Jump to content

Kyle Tarry

Members
  • Content Count

    842
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Kyle Tarry

  • Rank
    TT Silver Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    Pennsylvania

Recent Profile Visitors

358 profile views
  1. Kyle Tarry

    restackor comparison request

    By the way, nosila originally PMd me to ask for help with this. I told him, via PM, that I wasn't comfortable using ReStackor any more, because I don't know that I can trust the results it gives. I didn't post it publicly, or drag Clicked's name through the mud. Good to see that Clicked felt the need to drag me into this, even though I haven't been active on here for quite a while. Class act.
  2. Kyle Tarry

    restackor comparison request

    In case anybody wants to read the actual thread that Clicked is referring to: http://www.thumpertalk.com/topic/1108210-this-could-be-a-fun-experiment-wp-vs-kyb-graphs/ If you read it, you'll see that I didn't come up with the port geometry I used. I got it from MOG (a respected member) and got some other info from Kan3 (another respected member). I also had some info that I had measured on a Husky KYB shock that matched Kan3's data. Now, it's very possible that the geometry is wrong for the YZ. In that thread we had a conversation about how weird the different values were, and how we weren't sure what to use. More importantly, though, I wonder 2 things: 1. Why does Clicked pretend that this is my info that's wrong, when it was clearly posted by other people? Why keep finger pointing at me like I am responsible for this? 2. Why is Clicked so focused on this particular error, when this website is full of incorrect measurements on all kinds of things, especially since I'm not even trying to argue that it's the right data? Hey Clicked, is my error better or worse than the software package you sold to many (hundreds?) of people that was off by 400% on calculations of shim lift? You're critiquing a simulation I did for another member, using the information another member gave me, and yet you sold software to many people which you knew gave completely wrong results, and then refused to even talk about it when I figured it out? I don't come here or post here any more because of petty childish junk like this. In multiple threads, I have asked Clicked technical questions. He's consistently evasive, and often chooses to make ad hominem attacks on me instead of addressing the questions. I am sure he will continue to do the same long after I post this, so he will feel like he has won some sort of "victory." http://www.thumpertalk.com/topic/792432-restackor/?p=12157058 http://www.thumpertalk.com/topic/792432-restackor/?p=12157423 http://www.thumpertalk.com/topic/792432-restackor/?p=12157647 Grow up and act like an adult. This should be doubly true for someone who is representing a business.
  3. Kyle Tarry

    husqvarna wr 250 2011 kayabaforks

    Just comparing to what I run in my WR300, your rebound is stiffer. I run: 23.11 (4) 14 23 22 20 18 16 14 12 9 With that 23.15 that you have, it should add a decent amount of stiffness over my stack. So, I would expect your stack to be fine. However, if you like it best with the reb clicker turned in that far, I'd add a few face shims and back the clicker out to 10-12 clicks.
  4. If you use larger shims directly on the piston (face shims), it can influence low speed behavior because you force the oil through a longer passage with very small gap and there are viscous losses. Depending on the geometry of your stack (number and thickness of face shims, crossover thickness and build), putting the slightly larger shims after the crossover at the beginning of the high speed stack will probably have very little impact. I'd have to dig up a reference and double-check, but I think the larger OD shims will be slightly stiffer (more material to resist deflection with force being applied to the same area/radius where the face shims contact).
  5. I was wrong on the 2%/4% thing, good clarification. I was confused by your statement on page 1, but looking back again I understand now. You've been analyzing the differences between shim factors and finger press and dyno for 3 pages. I guess I just assumed you thought they were significant. I mean, if you didn't think they were, why would you be dissecting it? Just standard scientific method... Any time you are comparing two sets of data that show different results, the FIRST thing you do is test to see if the difference is significant (in a statistical sense), relative to the uncertainly and variation in the measurements. I'm simply suggesting that we do this, before we dedicate 3 more pages to the analysis of questionable data. You have some numbers, and the differences between them, or rather the significant or validity of the difference between them, is questionable. I am simply pointing that out. You don't seem to be interested in talking about the significance of the differences between your datapoints, and I've pointed this out a few times, so I'm going to bow out and just let this play out however it does, no sense in continuing to be argumentative. If you were to compare any datasets without the due diligence of significance tests and present them in any technical arena, the same question would be asked.
  6. Well, I've mentioned my concerns a couple of times and you've rebuffed or ignored them, so I interpreted that as disagreement. Not a big deal, you can't reasonably expect to agree with everyone all the time. I put phrases like "might be" in there because we have insufficient data to be certain of the statistical significance of these differences. I will not claim to be absolutely sure because I can't be. All I know is that the differences you're calling significant (2%, 8%, etc) are really small, especially given the sample size and testing methodology. I think a healthy dose of skepticism is important in experimentation, and standard scientific procedures require proof that differences between samples are statistically significant. To me, it's obvious that differences between 2% and 8% are very questionable, when we are talking about all the variables in a test like this, not to mention the fact that some of the data (like the finger press data) needs to be "corrected" before it's even in the right ballpark. I am NOT claiming outright that the data (or your conclusions) are wrong, but I am saying that we can't be certain that they are right, and that we need to better understand repeatability and reproducibility before we draw conclusions from the data. Edit: It's not just the MXScandanavia data. It's all of the data and the inherent inaccuracy (any test in inaccurate, it's just a matter of how much) of each test, which makes me question conclusion drawn from very small differences.
  7. I guess we'll agree to disagree on this. I think that 2% is definitely well within measurement uncertainty, and 8% very well might be. Since we don't have any data about the repeatability of these tests, it's sort of hard to say, but it's not an extreme statement to say that a single measurement with a hand fixture (which requires a large correction to even have the right y-intercept) might not be accurate to within a few percent. I remember a post from Kevin Stillwell where disassembling and reassembling a high speed compression adjuster resulted in a big change to its dyno results, and that was without any changes to the stack. No, it does not. No, I did not. Dyno data is not the only variable in question here. Unless we have 2 stacks on the same damper, dyno data, shim factor data, FEA data, and finger press data, we can't really make a full comparison. I'm not aware of a complete set of that data for a different pair of stacks (with a larger difference between them). IMO, dyno data at 500 in/sec is irrelevant, as that is MUCH faster than we will ever see in a real application.
  8. Kyle Tarry

    husqvarna wr 250 2011 kayabaforks

    Sorry, I was referring to the old Marz forks. OP said something about how those forks had a checkplate mid, and I was saying that, even so, they work better with a real mid (and so do the KYBs, by extension).
  9. Kyle Tarry

    husqvarna wr 250 2011 kayabaforks

    If the face shims are really 0.15 mm thick, you have way too many of them. I would remove all of the shims after the crossover, and possibly one of the shims before. I would not do a checkplate on the mid. Those Marzocchi forks work better with a real midvalve stack. If you want to try a softer midvalve, increase the float with spacers.
  10. Shim factors missed the stack stiffness change by a factor of 10 at high lift, not the stack stiffness. Big difference.
  11. Less float with the same stack will be stiffer (more damping), especially at mid-high speeds. 0.15 is a moderate change in float, the difference certainly ought to be noticeable.
  12. Kyle Tarry

    HELP NEEDED:1999 YZ400 Shim Stack

    If you're not close to bottoming, and it is too stiff/harsh, I'd keep going softer. Conventional wisdom would say that your springs are too soft, but whatever works... I'd remove the base valve shims like mog said, and also remove 1 face shim from the mid. See how that works.
  13. Less float, right? The additional shim is between the backer and the face shims... Good call on the base, it's probably a washer between the face shims and the clamp change.
  14. Kyle Tarry

    HELP NEEDED:1999 YZ400 Shim Stack

    I don't think that your measured float value is correct, but it's not clear. On page 2, you talked about measuring the 2 gaps behind the piston; you only want to measure the gap between the backer shim and the cup washer. In your first picture, where your tool is pointing, that is the float gap. It's between the 25.4 and the cup washer. Check that gap and post what you find. You're moving the right direction with the base valve, although it's not clear exactly what you're running now. I think if you get the mid straightened out you'll be in good shape. Also, it might be helpful if you can give us more information about what the bike is and isn't doing. It's not clear how much travel you're using, and how the bike feels. Maybe I missed it, but have you posted your weight and the spring rates you are using?
  15. Kyle Tarry

    How you smart guys make suggestions

    I only comment on stacks that are on forks that I have worked on, and in applications I am familiar with. I look back through what I used on some other similar bike and you can make mental tweaks if the guy asking the question is lighter/heavier, faster/slower, etc. You'll notice I mostly comment on KYB setups on woods bikes, because that is most of what I have done. I'm not on the same level of knowledge as guys like mog, Vietze, and other guys who post here who run shops etc. Those guys have probably built 100 times as many dampers as me.
×