Fox RC w/ Propedal or Manitou SPV

[5500C]

Hey guys,

I have the 7.875" RC on my bike right now and feel that the bike is a little sluggish especially when I changed to a Manitou Black Elite fork in the front.  My goal is to try to get enough sag to get back to sem-stock geometry.

I have the opportunity to pick up a new 8.5" RC w/ Propedal for around $200.  Is the Propedal a crappy stopgap solution to try and hold off the SPV shocks of the world?  Or should I wait and see if a Manitou 8.5" comes up.

Anyone have any experience with both and what are your opinions?

Thanks

[Matno]

"Is the Propedal a crappy stopgap solution to try and hold off the SPV shocks of the world?"

I don't think Fox makes "crappy stopgap solutions"... From what I hear, they're functionally pretty similar to everything else that is out there in the stable platform market.

[Kevins19]

Exactly, usually when fox does stuff they do it as good as or better than the competition. From what I understand the Pro-Pedal system uses an Aux. oil valve for the low speed prograssive damping instead of an air valve. Therefore there is no need to fill the system with air ever so often.

Then again the new DHX looks like it has a Schrader valve in the resivoir. So, who knows! Fox needs to releas more info about its Pro-Pedal system.

[5500C]

OK maybe I was little harsh on my adjective.  So I take it I should pick up the shock then?

[Kevins19]

Well, The new RC will give you more travel and have the pedal damping effects. Which are both a plus.  And $200 or so seem like a good price. But The Standard RC is still a good  shock. If you have the money burning a hole in your pocket it wouldn't be a bad thing to do! [smiley=beer.gif]

But, are there any other things you need for your bike. If it were me I might think about hydraulic discs or something instead. Then again I wouldn't mind having more travel.

[5500C]

Yeah I guess you're right, I really don't need it.  I just wish there was a way to extend the i2i measurement by 1/2 inch.  I thought of making an extension at the lower mount, but I don't think there is anyway to keep the mount braced without putting pressure on the CF.  (there is no material on the rear side of the shock mount)

Also, I have a medium frame so I don't want to switch to a 24" wheel which I think I would need to do if I went with an 8.5" shock regardless of brand, right?

I think my strategy is to run my bike into the ground and look for a sweet deal on a Santa Cruz Blur frame or maybe even a Heckler.

[Matno]

Also, I have a medium frame so I don't want to switch to a 24" wheel which I think I would need to do if I went with an 8.5" shock regardless of brand, right?

Nope. Some shocks, like the RC with a remote reservoir, when mounted with the reservoir on the swingarm end, can interfere with the rear tire. It's not related to the length of the shock, but to the length of the travel and the size of the remote reservoir sticking out.

I think my strategy is to run my bike into the ground and look for a sweet deal on a Santa Cruz Blur frame or maybe even a Heckler.

I second that. I'm just worried that my K2 is going to last me so long that I'll actually be able to afford a SantaCruz...

[pedro]

I have not tried it, but I beleive  an spv shock, such as the manitou 3 way, would work great on the evo frame.  I rode a gary fisher cake which comes equipped with the manitou 3 way air shock, and was extremely surprised.  The bike would not bob and absorbed hits such that my butt would not feel any bump.
Of course, the bike dealer tried to convince me that it was due to the frame's magnificent geometry, but the cake is just a rearward single pivot design, the shock made it feel great.
Someone on this site has posted using a manitou coil spv, with 8.5" i to i. That person said he loved it.
(I got a good deal on ebay on that same shock, but the seller disappeared on me. ) However, for the evo I would say an air shock would work best

[shovelon]

The guy with the Manitou SPV Coil Swinger 4 is me. It is 8.5 inches i2i and works as hyped.

The only complaint is that it works so good that I hate my front end. I am working on that end this weekend.

Terry

[5500C]

The guy with the Manitou SPV Coil Swinger 4 is me. It is 8.5 inches i2i and works as hyped.

The only complaint is that it works so good that I hate my front end. I am working on that end this weekend.

Terry

So you have a Large frame and run a 24" wheel?  Just checking b/c I'm hoping some way someone has figured out a way to run one with a Medium and a 26"

[shovelon]

5500c,



Yes and no. I have a large frame, but I run the stock size wheel-26 inch. Yes the bottom bracket hieght is more when I am not riding [smiley=diaper.gif], but I run more than usual sag to get to the original riding geometry [smiley=laughing.gif]. I had figured that with the additional travel, I could use the sag and have plenty of travel to spare. I run a rockshox psylo up front and alternate between 5 and 3 inches when desired. Worked as planned and then some .



The only difference between the large and med frame is the top tube length and standover, not BB hieght. So if it works on mine and others it should work on a med???



As far as the front end goes, I installed a new stable plateform cartridge in the Psylo and it rides a llitle taller now, a little better match for the rear. Dampening qualities are yet to be determined, I need to play with fork oil weights.



Terry

[Matno]

The only difference between the large and med frame is the top tube length and standover, not BB height. So if it works on mine and others it should work on a med???

Actually, the only difference between the medium and the large is top tube length. Standover is basically identical. I've got one of each - the medium is actually taller, but just enough to be explained by the extra shock length of 3/8". Tire clearance looks identical to my tape measure. (And my medium has the thicker tires).

In all honesty, I think the Vanilla RC reservoir rubbing on medium frames may have been a fluke. It seems that I remember one person saying it didn't fit and at least one saying that it fit a medium just fine. Perhaps tire selection played a role? I'm pretty sure the issue was confirmed to be a problem on small frames though, which actually do have lower standover.

In my opinion, the tire just doesn't move enough in relation to the shock to ever cause interference. The angles just don't work that way. I don't think there's ever been a report of someone with a medium frame actually hitting their shock while riding - only testing it out with the coil spring removed while on a bike stand, which probably allows it to compress farther than it ever would in reality. If I had a deal on a Fox Vanilla RC, I'd jump on it in a heartbeat (if I didn't already have a Risse and a Stratos).

FWIW, that's my two cents.  

[5500C]

Actually, the only difference between the medium and the large is top tube length. Standover is basically identical. I've got one of each - the medium is actually taller, but just enough to be explained by the extra shock length of 3/8". Tire clearance looks identical to my tape measure. (And my medium has the thicker tires).

In all honesty, I think the Vanilla RC reservoir rubbing on medium frames may have been a fluke. It seems that I remember one person saying it didn't fit and at least one saying that it fit a medium just fine. Perhaps tire selection played a role? I'm pretty sure the issue was confirmed to be a problem on small frames though, which actually do have lower standover.

In my opinion, the tire just doesn't move enough in relation to the shock to ever cause interference. The angles just don't work that way. I don't think there's ever been a report of someone with a medium frame actually hitting their shock while riding - only testing it out with the coil spring removed while on a bike stand, which probably allows it to compress farther than it ever would in reality. If I had a deal on a Fox Vanilla RC, I'd jump on it in a heartbeat (if I didn't already have a Risse and a Stratos).

FWIW, that's my two cents.  

So Matno, if I'm hearing you correctly, I can start obsessing over a 8.5" Propedal RC again or a swinger or a 5th?

[Matno]

Well, I'm trying to break the habit of obsessing over bike parts myself, so I can't encourage that kind of thing, but...

Other posts in the past clarified that if you can fit the shock with the reservoir on the top end, there is no issue. The only clearance problems were with some people (with 2000+ aluminum frames) who had to mount the RC "upside down" from the way you have yours mounted. Seeing as how you already have a Vanilla RC mounted with the reservoir on top, as long as the new shock fits the frame the same way, you will not have clearance issues. No way.  

Go for it. I rode a Manitou Swinger rear shock this summer (on a 2004 Jekyll), and it was amazing. Total control going up and down. Very little loss of plushness (and probably only because I was riding a bike set up for a rider who weighs 20 lbs more than I do.

[5500C]

Well, I'm trying to break the habit of obsessing over bike parts myself, so I can't encourage that kind of thing, but...

Other posts in the past clarified that if you can fit the shock with the reservoir on the top end, there is no issue. The only clearance problems were with some people (with 2000+ aluminum frames) who had to mount the RC "upside down" from the way you have yours mounted. Seeing as how you already have a Vanilla RC mounted with the reservoir on top, as long as the new shock fits the frame the same way, you will not have clearance issues. No way.  

Go for it. I rode a Manitou Swinger rear shock this summer (on a 2004 Jekyll), and it was amazing. Total control going up and down. Very little loss of plushness (and probably only because I was riding a bike set up for a rider who weighs 20 lbs more than I do.

Thanks Matno, I'm printing out your response and showing it to the wife for approval.  I think I'm going to try the Vanilla RC w/ propedal since I know I already can fit the RC on the bike.   [smiley=disbelief.gif]