CCDB Inline Air

[markcjr]

http://forums.mtbr.com/intense/new-i...l#post11383582

[JeffreyJim]

Inline is a rad shock for those that want a mega-adjustable platform and can't otherwise fit a piggyback style shock on their rig.

For the set it and forget it bunch that *can* fit a piggyback shock, go with a Monarch Plus with the correct tune. Better air spring and very good damping. Save the coin...

[markcjr]

I just wanted the debonair cause it's all black, to match the pike, and it's supposed to be a smooth operator! The regular rc3 must be the correct tune though, if Intense says to go with that one. But if I was gonna splurge, I thought the new debonair would be nice cause of the easier initial stroke. I have the ccdba-cs, but it's kind of overkill for everyday. Again, sorry everybody for the thread hijack. I guess I'll just stick with the ccdba-cs if the debonair won't mate up to the T275.

[JeffreyJim]

I just wanted the debonair cause it's all black, to match the pike, and it's supposed to be a smooth operator! The regular rc3 must be the correct tune though, if Intense says to go with that one. But if I was gonna splurge, I thought the new debonair would be nice cause of the easier initial stroke. I have the ccdba-cs, but it's kind of overkill for everyday. Again, sorry everybody for the thread hijack. I guess I'll just stick with the ccdba-cs if the debonair won't mate up to the T275.

Oh the Debonair is just the air can. You can change the volume to make it more progressive if thats the problem I say go for it and run spacers if you need more progressiveness. (black on black, so hot...)

http://instagram.com/p/pydCOMGjnC/?modal=true

[markcjr]

So basically, just buy the debonair rc3, and If I blow through the travel, add a spacer? I run one spacer in my pike and it's pimp! So soft and supple, but it that spacer keeps it from bottoming out and ramps up just enough to not soak up the lip of jumps. I'm 200lbs, so I'm a little heavier than the average guy.

[JeffreyJim]

Exactly. They have these strips you can reduce volume of the air can with... Simple as that!

[markcjr]

The debonair is probably better than normal monarch rc3 plus right? Again going for that black on black!

[wkd-rdr]

Exactly. They have these strips you can reduce volume of the air can with... Simple as that!

Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of the deboner? (its just a larger can, right?).

I had to shim my Float to get rid of the VPP mid-travel wallow. It worked, but it still sucks, and blows seals constantly. (yes - it sucks and blows)
Leaning towards the in-line myself for this reason, but I'm hoping there is more to the Monarch+ than a bigger can. And it appears one cannot purchase a non-debonair anymore.

[JeffreyJim]

Wouldn't that defeat the purpose of the deboner? (its just a larger can, right?).

I had to shim my Float to get rid of the VPP mid-travel wallow. It worked, but it still sucks, and blows seals constantly. (yes - it sucks and blows)
Leaning towards the in-line myself for this reason, but I'm hoping there is more to the Monarch+ than a bigger can. And it appears one cannot purchase a non-debonair anymore.

I haven't confirmed but I believe the negative spring system is tuned a bit different too.

FWIW, I have the shim the shit out of my InLine too to get rid of the "mid stroke wallow" (blowing through the travel).

Suspension tuning these days is actually pretty crazy. I'd wager 90% of the people out there don't even get close to getting it best for their bike/riding style/demands...

[creaky fossil]

...because they don't have the spring as dialed as RS - mostly due to a patent RS has on the design of their air stuff).

What does the RS patent's design provide functionally that the other mfrs can't achieve otherwise?

How does the RS air spring differ from other mfrs' springs, and how can one tell the different performance is due to the patented features?

Isn't an air spring just a can of air?

Is the important patent covering the air spring itself? or is it a feature in the overall shock patent?

[JeffreyJim]

Creaky - Good question.

An air spring is in fact a can full of air (Cap'n Obvious - Signing Out!). Its what is going on inside that can that makes it special, specifically the negative spring.

I don't have the patent in front of me but Rockshox has a way of implementing a negative spring that is more efficient & utilizes less seals than the rest. To add, RS is paying close attention to how a negative spring effects the whole spring curve and how to alter the overall spring curve through air can size/negative spring balancing (%) etc. This is a gross oversimplification but gives you an idea.

To my point, this is why you see a bunch of the competition still utilizing coil negative springs on their forks (DVO, X-Fusion) with Fox *just* implementing a negative air spring in their new 36, however it uses more seals and is less "free" than the RS stuff.

On trail this translates to more "off the top" suppleness while still being supportive through the rest of the stroke.

Make sense?

EDIT - this may be the patent...https://www.google.com/patents/EP092...=0CD4Q6AEwBTgK

[creaky fossil]

Creaky - Good question.

An air spring is in fact a can full of air (Cap'n Obvious - Signing Out!). Its what is going on inside that can that makes it special, specifically the negative spring.

I don't have the patent in front of me but Rockshox has a way of implementing a negative spring that is more efficient & utilizes less seals than the rest. To add, RS is paying close attention to how a negative spring effects the whole spring curve and how to alter the overall spring curve through air can size/negative spring balancing (%) etc. This is a gross oversimplification but gives you an idea.

This started when they went from separate + and - chambers/schraders to solo air? The integration of - spring into same chamber/schrader?

I remember an old Reba I had with separate + and - schraders, you could tune top suppleness but you'd lose spring/shrink travel.

To my point, this is why you see a bunch of the competition still utilizing coil negative springs on their forks (DVO, X-Fusion) with Fox *just* implementing a negative air spring in their new 36, however it uses more seals and is less "free" than the RS stuff.

On trail this translates to more "off the top" suppleness while still being supportive through the rest of the stroke.

Make sense?

It does, I'm curious on the how. Are they tuning can shape? reducing seal #? Seems someone could create a functionally similar design with distinction enough to avoid patent infringement, but maybe it's cheaper/easier to stick with a coil negative?

[kidwoo]

There's nothing that different between a fox and RS rear shock as far as # of seals. Material maybe, but they both have two rings supporting one seal on the air can, and two rings supporting one seal on the main air piston.

https://sram-cdn-pull-zone-gsdesign....ch_plus_sm.pdf

http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/articl...service-25701/

And both companies have always had self equalizing negative chambers that constantly set/reset through a dimple in the wall at a certain point in the travel. It's not the air can seals or the negative chamber that make the RS stuff ride better. With the bigger can on the RS stuff you can fine tune the chamber size with a little more precision via those rubber bands (0-10 of them I think on the longer shock bodies), vs. some 3 or 4 size volume reducers for the fox stuff. Fox just returned to some point in 2003 with their ideas of what damping should be a few years ago.

If anything it looks like the float x shocks use even fewer pieces.

http://www.carverperformance.com/pro...roductid=17608

[JeffreyJim]

This started when they went from separate + and - chambers/schraders to solo air? The integration of - spring into same chamber/schrader?

I remember an old Reba I had with separate + and - schraders, you could tune top suppleness but you'd lose spring/shrink travel.



It does, I'm curious on the how. Are they tuning can shape? reducing seal #? Seems someone could create a functionally similar design with distinction enough to avoid patent infringement, but maybe it's cheaper/easier to stick with a coil negative?

Creaky - those old Reba's were actually pretty rad. Now if only you could tune the *size* of the chambers too you could really start to get crazy with your tuning. But this would really result in an even shittier setup for 95% of the people out there... putting the power in the consumer's hands isn't always best.

Anyway, I'm not 100% sure how they are tuning or if the geometry of the can has a big impact. I'd imagine it does.

Honestly, if you want "case in point" of this, look at the new 36. Their negative spring is still a step behind so what did they do? They lightened the dust seal stiction as much as possible...to the point all the early ones off the line are pissing oil everywhere.

Thing is, with rear suspension, you've got a lot more leverage overcoming that "breakaway force" so its not as apparent...

Back to work or I'd blabber on about this for a lot longer.

[JeffreyJim]

There's nothing that different between a fox and RS rear shock as far as # of seals. Material maybe, but they both have two rings supporting one seal on the air can, and two rings supporting one seal on the main air piston.

https://sram-cdn-pull-zone-gsdesign....ch_plus_sm.pdf

http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/articl...service-25701/

And both companies have always had self equalizing negative chambers that constantly set/reset through a dimple in the wall at a certain point in the travel. It's not the air can seals or the negative chamber that make the RS stuff ride better. With the bigger can on the RS stuff you can fine tune the chamber size with a little more precision via those rubber bands (0-10 of them I think on the longer shock bodies), vs. some 3 or 4 size volume reducers for the fox stuff. Fox just returned to some point in 2003 with their ideas of what damping should be a few years ago.

If anything it looks like the float x shocks use even fewer pieces.

http://www.carverperformance.com/pro...roductid=17608

According the engineers on both sides of the fence, the air springs are different. How different? I'm not sure but I was told it was the number of seals.

To me, the proof is pretty obvious, especially with respect to front suspension. Tell me any of the other fork air springs feel even remotely like the Pike off the top...

That said, I could be wrong with rear suspension but was under the impresion the patent held up there too. Even if their isn't a patent in place, they certianly have spent a *lot* more time tuning their negative/positive spring curves when compared to the others out there...

[kidwoo]

Tell me any of the other fork air springs feel even remotely like the Pike off the top...

New boxxer does

And I didn't say that because I'm not talking about forks. I literally just came in from my garage rebuilding my monarch. The seal setup (as of 2014 models at least) look just like all the old fox rp3/rp23s which I've rebuilt a ton of. Like I said, it may be materials based, but there's nothing crazy going on. And air springs aren't that complex. It's just a chamber. You can shorten or lengthen it but not much else. The monarch's are just like a fox with a main chamber and bleed over external chamber, just like fox. If anything, I'd think that the fox setup with the float x may be the unique one. Because it's not the monarch. They might change the negative chamber volume and equalization pressure and that's not something you would really notice just looking at them.......I would think doing that might achieve what RS is claiming with a smoother off the top operation. But those new float x shocks are pretty smooth too.

And you know those guys will tell you it's a totally different system if they use a 0.011mm different o-ring size somewhere.

Fox tells you to rebuild their shocks with float fluid, RS says to put a dab of fork oil in there. I think that's their real secret

[JeffreyJim]

New boxxer does

And air springs aren't that complex. It's just a chamber. You can shorten or lengthen it but not much else. The monarch's are just like a fox with a main chamber and bleed over external chamber, just like fox. If anything, I'd think that the fox setup with the float x may be the unique one. Because it's not the monarch. They might change the negative chamber volume and equalization pressure and that's not something you would really notice just looking at them.......I would think doing that might achieve what RS is claiming with a smoother off the top operation. But those new float x shocks are pretty smooth too.

Smooth and breakaway force are pretty different factors.

I'd argue that although air springs are somewhat simple, the volume and equalization of that chamber has a pretty damn big impact on the ride. Small differences make a big difference...changes I'm not sure companies were really paying attention to until the last 4-5 years.

And I'm still not convinced they are identical in how they work. I have an email in to a bud at Fox to verify


Either way, I still say the breakaway force of the Debonair is damn near CCDB coil over like. Its pretty "free".

[kidwoo]

Smooth and breakaway force are pretty different factors.

I'm aware of that but both companies are making rear shocks right now that do both extremely well. When I say smooth, I mean as soon as your ass hits the seat on a topped out shock. In fact if anything I'd say a brand new fox feels better than what RS is doing. It's everywhere else in the stroke that RS shocks kill it but not because of the air spring (where it matters really).

I doubt they're identical down to the micron in terms of dimensions. I'm just saying that there's no radical departure in the RS shocks from the last 10 years of conventional air shock design. If there really is something in there that warrants a patent, it's minor. Or at least what I could consider minor.

I'm not bagging on rockshox or anything, the next frame I get will have as its first shock another monarch. They rule. I just don't see anything revolutionary about the air chamber setups.

[shirk]

The bonus for RS is that it's user serviceable. Easy to order seal kit, can run them without nitrogen and no special tools that you can't get.

[Lindahl]

Either way, I still say the breakaway force of the Debonair is damn near CCDB coil over like. Its pretty "free".

Jives with what I've heard. I spoke to a Santa Cruz engineer a little while ago and he was talking about how the improved negative airspring in the Debonair Monarch Plus and Vivid Air has made a pretty big improvement in the early travel. With the big cans, very coil like, with just a bit of progression at the end.

[wkd-rdr]

The bonus for RS is that it's user serviceable. Easy to order seal kit, can run them without nitrogen and no special tools that you can't get.

and this tipped the scales to the RS for me. Any benefit in performance is negated by potential downtime.
Should be on bike by Friday.

[Dromond]

I just updated my Santa Cruz 5010c with a 140mm Pike up front and a DB Inline in the back. The bike feels soooo much bigger now. I have been thrilled with the Inline compared to the stock CTD. Still getting the tune fully dialed, but the pairing front and rear makes this bike feel like a mini endure machine that can still climb. I also really like the fact that I can half engage the climb switch to give partial climbing damping.

Intersting as I'm running the same bike but with an RP23. Has anyone tried a Monarch on one of these? I'm unsure how much performance benefit there will be on a 125mm bike but it sounds like you are pretty stoked with the CC.

[kidwoo]

Intersting as I'm running the same bike but with an RP23. Has anyone tried a Monarch on one of these? I'm unsure how much performance benefit there will be on a 125mm bike but it sounds like you are pretty stoked with the CC.

Do it.

The fox shocks on those things are overdamped, restrictive garbage. That's a really fun bike. Once you get a different shock.

[wkd-rdr]

thought I'd add my 0.02 on the Monarch plus Debonair, since we kinna morphed into a which one is best.

I did not need to buy any mounting hardware (coming from a RP23), nice.
It came with its first rebuild kit, very cool.
I did not, and still do not, think it needs any shimming (on a VPP Carbine converted to 27.5), there is no mid-travel wallowing in corners as discussed above. I initially put more air in than I needed (anticipating wallowing) and then put the rebound dampening up 2 notches north of medium to compensate, but then let some air out on the first ride as it was a bit too much, and never had and sinking when climbing or descending.
In the firm mode, its climbs fantastically, stays high in travel. Even when I bump the switch into broBrah mode on accident (it happerns occasionally), it still climbs pretty good.
On the descents, it's just awesome. I was anticipating a bunking bronco, so I left the rebound up a bit, but have since returned it to medium and that has been fantastic. Holds strong in corners and high speed chunk (I am 200#, and non-graceful).
It is an amazing upgrade, especially if coming from an RP23 that constantly needs a rebuild. The RP23 takes hits like a punching bag compared to the M+. Very playful but not overly excited, very easy to adjust, even for a hack like me. I have owned 2 CCDB coils and found the Monarch to be much simpler and user friendly, but I cannot speak for the CCDB air.
I am happy with the product and would recommend.

[JeffreyJim]

No question - Monarch is a far better product than any Cane Creek air offering. The Cane Creek offerings kick ass in terms of adjustment but their air springs suck compared to RS and Fox. I'm very underwhelmed.

YMMV