sag, same for the woods?

I know that most suggest 95-100MM of static sag in the rear. If you ride woods vs. track, is this still the same? Lot to learn about suspenion. It was easy back in the day, there was no suspension. :confused:

Good question. I believe it is the same though.

I think it is the same. I think race sag has more to do with the balance of the bike front to back. I do know the enduro bikes run more static sag, ie 30-40mm, even more. I guess depending on the bike. The only way to get more static sag that i could think of is to run a slightly stiffer shock spring. The stiffer shock spring would allow less preload and therfore more static sag. Less preload would mean a more plush ride. Hopefully someone will chime in that knows the facts.

I know that most suggest 95-100MM of static sag in the rear. If you ride woods vs. track, is this still the same? Lot to learn about suspenion. It was easy back in the day, there was no suspension. :confused:

That isn't static sag but rider sag. But the sag should be basically the same for woods vs track. Maybe slightly more for woods but you basic setting should always start at 33-35% of available wheel travel. On a Jap bike with 12.2-12.4" of wheel travel (315mm) it should be about 104mm with 33%. On a KTM with 13.2" of Wheel travel (335mm) it should be 114mm with 34%. So all rider sags shouldn't be one flat number.

Fork sag should be about 25-27% of available travel. I use 26% on my KTM.

Cher'o,

Dwight :excuseme:

Thanks, it was 119MM. Set it to 113 and the bike seems to turn better. Before it plowed thru like a bulldozer. Also the rear wheel was all over the place on take off. Any other advice?

Why stop there? Try 108, then 103 until you know you've gone beyond the sweet spot, then fine tune. Just because it's better doesn't mean it can't get even better.

Trouble is, sometimes tuning and adjusting becomes the obsession!

Why stop there? Try 108, then 103 until you know you've gone beyond the sweet spot, then fine tune. Just because it's better doesn't mean it can't get even better.

Trouble is, sometimes tuning and adjusting becomes the obsession!

Tell me about it!:confused:

Why stop there? Try 108, then 103 until you know you've gone beyond the sweet spot, then fine tune. Just because it's better doesn't mean it can't get even better.

Trouble is, sometimes tuning and adjusting becomes the obsession!

The trouble is that 108 and 103 are far outside the range that the suspension works at its best. 112mm is as tight a rider sag that I would use. If you need tighter turning go to the front end. Raise the forks, increase the rider sag. If you are at 108 or 103mm rider sag , you are way light on your shock spring or way heavy on your fork springs.

IMO,

Dwight :confused:

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now