things more complicated than it needs to be... Use a V1 airshaft that is 10mm LONGER than the one on your V2 (that accounts for the 10mm long seal nut at the ends of V2 shafts), use the V2 red sealhead, and Luftkappe the V1 air piston = best of all worlds. The negative chamber will be slightly smaller as I recall but that would be a benefit to me as you get less pull down.

Have FUN!

G MAN


----------



## jack_steel (May 17, 2013)

Gman086 said:


> You're making things more complicated than it needs to be... Use a V1 airshaft that is 10mm LONGER than the one on your V2 (that accounts for the 10mm long seal nut at the ends of V2 shafts), use the V2 red sealhead, and Luftkappe the V1 air piston = best of all worlds. The negative chamber will be slightly smaller as I recall but that would be a benefit to me as you get less pull down.


I think you are wrong with a longer shaft... When I use a V1 air shaft and I replace the V1 seal head with the red V2 seal head, the negative chamber will be reduced in length by about 10 mm (the red V2 seal head i shorter then the black plastic V1 seal head). A 10 mm shorter negative chamber means 10 mm more travel for a given air shaft.

EDIT: After having a look into the installation instructions of the Luftkappe I learned, the Luftkappe does not need a top out bumper because it works with a pneumatic top out instead of a mechanic top out. How does that work? Is the force in the negative chamber simply strong enough to stop the piston before it touches the seal head?

I agree with you by trying to compensate for the shorter negative chamber with a Luftkappe but it would be very interesting to estimate the size of the resulting negative chamber. Will it be smaller or larger then a stock SoloAir chamber? Will it be smaller or larger then a DebonAir chamber?

I have to make sure the air shaft will not collide with my second positive air chamber (AWK) which has a length of 125 mm. I can use a 140 mm SoloAir shaft or a 130 mm V3 DebonAir shaft without problems. I'm not sure if I could use a modified 140 mm V1 SoloAir shaft with Luftkappe and V2 seal head.

EDIT: What if I use the stock SoloAir shaft with the SoloAir piston and the V2 DebonAir seal head AND I remove the top out bumper too. The missing bumper and the smaller sized seal head increases the possible size of the negative chamber but will I have something like the pneumatic top out of the Luftkappe?


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

jack_steel said:


> EDIT: What if I use the stock SoloAir shaft with the SoloAir piston and the V2 DebonAir seal head AND I remove the top out bumper too. The missing bumper and the smaller sized seal head increases the possible size of the negative chamber but will I have something like the pneumatic top out of the Luftkappe?


Seems our heads are in the same spot.



06HokieMTB said:


> Say I have a DSD Runt'd Lyrik and install a 150mm Solo Air (V1) shaft with the upgraded V2 red aluminum seal head (not the V3 nonesense that reduces negative air volume). Remove the top out bumper (increasing Solo Air/Debonair V1 negative volume).


----------



## jack_steel (May 17, 2013)

06HokieMTB said:


> Seems our heads are in the same spot.


How long is your DSD Runt? I use the german engineered AWK - more or less the same thing - a second positive air chamber. My AWK has a length of 125 mm (bottom to the point where the top cap touches the crown) and is sized to be compatible with 140 mm SoloAir shafts or less. I don't think I can mount a Luftkappe because of the larger piston head. But it would be nice to run the newer red V2 seal head for improved friction.
For what I know, the DebonAir spring (V2) didn't improve the fork when running it together with something like a AWK or a DSD Runt. Maybe because the negative chamber was to large?


----------



## mike156 (Jul 10, 2017)

I think with the Luftkappe, you'll find it may be too progressive in any setup that is close to the maximum travel of the fork. Its essentially like putting two tokens in the fork. Also, it acts just like the Debonair B1 spring on top out where it pulls a couple mm into the travel because it relies on a pneumatic top out.

I think the ideal setup would be basically an aluminum piston/sealhead B1 Debonair where it uses the shaft for the negative spring but doesn't have the added progression of the Luftkappe. The aluminum piston (with PTFE o-ring support rings like the Luftkappe) would likely just help reduce friction some by holding better tolerances on the o-ring squish.


----------



## Gman086 (Jul 4, 2004)

jack_steel said:


> EDIT: What if I use the stock SoloAir shaft with the SoloAir piston and the V2 DebonAir seal head AND I remove the top out bumper too. The missing bumper and the smaller sized seal head increases the possible size of the negative chamber but will I have something like the pneumatic top out of the Luftkappe?


THIS! Vorsprung makes this clear in their directions so I was assuming you knew that. And yes, I really think that is the best of all worlds.

Have FUN!

G MAN


----------



## petercarm (Nov 5, 2007)

What is the thinking that says a larger negative volume causes more suckdown? I can't see how that would work and think it would actually be the opposite.


----------



## luckyguy19 (Jun 28, 2017)

I'm not sure this is an upgrade for everyone. I installed the C1 air spring at the beginning of June. Right away I noticed it was harsher off the top and less sensitive. I had the feeling of the front end washing out on fast/loose/high-speed turns when leaned over. I knew I was getting my fork tuned and a Runt installed by DSD, so I left it in hoping it would get better after the tune/Runt. Even with the Runt, I still have the same sensation. At 165lbs I'm running 60psi Low and 120psi High, I'm using just about all the travel on my usual rides. I just can't get the traction out of the front I had before. I can tell it's slowing me down and I have less confidence. So I reinstalled the B1 air spring and will report back after a few rides to see if that fixed my issue.


----------



## Wayboarder (Jun 16, 2015)

Installed a 160 C1 in my 18’ Lyrik. After the install I was baffled by the force required and the “Preload’ as mentioned by Dougal on the air spring. Would it be possible without super negatively affecting anything to cut the top out bumper so the piston sits closer at top out to the seal head or internal dimple? My goal is to reduce the preload to near zero.


----------



## mgertz (Jan 3, 2020)

It seems that initial force necessary to move the fork is an issue often raised with the new C1 airspring in this thread. In this regard I made an (for me at least) interesting observation:

Recently. i changed the charger 2.0 seal head to the charger 2.1 usoing a 200h Service pack. In the package from RockShox, a brand new C1 assembly was also included (red foodstud and seal). Just for curiosity, i interchanged my used one to the factory fresh one. The difference in friction was substantial! Onestly, my used seal-cap had noticeably so much less friction, that i was really suprised. I also tried to relube the new seal-cap with r.s.p slick-kick, which helped, but did not resolved the difference in friction. 
So i'm not a (tribology) expert, but to me it seems reasonably that many of the here proposed initial impressions may be altered by the effect of "fresh" seal-caps? I understand that the theory speaks for reduced initial sensetivity, which i absolutely respect, but this effect should be "continous", right? But can it be possible that the often mentioned "Harshness" may occoure due to the stick-slip effect of the new seal-cap? 
I cannot remember how the old debonair seal-cap behaved when was new, so argumentation is not scientifically rigid, but i felt this observation seemed interesting for this thread.. 

Greetings to all,
Marvin


----------



## spokeywheeler (Dec 1, 2006)

I just installed a Debonair 2 spring assembly on my 2021 RS Pike Ultimate and the travel is now sitting at 150mm instead of the 140 I was intending on. I got part number: 00.4019.931.007 which is supposed to be the correct length for a 29" Pike to give 140mm of travel. I haven't disassembled it yet but I'm wondering if the shaft lengths are different for the newer Pikes vs. older? If so which one do I need to make the 2021 Pike 140? I guess I'll pull it apart and measure it but I'm not sure what length it should be??


----------



## petercarm (Nov 5, 2007)

spokeywheeler said:


> I just installed a Debonair 2 spring assembly on my 2021 RS Pike Ultimate and the travel is now sitting at 150mm instead of the 140 I was intending on. I got part number: 00.4019.931.007 which is supposed to be the correct length for a 29" Pike to give 140mm of travel. I haven't disassembled it yet but I'm wondering if the shaft lengths are different for the newer Pikes vs. older? If so which one do I need to make the 2021 Pike 140? I guess I'll pull it apart and measure it but I'm not sure what length it should be??


On a 2021 ultimate you need a 00.4019.930.002. The length of shaft depends on the equalisation port location and Pikes have had this refined since the 2018 model year. Your spring assembly is for 29er pikes from 2014-2017.


----------



## spokeywheeler (Dec 1, 2006)

petercarm said:


> On a 2021 ultimate you need a 00.4019.930.002. The length of shaft depends on the equalisation port location and Pikes have had this refined since the 2018 model year. Your spring assembly is for 29er pikes from 2014-2017.


Yeah thanks I did some research and realized that I had the wrong kit. I got the 14-17 A1/A2, not the 2018+ B1+ that I should have. I went ahead and swapped the air sealhead and footnut from the A1/A2 kit onto the airshaft that came with the fork and that got me sorted.


----------



## slipperyb (Sep 27, 2009)

So in reading through this thread, and some other sources, I think I am informed enough to make the right call, but perhaps someone with a better understanding can chime in if I'm of course...

I have a 2018 Pike RCT3, labeled Debonair on the lowers, but does not have the stamp on the upper stanchion, so I believe I have the V1 debonair. I need to change the travel, thus need a new air-shaft, and from what I gather, I am going to be best served going with a V2 debonair shaft 10mm longer than the travel I am actually after. This is based upon the reports that the V3 is firmer/harsher off the top, given it's design to sit topped-out w/ no rider weight (i.e.; no sag from bike weight). I understand the V2 will sit partially sagged, and will initiate travel a bit easier. I do have some concern about mid-stroke support with the V2, but am not positive what the real deal is with that with the V2.

This is for a playful steel hardtail. I typically ride fairly aggressive, but this bike is primarily used for rides with kids on more XC trail (Northeast) and flow/jump trails.


----------



## Jesse Hill (Dec 29, 2006)

slipperyb said:


> So in reading through this thread, and some other sources, I think I am informed enough to make the right call, but perhaps someone with a better understanding can chime in if I'm of course...
> 
> I have a 2018 Pike RCT3, labeled Debonair on the lowers, but does not have the stamp on the upper stanchion, so I believe I have the V1 debonair. I need to change the travel, thus need a new air-shaft, and from what I gather, I am going to be best served going with a V2 debonair shaft 10mm longer than the travel I am actually after. This is based upon the reports that the V3 is firmer/harsher off the top, given it's design to sit topped-out w/ no rider weight (i.e.; no sag from bike weight). I understand the V2 will sit partially sagged, and will initiate travel a bit easier. I do have some concern about mid-stroke support with the V2, but am not positive what the real deal is with that with the V2.
> 
> This is for a playful steel hardtail. I typically ride fairly aggressive, but this bike is primarily used for rides with kids on more XC trail (Northeast) and flow/jump trails.


if your looking for "playful" hardtail then the v3 is way more "playful" than v2.


----------



## shlotch (Nov 7, 2017)

Been back on the B1 spring for the last 3 weeks or so. Also took the opportunity to change the fork to 180mm from the stock 170mm. 

Honestly, I'm usually too ham-fisted of a rider to notice these little nuances so I'm honestly surprised how much of a difference these springs make. I also recognize that people's experiences will be subjective and will differ greatly based on bike setup and trails ridden. 

In my case, the bike is back to feeling balanced. With the C1 spring, I felt I was blowing through the travel much more easily towards the latter part of the stroke. Also, our trails vary from 'steep' to 'steeper' and front-end braking was causing significant dive with the C1. I suppose in another person's case, this could equate to 'more easily used travel', but my bike has a rather progressive rear-end and it needs some decent ramp up in the front in order to feel balanced.

Different strokes for different folks (pun entirely intended).


----------



## RVC (Jul 4, 2014)

codahale said:


> I can't tell if you don't know what RCTs are or how bets work, but best of luck in life.


Seriously... You throw an argument like this at Dougal? I strongly suggest you do more homework.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

RVC said:


> Seriously... You throw an argument like this at Dougal? I strongly suggest you do more homework.


He didn't pay up for losing the bet either. :nono:


----------



## slipperyb (Sep 27, 2009)

Jesse Hill said:


> if your looking for "playful" hardtail then the v3 is way more "playful" than v2.


Thanks for the response. Yes, this will be for my hardtail, which is playful by frame design, but I don't necessarily want a jump/slope feeling fork. I do like to push it on some flow lines and feel supported, but I also want it to provide a level of small bump smoothness when I'm doing some basic XC stuff with the kids. My want is for something supple off the top with easy travel initiation, as much mid-stroke support as I can get, and I will ramp it up as needed from there. That's why I thought I was in the right direction with the V2 spring. I'm seeing many V3 reports on here, that seem to indicate harsher/firm at the start of travel and a more hollow in the middle. But it's hard to gauge from the various reports, given subjective nature and relative comparison each report has to offer.


----------



## ccinpa (Jun 26, 2007)

I did a simple experiment while servicing my air spring in a 2020 Pike Ultimate 150. I simply left out the top out bumper. I am now able to run 10 more psi, going from 85 to 95 (~195lb riding wt) with better small bump compliance and better support. Oddly i regained the lost couple of mm, and the fork now sits at exactly 150mm static with the pneumatic top out. If i pump the fork quickly and pick up the front end like you were going of the lip of a jump it actually extends to 152mm. Try it ...it's free.


----------



## dhalsey (Aug 10, 2010)

ccinpa said:


> I did a simple experiment while servicing my air spring in a 2020 Pike Ultimate 150. I simply left out the top out bumper. I am now able to run 10 more psi, going from 85 to 95 (~195lb riding wt) with better small bump compliance and better support. Oddly i regained the lost couple of mm, and the fork now sits at exactly 150mm static with the pneumatic top out. If i pump the fork quickly and pick up the front end like you were going of the lip of a jump it actually extends to 152mm. Try it ...it's free.


Awesome feedback. Can anyone else comment on removing the top out bumper on the B1 spring? I'm going to give it a shot on a 170mm lyrik.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk


----------



## L. Ron Hoover (Feb 1, 2006)

shlotch said:


> Been back on the B1 spring for the last 3 weeks or so. Also took the opportunity to change the fork to 180mm from the stock 170mm.
> 
> Honestly, I'm usually too ham-fisted of a rider to notice these little nuances so I'm honestly surprised how much of a difference these springs make. I also recognize that people's experiences will be subjective and will differ greatly based on bike setup and trails ridden.
> 
> ...


After riding with the C1 spring in my A2 Pike for about 6 weeks, I started developing hand pain and was noticing more fatigue in my shoulders and upper back than usual and I'm putting it down to the stiffness in the initial stroke. So last week I went back to the B1 seal head and foot nut and I'm happy I did. I left the second token in and went back to my standard 75psi. 4 rides in since I changed it and the initial harshness is gone and my hands feel better already. It does sit a few mm into the travel unweighted but that doesn't seem to make much difference in the ride. I'm not feeling divey-ness and there's good end of stroke progression. It feels pretty good like this. Small bump compliance is very noticeably better but there doesn't seem to be much of a compromise in big hit performance. For reference, local trails are steep and super techy.


----------



## yonsson (Apr 28, 2019)

Went from Pike 140mm old debonair to 150mm new debonair. 
Only have two rides in it so far. 1st was with the same pressure as before (100psi) and two tokens. That ride was harsh since the sag went from 20% to 15%. 

Went down to 90psi (20% sag) and took another ride today. Great support on the downhills and no collapses on steep rocky sections as with the previous older debonair. It absolutely rides higher. Used pretty much the same mount of travel as with my previous setup. It’s a little rough on the rooty flatter sections where the speed is slower. 

Have you needed to mess with the rebound since swapping? I turned it down from -7 to -6 (from slow). Still feel like it’s rough over the roots. I don’t know if that might have to do with too slow or too fast rebound, will mess a little with that.


----------



## L. Ron Hoover (Feb 1, 2006)

yonsson said:


> Went from Pike 140mm old debonair to 150mm new debonair.
> Only have two rides in it so far. 1st was with the same pressure as before (100psi) and two tokens. That ride was harsh since the sag went from 20% to 15%.
> 
> Went down to 90psi (20% sag) and took another ride today. Great support on the downhills and no collapses on steep rocky sections as with the previous older debonair. It absolutely rides higher. Used pretty much the same mount of travel as with my previous setup. It's a little rough on the rooty flatter sections where the speed is slower.
> ...


Yeah, one of my riding buddies who did the C1 mod on his B1 (i.e old debonair) Revelation reports almost exactly what you are saying here. He found the original debonair air spring pretty divey and is really happy with the new one.

My experience with converting a solo air (A2) Pike was that the B1/B2 debonair air spring is better than the C1 air spring. It does sag a little into the travel with the B air spring but it's not divey and has good progression at the bottom of the stroke. I found the latest version harsh even with considerably less air pressure. Further up the thread someone said (can't remember who that was now, sorry) that it might behave differently because the equalization dimple is in a different place on the solo air forks.

I haven't noticed any difference with the rebound in any of the versions I've experienced in my Pike. I'm still around -6, -7 clicks like you.


----------



## jaks (Feb 2, 2005)

ccinpa said:


> I did a simple experiment while servicing my air spring in a 2020 Pike Ultimate 150. I simply left out the top out bumper. I am now able to run 10 more psi, going from 85 to 95 (~195lb riding wt) with better small bump compliance and better support. Oddly i regained the lost couple of mm, and the fork now sits at exactly 150mm static with the pneumatic top out. If i pump the fork quickly and pick up the front end like you were going of the lip of a jump it actually extends to 152mm. Try it ...it's free.


This seems to make a lot of sense. Basically the negative volume was increased over the stock V1 Debonair spring. Which means the negative air now extends a little further into the positive travel, improving small bump. Meanwhile, the higher positive pressure increases midstroke and makes the spring curve more linear. This does however make end-stroke harder since you're starting with more pressure in the positive spring. But if you had any tokens in the positive chamber, you could remove those to compensate.

As far as topout position, the negative spring ramps more slowly since it starts with a higher volume so the positive spring plus the spring pressure from the lowers would make the fork top out a little higher (pneumatically) in the fork's travel.

My only question is, is there a situation where not having the physical topout bumper would make the fork top out in a weird unexpected way and cause damage? I'm guessing you don't want to do this at the very limits of the fork's rated travel (150mm on a 29er Pike) for example, because you'd potentially hyperextend beyond the bushing overlap at topout. Any other situations that could happen?


----------



## jaks (Feb 2, 2005)

ccinpa said:


> I did a simple experiment while servicing my air spring in a 2020 Pike Ultimate 150. I simply left out the top out bumper. I am now able to run 10 more psi, going from 85 to 95 (~195lb riding wt) with better small bump compliance and better support. Oddly i regained the lost couple of mm, and the fork now sits at exactly 150mm static with the pneumatic top out. If i pump the fork quickly and pick up the front end like you were going of the lip of a jump it actually extends to 152mm. Try it ...it's free.


How exactly did you take out the take out the top out bumper? Did you cut it out from the side?

I'd love to hear from any others that have tried this little "experiment" to see how it went.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

jaks said:


> How exactly did you take out the take out the top out bumper? Did you cut it out from the side?
> 
> I'd love to hear from any others that have tried this little "experiment" to see how it went.


Undo the shaft foot and everything slides off the bottom.


----------



## EJ_92606 (Jul 11, 2004)

Just bought a 200 hr service kit for my B1 Pike Ultimate and was surprised to see that it came with the new sealhead and footnut. Save yourself $25.


----------



## jack_steel (May 17, 2013)

EJ_92606 said:


> Just bought a 200 hr service kit for my B1 Pike Ultimate and was surprised to see that it came with the new sealhead and footnut. Save yourself $25.


Could you tell what's the different in length between the old DebonAir footnut an the new one? Is my assumption correct, that replacing only the sealhead on my old DebonAir airshaft without replacing the footnut will reducing the travel of the fork by the difference in length of the footnuts?


----------



## Bosbefok (Oct 23, 2018)

They look completely different. 
Yes you will reduce the travel, thats why the upgrade kit comes with a longer footnut in the fist place.


----------



## Scandy101 (Feb 10, 2015)

Where are people running their clickers? I'm 175lbs with gear, pike 140, started at 78psi and creeped up to 80psi (My shock measures low compared to a friends). I'd run 1 maybe 2 clicks of LSC from fully OPEN, and typically fully open on HSC when i was at 78 psi. at 80psi now im just fully open on both. running 1 volume spacer.

I went a little higher with pressure to avoid diving on some of my go to trails biggest, chunkiest, high (bike) speed hits. 
was a small improvement but it added some low speed, low grip, tech harshness that i dont want to get any worse.

Wondering about going lower with pressure and actually running some compression. The hits where id like it to use less travel are where you're in a fast, medium chunk section which is keeping the fork low in its travel, and then you have one very big hit in the middle of that where the front end just drops and hangs up. 

I really dont want to add another volume spacer. unless i have to. but maybe im stuck in the mindset of my old lyrik that would get overly harsh with any compression, didnt like volume spacers, and basically just had to rely on air pressure..


----------



## half_man_half_scab (Mar 7, 2006)

I upgraded my wife's 120mm A1 Yari with a C1 airspring. She won't suffer a discussion of suspension setup, so it's a bit of a veterinary medicine situation with the air pressure.

Looked at the 2021 air charts for guidance:https://www.sram.com/globalassets/d...a-2021-fs-oil-air-coil-token-spec-english.pdf

I don't see anymore 120mm Yaris except for plus sized. Her's is a plain old 29er, should I go with the 29+ for ballpark pressure?


----------



## johnsogr (May 31, 2009)

Scandy101 said:


> Where are people running their clickers? I'm 175lbs with gear, pike 140, started at 78psi and creeped up to 80psi (My shock measures low compared to a friends). I'd run 1 maybe 2 clicks of LSC from fully OPEN, and typically fully open on HSC when i was at 78 psi. at 80psi now im just fully open on both. running 1 volume spacer.
> 
> I went a little higher with pressure to avoid diving on some of my go to trails biggest, chunkiest, high (bike) speed hits.
> was a small improvement but it added some low speed, low grip, tech harshness that i dont want to get any worse.
> ...


I had the exact same setting and issues at the same weight. Vorsprung Secus was a HUGE improvement and easy to install - you should consider it!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## shlotch (Nov 7, 2017)

I think this is related: Seb Stott just wrote an article comparing the ZEB with the Fox 38. It's interesting that pretty much everything he dislikes about the ZEB (even when compared to last year's Lyrik) can be attributed to the 'upgraded' air spring.

https://www.bikeradar.com/reviews/components/forks/suspension-forks/rockshox-zeb-vs-fox-38-fork/


----------



## magnil (Apr 28, 2013)

I am not happy with the new air shaft. Will "upgrade" to the old one 

I know that while not under load the old one is 5-10 mm down but how do they compare with normal load, SAG? Is the new one still 5-10 mm higher than the old one?

Reason I wonder is whether I should go for 160 as the one I have or if I should choose 170 to compensate.


----------



## petercarm (Nov 5, 2007)

magnil said:


> I am not happy with the new air shaft. Will "upgrade" to the old one
> 
> I know that while not under load the old one is 5-10 mm down but how do they compare with normal load, SAG? Is the new one still 5-10 mm higher than the old one?
> 
> Reason I wonder is whether I should go for 160 as the one I have or if I should choose 170 to compensate.


I had a bit of a play yesterday with all the different generation Lyrik springs I have lying around.

I've got three bikes with Lyriks:
- 170 solo air Charger 1 RCT3
- 160 Debonair Charger 2 RCT3 (originally a solo air but been a DebonAir since the start of 2019)
- 170 Debonair Charger 2.1 Ultimate 2020

The 160 did me proud in the 2019 enduro race season but it seems to have a narrow sweet spot. The Charger 1 stood in for one race and has been a well-dialled option which works just fine but isn't the most sensitive off the top. The Ultimate is on my e-Bike and has been completely awesome. I've been wanting some of that awesomeness on my enduro bike (the 160).

I got hold of a 170 Debonair spring. I also got hold of a 2021 spec upgrade hit (Debonair 3 seal head and footnut). I took the lowers off and did some measuring and took a bunch of pictures.

First surprise was that my mudguard was bottoming out and robbing me of ~6mm travel









After removing the mudguard, the bottom out on the bumpers in the lower legs leaves about 5mm of travel. Experience is that a hard bottom out can leave the o-ring right up at the top








I fitted each of the springs and measured from the seal head to the shaft end under ~25psi and with the chambers equalised. I wanted to see that the spring shafts matched the mathematical model I'd published earlier in this thread.

160mm solo air - 189mm









Where that places the lowers relative to the sag markings









Where the shaft sits relative to the topout bumper...









Debonair 2 160 - ~186.5mm















Debonair 2 170 - ~196.5mm (not surprisingly)







[

Debonair 3 - 160 - ~189mm









Pretty much the bumpstop is defining the rest position









So, the zero force location is just 2.5mm deeper in the travel for Debonair 2. When people report 5-10mm of "suck down" it will likely be a combination of static load and friction. The softness off the top from the larger negative spring does mean that sag will settle lower; the large negative contributes a lower spring rate for any given pressure in the early part of the travel. If you compensate by adding pressure, the positive spring will then be hard to bottom out but you an tune that a bit by removing spacers.

My eMTB (Commencal) that I like so much can be tuned with a soft feel and still have plenty of support but also has a short steerer and an overall lower front end. I've fitted the 170 Debonair 2 shaft to the bike (Norco Range C2 29er) so I can aim for the same sort of feel. The bike has 150mm rear travel and was originally on the solo air 160. I've dropped the stem down by a spacer (10mm) and will report back on how it rides.


----------



## yonsson (Apr 28, 2019)

yonsson said:


> Went from Pike 140mm old debonair to 150mm new debonair.
> Only have two rides in it so far. 1st was with the same pressure as before (100psi) and two tokens. That ride was harsh since the sag went from 20% to 15%.
> 
> Went down to 90psi (20% sag) and took another ride today. Great support on the downhills and no collapses on steep rocky sections as with the previous older debonair. It absolutely rides higher. Used pretty much the same mount of travel as with my previous setup. It's a little rough on the rooty flatter sections where the speed is slower.
> ...






Now down to 87 psi. Bottoming out on this drop but not otherwise. Could probably go down to 85psi. Still very happy with the upgrade for the rougher riding.


----------



## btslo (Oct 29, 2020)

I'm a bit confused on installing a C1 upgrade on a A1/A2 pike. The SRAM doc specifically says "*PIKE 2014-2017 forks are not compatible with DebonAir C1 air springs", yet people here have managed to fit them.

I have a A1 27,5" 160 pike (serial 32T4) with soloair and would like to upgrade to debonair. I know I would need a 140/29(160/27,5) first gen debonair assembly, but from 2018 the shafts for 27,5 and 29 are the same.

Can I fit a 2018+ (B1+) 160 assembly?

What should fit 100% (the SRAM doc shows this part #): https://www.bike-discount.de/en/buy/rockshox-pike-debon-air-upgrade-kit-734698

Would this 160mm fit? https://www.bike-discount.de/en/buy/rockshox-pike-revelation-debon-air-upgrade-kit-734537 (this is a 2019 debonair I suppose, which shouldn't fit)

C1 160: https://www.bike-discount.de/en/buy/rockshox-pike-b1-revelation-a1-debon-air-upgrade-kit-2018-962033 (which shouldn't fit but people here have fitted them, eg: https://forums.mtbr.com/shocks-susp...2021-a-1133399-post14871745.html#post14871745, https://forums.mtbr.com/shocks-susp...2021-a-1133399-post14793249.html#post14793249)

Thanks


----------



## jack_steel (May 17, 2013)

btslo said:


> I'm a bit confused on installing a C1 upgrade on a A1/A2 pike. The SRAM doc specifically says "*PIKE 2014-2017 forks are not compatible with DebonAir C1 air springs", yet people here have managed to fit them.
> 
> I have a A1 27,5" 160 pike (serial 32T4) with soloair and would like to upgrade to debonair. I know I would need a 140/29(160/27,5) first gen debonair assembly, but from 2018 the shafts for 27,5 and 29 are the same.
> 
> ...


I think you are save by upgrading to the older Debonair before:
https://www.bike-discount.de/en/buy/rockshox-pike-revelation-debon-air-upgrade-kit-734537

And then going to C1 by buying the proper footnut and sealhead:
https://www.bike-components.de/de/R...i-Revelation-p77483/?o=100830-universal-35-mm


----------



## ccinpa (Jun 26, 2007)

btslo said:


> I'm a bit confused on installing a C1 upgrade on a A1/A2 pike. The SRAM doc specifically says "*PIKE 2014-2017 forks are not compatible with DebonAir C1 air springs", yet people here have managed to fit them.
> 
> I have a A1 27,5" 160 pike (serial 32T4) with soloair and would like to upgrade to debonair. I know I would need a 140/29(160/27,5) first gen debonair assembly, but from 2018 the shafts for 27,5 and 29 are the same.
> 
> ...


Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the issue is that 2018+ pike have the equalization dimple further up to create a larger negative volume.

So if you try to install the new air spring in an older pike, while it will physically fit, it will push the seal head above the dimple on the older forks and it won't equalize properly if at all.


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

Has anyone thought about hacking a Zeb to have a pneumatic topout and less preload? The air spring has a spacer below the bottom sealhead that spaces the sealhead higher up into the stanchion. I am thinking about what would happen if you ran it without that spacer.


----------



## jack_steel (May 17, 2013)

D(C) said:


> Has anyone thought about hacking a Zeb to have a pneumatic topout and less preload? The air spring has a spacer below the bottom sealhead that spaces the sealhead higher up into the stanchion. I am thinking about what would happen if you ran it without that spacer.


Some thoughts on that: Negativ chamber will be much larger (maybe 2 times larger) and probably it will be difficult to equalize both chambers. Maybe you have to add air and equalize the fork step by step. Travel will not be changed because the equalization point does not change. Initial spring curve will be very, very linear, you will have a lot more sag and/or you need a lot more air pressure to achieve proper sag. Because positive volume is unchanged and air pressure is increased you will have a lot more progression.

It's more or less the same procedure what Vorsprung did with the Luftkappe for a 2015-2017 Fox 36. They removed a lot of spacer height below the negative chamber and increased it by that size without a significant change in positive volume and piston position.


----------



## half_man_half_scab (Mar 7, 2006)

Might be a good option for the 160mm Zebs that come with two positive spacers. Just take out those spacers? Would there be anything to keep the air spring seal head in place?


----------



## half_man_half_scab (Mar 7, 2006)

Could you alternatively remove the air shaft nut?


----------



## jack_steel (May 17, 2013)

half_man_half_scab said:


> Might be a good option for the 160mm Zebs that come with two positive spacers. Just take out those spacers? Would there be anything to keep the air spring seal head in place?


I've never seen a Zeb from inside and because of that I can't tell you if it physically works what you are trying to do. But I did a lot of modelation of air spring curves for my own forks to simulate volume changes of positive or negative chambers or to simulate the effect of a second positive chamber (like AWK or RUNT).
It would'nt be a difficult task to model the spring curve with and without the negative plate spacer in place, but it would need some measurements to estimate the exact volumes.


half_man_half_scab said:


> Could you alternatively remove the air shaft nut?


It won't work physically because you can't tighten the shaft to the casting. Beside of that, it would have the same effect like buying a shorter airshaft - you just travel the fork by doing that.


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

jack_steel said:


> Travel will not be changed because the equalization point does not change.


I was thinking it would top out a bit higher after removing the spacer, so you'd have more stanchions exposed at full top out, similar to Debonair B1 vs C1. The C1 has a longer foot but to compensate for the fact that its topout is mechanically limited by the deeper seal head.

That makes sense about having to remove some positive volume spacers. I am already down to 1 on my Zeb 160, so it might ramp too hard at the required pressures even with 0 tokens.

It might be a bit too much, but interesting to think about.


----------



## half_man_half_scab (Mar 7, 2006)

Cool, good info.

Seems like a good opportunity for the aftermarket suspension groups. You could perhaps sell packets of a handful of different seal head spacer heights to let the nerds mess with the sensitivity/progression tradeoff. 

The one thing I dislike about the Zeb is that it feels too tall. It's nearly impossible to get over 20% sag without dropping the pressure to unusable levels.


----------



## Phase_ (Nov 29, 2020)

I'm running a 180mm B1 spring in my Lyrik after trying C1 and not liking it. Can anyone confirm, is it safe to remove the top-out bumper for even more negative air volume on the B1 spring?


----------



## FactoryMatt (Apr 25, 2018)

curious, what didn't you like about the C1 spring? i have a B1 160 spring that works well, but COULD ride a little higher i guess.


----------



## Phase_ (Nov 29, 2020)

I didn't like the reduced suppleness off the top, which was my favorite thing about the Lyrik. I didn't mind it much on shorter runs, but definitely felt more beat up on longer days. I found I prefer running a bit more low-speed compression to keep the fork a bit higher, also I just bumped up the travel from 170 to 180 to compensate for it.

After getting a MegNeg on my shock, I'm definitely fan of larger negative air volumes, so I'm trying to figure out whether removing the top-out bumper is viable even at 180mm.


----------



## FactoryMatt (Apr 25, 2018)

thanks! great feedback. i'm also running a Megneg and it's great. i think i will do the same and just run a 170B1 spring instead of a 160C1.


----------



## jaks (Feb 2, 2005)

Phase_ said:


> I'm running a 180mm B1 spring in my Lyrik after trying C1 and not liking it. Can anyone confirm, is it safe to remove the top-out bumper for even more negative air volume on the B1 spring?


I recently removed the top-out bumper on my 160mm Lyrik B1 spring (it's actually 168mm since I added the C1 red footnut without the new sealhead) and it's great. It sits at 166mm at pneumatic top-out. It made a noticeable change and I increased baseline pressure from 83 to 88psi for the same sag which basically means I'm getting that much more midstroke support with more suppleness at the start of travel. This also allowed me to remove a full positive air token.

HOWEVER, I would advise NOT simply removing the top-out bumper with the 180mm Lyrik, since bushing overlap is already minimum at that length, and there's little margin in case there's any extra top-out. What I would do if I were you, is get some 10mm ID 13mm OD silicone tubing and cut that to the same length as the top-out bumper to make a smaller volume top-out bumper. The stock top-out bumper displaces ~4.5cc's of volume. The silicone tube would displace ~1cc of volume. So you'd get most of the negative volume increase with the safety of a mechanical top-out. Make sure to cut some relief shapes into the tube at the top to allow air to move through the ports in the shaft. I would also advise not doing this if you're not currently using any positive air tokens, as doing this will require you to add pressure and you may end up never using all of your travel.


----------



## Phase_ (Nov 29, 2020)

Thanks for the info! I was under the impression that if you use the new footnut with the old sealhead, the footnut might hit the sealhead at bottom out? Have you made sure that is not the case?

I also have a 170mm C1 spring on hand, I wonder if I can replicate your setup with the 170mm shaft, C1 footnut, B1 sealhead and no top-out bumper?


----------



## jaks (Feb 2, 2005)

The red footnut on a 170mm spring is basically the same as a standard 180mm spring. I wouldn’t run either without a mechanical bumper. That silicone tube I mentioned would probably work. Starting with a 180mm spring and adding a tube for mechanical topout, I predict you’ll end up at 176-177mm of exposed stanchions. 

On the issue of interference, I measured my 160mm spring and saw that it had 172mm of clear shaft before the footnut, so I believe I have enough clearance for 168mm of travel with the red footnut. I bottomed it once or twice on trail and didn’t hear any twacks so I think I’m good. YMMV. It would be even more clearance to the seal head if I was just running the 170mm spring to begin with, but my goal was to end up a little over 160mm at pneumatic top out. Didn’t want to be in the high 160s.


----------



## BurkeVT (Jul 11, 2003)

I've read all 437 posts in this thread over the past two nights. I think I'm finally ready to move forward with an air spring upgrade on my 2020 Pike Ultimate 140.
Based on what I've read, I think that I want to stick with the B1 spring, but bump the travel to 150. Still, I'm also a bit curious about the C1 at 140.
Since I'll need a new spring regardless, would it make sense to order a C1 at 150, and then switch out the footnut and seal head on each? If I could simply exchange these parts, I'm hoping I'd end up with a C1 140 and a B1 150.


----------



## Cycle64 (Nov 10, 2004)

2021, what is the reasoning for removing the top out bumper on the new air spring. Seen where it is said it will not damage the fork but now have concerns.


----------



## angieri918 (Apr 1, 2020)

Cycle64 said:


> 2021, what is the reasoning for removing the top out bumper on the new air spring. Seen where it is said it will not damage the fork but now have concerns.


i have a 2019 Pike which was originally 140 but I've since changed it to 160mm. I'm running the C1 and I've removed theblack top out bumper and I haven't noticed anything negative. The fork is setup pretty fast and there's no loud clunks or anything weird coming from the fork on the trail. Hope this helps


----------



## joecx (Aug 17, 2013)

angieri918 said:


> i have a 2019 Pike which was originally 140 but I've since changed it to 160mm. I'm running the C1 and I've removed theblack top out bumper and I haven't noticed anything negative. The fork is setup pretty fast and there's no loud clunks or anything weird coming from the fork on the trail. Hope this helps


At 160mm travel you run the risk of topping out the damper without some kind of mechanical top-out bumper. The pneumatic top your using will work as long as the air is equalizing but if something happened such as a clogged equalizing port your damper could be damaged.


----------



## Doogeman (Jan 9, 2021)

Hey all,

Reading all of these posts with massive interest, seems there is alot of experience.

Having tried both the original Solo air, B1 and C1 setup in a 2016 Pike RCT3 I didnt like any of them. Figured what they say about the C1 system not working in the pre 2018 Pikes might have been true but didn't like the natural drop with the B1 on my bike. Also felt like with 1 token it was hitting a point in travel where it wouldn't move further and I felt over the front.

I sold those and have just bought some 2018 Lyrik RCT3's. I have performed a full lower strip down, plenty of slick honey and a little bit of 5wt oil to lube the airshaft head. I was dissapointed at the initial stiction of the first 20mm. Then realised these are V1 Debonair. They still have a better damper and a larger volume than the Pikes so a better starting place. I then bought a C1 kit and separately a used B1 seal head and footnut.

My question is:

-Are there any differences between B1 and C1 shaft lengths for the same respective travel? As you can buy the C1 kit for the B1 shaft I suspect they are the same but wanted to clarify.

I plan to try the B1 setup without the top out bumper as per Ju Dan's post (#324) Interested to keep that small bump sensitivity without it sinking under its own travel.

I also want to try C1 without the bottom out bumper (#435) which Jaks suggested, I'm guessing this isnt safe without some kind of bottom out bumper.

Lastly, has anyone thought of modifying the C1 kit? The way I see it is by reducing the height of the seal head you will increase negative pressure. You would have to reduce the height of the footnut to also compensate. Thinking if you milled 2mm or 3mm off both there would be no clash at full compression, increase the negative air volume and keep the fork sitting higher than the B1 kit. I have a friend who could do this on a lathe, Im not about to take a hacksaw to it! What do people think?


----------



## Doogeman (Jan 9, 2021)

Ju Dan said:


> Here's an anecdotal assessment from a v3 user, for those that are interested. No graphs here, just my personal take.
> 
> So my fork was originally a 2018 Yari 160mm. I then upgraded to the Charger 2.1 damper and v2 air spring (170mm). So far so awesome. When it came time to do a service I experimented with removing the top out bumper - bad idea. Given my ride weight of around 90kg, I was running 84psi and that gave me around 20% sag; however when I removed the top out bumper I had to run 110psi just to get to sag and the fork felt awful. I immediately pulled the fork apart and went back to stock.
> 
> ...


I have given this a go today, quite impressed! 170mm C1 shaft in a 2018 Lyrik, no top out bumper, 10cc's of 5 wt oil in both legs, no tokens, no LSC, 70 PSI

It was purely a bounce test in the garage so not taken on a trail.

Positives:

1) Smooth from the start, very little stiction compared to the C1 Pike setup I tried on my 2016 Pike.
2) Through a mixture of bouncing (hard, fast, slow, light) and tweaking the rebound I noticed that 90% of the time I was getting full extension. Only on a few occasions was I losing 5mm-ish. This could be sorted by more pressure (I havent kitted up properly so I suspect I will up the pressure)
3) The forks appeared very linear, which some will like.
4) No obvious top-out, maybe the negative chamber is enough to provide pneumatic topout.

Negatives:

1) Not progressive enough for me, I felt it blew through its travel quite easily. I will install a token or two and test. This also might improve with higher pressure.
2) The odd times I didnt get full extension, as Ju Dan said the fork is designed to come back to a particular point.
3) I'm a bit worried about mechanical top out with no protection.

I intend to get a bit of 10mm silicone tubing as per Jaks post. As well as reducing negative volume, hopefully pushing the fork up a tiny bit I hope this will provide a bit of top out protection in the odd chance its needed. Whether this will ruin the small bump sensitivity Ill find out.

I still intend to change the head to the B1 head with the C1 footnut and try it out. I think the B1 without the topout bumper will pull the fork down more.


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

Can anyone point me to the part number for the “B” version of the debonair in 170mm?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Doogeman (Jan 9, 2021)

socalrider77 said:


> Can anyone point me to the part number for the "B" version of the debonair in 170mm?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I couldn't find a B1 shaft anymore now C1 is out. You can use a C1 shaft with B1 sealhead and footnut if you can find one.


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

Doogeman said:


> I couldn't find a B1 shaft anymore now C1 is out. You can use a C1 shaft with B1 sealhead and footnut if you can find one.


That's what I was afraid of. I have the B1 seal head and foot nut on my current fork, so maybe I'll just order the full C1 and swap over the shaft

Is everything above the seal head the same between the 2?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Doogeman (Jan 9, 2021)

socalrider77 said:


> That's what I was afraid of. I have the B1 seal head and foot nut on my current fork, so maybe I'll just order the full C1 and swap over the shaft
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Tbh I used the C1 kit without a top out bumper, nice and plush, sinks a small bit under its own weight but not as much as the B1 and has a pneumatic topout. But having both the C1 and B1 kit means you can chop and change and experiment.


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

Doogeman said:


> Tbh I used the C1 kit without a top out bumper, nice and plush, sinks a small bit under its own weight but not as much as the B1 and has a pneumatic topout. But having both the C1 and B1 kit means you can chop and change and experiment.


I think I found the right part on Amazon for the B1 170mm spring. We'll see when it shows up on Monday. Otherwise I'll test out the C1 shaft + B1 seal and footnut

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

For anyone looking for a 170mm B1 air spring, this is the part number - 00.4019.932.001

Ordered mine from Amazon, they seem to be getting scarce as that’s the only place I could find it 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## hece (Feb 27, 2017)

For Europeans, at least R2-bike and bike-components have them too.


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

hece said:


> For Europeans, at least R2-bike and bike-components have them too.


Yea I saw that too. Probably expensive to North America though! This is what I got sent, I believe it's the B1










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Floor Tom (Aug 2, 2012)

Just to confirm, that is a B1 shaft. C1 has a red foot nut


----------



## Trinimon (Aug 6, 2019)

Floor Tom said:


> Just to confirm, that is a B1 shaft. C1 has a red foot nut


Correct. B1 has the shorter seal and short silver foot nut.


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

Floor Tom said:


> Just to confirm, that is a B1 shaft. C1 has a red foot nut


I was 98% sure, now I'm 100% sure. Thank you for the confirmation!

Now to decide when I want to drop the lowers to install, given I just did a lowers service last week

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

For those who have tried the C1 with the topout bumper removed, how much further does it extend before reaching pneumatic topout? I am thinking of trying it on my 160 Zeb.


----------



## jayblack (Dec 29, 2009)

D(C) said:


> For those who have tried the C1 with the topout bumper removed, how much further does it extend before reaching pneumatic topout? I am thinking of trying it on my 160 Zeb.


It is a no go on the Zeb. Mine is 160mm as well and there is not enough pressure for pneumatic top out. While my friend has his removed on a 170mm lyrik and there was hard top out only when pumping it up and the piston was below the equalising dimple, but after we put some pressure and equalised the chamber the forks did top out pneumatically at around 172mm


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

jayblack said:


> It is a no go on the Zeb. Mine is 160mm as well and there is not enough pressure for pneumatic top out.


Thanks for saving me the trouble. I guess that makes sense; the Zeb has a larger negative spring volume than the Lyrik, so the pressure in the negative pressure ramps up over a longer distance than the Lyrik (it would need to extend further than the the Lyrik to top out pneumatically).

The rubber top-out bumper on the Zeb is also quite short given that it is partially recessed in the lower cup of the plastic spacer on the air spring, so removing the rubber bumper does not give much room before a hard top-out happens.

The other thought I had was making changes to the spacer that sits below the lower sealhead on the Zeb air spring, but you'd need to find a way to make sure things clear at bottom-out. I explained what I mean by this here: Rockshox Debonair 2021


----------



## jayblack (Dec 29, 2009)

No worries, I was curious just like you, because I've done it on my mate's lyrik and I was hoping that it will be the same on the Zeb. You are right about the top out bumper, half of it is not showing up. Btw I have ordered 3d printed spacers in 3 different lengths 10-20-30mm. I hope they survive at least 1 ride each so I can verify which is best.


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

jayblack said:


> No worries, I was curious just like you, because I've done it on my mate's lyrik and I was hoping that it will be the same on the Zeb. You are right about the top out bumper, half of it is not showing up. Btw I have ordered 3d printed spacers in 3 different lengths 10-20-30mm. I hope they survive at least 1 ride each so I can verify which is best.


Awesome! I am excited to hear how that goes.

That spacer probably needs to be long enough so that the stanchion bottoms out before the footnut hits the sealhead. How do you plan to check that?


----------



## jayblack (Dec 29, 2009)

I'm more of a trail and error guy. That means I'm gonna assemble the air spring, pump it up and see how much air shaft is sticking out now vs before. I'll be aiming at no more than 5-6mm difference. Also my fork came with the red sealhead, I've changed it to the silver one that came with the 200hr service kit. So my plan is to cut my extra red spacer once I'm done with testing.


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

I am more thinking about bottom-out clearance than top-out. You can trim the red spacer, but at a certain point, the fork is going to bottom out by the footnut hitting the sealhead, which is probably not ideal.

I took some measurements on an extra 170 mm Zeb air spring I have - see below for the position at bottom-out. With the sealhead slid 170 mm from the top-out bumper, which is the bottom-out position, there is 10 mm of sliding surface left on the air shaft between the footnut and the underside of the sealhead. What that means is that you can trim the red spacer by a maximum of 10 mm before it starts bottoming out by the footnut hitting the sealhead (I'd maybe do a bit less just to add a bit of factor of safety).










Some other ideas I had:

You could gain a bit more bottom-out clearance for the footnut by trimming down the footnut a bit (provided you maintain enough thread depth for the bolt to tighten fully) - this would give a bit more space to trim the red spacer
You could gain more top-out clearance by trimming the orange plastic adjacent to the top-out bumper - along with changes to the red spacer, you might be able to create enough room for pneumatic top-out
You could run the sealhead upside down, which would give more room for the footnut at bottom-out, allowing more trimming of the red spacer. Of course, this would make things worse for top-out, but if you can create enough space for pneumatic top-out by further trimming of the red spacer, this might work.


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

Thinking about this a bit more: I think a good starting point could be to flip the sealhead (which will add negative volume), then cut down the red spacer as much as allowable (which will reduce preload at topout). The fork is going to extend more at topout, so you may need to go one air shaft shorter to preserve axle to crown, or cut down the footnut if possible.

Essentially, you'd be modding the spring to be more like the B1.


----------



## austink26 (Jun 24, 2019)

If anyone is looking to convert their “C” back to a “B1” in a new fork and needs the old seal head and foot nut, dm me. I have 2 of them that I can sell. I definitely prefer the new set up over the old. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Smacktooth (Dec 7, 2020)

Hey Folks, what's the verdict on using the top out bumper or not with the B1 debonair? this is a 150mm airspring going in a 2018 Pike. thanks!


----------



## joecx (Aug 17, 2013)

D(C) said:


> Thinking about this a bit more: I think a good starting point could be to flip the sealhead (which will add negative volume), then cut down the red spacer as much as allowable (which will reduce preload at topout). The fork is going to extend more at topout, so you may need to go one air shaft shorter to preserve axle to crown, or cut down the footnut if possible.
> 
> Essentially, you'd be modding the spring to be more like the B1.


 Bad idea!


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

joecx said:


> Bad idea!


Why's that? (Other than the excessive modifications)


----------



## kimochi (Jan 21, 2019)

Heya wonder if anybody can help. I have a new Lyrik Ultimate with the C1 spring. I wanted to up the travel to 160mm and have 2 options in mind: get the new 160mm C1 spring or get the old B1 spring in 170mm for more plushnessss? Thoughts? Suggestions? What part number if I go 170mm B1? I don't see those in the spare parts catalog for the new lyrik. This is for a 29er fork not 27.5. thanks!


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

kimochi said:


> Heya wonder if anybody can help. I have a new Lyrik Ultimate with the C1 spring. I wanted to up the travel to 160mm and have 2 options in mind: get the new 160mm C1 spring or get the old B1 spring in 170mm for more plushnessss? Thoughts? Suggestions? What part number if I go 170mm B1? I don't see those in the spare parts catalog for the new lyrik.


How do you like the feel of your current air spring?

The B1, with its larger and more pressurized negative spring, is more eager to move into its travel and is therefore run at a higher pressure than the C1 to avoid excessive sag. This higher pressure results in a higher spring rate in the second half of the stroke, past the part of the stroke that is influenced by the negative spring. This higher spring rate can be experienced either as support or harshness, depending on preference.

It's hard to make a recommendation, but it might be worth trying both to see which you prefer. It's not an expensive experiment.


----------



## defiets (Sep 28, 2018)

kimochi said:


> Heya wonder if anybody can help. I have a new Lyrik Ultimate with the C1 spring. I wanted to up the travel to 160mm and have 2 options in mind: get the new 160mm C1 spring or get the old B1 spring in 170mm for more plushnessss? Thoughts? Suggestions? What part number if I go 170mm B1? I don't see those in the spare parts catalog for the new lyrik. This is for a 29er fork not 27.5. thanks!


I have a Pike '14 with a MST tuned Charger1 and a Vorsprung Luftkappe with a B1 debonair. That's absolutel da bomb


----------



## kimochi (Jan 21, 2019)

D(C) said:


> How do you like the feel of your current air spring?
> 
> The B1, with its larger and more pressurized negative spring, is more eager to move into its travel and is therefore run at a higher pressure than the C1 to avoid excessive sag. This higher pressure results in a higher spring rate in the second half of the stroke, past the part of the stroke that is influenced by the negative spring. This higher spring rate can be experienced either as support or harshness, depending on preference.
> 
> It's hard to make a recommendation, but it might be worth trying both to see which you prefer. It's not an expensive experiment.


Okay, I'm up for an experiment. Is the part number *00.4019.932.001*, if you know? I'm not sure if this is for 29 or 27.5. Thanks!


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

kimochi said:


> Okay, I'm up for an experiment. Is the part number *00.4019.932.001*, if you know? I'm not sure if this is for 29 or 27.5. Thanks!


If you scroll up to my previous posts here, or search my history, I said the part number for 170 B1 lyrik 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## kimochi (Jan 21, 2019)

socalrider77 said:


> If you scroll up to my previous posts here, or search my history, I said the part number for 170 B1 lyrik
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I did, but didn't see it was mentioned that it is for 29?


----------



## polentozer (Dec 22, 2020)

I don't think airshafts are wheel size specific.


----------



## kimochi (Jan 21, 2019)

polentozer said:


> I don't think airshafts are wheel size specific.


With my limited knowledge, I think for some, they are. A 150mm shaft for 27.5 is only a 130mm for 29. Doesn't hurt to ask. I bought the shaft as Amazon said it's the last one lol. Thanks, ride on!


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

kimochi said:


> With my limited knowledge, I think for some, they are. A 150mm shaft for 27.5 is only a 130mm for 29. Doesn't hurt to ask. I bought the shaft as Amazon said it's the last one lol. Thanks, ride on!


I believe the original Pike air shafts were wheel size-specific, but I'm quite sure Lyrik ones are not.


----------



## rete (Sep 23, 2019)

kimochi said:


> A 150mm shaft for 27.5 is only a 130mm for 29.


No. The current 35mm Lyrik, Yari, Pike and Revelation CSU and lowers are identical between 27.5" and 29". The position of the axle dropouts vary between wheel sizes. The air shaft is common for both wheel sizes.


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

kimochi said:


> I did, but didn't see it was mentioned that it is for 29?


As others have said, not wheel size specific. Glad you got one!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Rey112 (Jan 1, 2021)

Delete


----------



## kimochi (Jan 21, 2019)

Did the experiment today. Swapped the 150mm C1 shaft to 170mm B1 shaft and voila - what a dreamy suspension. Overall I liked it. However, my rear shock couldn't compensate to how supple the fork is. 170 might be too much for my trail bike, so now I'm looking for a 160mm B1 shaft and cannot find anything online!!!!!!


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

kimochi said:


> Did the experiment today. Swapped the 150mm C1 shaft to 170mm B1 shaft and voila - what a dreamy suspension. Overall I liked it. However, my rear shock couldn't compensate to how supple the fork is. 170 might be too much for my trail bike, so now I'm looking for a 160mm B1 shaft and cannot find anything online!!!!!!


If you get a 160 mm C1 kit, you can swap the sealhead and footnut from the 170 mm B1.


----------



## rete (Sep 23, 2019)

kimochi said:


> Did the experiment today. Swapped the 150mm C1 shaft to 170mm B1 shaft and voila - what a dreamy suspension. Overall I liked it. However, my rear shock couldn't compensate to how supple the fork is. 170 might be too much for my trail bike, so now I'm looking for a 160mm B1 shaft and cannot find anything online!!!!!!


Sounds like you need a new rear shock...it's a never ending spiral.


----------



## kimochi (Jan 21, 2019)

D(C) said:


> If you get a 160 mm C1 kit, you can swap the sealhead and footnut from the 170 mm B1.


Is that all it takes? Hmmm


----------



## kimochi (Jan 21, 2019)

rete said:


> Sounds like you need a new rear shock...it's a never ending spiral.


LOL yea, I was looking at a coil shock yesterday. Too tempting but no, I don't need it!!


----------



## rete (Sep 23, 2019)

kimochi said:


> Is that all it takes? Hmmm


Indeed it is - 8mm allen in the positive seal head, 10mm wrench on the foot nut and disassemble.


----------



## dh-noob (Sep 18, 2007)

I also could not decide which is the better option for me. Owning RS Lyrik Ultimate 2021 150 or 160mm.

Race ready 160lbs
Faster aggressive riding style

Ran my 160mm 2021 airshaft with 76 PSI - 20% SAG and the 160 2020 with 81 PSI and 20% SAG as well. Both times 1 spacer.
Used each time 90% travel.

Looking for:

good bump sensivity
good midstroke support / high front center
good usage of travel

I'm riding a Mondraker Dune setup as mullet. I prefere the „lower" 2020 shaft 

Thank your for your support


----------



## x-force (Jan 20, 2021)

dh-noob said:


> I also could not decide which is the better option for me. Owning RS Lyrik Ultimate 2021 150 or 160mm.
> 
> Race ready 160lbs
> Faster aggressive riding style
> ...


take a 170mm 2020/b1 airshaft to get the same travel as the 160mm c1, while getting all what you are looking for!


----------



## rete (Sep 23, 2019)

x-force said:


> take a 170mm 2020/b1 airshaft to get the same travel as the 160mm c1, while getting all what you are looking for!


People keep saying this but it's just not true. That "extra travel" is only present when the bike is propped up against a wall and you're looking at it, not sitting on it.

Nobody rides with zero % sag. You don't magically lose 5-8mm of travel... With a B1 spring the fork still extends to it's full travel when it needs to - from your sag point outwards to top out as you traverse undulations.


----------



## x-force (Jan 20, 2021)

rete said:


> With a B1 spring the fork still extends to it's full travel when it needs to - from your sag point outwards to top out as you traverse undulations.


sry, but you are wrong.
the b1 never extends to claimed travel, even if the bike is upside down. i own a 160 and a 170 b1 and have measured both


----------



## Yetichon (May 30, 2018)

x-force said:


> sry, but you are wrong.
> the b1 never extends to claimed travel, even if the bike is upside down. i own a 160 and a 170 b1 and have measured both


I can confirm, my 180 B1 Lyrik has more or less 172 mm of exposed stanchions without the weight of the bike.


----------



## rete (Sep 23, 2019)

x-force said:


> sry, but you are wrong.
> the b1 never extends to claimed travel, even if the bike is upside down. i own a 160 and a 170 b1 and have measured both





Yetichon said:


> I can confirm, my 180 B1 Lyrik has more or less 172 mm of exposed stanchions without the weight of the bike.


And this is why we can't have nice things from mass market manufacturers.

Sagged 8mm under it's own weight










Extended full travel hanging from front wheel


----------



## x-force (Jan 20, 2021)

rete said:


> And this is why we can't have nice things from mass market manufacturers.
> 
> Sagged 8mm under it's own weight


you mean because you cant read?
yetichon and i clearly stated, that it does not extend fully when the fork is* unloaded*!

you have not measured anything, get your ruler/caliper and show us!

if you paid attention to the problem you might have noticed that users have measured different travel in unloaded condition.
this may be because rockshox does not place the equalization dimple at the same height due to fluctuation in the production process.


----------



## rete (Sep 23, 2019)

x-force said:


> this may be because rockshox does not place the equalization dimple at the same height due to fluctuation in the production process.


Dimple's in the same place, they don't have manual labour sitting with a hammer and punch.

Steve at Vorsprung will tell you things like "don't buy our corset if you're too fat" or "don't buy our Luftkappe if you're anal about every mm of apparent travel". SRAM can't do that, so they come up with these type of "solutions".

You can also get the B1 spring to always extend to full length. Just inflate it to 30-40psi above your normal pressure. Then you have "full travel", don't you?


----------



## Yetichon (May 30, 2018)

rete said:


> Dimple's in the same place, they don't have manual labour sitting with a hammer and punch.
> 
> Steve at Vorsprung will tell you things like "don't buy our corset if you're too fat" or "don't buy our Luftkappe if you're anal about every mm of apparent travel". SRAM can't do that, so they come up with these type of "solutions".
> 
> You can also get the B1 spring to always extend to full length. Just inflate it to 30-40psi above your normal pressure. Then you have "full travel", don't you?


The dimple is in the same position in the stanchion yes, but the piston is not, it's lower, so your equalization point between the neg and pos chambers is lower, making the fork sucked down. You can extand it to the stated travel if you force it, but it won't stay there.

If you inflate and you cycle the fork, you'll just have more pressure in both the neg and pos chambers, but the equalization point will still be the same.

It just comes back to the initial statement, the B1 with 10 mm more travel than you want is probably the best choice. Very pleased with my 170 mm Lyrik, even tho it has a 180 mm marking on it.


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

We all know that the negative chamber got smaller.
But has anyone ever calculated or measured how much it got smaller in relation to positive chamber which also got reduced?
Positiv chamber is maybe about half a token smaller. How much is that, maybe 3-5% of total volume?
Negative chamber could be the same?

Edit: My estimation would be 30ml B1 and 25ml C1. For sure C1 is 5ml less than B1.


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

Is there anyone who tried B1 with new footnut or 8mm spacer in order to increase negative chamber and go further into equalisation point?


----------



## 294037 (Jun 30, 2006)

x-rated said:


> We all know that the negative chamber got smaller.
> But has anyone ever calculated or measured how much it got smaller in relation to positive chamber which also got reduced?
> Positiv chamber is maybe about half a token smaller. How much is that, maybe 3-5% of total volume?
> Negative chamber could be the same?
> ...


Yeah positive chamber got about 4% smaller by my measurements, neg chamber about 15% smaller. Thats in line with your estimates.

And are you talking about an 8mm spacer under the top out bumper?


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

yes, in order to increase negative chamber


----------



## rete (Sep 23, 2019)

I think your doubly whammy with C1 is a smaller chamber and slightly lower relative negative pressure - since it equalizes at top out instead of 10mm into travel. 

If you add the spacer you'll get a larger negative chamber, but the same lower relative negative pressure.


----------



## 294037 (Jun 30, 2006)

rete said:


> I think your doubly whammy with C1 is a smaller chamber and slightly lower relative negative pressure - since it equalizes at top out instead of 10mm into travel.
> 
> If you add the spacer you'll get a larger negative chamber, but the same lower relative negative pressure.


Yup, the neg chamber volume is set at the dimple so it won't be any different with a spacer, you will just have a smaller compression ratio and some preload at top out. Sag would be the same though, as in overall height.


----------



## Doogeman (Jan 9, 2021)

x-rated said:


> Is there anyone who tried B1 with new footnut or 8mm spacer in order to increase negative chamber and go further into equalisation point?


Yeh, I have been testing spacers under the top out bumper, currently at 10mm made out of a thin bit of silicone tube but going to try 8mm made from a UFO shaped plastic bit cut off from the original Solo Air sealhead. I hope this will decrease negative volume a little and increase negative pressure, currently I think its theres too much negative volume for how much positive volume is there. From what I have experienced so far though its ok, generally returns better than the B1 shaft but doesnt feel as good. However, I know my Charger damper needs a bleed as the shaft is not returning properly so until thats done the forks wont feel great whatever the airshaft is doing.


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

I meant using +10mm longer shaft and decrease travel by using 8mm spacer. Effectively increasing negative chamber and decreasing positive chamber.
Check out other solutions like everflow or chamber of Boxxer debonair.


----------



## Doogeman (Jan 9, 2021)

x-rated said:


> I meant using +10mm longer shaft and decrease travel by using 8mm spacer. Effectively increasing negative chamber and decreasing positive chamber.
> Check out other solutions like everflow or chamber of Boxxer debonair.


Ah ok, I am using the C1 footnut with the B1 sealhead and a spacer. I would be intrerested to hear about the above though.


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

Should be the same result, not sure if 10mm spacer is already too much.


----------



## defiets (Sep 28, 2018)

x-rated said:


> Is there anyone who tried B1 with new footnut or 8mm spacer in order to increase negative chamber and go further into equalisation point?


To increase the negative chamber you need a Luftkappe.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

x-rated said:


> Is there anyone who tried B1 with new footnut or 8mm spacer in order to increase negative chamber and go further into equalisation point?


Footnut height doesn't change chamber size. It only changes ride height. It's like making your fork a few mm longer.


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

why are you thinking this? See right most shaft, it has biggest negative volume, also due to longer foot nut.









If old foot nut is used with 8mm spacer, ride height will be even shorter. So 170 shaft gives 162mm travel. The only reason not to increase negative chamber is limited space in my opinion.

It would be even possible to use +20mm longer airshaft with 20mm spacer and attach schrader valve on the foot nut so have a independant negative pressure in chamber.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

x-rated said:


> why are you thinking this? See right most shaft, it has biggest negative volume, also due to longer foot nut.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The negative chamber size is set by the notch position whic doesn't change and the cup shape which does. The picture above is misleading because the coil negative isn't compressed but the air negative is shown compressed. The far left shaft also rests neutral before top-out.

Changing the shaft foot has no impact on the notch position or cup shape. Therefore it has no change to negative chamber size.

Here is a drawing which shows exactly the differences when installed: http://www.shockcraft.co.nz/media/pdfs/Shockcraft Debonair Comparison - Rev 0 - Copy.PDF

This drawing shows the shaft heights when equalised: https://shockcraft.co.nz/media/pdfs/Shockcraft Debonair Comparison - Rev 1.PDF

Taken from my post here: Rockshox Debonair 2021


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

You are confusing pressure and size, its not the same.
The first 8mm in stock B1 are like dead travel because there is no relevant spring force.
That is what RS was adressing, except they decreased negative chamber because there was no choice, they had to maintain that users can still install max. nr. of tokens and wanted to optimize end compression.
Changing foot nut has of course no impact on notch position as the position itself doesnt define size of negative volume.
Pressure equalization is "8mm later" on stock B1, which alters pressure in initial travel, thats the difference.
If you use longer foot nut or +10mm longer shaft on B1 with 8mm spacer, it is effectivly only 2mm difference but increases neg. chamber by diameter 35mm x height 8mm (minus shaft diameter).

And as i said already, it is also possible to skip the dimple at all by using even longer shafts.

Check out Boxxer negative air chamber, it is huge because there is room for it.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

x-rated said:


> You are confusing pressure and size, its not the same.
> The first 8mm in stock B1 are like dead travel because there is no relevant spring force.
> That is what RS was adressing, except they decreased negative chamber because there was no choice, they had to maintain that users can still install max. nr. of tokens.
> Changing foot nut has of course no impact on notch position as the position itself doesnt define size of negative volume.
> ...


I am not confusing anything. This drawing has positions taken direct from these four spring variations: https://shockcraft.co.nz/media/pdfs/Shockcraft Debonair Comparison - Rev 1.PDF

Changing a shaft foot does nothing but change ride height. There is 5mm difference in ride height between a B1 and C1 shaft. C1 rides higher. 8mm is from the difference in shaft feet, there is 3mm the other way in final equalised position.


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

Are you missing the fact this needs also additional 8mm spacer between seal head and piston?


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

x-rated said:


> Are you missing the fact this needs also additional 8mm spacer between seal head and piston?


No. Because it doesn't need any spacer.
The C1 is intended to be preloaded against the top-out bumper to stop heavy e-bike sagging under their own weight.


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

Not on the C1, on the B1. 
If you install longer foot nut on B1 without spacer it has only 8mm more travel.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

x-rated said:


> Not on the C1, on the B1.
> If you install longer foot nut on B1 without spacer it has only 8mm more travel.


If you install a longer foot-nut on the B1 it will hit the seal-head at full compression.

There is no need for a spacer on the B1. I have no idea what you are on about.


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

Dougal said:


> If you install a longer foot-nut on the B1 it will hit the seal-head at full compression.


have you tried?



> There is no need for a spacer on the B1. I have no idea what you are on about.


imagine offsetting the whole thing by 8mm


----------



## cxfahrer (Jun 20, 2008)

Just measure the lenght of the shaft moving.

Better than installing a longer foot nut on B1 is taking the shaft and piston off an A1.

Then drill small holes into the shaft from the side (or from the top, if you like it different - watch out for the screw, though!) and seal it on the end. You can leave away the bumpstop rubber. Replace it with a smaller one, if you dont like that clunking noise.


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

Thats what i already did before DebonAir





Radtechnik für Profis - http://radtechnik.2ix.de







radtechnik.2ix.de


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

x-rated said:


> have you tried?


Yes. I have even put the drawing showing that in front of you about 3 times now: https://shockcraft.co.nz/media/pdfs/Shockcraft Debonair Comparison - Rev 1.PDF

There is less than 170mm shaft available on a B1 shaft with the C1 footnut. 176-8 = 168mm.



x-rated said:


> imagine offsetting the whole thing by 8mm


An 8mm negative spacer doesn't offset anything.


----------



## defiets (Sep 28, 2018)

cxfahrer said:


> Just measure the lenght of the shaft moving.
> 
> Better than installing a longer foot nut on B1 is taking the shaft and piston off an A1.
> 
> Then drill small holes into the shaft from the side (or from the top, if you like it different - watch out for the screw, though!) and seal it on the end. You can leave away the bumpstop rubber. Replace it with a smaller one, if you dont like that clunking noise.


This sounds like a Luftkappe..


----------



## rete (Sep 23, 2019)

defiets said:


> This sounds like a Luftkappe..


It's just a homemade version of Debonair that adds the shaft volume to negative air. The Luftkappe also has negative air volume inside the piston itself.


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

my latest shaft


----------



## rete (Sep 23, 2019)

x-rated said:


> my latest shaft


Interesting.

I'd use something smaller than the two large rubber bumpers that steal a lot of volume....

What's used for the negative fill schrader? Something like this?


----------



## defiets (Sep 28, 2018)

O it’s a schrader, like a dual air from the good old days


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)




----------



## nikon255 (Dec 27, 2015)

What about equalizing notch in the stanchion?


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

nikon255 said:


> What about equalizing notch in the stanchion?


nothing, it will be skipped


----------



## nikon255 (Dec 27, 2015)

Ahh not exactly skipped. Piston wont go past the notch. It became dual air. Curious about your feeling on initial sensivity vs progression. I hope progression wont be too high.


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

It goes past notch during installation but doesnt return. The rubber i left also a bit bigger in case volume is too big.
Its also possible to fine tune negativ chamber like on Solo Air.


----------



## rete (Sep 23, 2019)

Negative from that setup cannot be too big. It's still small, compared to a Vorsprung Secus, or even a Luftkappe.

Intend Bicycle Components view on the subject.


----------



## CaveGiant (Aug 21, 2007)

Great idea.


----------



## romphaia (Sep 7, 2014)

x-rated said:


> my latest shaft


It's a pretty small increase, but it may be worth it for the cost. I'd replace the rubber bumpers with a smaller, rigid spacer + a thick oring to gain more volume.


----------



## wschruba (Apr 13, 2012)

@Dougal since Vorsprung is making a defacto B sealhead, any thoughts on using their footnut with a pressure-rated sleeve to make our own Debonair "B"?


----------



## Bafo808 (Feb 6, 2021)

romphaia said:


> It's a pretty small increase, but it may be worth it for the cost. I'd replace the rubber bumpers with a smaller, rigid spacer + a thick oring to gain more volume.


Yep, even a silicon hose with some carvings at both ends will work fine!


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

romphaia said:


> It's a pretty small increase, but it may be worth it for the cost. I'd replace the rubber bumpers with a smaller, rigid spacer + a thick oring to gain more volume.


it is +20mm longer


----------



## CaveGiant (Aug 21, 2007)

Thanks for some great ideas!

Skimming this thread previously got my two brain cells pretty fired up.

So this is what I've done.

I'm using a lyrik ultimate at 130mm travel.

Seeing how the B2 spring performs compared to my Dorado showed a ton of room for improvement.

My idea (which after fully reading this thread was not as original as I'd thought).

Space the negative chamber on my spare 170mm by 40mm pushing the piston past the equalisation port.

Drill out the foot nut and and machine a *schrader** style foot bolt to fill the secondary chamber manually.

Modify my Dorado program to calculate the spring curves for forks with an equalisation port.

Compare the calculated new vs old.

It looks good.

Am finishing the job tonight, so hope it's good!

Pic 1: draft footbolt. I've got the final one to finish tonight.
Pic 2: middle is showing how I'm modding the 170 to be a super 130.
Pic 3 sums and the stock curve
Pic 4 predicted final curve

*thanks Rete


----------



## rete (Sep 23, 2019)

CaveGiant said:


> View attachment 1932058
> 
> 
> Drill out the foot nut and and machine a presta style foot bolt to fill the secondary chamber manually.


Presta?


----------



## CaveGiant (Aug 21, 2007)

OK schrader... Typing in car. Expect typos!

It's built.


----------



## rete (Sep 23, 2019)

CaveGiant said:


> OK schrader... Typing in car. Expect typos!
> 
> It's built.
> 
> View attachment 1932068


You've omitted your parts list. This is one post where pictures alone just won't cut it...


----------



## CaveGiant (Aug 21, 2007)

rete said:


> You've omitted your parts list. This is one post where pictures alone just won't cut it...


Parts list is quite cheap if you have a good parts draw.

170mm b spring that came with the fork. I

40mm spacer, is cut down from a 100mm spacer from my Dorado.

The foot bolt:

Ebay.
2 GENUINE SCHRADER TYRE VALVE 1/8" CAR TRUCK MOTORCYCLE WHEEL AIR TANK DRAIN TAP

Turned the oversized thread down on a lathe to 8mm, then cut m8x1.25 with a die.

Total spend: £4


----------



## rete (Sep 23, 2019)

CaveGiant said:


> Parts list is quite cheap if you have a good parts draw.
> 
> 170mm b spring that came with the fork. I
> 
> ...


It's buying the lathe that can push the cost a little over a tenner....










I have 4 old RockShox 32mm dual air springs lying around, as well as a sizeable collection of 35mm pre-debonair and Lyrik + Pike debonair air shafts of varying lengths. I think the lower Schrader assembly in the old dual air springs is already threaded to M8 x 1.25 - but it takes filing some flats to disassemble one.

Guess it's almost time to create an all-Rockshox parts bin 35mm dual air franken spring...


----------



## Rick Draper (Dec 1, 2009)

rete said:


> It's buying the lathe that can push the cost a little over a tenner....
> 
> View attachment 1932081
> 
> ...


That air spring pictured has the foot nut assemble crimped in place.


----------



## rete (Sep 23, 2019)

Rick Draper said:


> That air spring pictured has the foot nut assemble crimped in place.


Thanks, I have (in dual air) a couple of 2010 Pike/Revelation and a 2012 Revelation air spring with that crimp band, and a ~2012 SID shaft that I think was one piece.

I'll sacrifice one of the 2010 shafts to destructive disassembly to see what's going on in there and what, if any, die-cut threading is possible.


----------



## CaveGiant (Aug 21, 2007)

rete said:


> It's buying the lathe that can push the cost a little over a tenner....
> 
> View attachment 1932081
> 
> ...


I just sheared the damn screw I machined. "let's do it up extra tight to make sure it's airtight" Fecking idiot.

I have a dual air assembly on my bench.... What are you suggesting raper?

I've also found a supplier for the bolt.

Not cheap though.

Anyone interested if I buy a few?

Moq of £125!


----------



## CaveGiant (Aug 21, 2007)

While I'm here has anyone got any accurate data on the size of the negative spring? 
I've done some approximations in my calcs I'd prefer not too. 

I've also not modelled the lowers, anyone got any data on those? 

Final hard question. 

What is the ideal spring curve? 

Everyone seems to calculate a spring isothermally, but surely we should be taking into account compressive heating effects? Standard adiabatic and hybrid modelling give results that do not seem close to reality!


----------



## rete (Sep 23, 2019)

CaveGiant said:


> I just sheared the damn screw I machined. "let's do it up extra tight to make sure it's airtight" Fecking idiot.
> 
> I have a dual air assembly on my bench.... What are you suggesting raper?


Well, that's probably one reason why SRAM crimped the useful end of the dual air shaft - the danger of exceeding a few N.m with thin-walled nickel-plated brass after a bunch of sharp stress risers were added during threading.

But regardless of the crimp, here you have a Ø 10mm hollow air shaft with a useful looking piece protruding at it's end, that's of unknown wall-thickness and structure where it's installed inside the shaft.










***_some disassembly with a can opener required_


----------



## CaveGiant (Aug 21, 2007)

well the side by side makes it clear what I'm doing.








New screw arrived this morning and all is fitted.

Small test this morning and it seems to do exactly what I expected. 
Off the top feels as plush as before. 
However instead of diving through the mid it smoothly ramps up through travel.

You can also precisely set how much travel is eaten by the B1 spring.

Before mods I was losing 17mm.
Setting to zero gives a slight top out noise as the bumper hits, setting it 5mm in to travel fixes this.

Seems a win so far. Time will tell =)


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

Very cool! 

Maybe this has been discussed, but it looks like you’ve also substantially reduced the positive volume. Any issues using full travel? Did you remove any tokens to compensate?

How much additional positive pressure are you running to account for the impact of the larger negative spring?


----------



## CaveGiant (Aug 21, 2007)

D(C) said:


> Very cool!
> 
> Maybe this has been discussed, but it looks like you've also substantially reduced the positive volume. Any issues using full travel? Did you remove any tokens to compensate?
> 
> How much additional positive pressure are you running to account for the impact of the larger negative spring?


Hi,

I removed spacers to maintain positive spring size.









Post mod 60psi primary, 65 negative.









Pre mod 50 psi.

Orange "curve" is 30lb linear with - 5mm preload.

Due to my cat running away this morning instead of 4 days in Wales testing it I'm cat searching =(

Initial testing on the street suggests it feels pretty similar, just a bit less divey. The ramp up before bottom feels a lot better.

Can- woot-just found ?.

We have 3 days to test it in the mountains!


----------



## CaveGiant (Aug 21, 2007)

Got my cat back!

She's diabetic so her escaping is BAD.


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

Some images popped up on another site showing a new air top cap on a Zeb. What's Rockshox up to?


----------



## rete (Sep 23, 2019)

D(C) said:


> Some images popped up on another site showing a new air top cap on a Zeb. What's Rockshox up to?


They've regularly changed cosmetic air cap design since air caps were a thing. The last revision was a few years ago with the spline design that uses a cassette tool - maybe this is just another periodic update.


----------



## CaveGiant (Aug 21, 2007)

Well we got 3 days of varied and at points comically technical terrain to test the fork on. 

The fork "felt amazing". 

Wifey is rarely complimentary on new kit, so this was high praise. 

It feels seriously plush without the travel loss or mid stroke dive of the B spring. 

The reason I did this mod was the embarrassingly poor midstroke dive on the stock fork. 

This has now become an amazing piece of kit =) 

It's surprisingly easy to do!


----------



## rete (Sep 23, 2019)

CaveGiant said:


> It's surprisingly easy to do!*


*Small Print: Lathe required



CaveGiant said:


> The fork "felt amazing".


Good to hear.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

CaveGiant said:


> Well we got 3 days of varied and at points comically technical terrain to test the fork on.
> 
> The fork "felt amazing".
> 
> ...


Lyriks aren't tapered internally right? I did a similar extension years ago on a Manitou Mattoc. Felt amazing on the bench for the first ~130mm and then I hit the internal taper at the top.
I was going to recreate it with a straight wall Comp stanchion but never got around to it.


----------



## rete (Sep 23, 2019)

Dougal said:


> Lyriks aren't tapered internally right?


It starts tapering at ~66mm below the top of the stanchion..


----------



## CaveGiant (Aug 21, 2007)

rete said:


> *Small Print: Lathe required
> 
> Good to hear.


I found a place that sells the adapter. 
So my wife's fork is part lyrik, part dorado and part Vespa!


----------



## CaveGiant (Aug 21, 2007)

Dougal said:


> Lyriks aren't tapered internally right? I did a similar extension years ago on a Manitou Mattoc. Felt amazing on the bench for the first ~130mm and then I hit the internal taper at the top.
> I was going to recreate it with a straight wall Comp stanchion but never got around to it.


I didn't know about, or notice the taper.....

Am I right in assuming from what you guys are saying that the wall thickness starts to increase near the top?

The air piston could jam if it moves up the tubing too far?

The piston doesn't go any further up the tube as the travel reduction matches the negative chamber increase.

The key part of the design is reducing travel on a stock shaft. If the stock shaft fits, this will.

I wonder how far I can push it though....

You need an air tight fit to pass the equalisation point, but could use reduced bore space above, a bit like luftkappe.

Swapping the spring/damper leg could allow you to increase the piston height any amount....


----------



## CaveGiant (Aug 21, 2007)

Has anyone measured the volume of the lowers?

That's the data I'm missing to calc properly.

Now I've got positive and negative mapped pretty well, it's just lowers that's left. 


Edit: I've just thought of an embarrassingly easy way to measure the negative spring volume. As it's dual air, measure the pressure at two known points, basic simultaneous equation and you get the volume. Why did I not think of that earlier!


----------



## rete (Sep 23, 2019)

CaveGiant said:


> I didn't know about, or notice the taper.....
> 
> Am I right in assuming from what you guys are saying that the wall thickness starts to increase near the top?


It does, yes.



CaveGiant said:


> The air piston could jam if it moves up the tubing too far?
> 
> The piston doesn't go any further up the tube as the travel reduction matches the negative chamber increase.
> 
> The key part of the design is reducing travel on a stock shaft. If the stock shaft fits, this will.


For general interest, the Lyrik's longest air shaft, 180mm, has 105mm clearance from top of piston to top of the stanchion at bottom out. In round numbers that's 40mm of straight and ~65mm of tapered bore left.


----------



## rete (Sep 23, 2019)

CaveGiant said:


> I've also found a supplier for the bolt.
> 
> Not cheap though.
> 
> ...





CaveGiant said:


> I found a place that sells the adapter.
> So my wife's fork is part lyrik, part dorado and part Vespa!


Ah, this is what you were referring to. So you have a Vespa's tubeless valve - like this?


----------



## CaveGiant (Aug 21, 2007)

That's the one, well found. It took me AGES. 

I guess knowing to search for vespa probably made it easier!


----------



## CaveGiant (Aug 21, 2007)

Scooter centre was the £125 moq. 

Ve UK was the cheapest with stock. 

There was a place in Ireland too, but I bought their last one.


----------



## rete (Sep 23, 2019)

CaveGiant said:


> I guess knowing to search for vespa probably made it easier!


That hint helped - the gargler spat out that link searching for _vespa M8x1.25 schrader_


----------



## CaveGiant (Aug 21, 2007)

Scooter centre was given to me by Google picture search. I then looked up the manufacturer and distributors gave me the one in Ireland. Shop in Ireland gave the alternative sku, which led to VE UK. 

Total faf, but the results are great. I can't stress enough how much better wifey is riding since the mod. It doesn't look that dramatic on paper, but the fork visibly works better.


----------



## rete (Sep 23, 2019)

CaveGiant said:


> Scooter centre was given to me by Google picture search. I then looked up the manufacturer and distributors gave me the one in Ireland. Shop in Ireland gave the alternative sku, which led to VE UK.
> 
> Total faf, but the results are great. I can't stress enough how much better wifey is riding since the mod. It doesn't look that dramatic on paper, but the fork visibly works better.


If you're in Australia a Schrader with M8x1.25 is no problem. Looks very similar to the Vespa's part as well.


----------



## CaveGiant (Aug 21, 2007)

rete said:


> If you're in Australia a Schrader with M8x1.25 is no problem. Looks very similar to the Vespa's part as well.
> 
> View attachment 1933228


I found the original factory that made it, all the same part and sold for 10p a piece. Unfortunately the moq was in the thousands!


----------



## JB450 (Mar 31, 2019)

rete said:


> If you're in Australia a Schrader with M8x1.25 is no problem. Looks very similar to the Vespa's part as well.
> 
> View attachment 1933228


Hahahaha, I was going to post the same thing.

I'm from Australia and used those ones for my diy runt/chickadeehill unit I made.

Sent from my INE-LX2 using Tapatalk


----------



## rete (Sep 23, 2019)

CaveGiant said:


> I found the original factory that made it, all the same part and sold for 10p a piece. Unfortunately the moq was in the thousands!


Was that on Alibaba?


----------



## spo0n (Nov 7, 2020)

JB450 said:


> Hahahaha, I was going to post the same thing.
> 
> I'm from Australia and used those ones for my diy runt/chickadeehill unit I made.
> 
> Sent from my INE-LX2 using Tapatalk


do tell?


----------



## CaveGiant (Aug 21, 2007)

DIY runt. I was also considering that... Information please!


----------



## JB450 (Mar 31, 2019)

spo0n said:


> do tell?





CaveGiant said:


> DIY runt. I was also considering that... Information please!


I've got a 2018 35mm Revelation on my Smuggler. The fork worked OK, but I did change out the MOCO damper for a take-off charger RC, definitely made it better. But I was keen to give a 3 chamber air spring a go.

Used the topcap from the MOCO damper to make life easier. Machined some aluminium round bar as the chamber.

The moco topcap has a hole in it already, so I just milled the hole into more of an oval shape to allow for the 2 schraders valves.

LH thread to screw onto the topcap.

Delrin IFP.

2 M8x1.25 schrader valves with the hex flats machined down.

Circlip groove in the bottom.

And voila a diy runt called the JBAC.
























Sent from my INE-LX2 using Tapatalk


----------



## spo0n (Nov 7, 2020)

IFP custom or from a rear shock?


----------



## JB450 (Mar 31, 2019)

spo0n said:


> IFP custom or from a rear shock?


Just a custom one.

Basically I made the JBAC then turned an IFP up to suit the ID of the chamber

Sent from my INE-LX2 using Tapatalk


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

Does anyone know if the Blackbox Zeb and Boxxer that are seen on some pro bikes include any air spring updates, or just a new damper?


----------



## ocnLogan (Aug 15, 2018)

D(C) said:


> Does anyone know if the Blackbox Zeb and Boxxer that are seen on some pro bikes include any air spring updates, or just a new damper?


No idea on the air spring, but wouldn't be surprised if there was another iteration.

The spy shots show new damper top caps with "Charger 3" engraved on the top cap. So it seems a new damper is confirmed for sometime soonish.

Now, how different charger 3 is from 2.1&#8230; that's anyone's guess.


----------



## spo0n (Nov 7, 2020)

I know a guy who met a guy who knows a guy... anyway, new Zeb air spring soon apparently


----------



## Kiwibaconator (Jul 7, 2021)

Charger 3. Damping further reduced to a single 0.05 shim. Spare parts supply limited to complete dampers.


----------



## ocnLogan (Aug 15, 2018)

Kiwibaconator said:


> Charger 3. Damping further reduced to a single 0.05 shim. Spare parts supply limited to complete dampers.


I wouldn't be surprised.

Although, at least this time they did a full number iteration again. So hopefully its a bit more different than the current charger 2.1 was from the charger 2.


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

spo0n said:


> I know a guy who met a guy who knows a guy... anyway, new Zeb air spring soon apparently


Cool. It will be interesting to see what they come up with for the Zeb. I have one and like it quite a bit, but it came out in a few comparative reviews as both firmer off the top and less supportive mid-stroke than the 38. I wouldn't be surprised to see them try to address that, and the use of a spacer beneath the air spring seal head in the current version gives them some real-estate to play with if tweaking the negative spring.


----------



## EJ_92606 (Jul 11, 2004)

I wonder if the Charger 3 can be retrofitted into forks that have Charger 2.1?


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

EJ_92606 said:


> I wonder if the Charger 3 can be retrofitted into forks that have Charger 2.1?


RS has typically been quite good about making things backwards compatible.


----------



## ocnLogan (Aug 15, 2018)

Yeah, they seem to be pretty good at being backwards compatible as much as they can. So I'd assume/hope it it will work in anything that the charger 2/2.1 works in at the very least.

Curious what changes they make though. As by all accounts the 2.1 was better than the 2.0 (ie, LSC actually kind of worked), but I'm not sure most would call it a "great' damper.


----------



## Kiwibaconator (Jul 7, 2021)

ocnLogan said:


> Yeah, they seem to be pretty good at being backwards compatible as much as they can. So I'd assume/hope it it will work in anything that the charger 2/2.1 works in at the very least.
> 
> Curious what changes they make though. As by all accounts the 2.1 was better than the 2.0 (ie, LSC actually kind of worked), but I'm not sure most would call it a "great' damper.


Doubt you'll see a Charger 3 for the non-boost Pike.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

Kiwibaconator said:


> Doubt you'll see a Charger 3 for the non-boost Pike.


I've seen all sorts of stuff kludged together that shouldn't be! The Charger 1 is a good damper chassis, just the stock tunes sucked. I like the Charger 1 more than Charger 2/2.1.


----------



## rete (Sep 23, 2019)

CaveGiant said:


> Scooter centre was the £125 moq.
> 
> Ve UK was the cheapest with stock.
> 
> There was a place in Ireland too, but I bought their last one.


Well f*ck.

Came back from vacation, saw these were delivered from VE UK in the meantime and figured I have a quick conversion left to do.

But nope. Lower bolt on top, Vespa Schrader from VE UK at bottom. Threaded end is too short and it barely protrudes through the mounting hole in the lowers.

Is this just the VE UK part that's too short, or how, what...?

I was going to run two of these in mongrel air springs with Luftkappe pistons held in place with a hollow bolt and DebonAir sealhead but - for now - no dual air DebonAir for me yet.


----------



## CaveGiant (Aug 21, 2007)

I use the original screw to pull the fork together, then replaced with the shorter vee. 

I can't remember how many threads engage, but I measured it and was OK.


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

Few months back i enlargened negative chamber and converted to "DualAir" on b1 but noticed on lower pressures around 70psi in positive chamber, i cannot put same pressure in negative chamber because the fork will not extend to its full length. On higher pressure no problem though.


----------



## romphaia (Sep 7, 2014)

That's really weird. Did you find the cause? Maybe something to do with the balancing port? At lower pressures the top-out bumper may be too strong and keep the piston seal above the port...


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

I do not use balancing port anymore.


----------



## romphaia (Sep 7, 2014)

x-rated said:


> my latest shaft


Too much rubber, as I already said... the fork extension will vary with pressure. At lower pressure the bumpers won't be fully compressed. Actually I'd be curious to see how they look when compressed...


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

I do not think the rubber will be compressed in extended state.


----------



## romphaia (Sep 7, 2014)

x-rated said:


> I do not think the rubber will be compressed in extended state.


The only way to know is to remove all air and measure the full extension.


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

Without air 164mm, pretty much same as with 87/80psi.


----------



## tastik (Aug 25, 2021)

Anyone with thoughts on B1 airspring vs C1 airspring with topout bumper cut in half or removed to increase negative volume?


----------



## defiets (Sep 28, 2018)

Buy a Luftkappe 😉


----------



## JB450 (Mar 31, 2019)

tastik said:


> Anyone with thoughts on B1 airspring vs C1 airspring with topout bumper cut in half or removed to increase negative volume?


I'm running the C1 with a diy runt.

I cut the bumper in half, works well.


----------



## x-rated (Jan 1, 2019)

Wont this extend travel?


----------



## JB450 (Mar 31, 2019)

x-rated said:


> Wont this extend travel?


Doesn't appear to have increased.

Does "sag" at topout/rest ever so slightly (1-2mm)


----------



## tastik (Aug 25, 2021)

JB450 said:


> Doesn't appear to have increased.
> 
> Does "sag" at topout/rest ever so slightly (1-2mm)


I see people who prefer C1 due to riding higher in travel/more poppy, being less harsh in mid-stroke (due to lower pressure), but with worse small bump. And those who prefer B1 due to better small bump, and better mid support (due to higher pressure). Would modifying the topout on the C1 be a compromise between the 2 and overall be better than the 2 or are there some bad qualities to doing this? Or would the modification just turn it into a B1 with a smaller positive chamber (equivalent to adding spacer to B1, since C1 reduces both positive and negative and bumper modification restores at least partially the negative volume)?


----------



## spokeywheeler (Dec 1, 2006)

You can just run the B1 with a longer shaft, then you get all of the advantages of the B1 without the main concern of losing travel. For my bikes if I want 150 in the front, I run a 160mm air shaft with the B1 seal and foot nut. I get a full 150, probably more like 154mm and I get the bigger negative volume.


----------



## JB450 (Mar 31, 2019)

tastik said:


> I see people who prefer C1 due to riding higher in travel/more poppy, being less harsh in mid-stroke (due to lower pressure), but with worse small bump. And those who prefer B1 due to better small bump, and better mid support (due to higher pressure). Would modifying the topout on the C1 be a compromise between the 2 and overall be better than the 2 or are there some bad qualities to doing this? Or would the modification just turn it into a B1 with a smaller positive chamber (equivalent to adding spacer to B1, since C1 reduces both positive and negative and bumper modification restores at least partially the negative volume)?


The main reason I'm running the C1 is because it apparently works better with the DSD Runt.

Although my diy runt isn't the same as the DSD version, I have tried both B1 and C1 with it and I agree with Diaz. C1 suits the runt better.


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

JB450 said:


> The main reason I'm running the C1 is because it apparently works better with the DSD Runt.
> 
> Although my diy runt isn't the same as the DSD version, I have tried both B1 and C1 with it and I agree with Diaz. C1 suits the runt better.


Is the DIY runt just the bumper cut in half or something else as well?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## JB450 (Mar 31, 2019)

socalrider77 said:


> Is the DIY runt just the bumper cut in half or something else as well?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


It's a separate air chamber with an IFP.

So 2 different airspring pressures to allow infinite adjustment.









Rockshox Debonair 2021


Scooter centre was the £125 moq. Ve UK was the cheapest with stock. There was a place in Ireland too, but I bought their last one.




www.mtbr.com


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

JB450 said:


> It's a separate air chamber with an IFP.
> 
> So 2 different airspring pressures to allow infinite adjustment.
> 
> ...


Nice, thanks!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## slipperyb (Sep 27, 2009)

Anyone know the part number for 150 C1 airshaft? I'm talking just the shaft for 150mm, not the whole $42 airspring assembly.


----------



## evernorth (Apr 13, 2020)

You can not buy the part only. It's not listed in the RS parts catalog. You can only buy the complete assembly or the upgrade kit which contains the bottom stud and seal head. 

Gesendet von meinem Pixel 5 mit Tapatalk


----------



## slipperyb (Sep 27, 2009)

evernorth said:


> You can not buy the part only. It's not listed in the RS parts catalog. You can only buy the complete assembly or the upgrade kit which contains the bottom stud and seal head.
> 
> Gesendet von meinem Pixel 5 mit Tapatalk


Fair enough, thanks. Could you buy just air shafts for the older versions? I swore there were just air shafts being sold at one point. Oh well.


----------



## Doogeman (Jan 9, 2021)

I gotta be honest, I played around with so many combos of B1 and C1 sealheads and footnuts, spacers, bumpers, etc and settled on just deciding to go for a 180mm shaft for 170mm travel. 

One thing intrigued me though, I would assume the uppers are the same per model of fork meaning the dimple is in the same place. Depending on what length of travel you have it must affect the feel of the fork. Also, if we had the measurement of the dimple in relation to where the sealhead sits you could accurately tune the length.


----------



## CaveGiant (Aug 21, 2007)

Doogeman said:


> I gotta be honest, I played around with so many combos of B1 and C1 sealheads and footnuts, spacers, bumpers, etc and settled on just deciding to go for a 180mm shaft for 170mm travel.
> 
> One thing intrigued me though, I would assume the uppers are the same per model of fork meaning the dimple is in the same place. Depending on what length of travel you have it must affect the feel of the fork. Also, if we had the measurement of the dimple in relation to where the sealhead sits you could accurately tune the length.


Spot on.

This is why I converted mine to dual Air. The dimple was always a bodge to make things easier.


----------



## Doogeman (Jan 9, 2021)

CaveGiant said:


> Spot on.
> 
> This is why I converted mine to dual Air. The dimple was always a bodge to make things easier.


Intrigued, so how does that work? I've often thought having sealed separate positive and negative air spaces could make things easier to tune properly.


----------



## CaveGiant (Aug 21, 2007)

Doogeman said:


> Intrigued, so how does that work? I've often thought having sealed separate positive and negative air spaces could make things easier to tune properly.


Scroll back in this thread.


----------



## Doogeman (Jan 9, 2021)

CaveGiant said:


> Scroll back in this thread.


Interesting, so effectively seal off positive air leaking into negative chamber through the dimple by increasing length so it never drops below the dimple. Using a B1 hollow shaft and being able to fill up the negative air volume via a modified air valve.

Related question, how does the air leak through the airshaft into the negative area?

I did see some crazy European chap drill a tiny hole in the shaft to give the air somewhere to go.


----------



## Bafo808 (Feb 6, 2021)

There are two ports under the piston (not the best quality image to show), and two holes at the top of the shaft that allows the "air exchange"


----------



## CaveGiant (Aug 21, 2007)

Part of the debonair system is utilising the hollow shaft as negative air space. The hole is predrilled! 

It should also be possible to swap fork legs. Fit the damper in the dimple leg (where the dimple will do nothing) and put the air spring in the former damper leg. This means that you don't need to reduce travel. 
I've not tried that because I wanted to reduce travel, but it should be fine.


----------



## trel (Aug 7, 2018)

slipperyb said:


> Could you buy just air shafts for the older versions?


Solo Air shafts are still around, mostly on clearance. IMO the only reason to get one for a debonair fork is to run a Luftkappe instead of B1/C1 Debonair.


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

For those who fitted a schrader valve in place of the foot bolt, how is it going? I am thinking of giving it a try on my Zeb. Any reason I shouldn't?


----------



## CaveGiant (Aug 21, 2007)

Still working great. 

Remember to use the original overlong screw to pull the lowers in to place, then the schrader. 

No idea on the zeb, not seen one, let alone had one apart!


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

Rockshox launched its electronic suspension system today, something I personally don’t care that much about.

But an air spring update is also included in today’s launch (Debonair+). The best details I’ve found are in the service manual: https://www.sram.com/globalassets/d...e-flight-attendant-service-manual-english.pdf

All springs get an elastomer at the bottom of the air shaft (Buttercup), said to help with small bumps.

The Zeb air spring gets additional negative volume above the piston, Luftkappe style. I see that the baseline token setup has one less token than 2021 for a given travel, likely to account for the reduced positive spring volume. The positive/negative equalization point appears to be the same as 2021.

Pike and Lyrik air springs have a spacer beneath the lower sealhead, likely to clear the elastomer. It’s unclear how positive/negative volumes and equalization point compares to current versions, and whether this air spring is backwards-compatible (although my guess is that 2021 and earlier forks are unable to accommodate the spacer beneath the air spring sealhead at the bottom of the stanchion).


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

Interesting, wonder when reviews of it will come out. Would be interested in trying it if it’s all the best pieces of a B1 spring and C1 spring put together 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ARider (Feb 28, 2005)

Vorsprung should get some royalties from that gold luftkappe piston! 

Elastomer at the bottom of both air and damper shaft is interesting. To be on the damper side it must be super soft.


----------



## ARider (Feb 28, 2005)

Glad to see that this has enabled Specialized to have a $12,500 Enduro! 
Nice works folks...


----------



## romphaia (Sep 7, 2014)

So they decreased lower leg volume, and to avoid decreasing negative volume as a result of that, they decreased the positive. I can't wait to see what they come up with next year.


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

romphaia said:


> So they decreased lower leg volume, and to avoid decreasing negative volume as a result of that, they decreased the positive. I can't wait to see what they come up with next year.


Yeah, I guess the elastomer steals some of the hollow air shaft volume that would have been part of the negative spring volume in 2021. Is that what you're saying?


----------



## Bafo808 (Feb 6, 2021)

romphaia said:


> So they decreased lower leg volume, and to avoid decreasing negative volume as a result of that, they decreased the positive. I can't wait to see what they come up with next year.


Same thoughts, but the idea of the buttercup is interesting.


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

Can someone explain the concept of a buttercup to me? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

socalrider77 said:


> Can someone explain the concept of a buttercup to me?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Rubber isolator on the compression rod to absorb some vibration. Just like Manitou ISO Air.


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

Dougal said:


> Rubber isolator on the compression rod to absorb some vibration. Just like Manitou ISO Air.


Thank you! So does this make up for the C1 being “harsh” compared to the B1? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 2supple (Aug 29, 2020)

Based on everyone's comments, seems like B1 airspring at 180mm is the best option for a 170mm bike (taking into consideration the extra sag of the B1).

Want to confirm, Is this the correct link to the goldilocks airspring? 









Amazon.com : RockShox Unisex's Air Spring Upgrade Kit (Includes Debonair Assembly, Sealhead) Lyrik B1+/Yari A1+ (2016, Black, 180mm : Sports & Outdoors


Amazon.com : RockShox Unisex's Air Spring Upgrade Kit (Includes Debonair Assembly, Sealhead) Lyrik B1+/Yari A1+ (2016, Black, 180mm : Sports & Outdoors



www.amazon.com


----------



## wschruba (Apr 13, 2012)

2supple said:


> Based on everyone's comments, seems like B1 airspring at 180mm is the best option for a 170mm bike (taking into consideration the extra sag of the B1).
> 
> Want to confirm, Is this the correct link to the goldilocks airspring?
> 
> ...


I dunno, maybe? What fork do you have; that's the important information here.

FWIW: I managed to track down a B1 for my Pike, which was no easy feat--it took several months of watching/checking ebay. It was the 'wrong' length shaft, easy to swap over the pertinent hardware to the right length. The difference may not have been mind blowing, but it definitely functions 'better' than the equivalent 'C'


----------



## 2supple (Aug 29, 2020)

wschruba said:


> I dunno, maybe? What fork do you have; that's the important information here.
> 
> FWIW: I managed to track down a B1 for my Pike, which was no easy feat--it took several months of watching/checking ebay. It was the 'wrong' length shaft, easy to swap over the pertinent hardware to the right length. The difference may not have been mind blowing, but it definitely functions 'better' than the equivalent 'C'


2021 Lyrik…


----------



## wschruba (Apr 13, 2012)

Should be the right kit, but I don't service forks daily. You can check your model numbers through Sram's site, trailhead.rockshox.com

AFAIK, it wasn't until the newest Zebs that a new generation of spring was released, so--at first blush--the answer would be yes.


----------



## CaveGiant (Aug 21, 2007)

I'd hazard the best spring is the dual air. 
However for easy off the shelf, I'd take b.


----------



## 2supple (Aug 29, 2020)

wschruba said:


> Should be the right kit, but I don't service forks daily. You can check your model numbers through Sram's site, trailhead.rockshox.com
> 
> AFAIK, it wasn't until the newest Zebs that a new generation of spring was released, so--at first blush--the answer would be yes.


Yes, thanks for linking the generic rockshox trailhead site that is essentially the trailhead app...

I guess I need to make this clear - my question is if the link I provided is the B1 spring that everyone is talking about, and if I can throw it in a C1 Lyrik to bring it back to the "better" spring (ideally one that is more supple)... I'm pretty sure it is but just wanted to confirm. Based on Cavegiant's response it seems like the answer is yes. 

Throwing this out there - has anyone noticed the B1 offers better traction than the C1 in loose/dry conditions? I was running a Zeb and struggled to get the same glued to the ground small bump as my 36 or 38 grip2. Wondering if a B1 Lyrik might offer better grip than the C1 or Zeb, while also being in a lighter package.


----------



## wschruba (Apr 13, 2012)

2supple said:


> I guess I need to make this clear


I guess so.

If it's a B, it's a B.


----------



## MhenningS (Oct 23, 2021)

CaveGiant said:


> Still working great.
> 
> Remember to use the original overlong screw to pull the lowers in to place, then the schrader.
> 
> No idea on the zeb, not seen one, let alone had one apart!


Hi!
I will try this mod, but one question remains:
How dir you seal shrader and airshaft nut?


----------



## CaveGiant (Aug 21, 2007)

MhenningS said:


> Hi!
> I will try this mod, but one question remains:
> How dir you seal shrader and airshaft nut?


I can't remember, probably put hylomar blue on the threads 

If it was a complicated problem I'd have remembered =)


----------



## slipperyb (Sep 27, 2009)

Has anybody put a B1 seal head on an A1 air shaft? Would this work to reduce the breakaway force and improve small-bump? Would the bumper or anything else need to be swapped?

Asking because I have an A1 pike shaft in one of my forks and an spare B1 from my lyrik. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MhenningS (Oct 23, 2021)

CaveGiant said:


> I can't remember, probably put hylomar blue on the threads
> 
> If it was a complicated problem I'd have remembered =)


The Fork (Lyrik ultimate, b1 170mm, charger 2.1, now traveled to 150mm with "dual Air mod") feels great, thanks for the Idea and advice 

I did use hylomar blue as suggested, works very well. _Thumbs Up_

The Mod ist easy and cheap, i just had to change the sides of damper (charger) and airspring, thread and seal the 10€ schrader for Vespa rims (after pulling airshaft with the original screw), and set it up. 

Setup takes a little Bit longer, because I dont use a bumper and have to eyeball the travel while adjusting pressure in both airchambers.


----------



## 2supple (Aug 29, 2020)

Anyone know where you can find a 170mm B1 air spring for sale in the U.S.? Seem to be sold out everywhere...


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

2supple said:


> Anyone know where you can find a 170mm B1 air spring for sale in the U.S.? Seem to be sold out everywhere...











Secus Fitment Parts & Spares


Looking to swap your Secus to a different fork? Get yourself a different fitment kit here. Kits include a footstud plus any other necessary fitment components unless otherwise specified. Rockshox A3 FootstudPlease note that the Rockshox A3 fitment kit replaces the old Rockshox A1 and A2 kits. It...




www.vorsprungsuspension.com





Vorsprung sells the b1 sealhead, you could probably have a footnut made 

Or, but this guy and use the sealhead and footnut and retrofit it onto a 170mm C1 shaft. The only different between the 2 is the seal head and footnut 









RockShox Lyrik DebonAir Air Spring Upgrade Kit - Bike


Buy the RockShox Lyrik DebonAir Air Spring Upgrade Kit online or shop all Bike from Backcountry.com.




www.backcountry.com






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## austink26 (Jun 24, 2019)

I have a B1 seal/foot nut to sell if you want. Shoot me a pm. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Skeptastic (Mar 31, 2012)

I'm admittedly a bit confused about the kit nomenclature. I see folks referring to the B1 debonair spring as the one coming just prior to the C1 change, but SRAM only lists an A1-A2 generation, along with a B1+ generation. When you search for a B1+ air spring using the item code provided in SRAM's upgrade and travel change manual, the C1 spring populates. If you search for the A1-A2 air spring, it simply says "Debonair Air" for A1-A2 Pike. I don't know if I am making sense at all, but I cannot tell if I have located the proper B1 Debonair spring that seems to be more well-regarded.

Can anyone please tell me what the correct item code is for the B1 spring? I'd really appreciate it. Maybe it is that the spring for the A1-A2 generation is the B1 spring, and I am being thrown off by that lack of knowledge. What is confusing me is that it seems some are saying if you have the A1-A2 spring, you cannot fit the C1, as though there is truly a spring named B1, which never comes up when you search. It also sounds like RS, at one point, upgraded the A1-A2 to the B1, but their manual gives no indication of this, so maybe it is that riders labeled it the B1 but RS never actually called it this. If that is the case, how can one determine if they are buying spring that as upgraded to the B1, as opposed to the original A1-A2 spring?

Thanks a ton for any help you all can offer. I'm buying a 2021 Pike Ultimate on Monday and would like to grab a B1 spring to try it against the C1 that comes stock on the 2021 Pike.


----------



## Skeptastic (Mar 31, 2012)

I've included a screenshot of the Pike travel change air spring kit options. My bike will be a 29/27.5+, which is why I didn't mention the A2-B1 springs since RS lists these as fitting a 29+ fork. I hope this helps someone point out the right one for me, haha! I am finding that the 2018+ version is the C1, while the 2014-2017 version doesn't mention whether it is the B1 version or an earlier version.


----------



## ARider (Feb 28, 2005)

I go by the visual;

C1 has red foot nut and taller red seal head
B1 has silver foot nut and shorter red seal head
A1 has black plastic seal head and should be avoided at all costs!

I have a 2021 29" Pike I just put the B1 air spring in (like below), works great!

Also note, if you can't find the correct length B1 air shaft, you can just swap the foot nut and seal head to the C1 air shaft that comes with the fork.


----------



## Skeptastic (Mar 31, 2012)

ARider said:


> I go by the visual;
> 
> C1 has red foot nut and taller red seal head
> B1 has silver foot nut and shorter red seal head
> ...


I really appreciate the time you took to help me with this. What's weird is I cannot seem to find any springs with the black plastic seal head, yet one of them still says A1-A2. Could this be the upgraded A1 (B1 as folks are calling it)?

I've included links to four different springs. One of them is clearly the C1 (red foot nut and taller red seal head), but then two of the others throw me for a loop because the images are the same (silver foot nut and shorter red seal head), while the descriptions and prices are different. The fourth is a repeat of the A1-A2 spring, which still shows the image of the silver foot nut and shorter red seal head. Trying to figure out if one of them is secretly the A1 with black seal head and maybe an image is wrong, or what is going on in general.

A1-A2 (B1?) #1: https://www.worldwidecyclery.com/pr...-a1-a2-2014-2017-120mm-29-140mm-27-5-150mm-26

A1-A2 (B1?) #2: RockShox DebonAir Air Spring Upgrade Kit: Fits Pike (A1-A2/2014-2017) 120mm-29", 140mm-27.5" 150mm-26"

C1: https://www.worldwidecyclery.com/pr...sembly-and-seal-head-pike-b1-revelation-a1-18

Unspecified (B1?) https://planetcyclery.com/rockshox-debonair-air-spring-upgrade-kit-120mm-fits-pike-b1-revelation


----------



## evernorth (Apr 13, 2020)

Skeptastic said:


> I really appreciate the time you took to help me with this. What's weird is I cannot seem to find any springs with the black plastic seal head, yet one of them still says A1-A2. Could this be the upgraded A1 (B1 as folks are calling it)?
> 
> I've included links to four different springs. One of them is clearly the C1 (red foot nut and taller red seal head), but then two of the others throw me for a loop because the images are the same (silver foot nut and shorter red seal head), while the descriptions and prices are different. The fourth is a repeat of the A1-A2 spring, which still shows the image of the silver foot nut and shorter red seal head. Trying to figure out if one of them is secretly the A1 with black seal head and maybe an image is wrong, or what is going on in general.
> 
> ...


#1 and #2 are both the one you want to buy. They black top piston is used for Sari/Lyrik. The grey is pike/revelation. 

The text A1-A2 in the descriptions just refers to compatible versions of the listed forks. 

So you can purchase both. Also your unspecified link is the correct one.

Gesendet von meinem Pixel 5 mit Tapatalk


----------



## Skeptastic (Mar 31, 2012)

evernorth said:


> #1 and #2 are both the one you want to buy. They black top piston is used for Sari/Lyrik. The grey is pike/revelation.
> 
> The text A1-A2 in the descriptions just refers to compatible versions of the listed forks.
> 
> ...


Thanks for your reply. I guess what confuses me is that they are listed at different prices when offered from the same shop. Why would this be the case if they were the same spring? That's what throws me off. The one from Worldwide Cyclery has a different price, but that is because they sell any of the springs for the same price. Just wondering why the "retail" price from which #2 and the unspecified one would be different if they are the same. I am concerned that the image is the same, but the actual spring could be different. How can you tell #2 and the unspecified one are the same spring outside of the image? Thanks for your help. It's truly appreciated!


----------



## Skeptastic (Mar 31, 2012)

So, I just received both a 120 mm and 130 mm air shafts and they did come with the appropriate, shorter red seal head and silver foot nut. Should they be more than 10 mm difference in length? The 130 seems to be quite a bit longer than the 120, even though both kits are specified as being for a 29er fork at their listed lengths. I've attached a photo including both side-by-side. I calculate a difference of between 1" to 1.25", or 25-32 mm. Maybe I am missing something, but I don't get how a 10 mm difference in air shaft could make one 2.5 to 3 times as long.

Sorry if they are a bit difficult to see, as I don't want to remove them from their packaging if it looks like I should need to return due to incorrect size. Let me know what you all think!


----------



## JB450 (Mar 31, 2019)

My understanding is that the 00.4019.931.004 120mm is for a B1 2018+ Pike

And the 00.4019.931.008 130mm is for an A1-A2 pike.

Could be totally wrong though.


----------



## evernorth (Apr 13, 2020)

What fork do you have and what travel do you want to go to? Maybe it's easier this way. 



Kompatibilität: Pike 26" Federgabel Modell 2014 - 2017 (A1 - A2), 160 mm Federweg / Pike 27,5" Federgabel Modell 2014 - 2017 (A1 - A2), 150 mm Federweg / Pike 29" Federgabel Modell 2014 - 2017 (A1 - A2), 130 mm Federweg
- Herstellernummer: 00.4019.931.008

Kompatibilität: Pike Federgabel ab Modell 2018 (B1), 120 mm Federweg / Revelation Federgabel ab Modell 2018 (A1), 120 mm Federweg
- Herstellernummer: 00.4019.931.004

Those are the descriptions (sorry for the language, but you get the contents) 

It's how @JB450 said, .008 is for A1-A2 and .004 for B1

Gesendet von meinem Pixel 5 mit Tapatalk


----------



## Skeptastic (Mar 31, 2012)

Aw man. I asked before buying and was told that either would work. I bought a brand new 130 mm 29 Pike with the C1 air shaft. Was just looking to get a 120 and 130 B1 shaft.

I blame myself. I shoIlde just called Rockshox. That's what I'll do now haha.


----------



## evernorth (Apr 13, 2020)

Oh thought you were asking which of the versions is a B1, which all of them were. Didn't saw the actual request. 

What couldt be done whit what you already have, is switching over the foot nut and the lower seal. But you need 10mm shaft clamps in order to do so. 

Ride on


Gesendet von meinem Pixel 5 mit Tapatalk


----------



## JB450 (Mar 31, 2019)

evernorth said:


> Oh thought you were asking which of the versions is a B1, which all of them were. Didn't saw the actual request.
> 
> What couldt be done whit what you already have, is switching over the foot nut and the lower seal. But you need 10mm shaft clamps in order to do so.
> 
> ...


Don't the B1 pistons have an 8mm Allen key recess in the top so you don't need the shafts clamps?

Mine did at least.


----------



## Knesling (Sep 4, 2019)

This might be a stupid question but I've read through countless pages in this thread without finding the answer. If I get a 170mm c1 airspring and change out the seal head and footnut to the b1 hardware, will it still be 170mm? I've got a b1 air spring in 140mm lying around not being used anyway that I can harvest the parts from.

I know it might sag into the travel a bit, that's not the question. I'm just wondering if I could have bought a b1 170 airspring, would it be the same as a c1 170 with the b1 footnut and seal head?


----------



## johnsogr (May 31, 2009)

Knesling said:


> This might be a stupid question but I've read through countless pages in this thread without finding the answer. If I get a 170mm c1 airspring and change out the seal head and footnut to the b1 hardware, will it still be 170mm? I've got a b1 air spring in 140mm lying around not being used anyway that I can harvest the parts from


Yes


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Skeptastic (Mar 31, 2012)

evernorth said:


> Oh thought you were asking which of the versions is a B1, which all of them were. Didn't saw the actual request.
> 
> What couldt be done whit what you already have, is switching over the foot nut and the lower seal. But you need 10mm shaft clamps in order to do so.
> 
> ...


I see what you mean. I'm gonna call and email Rock Shox tomorrow and find out if the air shaft I need is available (impossible to find in 130 mm online), but also find out exactly what I'd need to just turn my 130 mm fork into a 130 mm B1 version.


----------



## joecx (Aug 17, 2013)

Skeptastic said:


> So, I just received both a 120 mm and 130 mm air shafts and they did come with the appropriate, shorter red seal head and silver foot nut. Should they be more than 10 mm difference in length? The 130 seems to be quite a bit longer than the 120, even though both kits are specified as being for a 29er fork at their listed lengths. I've attached a photo including both side-by-side. I calculate a difference of between 1" to 1.25", or 25-32 mm. Maybe I am missing something, but I don't get how a 10 mm difference in air shaft could make one 2.5 to 3 times as long.
> 
> Sorry if they are a bit difficult to see, as I don't want to remove them from their packaging if it looks like I should need to return due to incorrect size. Let me know what you all think!
> 
> ...


The airshaft on a 29er A2 Pike is 20mm longer than a B1 Pike due to the different configuration of the lower legs. The one you have is the 130mm upgrade kit for a 29er A2 pike. 
The 27.5 A2 uses the same shaft length as all of the B1's.


----------



## Skeptastic (Mar 31, 2012)

joecx said:


> The airshaft on a 29er A2 Pike is 20mm longer than a B1 Pike due to the different configuration of the lower legs. The one you have is the 130mm upgrade kit for a 29er A2 pike.
> The 27.5 A2 uses the same shaft length as all of the B1's.


I believe it. The A1 130 is right at about 30 mm longer. I'd have needed the 27.5 130. I wonder if there are any differences between the A1/A2 27.5 130 and the B1 130. I'll call SRAM tomorrow and find out just to be sure. If you search using the item code for the B1 shafts, the C1 shafts are what populate. It seems you almost have to get an A1/A2 shaft with the shorter red seal head in order to get a B1 shaft. 

The spot I got the wrong shaft from has the 27.5 130, so hopefully I can jus exchange and only be out return shipping.


----------



## Skeptastic (Mar 31, 2012)

So, SRAM claims that since the A1/A2 generation is different than the B1+ generation, even though the upgrade kit shafts look identical besides shaft length, the A1/A2 is not SRAM-approved for use in the B1+ forks. I'm not sure it's worth using the A1/A2 kit, even if it is identical, if SRAM is gonna potentially refuse to warranty the fork, should something happen. Not even sure they can tell if it's an A1/A2 once installed, but I intend to find out lol. I do believe that if one were to get the A1/A2 in a 27.5 version and use it in a modern 29 fork, it would be the same length as the modern length 29 shaft.

I did confirm that the previous B1 Debonair spring has item codes no longer listed in SRAM's travel upgrade kit manual. The rep provided me an item code on the phone, which matched up perfectly with the 120 mm B1+ shaft I purchased. I am unable to locate a 130 mm shaft using the item code provided. For some reason, SRAM has discontinued the previous model, but still has the A1/A2 model, which when you hold them both in-hand, look identical, shorter red seal head and all. Hmmm.

I am a bit hesitant to try the 120 mm B1 kit, as it seems the low static height would make it more like having a 110 mm fork. The 130 mm B1 kit should be similar to a 120 mm C1, which would be cool. If I can find a 130 mm B1, I'd essentially have a 130 mm C1 with 130 mm top-out length, and a 130 mm B1 with 120 mm top-out length. They'd ride differently, but be within the range of fork lengths my bike's designer considers to be optimal for the frame.

Anyway, just thought I'd add the info given to me by SRAM to the thread. I am sure the A1/A2 with the identical shaft, seal head, etc. as the B1 kits would be just fine in 27.5 variety (for a modern 29 fork), but I'm a bit unsure if I wanna test SRAM's stance on retrofitting using the A1/A2 version.


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

Get a 130 C1 and cut off 1/3 of the top out bumper 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Skeptastic (Mar 31, 2012)

Dougal said:


> When Debonair 2 hit the A1/A2 and B1 pike (in 27" format) used the exact same shafts:
> 
> 
> __
> http://instagr.am/p/Bki8XIfBR00/


Hey @Dougal! You seem to have a firm grasp of the A2 Debonair vs B1 Debonair spring similarities. Can you please help me confirm which A1/A2 Debonair spring kit will have the same length as a B1 Debonair spring kit?

I bought a 2021 Pike Ultimate 29 with 130 mm travel, which of course comes with the C1 Debonair spring. I'm wanting to give the B1 a shot, but it is impossible to find the 130 mm B1 Debonair spring, as confirmed in a convo I had with SRAM earlier today. The B1 versions have ben discontinued, which is why you won't find their item codes in the current Travel Upgrade Kit manual SRAM releases each year. I somehow managed to find a 120 mm B1, but the 130 is goners.

I ordered an A1/A2 Debonair kit with 130 mm of travel for a 29" A1/A2 fork and apparently this ends up being the equivalent of a 150 mm spring for a 2021 29" Pike. Is it true that the A1/A2 Debonair and B1 Debonair springs are identical, the A1/A2 Debonair spring is compatible with a 2021 Pike, and that I should get the A1/A2 130 mm travel spring in 27.5 form in order to be equivalent to a 130 mm travel spring in the 2021 version of the 29" Pike?

I hope all of that makes sense and thanks in a advance for any help you can offer. SRAM confirmed that the B1 springs have been discontinued, so if you find them you are simply fortunate. The A1/A2 Debonair springs are widely available, but seem to be different lengths than the B1 Debonair springs designed for the same fork type (ie: A1/A2 Pike 29 vs B1 Pike 29). Otherwise, I'd have just grabbed a 130 mm B1 Debonair spring and called it a day, easy peasy. I do have the 120 mm B1, but am thinking the 130 mm version with bike weight sag will put me right around 125 mm of travel, which maintains geometry a bit better than a 120 mm B1, which will put me around 115 mm of travel with bike weight sag.


----------



## Skeptastic (Mar 31, 2012)

ARider said:


> Also note, if you can't find the correct length B1 air shaft, you can just swap the foot nut and seal head to the C1 air shaft that comes with the fork.


It just occurred to me that you may have helped me hit the jackpot. The 2021 Pike I have comes with 130 mm of travel and if I just keep any one of the Debonair spring kits (whether A1/A2 or B1 as long as they have the shorter red seal head and silver foot nut) I can just swap the longer C1 seal head and red foot nut for the shorter red seal head and silver foot nut of the B1 kit and have what I am struggling to find in 130 mm form. Does that sound right?

@Dougal does that sound like a much simpler way to get the 130 mm B1 that I'm seeking, or would it be wiser to get the A1/A2 Debonair that is the same as a B1 Debonair spring and swap the entire spring kit instead of swapping seal head and foot nut?


----------



## ARider (Feb 28, 2005)

Correct that you can swap foot nuts/seal haeds, but you will need a 130mm air shaft. 
Putting the silver foot nut/slimmer seal head on your 120mm shaft will still yield a 120mm fork (or 115 ).

Are any of the air shafts themselves 10mm longer than your stack 120mm? Don't measure the foot nut, just to the undercut where the threads start. Or take the foot nuts off and measure.

I think the one you want is marked "090" by the foot nut, but not sure. Mine is in the fork.


----------



## Skeptastic (Mar 31, 2012)

ARider said:


> Correct that you can swap foot nuts/seal haeds, but you will need a 130mm air shaft.
> Putting the silver foot nut/slimmer seal head on your 120mm shaft will still yield a 120mm fork (or 115 ).
> 
> Are any of the air shafts themselves 10mm longer than your stack 120mm? Don't measure the foot nut, just to the undercut where the threads start. Or take the foot nuts off and measure.
> ...


My bad, that was a typo. I have a 130 fork.


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

Skeptastic said:


> My bad, that was a typo. I have a 130 fork.


Keep the 120 B1 you bought, and swap the sealhead/footnut onto your 130 C1 and then you have a 130 B1


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

Skeptastic said:


> It just occurred to me that you may have helped me hit the jackpot. The 2021 Pike I have comes with 130 mm of travel and if I just keep any one of the Debonair spring kits (whether A1/A2 or B1 as long as they have the shorter red seal head and silver foot nut) I can just swap the longer C1 seal head and red foot nut for the shorter red seal head and silver foot nut of the B1 kit and have what I am struggling to find in 130 mm form. Does that sound right?
> 
> @Dougal does that sound like a much simpler way to get the 130 mm B1 that I'm seeking, or would it be wiser to get the A1/A2 Debonair that is the same as a B1 Debonair spring and swap the entire spring kit instead of swapping seal head and foot nut?


Yes buying the right size C1 shafts and swapping over the B1 foot & cap is how we do it.


----------



## Skeptastic (Mar 31, 2012)

socalrider77 said:


> Keep the 120 B1 you bought, and swap the sealhead/footnut onto your 130 C1 and then you have a 130 B1
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I think this makes the most sense. Simple and immediately gives me the 130 C1, 130 B1, and 120 B1 options for the least coin.


----------



## Skeptastic (Mar 31, 2012)

Dougal said:


> Yes buying the right size C1 shafts and swapping over the B1 foot & cap is how we do it.


That seals it! Appreciate you.

Thank you all for your contributions. time to watch some videos about how to complete the swap, make sure I have the right tools, etc.

@Dougal do you have any recommendations for completing this swap? Should I replace and/or check the oil in the lowers, use a certain type of oil, or get any specific tools that may not come recommended in the general how-to video I find?


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

Skeptastic said:


> That seals it! Appreciate you.
> 
> Thank you all for your contributions. time to watch some videos about how to complete the swap, make sure I have the right tools, etc.
> 
> @Dougal do you have any recommendations for completing this swap? Should I replace and/or check the oil in the lowers, use a certain type of oil, or get any specific tools that may not come recommended in the general how-to video I find?


I use Supergliss in the lowers. 68k for cold conditions, 100k for warm. I only use grease (Slickoleum) in the air-spring as oil will end up in the wrong place. Coat the quad-rings, rub it into the shaft and coat the inside of the stanchion so the air piston collects it on the way up.


----------



## Skeptastic (Mar 31, 2012)

Dougal said:


> I use Supergliss in the lowers. 68k for cold conditions, 100k for warm. I only use grease (Slickoleum) in the air-spring as oil will end up in the wrong place. Coat the quad-rings, rub it into the shaft and coat the inside of the stanchion so the air piston collects it on the way up.


Thanks Dougal! Do you coat the entire shaft, or just where you can reach with your fingers?


----------



## HollyBoni (Dec 27, 2016)

What do you guys think about the Everflow stuff, especially compared to the Luftkappe? I have a 150 Pike with a C1 so i'd need to source a few things to install the Luftkappe, while the Everflow kit would just drop straight in. 



https://www.everflow.it/product/zero-pike-revelation-2018-2021


----------



## angieri918 (Apr 1, 2020)

HollyBoni said:


> What do you guys think about the Everflow stuff, especially compared to the Luftkappe? I have a 150 Pike with a C1 so i'd need to source a few things to install the Luftkappe, while the Everflow kit would just drop straight in.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.everflow.it/product/zero-pike-revelation-2018-2021


Ya I’d really like to know more about this


----------



## johnsogr (May 31, 2009)

Just ordered one. Honestly won’t ride it until mid March, but I’ll let you all know when I do!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## HollyBoni (Dec 27, 2016)

I think i'm gonna cop one as well. Very interested to see the difference coming from a C1.


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

HollyBoni said:


> I think i'm gonna cop one as well. Very interested to see the difference coming from a C1.


Did you order to the US? I’m curious how much it is after taxes and import fees


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## HollyBoni (Dec 27, 2016)

socalrider77 said:


> Did you order to the US? I’m curious how much it is after taxes and import fees
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Nope, i'm in Europe.


----------



## johnsogr (May 31, 2009)

It was $180 all in, but I got the full air shaft, not the DIY kit. Yolo!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## angieri918 (Apr 1, 2020)

Hey Dougal what is your thoughts on this Everflow air spring? I’m not understanding what the tank is used for and what is the MVP supposed to do? I have a ‘19 Pike with Ult 2.1 @160mm and this is something I’d be interested in trying if the gurus think it’s a sound design


----------



## johnsogr (May 31, 2009)

The MVP is just the seal head machined to increase negative volume. The Tank raises the shaft out of the bottom out bumper and increase negative volume as internal shaft is also part of negative chamber. The whole thing is all about negative chamber without having the sink down.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

johnsogr said:


> It was $180 all in, but I got the full air shaft, not the DIY kit. Yolo!
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Did you order to the US? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## johnsogr (May 31, 2009)

socalrider77 said:


> Did you order to the US?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yup, to Philly


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## HollyBoni (Dec 27, 2016)

angieri918 said:


> Hey Dougal what is your thoughts on this Everflow air spring? I’m not understanding what the tank is used for and what is the MVP supposed to do? I have a ‘19 Pike with Ult 2.1 @160mm and this is something I’d be interested in trying if the gurus think it’s a sound design


Sorry i'm not Dougal, but maybe this will help as well.










See that hole below the piston? The air shaft is hollow, air goes inside that hole and inside the air shaft, which adds volume to the negative spring. This is a stock Rockshox thing. The tank is exactly that, it's a hollow air tank. In stock form you have a foot nut on the bottom of the air shaft, the tank replaces that, and since air goes inside the air shaft through a hole, it goes into the tank as well, enlarging the negative spring again. Also, the rubber top out bumper is replaced with an actual coil spring, which takes up less volume.
The MVP is a machined down C1 seal head, similar to a B1 seal head. Again, it enlarges the volume of the negative spring. 
So basically the whole thing is about increasing the volume of the negative spring, and it kind of combines the advantages of both the Rockshox B1 and C1 air spring.


----------



## angieri918 (Apr 1, 2020)

Ah hah now I understand thanks Holly 🤙


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

HollyBoni said:


> Sorry i'm not Dougal, but maybe this will help as well.
> 
> View attachment 1964414
> 
> ...


When you say advantages of the C1 air spring, do you mean that positive and negative equalize at the top of the travel as opposed to a few mm in like the B1, giving a mechanical topout rather than pneumatic?


----------



## HollyBoni (Dec 27, 2016)

D(C) said:


> When you say advantages of the C1 air spring, do you mean that positive and negative equalize at the top of the travel as opposed to a few mm in like the B1, giving a mechanical topout rather than pneumatic?


That I don't know, the equalization thing is not clear to me and whether a mechanical or pneumatic topout is better (explanations are welcome). It might seem like I know what i'm talking about but half of the time I have no idea. 

What I guess I meant is that you get the increased negative with the fork also sitting a bit higher due to the foot nut. But I guess the latter is not that big of a deal.


----------



## johnsogr (May 31, 2009)

I surmise that the piston head sits higher in the upper, effectively reducing the positive chamber volume. I think this because there’s a weight limit and he describes increased progressivity. I do think it will sit at rest like the C1, but I’m not 100%…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## HollyBoni (Dec 27, 2016)

johnsogr said:


> I surmise that the piston head sits higher in the upper, effectively reducing the positive chamber volume. I think this because there’s a weight limit and he describes increased progressivity. I do think it will sit at rest like the C1, but I’m not 100%…
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I've seen him say that the kit doesn't rob volume from the positive chamber (not sure if that was compared to a B1 or C1), and the weight limit is there because you need higher pressures to achieve the same sag as before and you might hit the max pressure limit of the fork if you're heavier. But i'm only going on what he said.
Just ordered a Zerodue. Originally there was no option for shipping to where I live, wrote an email, got a response about 3 minutes later, he immediately looked up shipping options and added it to the site. Nice! 🤙


----------



## johnsogr (May 31, 2009)

Ahhh interesting! I guess I don’t know how to interpret this pic:











Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## JB450 (Mar 31, 2019)

johnsogr said:


> Ahhh interesting! I guess I don’t know how to interpret this pic:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Much larger negative.

I'm not 100% and I haven't seen a picture of a C1 foot nut beside the tanke, but thinking that the tanke is obviously wider but maybe not as tall hence being able to use a seal head similar to the B1 instead of the raised C1 seal head.

The ever flow seal head is also machined out allowing more negative.


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

johnsogr said:


> Ahhh interesting! I guess I don’t know how to interpret this pic:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This answers my question. The C1 is designed to top out right at the equalization dimple (mechanical topout). The B1 will top out past the equalization dimple (pneumatic topout). The Everflow looks like it will top out in the same position as the C1, depending on the stiffness of the coil top-out bumper compared to the stock rubber one. The Everflow does indeed have a larger negative spring volume than the C1.


----------



## JB450 (Mar 31, 2019)

The dependence on weight limit makes sense as the increase in negative is quite significant, which as a whole (-ve and +ve) volume means you will definitely need significantly higher pressure to achieve 20%-30% sag


----------



## johnsogr (May 31, 2009)

Will be interesting to see how it compares to the Secus! Struggling to get mine to less sag while still bottoming (I have zero spacers)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

johnsogr said:


> Ahhh interesting! I guess I don’t know how to interpret this pic:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That pic is misleading. The actual equalisation points (and hence negative chamber length) of each are more similar than shown because the notch in the stanchion is the same distance from the end of the cap on each.
At top-out point the B1 is extended and the bumper isn't really doing anything. The C1 is compressing the bumper hard and the Everflow will have that spring about half compressed.


----------



## johnsogr (May 31, 2009)

Dougal said:


> That pic is misleading. The actual equalisation points (and hence negative chamber length) of each are more similar than shown because the notch in the stanchion is the same distance from the end of the cap on each.
> At top-out point the B1 is extended and the bumper isn't really doing anything. The C1 is compressing the bumper hard and the Everflow will have that spring about half compressed.


Ahhh interesting! Good to know, thanks @Dougal


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

johnsogr said:


> Yup, to Philly
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Awesome. Keep us updated on how long it takes and how you like it once you get it put on. I’ve got a yari I’m using for experimentation purposes and this is intriguing. This + a novyparts splug could make a pretty good fork for about the same price as a charger 2.1 upgrade 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Danzzz88 (Jun 10, 2020)

There is a much cheaper and simpler solution...the stock air piston and shaft are already pre-drilled...just shitty RS quality control means it's not usually lined up and the port into the shaft is blocked. I know a guy rang RS after I told him about this and apparently they didn't know what the hell he was on about and that the port doesn't do anything.

Well I believed it must have been for negative volume so just screwed the piston on until the port holes lined up..I also removed the rubbed top out bumper and replaced with a few small o rings and didn't have top out issues. The modification above seems like an over engineered more expensive way to achieve the same solution. Either way the difference in performance is barely noticeable.

But a week later I ripped it out and fitted a Smashpot...not interested in fiddling with and maintaining air springs all the time...


----------



## HollyBoni (Dec 27, 2016)

Danzzz88 said:


> There is a much cheaper and simpler solution...the stock air piston and shaft are already pre-drilled...just shitty RS quality control means it's not usually lined up and the port into the shaft is blocked. I know a guy rang RS after I told him about this and apparently they didn't know what the hell he was on about and that the port doesn't do anything.
> 
> Well I believed it must have been for negative volume so just screwed the piston on until the port holes lined up..I also removed the rubbed top out bumper and replaced with a few small o rings and didn't have top out issues. The modification above seems like an over engineered more expensive way to achieve the same solution. Either way the difference in performance is barely noticeable.
> 
> But a week later I ripped it out and fitted a Smashpot...not interested in fiddling with and maintaining air springs all the time...


Not the same thing. You still get more negative volume due to the tank and machined down C1 seal head (if you're coming from a C1).
Not sure how much of a difference it makes, we'll see.
I'd like to try a coil some day as well.


----------



## romphaia (Sep 7, 2014)

johnsogr said:


> Ahhh interesting! I guess I don’t know how to interpret this pic:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The biggest improvement is the removal of the preload of the top-out bumper of the C1 Debonair. But you can achieve the same using a B1 and 10mm longer travel; either way you are reducing the volume in the lower leg. This can prevent use of full travel especially for lighter riders, and probably is the reason RS discarded the B1 seal head.

The increase in negative volume looks about a +25% compared to the C1, mostly at the expense of the lower leg volume.
Similar to the Luftkappe, which increases the negative by decreasing the positive.
That's scraping the bottom of the barrel. There's not much to achieve without a complete redesign, such as this:










This, for RS forks, is a +80% negative volume; positive increases by approx. 1 or 2 tokens depending on the model; no change in the lower leg volume. The price to pay for this (it's not magic after all) is that requires about +60% air pressure, but for most riders that will be well within the max limit reccomended by RS.


----------



## HollyBoni (Dec 27, 2016)

romphaia said:


> The biggest improvement is the removal of the preload of the top-out bumper of the C1 Debonair. But you can achieve the same using a B1 and 10mm longer travel; either way you are reducing the volume in the lower leg. This can prevent use of full travel especially for lighter riders, and probably is the reason RS discarded the B1 seal head.
> 
> The increase in negative volume looks about a +25% compared to the C1, mostly at the expense of the lower leg volume.
> Similar to the Luftkappe, which increases the negative by decreasing the positive.
> ...


I wanted to try a Luftkappe first but my biggest problem is that I can barely find B1 seal heads, let alone foot nuts. I'm guessing that's gonna be even worse in the future. But it looks like RS redesigned the air spring again in the flight attendant stuff, curious to see if those are going to fit in my current fork.


----------



## Danzzz88 (Jun 10, 2020)

A bit unrelated but I have a ZEB and anyone else notice their RS fork doesn't compress to the Max Travel marker on the stanchion even with spring removed? I measured the length from the wiper seal to this marking and it's 180mm like my fork should be...but the lowers only compress to about 170/175


----------



## JB450 (Mar 31, 2019)

Bottom out bumpers in the fork lower legs


----------



## Danzzz88 (Jun 10, 2020)

JB450 said:


> Bottom out bumpers in the fork lower legs


Ahh that explains it. Do these bumpers tend compress around the stanchions and cause friction as I've noticed if I press the uppers into the lowers deep enough near bottom out it seems to bind and they get stuck?


----------



## JB450 (Mar 31, 2019)

Danzzz88 said:


> Ahh that explains it. Do these bumpers tend compress around the stanchions and cause friction as I've noticed if I press the uppers into the lowers deep enough near bottom out it seems to bind and they get stuck?


No idea, never been too worried about using full travel on my forks.

But they could do that I guess.


----------



## johnsogr (May 31, 2009)

HollyBoni said:


> I wanted to try a Luftkappe first but my biggest problem is that I can barely find B1 seal heads, let alone foot nuts. I'm guessing that's gonna be even worse in the future. But it looks like RS redesigned the air spring again in the flight attendant stuff, curious to see if those are going to fit in my current fork.


You can purchase a “BIP” sealhead from Vorsprung - it’s an in-house B1 sealhead


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Balgaroth (Dec 14, 2021)

johnsogr said:


> You can purchase a “BIP” sealhead from Vorsprung - it’s an in-house B1 sealhead
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Novypart also as some airspring modifications available. He has been doing it for a very long time as is first one was for the solo-air on Totems, sold to forum users at Velovert, the good old times lol.


----------



## HollyBoni (Dec 27, 2016)

johnsogr said:


> You can purchase a “BIP” sealhead from Vorsprung - it’s an in-house B1 sealhead
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yeah i've seen that, haven't actually found a shop in Europe who sells them and ships here, but i'm sure there is one. (Vorsprung stuff is a bit less common here)

I did the math, the Luftkappe, shaft clamps, seal head, air shaft, foot nut (if I can find one) would come out just as or more expensive as the Zerodue, and with the Zerodue I just click buy, install it and i'm done. We'll see how it's gonna work out. If it sucks, i'll get to try out new stuff again! 😁


----------



## Jukka4130 (Jun 21, 2020)

Shoot a message at info[at]4130.fi for a BIP seal head.


----------



## HollyBoni (Dec 27, 2016)

Jukka4130 said:


> Shoot a message at info[at]4130.fi for a BIP seal head.


Too late, my Zerodue is getting shipped on monday. But i'll keep it in mind in case I want to get a Smashpot... 🤙


----------



## Jukka4130 (Jun 21, 2020)

Sounds good. There's plenty of Smashpots in stock at the moment with a wide selection of springs.


----------



## ARider (Feb 28, 2005)

Danzzz88 said:


> A bit unrelated but I have a ZEB and anyone else notice their RS fork doesn't compress to the Max Travel marker on the stanchion even with spring removed? I measured the length from the wiper seal to this marking and it's 180mm like my fork should be...but the lowers only compress to about 170/175





Danzzz88 said:


> Ahh that explains it. Do these bumpers tend compress around the stanchions and cause friction as I've noticed if I press the uppers into the lowers deep enough near bottom out it seems to bind and they get stuck?


I've gotten "full to the mark travel", but it takes a pretty big hit.

But if you're only getting 170 w/o the air spring installed, and it is sticking and binding there is likely a good amount of misalignment or bushing bind going on.

Try this;
Let all the air out or remove the spring, take the front wheel out and put the axle back in, but don't tighten it (leave about 5mm gap between end of axle and lower), flip the bike upside down and push the fork into it's travel. Watch the axle to fork leg gap, if it moves as you compress the fork there is some alignment issue. If it stays the same but fork just gets tight or binds, then the bushings are too tight.


----------



## areks (Jan 30, 2016)

ARider said:


> Try this;
> Let all the air out or remove the spring, take the front wheel out and put the axle back in, but don't tighten it (leave about 5mm gap between end of axle and lower), flip the bike upside down and push the fork into it's travel. Watch the axle to fork leg gap, if it moves as you compress the fork there is some alignment issue. If it stays the same but fork just gets tight or binds, then the bushings are too tight.


do you often ride without front wheel?


----------



## Danzzz88 (Jun 10, 2020)

areks said:


> do you often ride without front wheel?


What was that for? He is explaining a method to me to discern whether it is bushing bind or misalignment...


----------



## ARider (Feb 28, 2005)

Happened to have a ZEB apart today, slid to within 2mm or so of bottom out line with minimal friction.


----------



## HollyBoni (Dec 27, 2016)

If anyone is interested, first ride done with the Zerodue installed. 150 Pike Select+, coming from a C1 air spring. There is definitely a difference. The fork is a bit more supple on small bump, when I hopped on my bike first, I thought it's gonna be way too soft, but no. I noticed that the fork doesn't seem to dive as much as before. I've gone to a place where i've had two very bad bottom outs previously, but now I always had about 1cm of travel left. I think it also feels more plush on medium sized hits.
The fork feels pretty darn good, but i'm gonna play around a bit more with air pressure. For now I went up 10psi in air pressure, and removed a token.
So far i'm pretty happy.


----------



## johnsogr (May 31, 2009)

HollyBoni said:


> If anyone is interested, first ride done with the Zerodue installed. 150 Pike Select+, coming from a C1 air spring. There is definitely a difference. The fork is a bit more supple on small bump, when I hopped on my bike first, I thought it's is gonna be way too soft, but no. I noticed that the fork doesn't seem to dive as much as before. I've gone to a place where i've had two very bad bottom outs previously, but now I always had about 1cm of travel left. I think it also feels more plush on medium sized hits.
> The fork feels pretty darn good, but i'm gonna play around a bit more with air pressure. For now I went up 10psi in air pressure, and removed a token.
> So far i'm pretty happy.


Awesome! Thanks for the report, still waiting on mine. Have you ridden a SECUS before? If so can you compare?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## HollyBoni (Dec 27, 2016)

johnsogr said:


> Awesome! Thanks for the report, still waiting on mine. Have you ridden a SECUS before? If so can you compare?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Nope, no Secus, don't have experience with a lot of "higher end" forks TBH.


----------



## Bafo808 (Feb 6, 2021)

Hello everyone! I will try to clarify some stuff:


HollyBoni said:


> See that hole below the piston? The air shaft is hollow, air goes inside that hole and inside the air shaft, which adds volume to the negative spring. This is a stock Rockshox thing. The tank is exactly that, it's a hollow air tank. In stock form you have a foot nut on the bottom of the air shaft, the tank replaces that, and since air goes inside the air shaft through a hole, it goes into the tank as well, enlarging the negative spring again. Also, the rubber top out bumper is replaced with an actual coil spring, which takes up less volume.
> The MVP is a machined down C1 seal head, similar to a B1 seal head. Again, it enlarges the volume of the negative spring.
> So basically the whole thing is about increasing the volume of the negative spring, and it kind of combines the advantages of both the Rockshox B1 and C1 air spring.


Correct! But the MVP is a machined B1 seal head, not a C1. Compared to a B1 it offers less friction, a bit more lower leg volume and a bit more negative volume. The MVP for the Zeb increases only lower leg volume, and offers less friction as well.



johnsogr said:


> I surmise that the piston head sits higher in the upper, effectively reducing the positive chamber volume. I think this because there’s a weight limit and he describes increased progressivity. I do think it will sit at rest like the C1, but I’m not 100%…


The positive volume is the same on B1 and C1 Debonair, and also with the Tank fitted it doesn't change.



johnsogr said:


> Will be interesting to see how it compares to the Secus! Struggling to get mine to less sag while still bottoming (I have zero spacers)


Well, the Secus is a much more expensive and complex device, it *for sure* performs better than any of my products, which I've made with the goal of an affordable but still effective kit.



Dougal said:


> That pic is misleading. The actual equalisation points (and hence negative chamber length) of each are more similar than shown because the notch in the stanchion is the same distance from the end of the cap on each.
> At top-out point the B1 is extended and the bumper isn't really doing anything. The C1 is compressing the bumper hard and the Everflow will have that spring about half compressed.


That's true, its misleading and I've removed from the website some time ago, also because it's one year old and the spring-bushing-oring combo has been changed, so you can jump on wrong conclusions by looking at it. The kit for the C1 Debonair uses a completely different spring, so it's not half compressed.



Danzzz88 said:


> There is a much cheaper and simpler solution...the stock air piston and shaft are already pre-drilled...just shitty RS quality control means it's not usually lined up and the port into the shaft is blocked. I know a guy rang RS after I told him about this and apparently they didn't know what the hell he was on about and that the port doesn't do anything.
> 
> Well I believed it must have been for negative volume so just screwed the piston on until the port holes lined up..I also removed the rubbed top out bumper and replaced with a few small o rings and didn't have top out issues. The modification above seems like an over engineered more expensive way to achieve the same solution. Either way the difference in performance is barely noticeable.


The difference in performace was obviously barely noticeable bacause you simply barely increased the negative volume! Replacing the bottom out bumper with few orings vs a dedicated piston with ports on both sides (stock piston only have 1 hole), whithout useless plastic extension, hollow and with an added reservoir for negative volume at the bottom of the shaft makes a very noticeable difference, if someone is interested, feedbacks are available here or here.


----------



## johnsogr (May 31, 2009)

Bafo808 said:


> Hello everyone! I will try to clarify some stuff:
> 
> Correct! But the MVP is a machined B1 seal head, not a C1. Compared to a B1 it offers less friction, a bit more lower leg volume and a bit more negative volume. The MVP for the Zeb increases only lower leg volume, and offers less friction as well.
> 
> ...


Awesome, thanks so much for taking the time to reply! Can't wait to get mine.


----------



## Balgaroth (Dec 14, 2021)

Hey guys I got an idea and would like to run it with you mostly for compatibility issues.

I currently have 3 shafts at home, all in 160mm: SoloAir, B1 and C1.

I recently went from stock C1 to B1 without bumper and it feels much better on my hardtail. I was planning to go back to 150mm so 160mm B1 did the job.

I need to improve my GF Yari which is an old model with Soloair. Initially I planned to give her the C1 and removing the bumper so she would have good sensitivity and would benefit from the bigger lower leg volume (she is less than 60kg) as using the end of travel is complicated for her even without any token. But it got me thinking and maybe I could use the Soloair shaft (no bumper and drilled) on the C1 sealhead to gain back some of the negative volume ? I don't see any reason why it wouldn't work, any ideas ? Maybe the shaft is too short ? I which case I could source a longer one for super cheap anyway.


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

Balgaroth said:


> Hey guys I got an idea and would like to run it with you mostly for compatibility issues.
> 
> I currently have 3 shafts at home, all in 160mm: SoloAir, B1 and C1.
> 
> ...


I don’t have an answer to your question, but any top out issues without the bumper? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Balgaroth (Dec 14, 2021)

socalrider77 said:


> I don’t have an answer to your question, but any top out issues without the bumper?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


B1 without bumper works perfectly, got the idea reading the thread with several contributors that did it successfully. It seems that C1 can also be run this way which reduce the begining of stroke harshness since the Neg/Pos chambers are equalized at resting position instead of the positive pressing against the bumper. Haven't tested this combination yet but some did.


----------



## Bafo808 (Feb 6, 2021)

I don't think that you will have any advantage using the soloair shaft. If she struggle to use all the travel try the ''zip tie trick'' with the fork at about sag height. In this way there will be a small vacuum inside the lowers with the fork fully extended and this can slightly improve small bump sensitivity and help a bit to use the full travel.


----------



## slipperyb (Sep 27, 2009)

Am I correct that a B1 Lyrik footnut/sealhead is the same as (will fit) a Pike footnut/sealhead?


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

slipperyb said:


> Am I correct that a B1 Lyrik footnut/sealhead is the same as (will fit) a Pike footnut/sealhead?


Yes. Lyrik has a bigger pedestal moulded into the piston. Foot-plate and shaft foot are the same.


----------



## johnsogr (May 31, 2009)

Had my first (only 2.5 miles) ride on the EverFlow piston mated w/ an Avy damper (no coil), and it was fantastic! I removed a Secus and installed the EverFlow piston, but the only hiccup as that I kept blowing the green SKF fork seal on the air side when I'd fully compress the fork to bleed the avy damper. The only thing that worked was removing the green SKF, and putting old the old PUSH seal back on (I don't like these as I've had the foam rings fall into the lowers, and I have the hardest time getting the uppers into the lowers with them installed). Anyone ever had this problem? Maybe I contaminated the seals where it meets the fork and isn't supposed to be lubed?

Anyhow, the Secus always seemed to sag a bit unweighted, which really annoyed me, so I loved how the EverFlow stood right up without unweighted sag. Small bump compliance was fantastic (way better than C1 & B1), and the ramp up was great (I'm 75 kg, riding a Lyrik 160 & 75 psi for 24% sag and no volume spacers, all on a Transition Sentinel). I don't think I'll be going back to the Secus, and kudos to Eveflow!


----------



## HollyBoni (Dec 27, 2016)

johnsogr said:


> but the only hiccup as that I kept blowing the green SKF fork seal on the air side when I'd fully compress the fork to bleed the avy damper.


What do you mean by "blowing"? Is it letting oil out? Had that issue with one of mine, contacted the shop I bought it from, they sent me a new one and that worked fine. I've read other people having issues with the SKF seals as well.
Also, what oil are you using and how cold is it currently where you live?


----------



## johnsogr (May 31, 2009)

Sorry - you have to fully compress the fork when bleeding an Avy damper. When I did this, with the air cap off, the green SKF seal would literally pop off when I completely compressed the fork w/ the EverFlow installed. I'm not sure if it's just a bad seal that I contaminated with oil where it contacts the lowers, but it happened a couple times, so I just took it off and replaced w/ a PUSH seal (which stayed on).

Air side I'm just using RS 0W30, and damper side calls for 85/150 cartridge oil, currently 28F out here.


----------



## HollyBoni (Dec 27, 2016)

johnsogr said:


> Sorry - you have to fully compress the fork when bleeding an Avy damper. When I did this, with the air cap off, the green SKF seal would literally pop off when I completely compressed the fork w/ the EverFlow installed. I'm not sure if it's just a bad seal that I contaminated with oil where it contacts the lowers, but it happened a couple times, so I just took it off and replaced w/ a PUSH seal (which stayed on).
> 
> Air side I'm just using RS 0W30, and damper side calls for 85/150 cartridge oil, currently 28F out here.


Holy cr*p!  That's brutal, it was pretty dang hard to install and take out my SKF seals, I can't ever imagine them just popping off. Not sure what's going on there.


----------



## ARider (Feb 28, 2005)

Hey Folks,

I've got an Lyrik B1 air shaft that is laser etched "090" on the bottom near the foot nut. It's the only one in the collection that is not labeled. 

Can anyone tell me if it's the 150 or 160mm version?

Thanks!


----------



## Bafo808 (Feb 6, 2021)

It's "060", and that's the 160mm. If it's 090, which i doubt, it's a 130mm.


----------



## ARider (Feb 28, 2005)

Thanks!
It's for sure 090 if you read it like the others with the foot nut on the right.

Never had a Lyrik that short, maybe it's from a Pike?


----------



## Bafo808 (Feb 6, 2021)

If it has a black piston it's for Lyrik/Yari, they use to made Yaris with that travel, even 120mm!
If it has a grey piston it's for Pike/Revelation, and it should be 140mm but I'm not as sure as for the Lyrik.


----------



## Balgaroth (Dec 14, 2021)

I finally installed the C1 with removed bumper stop on my girlfriends' Yari. It seems that with the bumper removed the C1 is as smooth as B1 with/without bumper and the stiff breakaway force is gone compared to when it was on my Yari on the hardtail. It seems slightly better than the SoloAir it replaced on her fork but time will tell. I tried to pull the fork and it doesn't make any top out noise, I could only create such noise by holding the lowers and tugging the uppers. We will see how that behaves on the trails tho. Last point being that the 160mm airshaft is basically giving 155mm of real travel now that the piston isn't resting on the bumper, so the fork isn't any higher than with 160SA or 160B1. Hopefully the higher lower volume due to the C1 cup will help her use full travel.


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

Balgaroth said:


> I finally installed the C1 with removed bumper stop on my girlfriends' Yari. It seems that with the bumper removed the C1 is as smooth as B1 with/without bumper and the stiff breakaway force is gone compared to when it was on my Yari on the hardtail. It seems slightly better than the SoloAir it replaced on her fork but time will tell. I tried to pull the fork and it doesn't make any top out noise, I could only create such noise by holding the lowers and tugging the uppers. We will see how that behaves on the trails tho. Last point being that the 160mm airshaft is basically giving 155mm of real travel now that the piston isn't resting on the bumper, so the fork isn't any higher than with 160SA or 160B1. Hopefully the higher lower volume due to the C1 cup will help her use full travel.


Unless you dropped the air pressure, more negative volume (which is what taking out the bumper does) will use less travel because it ramps more at the end of the stroke 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Balgaroth (Dec 14, 2021)

socalrider77 said:


> Unless you dropped the air pressure, more negative volume (which is what taking out the bumper does) will use less travel because it ramps more at the end of the stroke


Yes ... and no. All things equal this is true but this is a replacement for a first gen SoloAir. 

SoloAir is dumping air in the lowers, and the sealhead is flat like B1 Debonair which gives a rather small volume for the lowers. 

C1 has a high dish on the sealhead to increase the lowers' volume, it also has a much smaller negative volume compared to B1. Removing the bumper will give a slightly bigger negative volume compared to stock C1 but still smaller than B1 stock, while also having a bigger volume in the lowers than B1. Hopefully this will give her good small bump compliance and a fork with which she can use the travel. And if it is too linear I can still stuff some tokens in. 

C1 with the bumper is just plain not comfortable so it isn't an option in this case. B1 is notorious for being difficult to use the whole travel so this isn't an option at all.


----------



## D(C) (Jun 17, 2013)

socalrider77 said:


> Unless you dropped the air pressure, more negative volume (which is what taking out the bumper does) will use less travel because it ramps more at the end of the stroke
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I would have thought that bottom-out resistance would be similar at the same positive air spring pressure, regardless of changes to negative spring volume.


----------



## JB450 (Mar 31, 2019)

Balgaroth said:


> I tried to pull the fork and it doesn't make any top out noise, I could only create such noise by holding the lowers and tugging the uppers. We will see how that behaves on the trails tho.


Cut the bumper in half and put half in if at top out it is noisy.


----------



## Balgaroth (Dec 14, 2021)

JB450 said:


> Cut the bumper in half and put half in if at top out it is noisy.


Thanks for the tip. She is running 55psi right now so the return force is much less than for us. If it is noisy I will add a o-ring that should do the trick.


----------



## noapathy (Jun 24, 2008)

Sorry - is there a Clif Notes for this thread? I was getting ready to purchase the C1 upgrade for a 170mm Yari until I saw it. Is there a consensus whether it's an improvement?


----------



## Bafo808 (Feb 6, 2021)

noapathy said:


> Sorry - is there a Clif Notes for this thread? I was getting ready to purchase the C1 upgrade for a 170mm Yari until I saw it. Is there a consensus whether it's an improvement?


On average, people feels like it is a downgrade


----------



## Graveltattoo (Sep 14, 2017)

Bafo808 said:


> On average, people feels like it is a downgrade


And some people don't.


----------



## noapathy (Jun 24, 2008)

Bafo808 said:


> On average, people feels like it is a downgrade





Graveltattoo said:


> And some people don't.


Well that's about right for the internet.


----------



## HollyBoni (Dec 27, 2016)

To be fair he said average, not that every single person thinks of the C1 as a downgrade. 😛


----------



## Bafo808 (Feb 6, 2021)

HollyBoni said:


> To be fair he said average, not that every single people thinks of the C1 as a downgrade. 😛


Thank you Holly 😂
Btw I should have argued my answer... On average is not appreciated because of less small bump compliance due to a smaller negative chamber. 😉


----------



## JB450 (Mar 31, 2019)

Apparently the C1 works better with a runt/chickadee thingy.

I've used both B1 and C1 with my diy runt and do think the C1 suits it better


----------



## noapathy (Jun 24, 2008)

JB450 said:


> Apparently the C1 works better with a runt/chickadee thingy.
> 
> I've used both B1 and C1 with my diy runt and do think the C1 suits it better


OK, but I don't want to keep buying (or making) thingies just for tiny marginal gains. The guy at the LBS made it sound like a miracle fix for some horrible problem. I think I'll just ride the thing until it either dies or becomes too annoying and then switch to a Manitou.


----------



## Graveltattoo (Sep 14, 2017)

Bafo808 said:


> Thank you Holly 😂
> Btw I should have argued my answer... On average is not appreciated because of less small bump compliance due to a smaller negative chamber. 😉


I've talked to 4 different suspension experts, 2 said downgrade, 2 said improvement. Even the experts can't agree!😁

I think a big part is what type of trails you're riding. I found on the steep janky stuff the B1 dove too far into its travel, end travel was to harsh for me. Only advantage was the slightly better small bump compliance.....but I found the C1 better for the rest.

If we all liked the same things, there would be only one bike, one fork, one.....😁


----------



## noapathy (Jun 24, 2008)

Well, I found a C1 kit for about $25 off fleabay so I'll take a chance for that price - now all I have to do is work up the motivation to install it. I'll probably get around to it during lowers service (right about the time they come up with a newer version).


----------



## JB450 (Mar 31, 2019)

noapathy said:


> OK, but I don't want to keep buying (or making) thingies just for tiny marginal gains. The guy at the LBS made it sound like a miracle fix for some horrible problem. I think I'll just ride the thing until it either dies or becomes too annoying and then switch to a Manitou.


That's entirely up to you.


noapathy said:


> Well, I found a C1 kit for about $25 off fleabay so I'll take a chance for that price - now all I have to do is work up the motivation to install it. I'll probably get around to it during lowers service (right about the time they come up with a newer version).


FWIW, as I mentioned earlier I cut the top out bumper in half on the C1 airshaft and also at one point re-installed the RS top cap (instead of my diy jobby).

Worked well like this, no topout noise. An ever so slight amount of suck down at static ride height (1-2mm). I reckon it would be even better with a couple of fat o-rings in place of the half topout bumper too.


----------



## noapathy (Jun 24, 2008)

JB450 said:


> FWIW, as I mentioned earlier I cut the top out bumper in half on the C1 airshaft and also at one point re-installed the RS top cap (instead of my diy jobby).
> 
> Worked well like this, no topout noise. An ever so slight amount of suck down at static ride height (1-2mm). I reckon it would be even better with a couple of fat o-rings in place of the half topout bumper too.


Thanks - did it make a topout noise with the whole (stock) bumper? If so, I can handle doing some minor surgery, but would rather leave it alone if it's just a couple mm of suck down since I'm already bumping the bike's travel from 150 to 170.


----------



## JB450 (Mar 31, 2019)

noapathy said:


> Thanks - did it make a topout noise with the whole (stock) bumper? If so, I can handle doing some minor surgery, but would rather leave it alone if it's just a couple mm of suck down since I'm already bumping the bike's travel from 150 to 170.


No topout noise with the whole bumper.

Worth noting that with the half bumper, I made sure I cycled the suspension ever 50psi or so as I put pressure in.


----------



## noapathy (Jun 24, 2008)

JB450 said:


> No topout noise with the whole bumper.
> 
> Worth noting that with the half bumper, I made sure I cycled the suspension ever 50psi or so as I put pressure in.


Cool. I'll try it without mods first. Thanks again!


----------



## Skeptastic (Mar 31, 2012)

Dougal said:


> I use Supergliss in the lowers. 68k for cold conditions, 100k for warm. I only use grease (Slickoleum) in the air-spring as oil will end up in the wrong place. Coat the quad-rings, rub it into the shaft and coat the inside of the stanchion so the air piston collects it on the way up.


Hey again Dougal! I've finally got all of my parts and am building up the bike this week. Gonna have the lowers dropped the fork serviced out the gate. Just to clarify, are you saying that you add the Supergliss to the damper side only, and then just slickoleum to the air side? The Rockshox manual says to add oil to the damper and spring lowers, and a little oil to the spring upper tube. Just checking with you before it's completed, because the shop building the bike up will be doing all of this and I wanna make sure I have them do it the right way, as opposed to how they might have been taught. Thanks again. Appreciate your time and help!


----------



## EatsDirt (Jan 20, 2014)

I'm pretty sure Dougal is talking specifically about not using oil in the air spring. Both sides of the lowers still need bath oil.


----------



## johnsogr (May 31, 2009)

Correct, definitely need oil in lowers to live the bushings, just not the 3 mL on top of the airspring in the positive chamber that RS recommends


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## HollyBoni (Dec 27, 2016)

Yep.

I just disassembled my air spring after putting dynamic seal grease and 3ml of oil in it last time. Oh my god... What a freaking mess.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

Skeptastic said:


> Hey again Dougal! I've finally got all of my parts and am building up the bike this week. Gonna have the lowers dropped the fork serviced out the gate. Just to clarify, are you saying that you add the Supergliss to the damper side only, and then just slickoleum to the air side? The Rockshox manual says to add oil to the damper and spring lowers, and a little oil to the spring upper tube. Just checking with you before it's completed, because the shop building the bike up will be doing all of this and I wanna make sure I have them do it the right way, as opposed to how they might have been taught. Thanks again. Appreciate your time and help!





EatsDirt said:


> I'm pretty sure Dougal is talking specifically about not using oil in the air spring. Both sides of the lowers still need bath oil.


Yes that^^


----------



## jonteq (Jul 5, 2020)

Hello! 
Thinking of changing my current C1 airspring in my 150 mm 2021 Pike. A question, would a B1 150 mm air shaft kit from a Lyrik fit in the Pike?


----------



## Bafo808 (Feb 6, 2021)

jonteq said:


> Hello!
> Thinking of changing my current C1 airspring in my 150 mm 2021 Pike. A question, would a B1 150 mm air shaft kit from a Lyrik fit in the Pike?


The Lyrik's piston is "taller" and the shaft length is different. But also the foot nut length is different from B1 to C1 so in the end it could totally work and the travel could be just a bit less than 150mm.


----------



## jonteq (Jul 5, 2020)

Ok, I will maybe just swap the seal head then. My thought was that the piston of the Lyrik might give a little more negative air. 

(OT: Thanks for your advice today Bafo808)


----------



## Bafo808 (Feb 6, 2021)

jonteq said:


> Ok, I will maybe just swap the seal head then. My thought was that the piston of the Lyrik might give a little more negative air.
> 
> (OT: Thanks for your advice today Bafo808)


I've edited my post above! Anyway, I don't think you will gain negative volume with the lyrik shaft, I believe the opposite, since the piston "neck" it's longer.


----------



## jonteq (Jul 5, 2020)

Bafo808 said:


> I've edited my post above! Anyway, I don't think you will gain negative volume with the lyrik shaft, I believe the opposite, since the piston "neck" it's longer.


Ok, sounds reasonable. I have noticed that the B1 Lyrik often is described as more supple of the top than the B1 Pike. If that is the case could that be explained by overall longer travel and hence more negative air in the hollow shaft (along with stiffer chassis?


----------



## Bafo808 (Feb 6, 2021)

jonteq said:


> Ok, sounds reasonable. I have noticed that the B1 Lyrik often is described as more supple of the top than the B1 Pike. If that is the case could that be explained by overall longer travel and hence more negative air in the hollow shaft (along with stiffer chassis?


No, it's because the distance from the seal head to the dimple is bigger than on the Pike (and this is why the pistons have different lengths) so there is effectively a bigger negative chamber on the Lyrik. In fact, on the Pike you can fit a B1 Lyrik shaft but not a C1, the taller seal head would prevent the piston to get to the dimple and equalize the chambers.


----------



## angieri918 (Apr 1, 2020)

Anyone rocking the Everflow air shaft for their Pike? Really interested in this. Hoping to hear some peoples experience with this


----------



## HollyBoni (Dec 27, 2016)

angieri918 said:


> Anyone rocking the Everflow air shaft for their Pike? Really interested in this. Hoping to hear some peoples experience with this


I've been riding a Zerodue kit in a 150mm 2021 Pike Select+ for a few months now. Kinda does what it says. I definitely noticed more mid stroke and more progression. I'm not sure if small bump sensitivity improved much, but at least it stayed the same while gaining some mid stroke which is nice.
I think having the damper tuned made a bigger difference to me in how the fork feels (in different areas tho), but these two changes together really transformed the fork.


----------



## Bafo808 (Feb 6, 2021)

In all honesty is really unusual that it wasn't felt any difference in small bump sensitivity, but anyway, here is another user that installed it but on a Lyrik, there are a few others in the forum but I can't find the posts at the moment.


johnsogr said:


> Had my first (only 2.5 miles) ride on the EverFlow piston mated w/ an Avy damper (no coil), and it was fantastic! I removed a Secus and installed the EverFlow piston, but the only hiccup as that I kept blowing the green SKF fork seal on the air side when I'd fully compress the fork to bleed the avy damper. The only thing that worked was removing the green SKF, and putting old the old PUSH seal back on (I don't like these as I've had the foam rings fall into the lowers, and I have the hardest time getting the uppers into the lowers with them installed). Anyone ever had this problem? Maybe I contaminated the seals where it meets the fork and isn't supposed to be lubed?
> 
> Anyhow, the Secus always seemed to sag a bit unweighted, which really annoyed me, so I loved how the EverFlow stood right up without unweighted sag. Small bump compliance was fantastic (way better than C1 & B1), and the ramp up was great (I'm 75 kg, riding a Lyrik 160 & 75 psi for 24% sag and no volume spacers, all on a Transition Sentinel). I don't think I'll be going back to the Secus, and kudos to Eveflow!


Some other feedbacks can be found here


----------



## HollyBoni (Dec 27, 2016)

Bafo808 said:


> In all honesty is really unusual that it wasn't felt any difference in small bump sensitivity, but anyway, here is another user that installed it but on a Lyrik, there are a few others in the forum but I can't find the posts at the moment.
> 
> 
> Some other feedbacks can be found here


Oh it's possible that it's just me and there is actually a very noticeable difference. It's also worth mentioning that I installed it in the winter when it was about 0-5C outside and a week or two might have passed between riding the old spring and the new spring so...
But i'm happy with the product even for just the increased mid stroke (which I definitely feel).


----------



## Bafo808 (Feb 6, 2021)

For sure every rider has different "sensitivity" as well 😄


----------



## angieri918 (Apr 1, 2020)

Bafo808 said:


> For sure every rider has different "sensitivity" as well 😄


Appreciate the info 🙏 I will def be considering this mod


----------



## Brodybro29 (May 10, 2021)

Anybody has already ran the new Pike against the two previous debonair ?
I have moved my 2020 pike on my new hardtail at 130mm for general trail riding. I have first used it with the debonair C to give it a new chance, fairly harsh feeling, and then back to B which feels so smooth. Exact same damper setting, 3 from close HSC and 5 from close LSC.
Ive the feeling that the difference in suppleness is even more pronounced at lower travel


----------



## Balgaroth (Dec 14, 2021)

C can feel fine if you remove the top-out bumper. That will give you a slight increase in negative air volume but mostly your top-out will be with equalized air chambers rather than the positive air chamber pushing against the bumper. I did this on my girlfriend fork as increasing the lower volume was needed so she could use full travel but in stock form the C spring was definitely harsh.


----------



## Bakudan (May 19, 2011)

EDIT: Nvm I found my answer a few pages back.


----------

