# Dorado vs DVO Emerald



## meSSican (Aug 8, 2010)

Wanted to see if anyone had any real world comparisons to the two forks. Reading all the great reviews for the Dorado has me very curious and wanting to try one out. I am currently on an Emerald and have no complaints about it, I am just wondering how they compare.

Thanks!


----------



## Gemini2k05 (Apr 19, 2005)

I'm currently in the process of writing a very detailed comparison. This week you will have your answer.


----------



## meSSican (Aug 8, 2010)

Gemini2k05 said:


> I'm currently in the process of writing a very detailed comparison. This week you will have your answer.


Amazing.... Thank you.


----------



## kazlx (Jun 13, 2005)

I have a Dorado and it's a great fork. I'm guessing the Emerald might be better, but not for the price.


----------



## Rob-Bob (Jun 11, 2004)

kazlx said:


> I have a Dorado and it's a great fork. I'm guessing the Emerald might be better, but not for the price.


I have to agree.. My Dorado is an awesome fork and I am sure the Emerald is as well but I could buy three Dorado's for the price of one Emerald. So the question is , is the Emerald 300% better than the Dorado..I doubt it.


----------



## Tim F. (May 22, 2006)

Doesn't the DVO come with some lame azz pirate endorsement? That's gotta make it much slower. And it's green, every one knows black is faster!


----------



## SHIVER ME TIMBERS (Jan 12, 2004)

Tim F. said:


> Doesn't the DVO come with some lame azz pirate endorsement? That's gotta make it much slower. And it's green, every one knows black is faster!


there are black ones too numskull


----------



## SHIVER ME TIMBERS (Jan 12, 2004)

not replacing seals on dorado (dorados have problems here)

Emeralds are stiffer


----------



## kazlx (Jun 13, 2005)

My Dorado doesn't. Like I said, I'm sure the Emerald is a great fork and honestly, barring price, it would probably be my first choice. I have also not ridden one, but would like to. The Dorado is by far, the best fork I have ridden, having not ridden the Emerald.


----------



## Gemini2k05 (Apr 19, 2005)

SHIVER ME TIMBERS said:


> not replacing seals on dorado (dorados have problems here)


Not really. Some of them just came from the factory with zero grease on them which caused them to leak prematurely.


----------



## Rob-Bob (Jun 11, 2004)

kazlx said:


> My Dorado doesn't. Like I said, I'm sure the Emerald is a great fork and honestly, barring price, it would probably be my first choice. I have also not ridden one, but would like to. The Dorado is by far, the best fork I have ridden, having not ridden the Emerald.


+ 1


----------



## kazlx (Jun 13, 2005)

Another thing to add, I had a great experience with Manitou. They offer your first rebuild free of charge. Call them, get an RA number and ship it to them. They rebuild and ship it back on their dime. All you pay is shipping to them. Fork feels even better after getting it back.


----------



## metalMTB (Sep 15, 2005)

i already ordered my emerald but I would love to hear a comparison. I know that everyone I've talked to who has ridden an inverted fork loves them compared to a "normal" fork.


----------



## Gemini2k05 (Apr 19, 2005)

DVO review

Summary:
DVO has a vastly superior chassis to other fork offerings and significantly better damper performance. Although it is slightly heavier, I didn’t notice it while riding, generally, except when trying to manual maybe? Although I’m larger (and STRONGER! ) than the average rider. The stock tune was not very good, a bit harsh, but after I had them retune the compression stack, it is quite impressive.

Background:
Over the past few years I’ve run a variety of 888s including one with an Avy damper. The last year I’ve ridden a few Dorados (expert/pro, different years), and this year have been alternating between the Dorado and the Emerald. I think that Dorado is probably the second best fork on the market (and the expert is certainly the best value), so for most of the review I’ll be doing an A-B comparison of the 2. 

I’ve explored the full tuning range of the Dorado (oil heights and weights, adjusters, spring rates, but not hardware/shim stack tuning) but have yet to do the same with the Emerald. In the past 8 years I’ve run a 40 and some different boxxers *shudders*, some 66’s, old Manitou shermans, 55’s, pikes, and more. I have not ridden any of the recent 40’s, but I’ve bounced around on a few. I still would like to get my hands on a Zoke 380. Although the whole “Let’s underspring every single fork we sell” attitude of Zoke has left me a bit jaded. I’d say I ride at the upper end of the expert level, I’m not especially fast, but at North American resorts I’ll clear most if not all of the most challenging features without much if any trouble. 

I. Chassis:
A. Smoothness
This is where the Emerald truly shines. I’ve spent a good amount of time playing with improving the action of 888 and Dorado chassis in the past. Frequent rebuilds, using a variety of different greases on the seals and damper/lubrication oils, etc. So I’m used to a fairly supple fork. The DVO hands down beats any other fork I’ve tried right out of the box, much lower friction from the seals/bushing interface. This is probably due to improved mfg. tolerances. This effect is quite striking, even random Joe Blows who have pushed down on my fork notice it. After a couple of hard resort weekends (Mammoth and Northstar, ~10-15k vert/day) it’s only getting smoother, it’s like a reverse Boxxer! At 225lbs I run a spring rate far higher than most people, and yet the initial inch or so of travel is still significantly more plush than boxxers/40’s/Dorados sprung for people 50 pounds less than me. I notice a SIGNIFICANT improvement in hand fatigue over the Dorado. Which to me is one of the most important aspects of a fork when you’re trying to rack up the days at Northstar.



B. Offset
The DVO has a reduced offset on the crowns compared to the Dorado. That means that the fork is “further back” relative to the headtube. Although this isn’t discussed much in MTB circles, offset is a HUGE tuning parameter in the moto world. A larger offset makes the fork more stable, but a reduced offset should increase low speed handling performance, turning, etc.

I notice that the Dorado has s tendency to want to “flop over” in turns compared to the DVO. It feels a bit more “raked out” too as a result (partially because the axle to crown height is longer too). The DVO turns significantly better. Handling overall is much improved. I expected there would be some trade offs with high speed stability. Mammoth has plenty of super fast (Strava had me at ~42mph whatever that’s worth) and loose fireroad and ski-run type trails to test this on (Kamikaze, Toll road, etc.). Doing some A-B comparisons with the Dorado I noticed almost no reduction in stability with the DVO. I wonder if that’s because the reduced torsional rigidity of the Dorado makes up for the added stability of the larger offset?

C. Height
The axle to crown is shorter on the DVO, I like that. ‘nuff said. Unfortunately they do not make a top crown for it. So I’m having one custom made to get the bars high enough.


D. CTA
One of the things I’ve noticed with the Dorado is the torsional flex of the fork in rough, deep rock gardens. I think as a bigger guy I’m more apt to notice this short coming. I’m not convinced that a normal sized person would have a problem with it though. The Emerald however has all the stiffness attributes of a right-side-up fork. You would never know that you are riding an inverted fork. It definitely improves low speed performance, and it holds lines much better in rocky sections. The CTA is the real deal. Torsional stiffness is noticeably improved over the Dorado. I have not tried riding without it yet. I might take it off for a run if I feel like risking damaging the stanchions, we’ll see.

II. Air Spring:

The air spring is quite good. It’s smooth like a coil, no detectable friction from the added seals of an air spring, very similar to the Dorado. The OTT is nice, real nice. It makes a huge difference and is probably the coolest, most useful feature on the bike. It goes beyond just allowing you to adjust the suppleness of the initial inch of travel. It allows you to tune the entire progressivity of the air spring when you play with the air spring pressure as well. You end up screwing with the OTT/spring rate more than you do with the damping adjusters on the fork.

The Dorado I’ve noticed has a tendency to gradually lose travel. Supposedly that’s due to air in the positive spring leaking past the check valve into the negative spring chamber (or something). I have not noticed such a problem with the Emerald over similar time scales.


III. Damper:

The Dorado’s biggest, more glaring problem is the total lack of midstroke support. I find that no matter what I do on that fork I’m constantly engaging the bottom out system on it (luckily the bottom out system is badass). As a result that fork is always packing down and deflects easily in long sustained rock gardens. High air pressure, thicker oil, compression adjusters cranked all the way in, fast rebound, none of those solve the problem. The DVO does not have that problem at all. You get as much midstroke support as you want, and as result the fork stays in a much more active portion of its travel. 

I am able to run quite a bit of rebound damping on the DVO, more so that the Dorado. It stays a lot higher in the travel so I don’t have to worry about it packing down if I run the rebound slow. Being able to run slower rebound makes it really nice for high speed rock stuff since it won’t have that pogo feeling and stays much more controlled.

The compression adjusters make a difference. They have a narrower range of adjustment than the Dorado though. I’ve found I like the HSC far out, and the LSC mid way in the adjustment range. The HSC seem to mostly add harshness without improving chassis control. Turning in the LSC helps improve the support in turns/braking/drops pretty well. 

IV. Durability/Maintenance:

The Dorado is ridiculously easy to maintain, and for the most part has been trouble free. Only quirks are A. Some of the Dorado’s I’ve had have come from the factory with zero grease on the seals which caused them to leak right away, easily remedied. B. I bent the air spring shaft on one. But that was from overshooting a 30ft table to flat and crashing in a spectacular fashion. 

So far so good with the DVO. I haven’t spent anywhere near enough time to consider a long term review, but it hasn’t had any obvious defects so far. I’m heading to whistler next week with both forks, so more thoughts and comments may follow that. I haven’t pulled it apart either yet, so I can’t speak to it’s ease of maintenance either, supposedly it’s just as easy as the Dorado. 

Overall: 
The Emerald is the best fork I’ve run. It has a very moto feel to it. Much more controlled than other forks. I’m probably going to buy a second one for my backup DH bike to replace the Dorado at some point. The biggest shortcoming is the price. If you’re a bigshot, go for it.

Emerald:
Chassis: A++
Spring: A
Damper: A- (initial tune was sub par)
Value: B+ (it’s pricey)

Dorado Expert 
Chassis: B+
Spring: B (getting stuck down)
Damper: B+ (poor midstroke support)
Value: A (price is great)


----------



## Pau11y (Oct 15, 2004)

Gemini2k05 said:


> The HSC seem to mostly add harshness without improving chassis control.


So, I'm in the process of selling off my '14 Jedi and DVO Emerald, to get the '15 of both for the 650b wheels. Have you thought about getting hold of DVO about their 650b crown set to address the bar height? If you have, is it still not tall enough?

About the HSC, I retuned my Emerald and got it opened up a LOT more. When I get the 650b fork, I'll prob do it again unless they change the factory tune for '15. But when I had to loader out, I think I recall how to remove the rim loading HSC adjuster so that I can just hardwire the HSC shims...ala Avy cart.


----------



## Gemini2k05 (Apr 19, 2005)

Pau11y said:


> So, I'm in the process of selling off my '14 Jedi and DVO Emerald, to get the '15 of both for the 650b wheels. Have you thought about getting hold of DVO about their 650b crown set to address the bar height? If you have, is it still not tall enough?


Yes I discussed that with them. I don't want to go to the larger offset though, just taller.

I already had it retuned to reduce the HSC. I like it where it is now. Where it is just happens to be only 2-3 clicks in on the HSC.


----------



## Pau11y (Oct 15, 2004)

Gemini2k05 said:


> Yes I discussed that with them. I don't want to go to the larger offset though, just taller.
> 
> I already had it retuned to reduce the HSC. I like it where it is now. Where it is just happens to be only 2-3 clicks in on the HSC.


That's about where I'm at w/ my HSC too, and about 10 turns in from full open on LSC. Did Keystone pretty well w/ that setup, and fast rebound  I do soften up the LSC a touch at Trestle...way faster and pretty smooth.

Okay, so the 650b increases the offset, not taller. I guess w/ a 650b wheel, that might be fine, but I do agree w/ your assessment on the forks turning...it does carve nicely in the tights! I've not noticed any instability in the fasts tho...but that could be the 800mm Havoc 35 carbon bar too.


----------



## Pau11y (Oct 15, 2004)

Gemini2k05 said:


> Yes I discussed that with them. I don't want to go to the larger offset though, just taller.
> 
> I already had it retuned to reduce the HSC. I like it where it is now. Where it is just happens to be only 2-3 clicks in on the HSC.


Say Gemini, did they send you the tune? I'd be interested to find out what they changed in the shim stack. TIA.


----------



## Gemini2k05 (Apr 19, 2005)

Pau11y said:


> Say Gemini, did they send you the tune? I'd be interested to find out what they changed in the shim stack. TIA.


I did not ask what the stack was. You can call them up and I'm sure they can give you all the tuning info you want.


----------



## Pau11y (Oct 15, 2004)

Gemini2k05 said:


> I did not ask what the stack was. You can call them up and I'm sure they can give you all the tuning info you want.


I have the old stacking, was just hoping to see if what they did jive w/ what I did


----------



## metalMTB (Sep 15, 2005)

im getting the '15 jedi with dvo too. going 27.5. guess might as well convert now and save some money.


----------



## Gemini2k05 (Apr 19, 2005)

Also a few other comments

Air spring recommended pressures in the manual are way off. Assume you have to go 10-15 psi lower (this is universally known now.

With stock tune, anyone under 200 pounds is probably going to be full open on rebound

Tuning the OTT is critically important for the feel of the fork, start with that before fiddling with compression adjusters


----------



## motochick (Jun 22, 2010)

How does the DVO compare to the Avy tuned forks you have ridden?


----------



## Gemini2k05 (Apr 19, 2005)

motochick said:


> How does the DVO compare to the Avy tuned forks you have ridden?


So the Avy cart is a roller coaster of emotion. It does some things really well, and some things absolutely horribly.

Good:
Midstroke support/mid valve
Bottom out cone

Bad:
Initial tunes
Ease of dissassembly

It has really good midstroke support. Much better than the stock 888 damper. Doesn't dive in turns or under heavy braking as much. It was a big improvement. The hydraulic bottom out is also really nice. Never got a metal on metal bottom, always smooth. It's pretty easy to install, just need an impact wrench to get the footnut tight. Cartridge is easy to bleed as well.

It does have some GLARING weaknesses though. You need a special tool and shaft blocks to take apart the fork in order to adjust the shim stacks. There is absolutely no reason for this. In fact, it was probably harder and more costly to design it this way than to just make proper wrench flats on the cartridge like an average moto fork. Absolutely retarded. It's just done so you have to buy a special tool for ~$70 that cost him $5 to make.

Additionally he uses red loctite on the threads to make it even more obnoxious to disassemble. No reason blue isn't good enough. Also you have to use the shaft blocks to clamp onto the foot nut threads to take apart the compression assembly. Although it seemed to work okay once so far, this seems like a really bad idea if you have to retune it a bunch of times.

All of these aforementioned issues wouldn't be a big deal if his stock "custom" tunes were spot on to begin with, but they're not. When I bought the cart I made it VERY clear how big I was, what spring rate I wanted to run (stuck a Fox 40 Xfirm spring in there because the stiffest 888 spring was inadequate), and how I wanted the damping to feel. He failed miserably on that. The rebound was basically a pogo stick, and the low speed compression was horribly underdamped. Both adjuster were run all the way in and had little effect. Tune was wayyyyyy off, even if I ran it with the 888 xfirm spring. I just recently retuned it. It's kind of a band-aid tune, but it should be better. I'm not sure how much energy I want to put into fiddling with the fork thought.

Also, there is some kind of rough spot/slight bend in the shaft somewhere. The piston binds a little bit at one point.

Unless you've already got a fork with a good chassis (i.e. NOT a boxxer or 40) I'd avoid it, not worth the price. Just get a Dorado expert or something. Especially if you're over 160 pounds, cause his tunes are gonna suck.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

Gemini2k05 said:


> I've explored the full tuning range of the Dorado (oil heights and weights, adjusters, spring rates, but not hardware/shim stack tuning)


Great run-down, but I'm curious about your tuning above.

You're using oil weight and height as tuning, but neither are an effective way to tune a Dorado.
Unless you change the shim-stacks it's not going to acheive much more than playing with the adjusters.

The Dorado is also a fork that is very sensitive to oil type. With the wrong type of oil (stuff that isn't slippery enough) they feel very notchy. Put RS oil in them and you'd swear they have sand-paper coated bushings. But change back to the right oil (I'm using Motorex fork oil in the damper and a Motorex fully synthetic lube oil in the air side) and they are straight back to dead smooth.


----------



## Gemini2k05 (Apr 19, 2005)

Dougal said:


> Unless you change the shim-stacks it's not going to acheive much more than playing with the adjusters.
> 
> The Dorado is also a fork that is very sensitive to oil type. With the wrong type of oil (stuff that isn't slippery enough) they feel very notchy.


Yes, this is 100% true. About all the oil weight does is increase rebound damping and LSC. It helps me go from being at the end of the adjuster range, to back in the middle at least. Basically zero change to mid stroke support. And of course the oil height does basically nothing. You can get the spring to ramp up a tiny bit by putting a few extra CC's of oil in the air cartridge, but that might just be in my head.

Supposedly manitou has some tune adjustment to improve the mid stroke support. I have yet to get my hands on those settings and try it. I'll probably do that after I get back from Whistler next week and rebuild the fork.

I've used a few different oil types. Tried maxima, which of course, ruins seals on MTB forks by swelling them (but for some reason works great on my moto forks). On my other Dorado I'm now rocking Golden Spectro oil since that's what DVO uses and it doesn't ruin seals.


----------



## mullen119 (Aug 30, 2009)

Gemini2k05 said:


> Yes, this is 100% true. About all the oil weight does is increase rebound damping and LSC. It helps me go from being at the end of the adjuster range, to back in the middle at least. Basically zero change to mid stroke support. And of course the oil height does basically nothing. You can get the spring to ramp up a tiny bit by putting a few extra CC's of oil in the air cartridge, but that might just be in my head.
> 
> Supposedly manitou has some tune adjustment to improve the mid stroke support. I have yet to get my hands on those settings and try it. I'll probably do that after I get back from Whistler next week and rebuild the fork.
> 
> I've used a few different oil types. Tried maxima, which of course, ruins seals on MTB forks by swelling them (but for some reason works great on my moto forks). On my other Dorado I'm now rocking Golden Spectro oil since that's what DVO uses and it doesn't ruin seals.


I am a little confused. You keep referring to changing damping setting and changing oil weights/volumes as your way of trying to gain mid stroke support. Gaining mid stroke support is achieved mainly by changing spring characteristics from changing the volume of the air spring, not by changing oil weights or adjusting your compression settings. At 225lbs, you are a prime candidate to have this problem with the linear spring rate of a Dorado. I highly suggest that you reduce the spring volume if you have not already done so, doing so will allow you to get more support through out the entire stroke. I believe Manitou started making "bottomless tokens" for the Dorado air spring systems used in the Mattoc and Dorado, I would contact Manitou and ask them about it. You also stated that the DVO has a custom tune, but you have never played with the Dorado shim stacks. Not really a fair damper comparison IMO


----------



## Gemini2k05 (Apr 19, 2005)

mullen119 said:


> Gaining mid stroke support is achieved mainly by changing spring characteristics from changing the volume of the air spring, not by changing oil weights or adjusting your compression settings. At 225lbs, you are a prime candidate to have this problem with the linear spring rate of a Dorado. I highly suggest that you reduce the spring volume if you have not already done so, doing so will allow you to get more support through out the entire stroke. I believe Manitou started making "bottomless tokens" for the Dorado air spring systems used in the Mattoc and Dorado, I would contact Manitou and ask them about it. You also stated that the DVO has a custom tune, but you have never played with the Dorado shim stacks. Not really a fair damper comparison IMO


All good, correct points. I was hoping for an "easy fix" with the Dorado, but yeah, it needs larger changes. I have not heard about these bottomless tokens. Are they just spacers to reduce the spring cart volume?


----------



## mullen119 (Aug 30, 2009)

Gemini2k05 said:


> All good, correct points. I was hoping for an "easy fix" with the Dorado, but yeah, it needs larger changes. I have not heard about these bottomless tokens. Are they just spacers to reduce the spring cart volume?


I called them "bottomless tokens" since thats what Rock Shox calls them, Not sure if Manitou named them yet. But yes, they are spacers to reduce volume. Last I heard, they were supposed to start shipping with Mattoc forks a few months back, and the previously shipped forks could get them for free by contacting Manitou. I believe they said they would work in a Dorado as well. I would contact Manitou and ask them/verify. I just read it online earlier in the summer. [email protected]


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

The Dorado spring is an upright cartridge with the air valve at the top. You can simply use oil inside it to reduce volume.

But a linear spring is what gives the best mid-stroke support. Reducing volume and making it more progressive gives a weaker mid-stroke for the same bottomout. The close to linear spring is the reason I've been so impressed with the Dorado. I normally only like coil spring forks.


----------



## mullen119 (Aug 30, 2009)

Dougal said:


> The Dorado spring is an upright cartridge with the air valve at the top. You can simply use oil inside it to reduce volume.
> 
> But a linear spring is what gives the best mid-stroke support. Reducing volume and making it more progressive gives a weaker mid-stroke for the same bottomout. The close to linear spring is the reason I've been so impressed with the Dorado. I normally only like coil spring forks.


Somewhat true if you are only judging by bottom out, and reducing air pressure while increasing progressiveness with a lower volume spring. Thats not what I would suggest though. Gemini2k05 said he was constantly getting to the where the hydraulic bottom out was engaging. Reducing volume while running the same pressure/Sag will increase the mid to bottom support and keep him from constantly engaging the bottoming cone.

Run the same Sag/pressure number while adding a bit of progressiveness to the spring is what the doctor ordered in this case. Tends to always be the case with heavier riders really, light weight riders are the ones who usually benefit from a linear spring.


----------



## Gemini2k05 (Apr 19, 2005)

mullen119 said:


> But yes, they are spacers to reduce volume. Last I heard, they were supposed to start shipping with Mattoc forks a few months back, and the previously shipped forks could get them for free by contacting Manitou.


I've already tried putting extra oil in the spring cat, would should have the same effect, no?


----------



## mullen119 (Aug 30, 2009)

Gemini2k05 said:


> I've already tried putting extra oil in the spring cat, would should have the same effect, no?


Yes it would, though you may need to add 15ml+ of oil to get a noticable effect on the spring.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

Gemini2k05 said:


> I've already tried putting extra oil in the spring cat, would should have the same effect, no?


Did you remove the air spring piston and compression rod to add oil below that?

I have recovered up to 38cc of oil from Dorado air chambers. Those forks were used for racing and had no ill effects from that.
The riders however liked them more without.

It sounds like you really need more air pressure. For a spring that linear increasing damping and progression (via oil) will just make for less mid-stroke support.
The only way to gain more support is more air pressure.

Tuning always needs to start with the right spring.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

mullen119 said:


> Somewhat true if you are only judging by bottom out, and reducing air pressure while increasing progressiveness with a lower volume spring. Thats not what I would suggest though. Gemini2k05 said he was constantly getting to the where the hydraulic bottom out was engaging. Reducing volume while running the same pressure/Sag will increase the mid to bottom support and keep him from constantly engaging the bottoming cone.


Reducing volume has almost no effect on the mid-stroke. If you want more mid-stroke support you need more air pressure.



mullen119 said:


> Run the same Sag/pressure number while adding a bit of progressiveness to the spring is what the doctor ordered in this case. Tends to always be the case with heavier riders really, light weight riders are the ones who usually benefit from a linear spring.


There is no difference in tuning methods or intended results for heavier/lighter riders. Too many riders try to run for more bottomout protection when they need to be running stiffer springs. In this case, more air pressure.


----------



## mullen119 (Aug 30, 2009)

Dougal said:


> Did you remove the air spring piston and compression rod to add oil below that?
> 
> I have recovered up to 38cc of oil from Dorado air chambers. Those forks were used for racing and had no ill effects from that.
> The riders however liked them more without.
> ...


Logically, your argument against adding progression via reducing spring volume doesnt add up. Say a rider need 50psi to achieve 30% sag. Running 50psi leaves causes the fork to feel weak in the mid to bottom of the stoke. The rider then adds 20cc of oil to the spring to add progression. 50psi still gives about 30% sag, but the the volume reduction makes the spring ramp up sooner, giving more support in the middle and bottom of the stroke because the air pressures will be higher as the stroke deepend compared to a more linear spring rate.

As I said early, the heavier you are, the more progression you need. This is why companies like Push always recommended doing the HV mod to the old Fox Float forks only if you were under 180lbs. Heavier riders create more force on any given hit and need progression to compensate.

I do agree that proper spring rate is where you need to start though. So many people skip spring rate tuning when it has a larger effect on overall feel than anything else. They skip rebound too and rebound is more important than compression as well.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

mullen119 said:


> Logically, your argument against adding progression via reducing spring volume doesnt add up. Say a rider need 50psi to achieve 30% sag. Running 50psi leaves causes the fork to feel weak in the mid to bottom of the stoke. The rider then adds 20cc of oil to the spring to add progression. 50psi still gives about 30% sag, but the the volume reduction makes the spring ramp up sooner, giving more support in the middle and bottom of the stroke because the air pressures will be higher as the stroke deepend compared to a more linear spring rate.
> 
> As I said early, the heavier you are, the more progression you need. This is why companies like Push always recommended doing the HV mod to the old Fox Float forks only if you were under 180lbs. Heavier riders create more force on any given hit and need progression to compensate.
> 
> I do agree that proper spring rate is where you need to start though. So many people skip spring rate tuning when it has a larger effect on overall feel than anything else. They skip rebound too and rebound is more important than compression as well.


You need to understand the progression of air-springs. They are exponential and any volume change to make a significant difference in the mid-stroke ends up massively over cooking the end of stroke.

Which is why reducing volume is an ineffective way to bolster mid-stroke. It's effect is virtually all end-stroke. Where increasing air pressure has a direct relationship with weight carrying throughout the stroke.

Here's a graph I stole off pirate4x4.com. It's not perfect, but it gives you a rough idea:









Gravity acts on heavy and light riders in direct proportion. The amount of progression required depends on what is ridden. Not how heavy the rider is.


----------



## mullen119 (Aug 30, 2009)

Dougal said:


> Reducing volume has almost no effect on the mid-stroke. If you want more mid-stroke support you need more air pressure.
> 
> There is no difference in tuning methods or intended results for heavier/lighter riders. Too many riders try to run for more bottomout protection when they need to be running stiffer springs. In this case, more air pressure.


You are just giving bad information. The reason companies like Rock Shox and Fox produce Tokens to add progression is because heavier riders need more progression to keep small bump sensitivity while maintaining support. Just adding more air would is not a valid solution.

Your graph also shows nothing useful. So here are a few that put it all in perspective.

Graph comparing spring curves between different volume air cans on a DBair.









Clearly gives more support at 20-30% into its stroke and ramping up from there, meaning more mid to bottom support. In a Dorado's case, it would keep the fork from constantly getting into the HBO.

I know whats coming..... "Thats a rear shock".......

Here is a graph for a Boxxer with different numbers of tokens installed:









Once again, the graphs clearly show that adding progression has a large effect on the last 2/3 of the stroke, adding midstroke support and keeping the HBO from engaging unless its a very large impact.(what HBO is supposed to do)

Once again, I am done arguing with you. This is a thread about Dorado's and Emeralds, not spring rate tuning. My original post was to point out that tuning the air spring is how to gain midstroke support, not turning the clickers on your fork. I feel I have made my point. :thumbsup:


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

mullen119 said:


> You are just giving bad information. The reason companies like Rock Shox and Fox produce Tokens to add progression is because heavier riders need more progression to keep small bump sensitivity while maintaining support. Just adding more air would is not a valid solution.


I don't give bad information. Check your own.

The reason RS and Fox produce tokens is their dampers aren't tunable enough to carry the weight of heavier riders. So they take the only easy option and reduce volume to stop bottom-out.



mullen119 said:


> Your graph also shows nothing useful.


You need to stop there, go back, read and understand how air spring curves actually work.
Do the maths on both adiabatic compression and ideal gas laws. They are the situations of fast and slow compression.

Your graphs are marketing material.



mullen119 said:


> Clearly gives more support at 20-30% into its stroke and ramping up from there, meaning more mid to bottom support. In a Dorado's case, it would keep the fork from constantly getting into the HBO.


Just let the HBO do it's job.
Attempting to ramp up the spring so the bottom out system doesn't work is completely backwards and will ruin suspension peformance across all fast and sharp hits where you need deep stroke but aren't near bottom out.



mullen119 said:


> Once again, I am done arguing with you. This is a thread about Dorado's and Emeralds, not spring rate tuning. My original post was to point out that tuning the air spring is how to gain midstroke support, not turning the clickers on your fork. I feel I have made my point. :thumbsup:


This thread has been specifically about the Dorado air-spring and mid-stroke support. Do you not think air springs have a spring rate?


----------



## mullen119 (Aug 30, 2009)

Dougal said:


> I don't give bad information. Check your own.
> 
> The reason RS and Fox produce tokens is their dampers aren't tunable enough to carry the weight of heavier riders. So they take the only easy option and reduce volume to stop bottom-out.
> 
> ...


Literally feel like I'm arguing with a little kid who isn't listening to what I am saying. You tune springs however you want, me and the rest of the tuning world will do it the right way.


----------



## Pau11y (Oct 15, 2004)

mullen119 said:


> View attachment 923825


Want more of a mind-bender, and this is in support of what mullen said...

The attached graph exactly explains how tokens introduce progression at ZERO PSI gauge. But, the true point where those curves kick in is from your sag point. And, since YOUR mass is fixed, the response "force" to suspend you at say...25% sag...will not change w/ the number of tokens in the fork...aka PSI of air pressure...and this PSI won't be so low as the graph at ZERO PSI gauge. So, shift all the curves up...say 50psi...at the 25% sag point...?

Now the merge point where all those curves in graph 4 will now intersect at the 25% travel point. They will then project back to 0% travel at various PSI...w/ the flattest curve/least number of tokens installed having the highest PSI and the lowest PSI for the most number of tokens installed.

Now, if you open up your rebound, and all of a sudden the lower PSI w/ more tokens will have enough oomph to push the fork out to full extension. And, if you also open up your LSC a bit, there's your small bump sensitivity. Crank up a bit of HSC, and there's your big bump/high speed hit support. Your mid-stroke support is also marginally better since the progression starts from your sag point, where the curves start to diverge at a much greater rate the deeper into the stroke you go.

So, can you visualize how adding tokens will also give you better mid-stroke support now?


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

Pau11y said:


> Want more of a mind-bender, and this is in support of what mullen said...
> 
> The attached graph exactly explains how tokens introduce progression at ZERO PSI gauge. But, the true point where those curves kick in is from your sag point. And, since YOUR mass is fixed, the response "force" to suspend you at say...25% sag...will not change w/ the number of tokens in the fork...aka PSI of air pressure...and this PSI won't be so low as the graph at ZERO PSI gauge. So, shift all the curves up...say 50psi...at the 25% sag point...?


You are correct that force at the same sag will be the same for all volume options. This is the difference between graphs produced for marketing reasons and graphs produced to actually show what happens.



Pau11y said:


> Now, if you open up your rebound, and all of a sudden the lower PSI w/ more tokens will have enough oomph to push the fork out to full extension. And, if you also open up your LSC a bit, there's your small bump sensitivity.


Hang on a minute.
Rebound (LS) and LSC are about chassis control. Opening them up in an attempt to improve small bump response will compromise the whole reasons you had them at their previous settings.

Forks pushing out to full extension unloaded is high speed rebound. Not LS. This is nothing to do with mid-stroke support.



Pau11y said:


> Crank up a bit of HSC, and there's your big bump/high speed hit support.


You've already increased air spring progression, which makes full travel harder to get. Why are you now also increasing HSC?



Pau11y said:


> Your mid-stroke support is also marginally better since the progression starts from your sag point, where the curves start to diverge at a much greater rate the deeper into the stroke you go.
> 
> So, can you visualize how adding tokens will also give you better mid-stroke support now?


Your improved midstroke support (by adding RS accessories) is now at the expense of the entire tune.

Mid stroke support is about keeping the fork up in steep terrain where the front is highly loaded. This is only about the spring. It has nothing to do with the damper.

Making the damper more progressive will hold you up fractionally higher, but will result in no usable travel past that point.
Where a linear spring which is stiff (more air pressure) holds up the rider with a far more usable spring rate which still allows compression deeper into the travel.


----------



## Pau11y (Oct 15, 2004)

Dougal said:


> You are correct that force at the same sag will be the same for all volume options. This is the difference between graphs produced for marketing reasons and graphs produced to actually show what happens.
> 
> Hang on a minute.
> Rebound (LS) and LSC are about chassis control. Opening them up in an attempt to improve small bump response will compromise the whole reasons you had them at their previous settings.
> ...


The thinking of how I tune my trail forks is w/ low air vol, high ramp up rate, and sag set by % w/ pretty open damping. I start at 50% on all knobs and open it up from there.

On the DVO, I changed out the oil and lightened up the shims to get to the more open spot. Sag is at almost 25%, or 2", and OTP is well shy of Ronnie's recommendation...about 20 clicks of preload from fully unloaded...just wanted to get the fork to the point where there's no unweighted sag.

I manage to use ~95% of the travel on a fairly consistent basis, and that last 5% I'm okay w/ having it as reserve, for the very serious OH FACK moments. I'm not saying I know all of the voodoo, but everyone who've ridden/felt my squishy bits were like...JESUS, it feels NIIICE! Maybe where you ride you don't need that initial LSR and LSC open, but for the Front Range of CO, it works really well for techy ups AND downs.

And, your association of HSC to end of stroke ramp up is faulty. HSC could be right out of the sag point...think riding along and slamming into a curb. But for rebound damping, you can _almost_ associate LSR and HSR to where in the stroke you are...after all, rebound damping is ONLY fighting the spring.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

Pau11y said:


> The thinking of how I tune my trail forks is w/ low air vol, high ramp up rate, and sag set by % w/ pretty open damping. I start at 50% on all knobs and open it up from there.
> 
> On the DVO, I changed out the oil and lightened up the shims to get to the more open spot. Sag is at almost 25%, or 2", and OTP is well shy of Ronnie's recommendation...about 20 clicks of preload from fully unloaded...just wanted to get the fork to the point where there's no unweighted sag.
> 
> I manage to use ~95% of the travel on a fairly consistent basis, and that last 5% I'm okay w/ having it as reserve, for the very serious OH FACK moments. I'm not saying I know all of the voodoo, but everyone who've ridden/felt my squishy bits were like...JESUS, it feels NIIICE! Maybe where you ride you don't need that initial LSR and LSC open, but for the Front Range of CO, it works really well for techy ups AND downs.


It sounds like your end setup works well for you. But I certainly wouldn't take any other setup and reduce air volume, LSR, LSC and crank up HSC. Those are a series of drastic changes.
I also wouldn't try to apply a setup tweak that works on a DVO to a Dorado.

Where I like to ride it's technical, full of sharp high shaft speed impacts and you need travel in reserve when riding heavily over the front. Hence the reason my bikes still have coil springs. I run a completely linear spring, only progression comes from some trapped air in the damper cartridges.
I run more LSC and less HSC, HSR and LSR than almost anyone else.



Pau11y said:


> And, your association of HSC to end of stroke ramp up is faulty. HSC could be right out of the sag point...think riding along and slamming into a curb. But for rebound damping, you can _almost_ associate LSR and HSR to where in the stroke you are...after all, rebound damping is ONLY fighting the spring.


That isn't at all what I said.
I said the combination of more HSC and more progression would make full travel harder to access and essentially limit travel.

HSC is active throughout the stroke. I'm not exactly new to this game. I don't need simplified explanations of how damping works.

Rebound damping isn't only fighting the spring. Rebound works on the net extension force and resulting speed. Which may or may not include accelerating you or accelerating your wheel.


----------



## Pau11y (Oct 15, 2004)

Dougal said:


> Rebound damping isn't only fighting the spring. Rebound works on the net extension force and resulting speed. Which may or may not include accelerating you or accelerating your wheel.


You're right, not "only". But, when your 10lbs front wheel + fork lowers and whatever else you're doing at the bar is compared to a starting pressure of 70 psi (my Emerald air pressure) which ramps up exponentially the deeper you go into your stroke, that front wheel and fork lowers mass becomes pretty negligible...even w/ its rotating mass...as far as rebound damping is concerned.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

Pau11y said:


> You're right, not "only". But, when your 10lbs front wheel + fork lowers and whatever else you're doing at the bar is compared to a starting pressure of 70 psi (my Emerald air pressure) which ramps up exponentially the deeper you go into your stroke, that front wheel and fork lowers mass becomes pretty negligible...even w/ its rotating mass...as far as rebound damping is concerned.


It's not negligable at all. The natural frequency of the front wheel shaking up and down (radians/s = sqroot(stiffness/mass)) is what matters most when following corrugations in the road surface. It is where high speed rebound valving makes a huge difference.

Lower unsprung mass gives a higher frequency and higher return speed. Improving the ride.

Basically the suspension system has two natural frequencies. The slow one is you bouncing up and down on the springs. The fast one is the wheels bouncing up and down between the springs and the ground.
This is why we have high speed rebound ports. To allow maximum seperation of these two natural frequencies to give us both stability and suspension response.


----------



## Gemini2k05 (Apr 19, 2005)

Dougal said:


> Did you remove the air spring piston and compression rod to add oil below that?


Come on, it's not my first day!  Yeah I added about 10-15ml below the piston. I didn't add more because I was afraid of violent hydrolocking.

I've explored the full range of reasonable spring rates (up to around 100psi, maybe a touch higher). If I run any higher than around 90psi it gets REALLY harsh without really improving the mid stroke support. I've found that in practice adding 5-10psi has very little impact on that.

Although I just DESTROYED my handlebars on my DVO equipped bike today (see pic), so I'll be rocking the Dorado-equipped bike the rest of the Whistler trip. I'll fiddle with the fork a bunch tomorrow.


----------



## Pau11y (Oct 15, 2004)

Dougal said:


> It's not negligable at all. The natural frequency of the front wheel shaking up and down (radians/s = sqroot(stiffness/mass)) is what matters most when following corrugations in the road surface. It is where high speed rebound valving makes a huge difference.
> 
> Lower unsprung mass gives a higher frequency and higher return speed. Improving the ride.
> 
> ...


Thought exercise: remove all mass from your wheel and lowers...no momentum, no inertia. Yeah, it's one of those "simple" examples, again...you plow that curb from the above example, or send it off a drop...

1. Are you still going to need damping?
- Yes. That 70psi air spring is still there, suspending YOU. So, compression is self explanatory...unless you don't mind your stem/bar in your grill. But rebound...how many cycles of a 70psi spring releasing at unrestrained rate can that little channel machined into the bottom of your stanchion to capture the circlip take before the wheel/bottom departs on an air, even w/ a topout spring/bumper?

2. Have you been sold a bill of good by marketing dept w/ regards to "unsprung mass"?
- If you NEED damping from above, then how does higher return speed even matter? tow clicks of rebound and/or compression nob and your bettered return speed is shot to hell.

3. Is the front wheel a necessary part?
- Obviously, else what's the point of a fork. So, in reality you buy a set of Enve and optimistically drop 250g off your rim in comparison to some 675g EX729s. You're gaining what... ~ 250g * Pi in rotational momentum efficiency...what's that, like 1.5 lbs by feel, roughly? Your fork spring is in the realm of 70PSI, unloaded! So cyclical frequency increase percentage...? Even at a boat anchor weight of 10 pounds for the entire front assembly, STILL NEGLIGIBLE, especially when your fork is at all into its stroke.

4. What is the reality of going to Enve hoops on your wheels..."unsprung mass"?
- Don't think so. How's about reduced weight causes YOU less fatigue over the duration of a ride because your power output is NO WHERE NEAR what a 70psi fork can dish out again and again. And, stiffness of carbon hoops...how well the wheel carves and fights side loads...maybe?

I went w/ an Emerald not because of unsprung mass, but the fact that the seals are constantly lubed...ALL moving parts are sitting in oil. That's IT...well, and that I can get into its shim stacks so easily. And while everyone is arguing about unsprung mass of USD forks, seems many forget the oil that's moving w/ the lowers/front wheel...330cc in the case of the Emerald..._still negligible_.


----------



## Dougal (Jan 23, 2004)

Pau11y said:


> Thought exercise: remove all mass from your wheel and lowers...no momentum, no inertia. Yeah, it's one of those "simple" examples, again...you plow that curb from the above example, or send it off a drop...
> 
> 1. Are you still going to need damping?
> - Yes. That 70psi air spring is still there, suspending YOU. So, compression is self explanatory...unless you don't mind your stem/bar in your grill. But rebound...how many cycles of a 70psi spring releasing at unrestrained rate can that little channel machined into the bottom of your stanchion to capture the circlip take before the wheel/bottom departs on an air, even w/ a topout spring/bumper?
> ...


If you're questioning the importance of unsprung weight, then this is not a subject for you.

No-one suggested damping isn't needed. Your post is bizarre.


----------



## Bissman (Feb 7, 2014)

I own a set of Dorados and sometimes feel like I could do with having a slightly more supportive midstroke, I run 20% sag. What would be the best way to tackle this issue?


----------



## BlackPine307 (Jul 18, 2016)

Bissman said:


> I own a set of Dorados and sometimes feel like I could do with having a slightly more supportive midstroke, I run 20% sag. What would be the best way to tackle this issue?


The new MRD kit that include the IRT would probably be the best way to fix this. I love this kit and it has made a major improvement in my Dorado's performance. I'm running 30% sad and the mid stroke is super supportive without much dampening maybe 3-4 clicks of each. It makes behave almost as if it is coil sprung without the weight or need to find the right spring. Makes the dorado a much better overall fork and closer if not on the same performance level as a DVO.


----------



## ringoesroadking (Feb 4, 2008)

BlackPine307 said:


> The new MRD kit that include the IRT would probably be the best way to fix this. I love this kit and it has made a major improvement in my Dorado's performance. I'm running 30% sad and the mid stroke is super supportive without much dampening maybe 3-4 clicks of each. It makes behave almost as if it is coil sprung without the weight or need to find the right spring. Makes the dorado a much better overall fork and closer if not on the same performance level as a DVO.


I just got my IRT kit, was wondering if you could share a couple of things like.
rider weight, spring pressure, sag before the irt and after?
Also did you need to change your bar height or adjust your cockpit to account for the 30% sag?
Does the for have alot more progressive feel?
Thanks


----------



## BlackPine307 (Jul 18, 2016)

ringoesroadking said:


> I just got my IRT kit, was wondering if you could share a couple of things like.
> rider weight, spring pressure, sag before the irt and after?
> Also did you need to change your bar height or adjust your cockpit to account for the 30% sag?
> Does the for have alot more progressive feel?
> Thanks


I used to run them at 50 PSI in the main chamber for around 25%ish sag. After the upgrade I'm running 40 in the main and 120 in the IRT with 30% sag. I weigh 170-180 with all my gear on. I also am only running 4 clicks of TPC+ and 0 of high speed with an inch or so of reserve travel. I will probably pack the IRT off to 100-110 after the seals and oil break in. It doesn't really have a super progressive feel but rather it feel very supportive in the midstroke with a hard bottom out. I like to think it's linear but slightly progressive towards the last couple inches of travel. I did not have to change my cockpit at all.


----------



## ideate (May 28, 2016)

I've had both and now on Rux.

Had Dorado first on Darkside.








Then bought some Emerald's on same bike.








Then bought some new Rux.









Dorado twist (would always have to re-align front wheel after a crash).
Dorado lose travel over time.
Dorado's initial travel can get a little sticky after a while.
Dorado are cheap and fairly easy to service.
Damper works well.
Dorado is a good all round fork.


Emerald arch keeps forks stiff but makes them look like a regular fork.
Emerald looks good.
Emerald is butter smooth compared to Dorado, especially during the initial stroke.
OTT setting is nice for bumpy chatter/jumpy tracks.
Damper is better than Dorado but more clicks = slightly more complicated.
Emerald is super easy to service with easy access to the shims.
Emerald is HEAVY.
Emerald is good for smashing rough rocky steep tracks.

Rux is cheap like a Dorado, stiff like a Emerald, light like a Dorado and easy to service like both. Air spring is better than Dorado but damper is not as good as Emerald.


----------



## BlackPine307 (Jul 18, 2016)

ideate said:


> I've had both and now on Rux.
> 
> Had Dorado first on Darkside.
> View attachment 1083653
> ...


I'm glad to hear the comparison. What year dorado a did you use and did you tighten the axle in the proper way? I haven't had any issues with my front wheel and crashes (and I'm just coming off a collarbone breaking one). Also I think the Dorado's main problem was the complete lack of midstroke support in the air spring. I honestly like the Dorado dampener better than the DVO simply because of the TPC+ circuit. I haven't had any issues with mine losing travel or having a sticky beginning stroke. If I remember right some of the older Dorados had an issue with air leaking past the poppet valve and into the negative spring. I do agree that the DVO is easier to tune the shims, but I've yet to need to change them on the Dorado (but time will tell). Just my 2 cents but I've been extremely impressed with my Dorados especially after I put in the MRD upgrade kit.


----------



## kitejumping (Sep 3, 2010)

Has anyone ever measured the breakaway force required to get the fork moving in it's travel? It's a good quick way to see how much stiction a fork has or if you need to service it. Flip the bike, take the front wheel out, cycle it in the first part of the travel a few times, then use a hand scale to pull down on the through axle and see how many lbs of force it takes to get the fork started moving in it's travel. Usually any forks with an air spring component will be way higher than a coil only fork.


----------



## BlackPine307 (Jul 18, 2016)

I don't think anyone has tried that with any of these forks.


----------

