|
Post by blitzed on Jun 13, 2019 6:51:09 GMT
Planning to upgrade the rear spring. Having a hard time locating a vendor selling them for the MT10. Seems since it’s such a new bike, information and parts are limited.
Any suggestions? I’m in the US, so US shipping would be needed.
Will the R1 spring fit the MT10 shock? I know they’re very similar but I don’t want to buy the part of it will not fit, and I know some differences exist.
Anyone done this procedure?
|
|
|
Post by theculturalattache on Jun 13, 2019 19:20:39 GMT
|
|
|
Post by theculturalattache on Jun 13, 2019 19:31:21 GMT
Seem to remember reading somewhere that the R1 and MT10 have the same spring, although could be wrong.
Think someone on here changed a shock spring,not sure if it was a standard shock though.
|
|
|
Post by X Plane on Jun 13, 2019 20:00:17 GMT
Honestly, please forget the notion of fitting a stiffer / harder spring to OEM shock as a fix...
A stronger spring is not a good idea on the stock shock; As the original 2016 OEM shock’s damping is much to weak in both compression and rebound directions to start with.
Fitting on a stiffer stronger spring on the OEM shock will not help the ride or the handling... in fact a stiffer spring will further strain the rebound damping (& over come the rebound damping even more) far more and in an even more uncontrolled underdamped way far to quickly. You’d only be wasting time etc.
The Only easy answer is to fit a Better replacement shock with a similar spring or harder spring only if rider is over 80kg in riding gear.
A Better non-stock shock (believe me) transforms the bike in to a / the gem handling wizard machine with a gorgeous better ride to; which makes it the fully amazing road bike that it should always have been with that brilliant chassis and engine combo.
|
|
|
Post by blitzed on Jun 14, 2019 14:51:17 GMT
Honestly forget about the fitting of a stronger / harder spring... A stronger spring is not a good idea on the stock shock; As the original OEM shock’s damping is much to weak in both compression and rebound directions to start with. Fitting on a stronger spring on the OEM shock will not help the ride or the handling... in fact a stiffer spring will further strain the rebound damping (& over rebound) far more and in an even more uncontrolled undamped in a way to quickly fashion. You’d only be wasting good time and money etc. The Only answer is to fit a Better replacement shock with a similar spring or harder spring only if rider is over 80kg in riding gear. A Better non-stock shock (believe me) transforms the bike in to a / the gem handling wizard machine with a gorgeous better ride to; which makes it the full amazing bike that it should always have been with that brilliant chassis and engine combo. Your response is definitive and absolute, as if your answer is not debatable. But Dave Moss, worldwide renowned suspension guru and also MT-10 owner says definitively that the stock shock is absolutely fine with a re-valve and re-spring for weight. He says it plain as day in one of his MT10 videos inside the paywall. Young man weighing 230 with an MT10 is at a track day, Dave Moss is tuning his suspension. Dave Moss laughs at the question "should I buy an aftermarket shock"? He says "absolutely not". The rear shock on the R1 and MT10, although not perfect, is thoroughly adequate for most all riding except at the peak competitive levels. Dave Moss says just get it properly re-sprung and re-valved for your weight. Unless you're in a naked standard race class.....a re-spring is fully sufficient...... Your argument that the rebound damping would be overwhelmed by a stronger spring is not backed up by facts. Plenty have re-sprung the stock shock of an R1 and R6, and MT10 without the having this phenomenon you describe. The rebound damping of this shock is known to be the strongest aspect of the shock. I'm not sure where you got this idea... $150 for a re-spring for an 80% improvement vs $1500 for a shock with a 95% improvement.... I think I'll take the 80%. And that's what Dave's argument was. If you want to throw $1350 at a 15% improvement.... by all means....
|
|
|
Post by blitzed on Jun 14, 2019 15:30:08 GMT
Dave Moss on whether or not it's beneficial to purchase an aftermarket shock for the MT10: "Completely unnecessary".
|
|
|
Post by X Plane on Jun 14, 2019 19:15:57 GMT
Dave Moss on whether or not it's beneficial to purchase an aftermarket shock for the MT10: "Completely unnecessary". ^ an ‘Out of context’ quote used.... Dave (that man) said that: “a re-valve will sort”... (with appropriate spring if heavy rider), meaning that re-valving is needed which means after revalving that an aftermarket shock would then be, “completely unnecessary”. Interestingly Dave’s business depends on people paying him for re-valvings; that he can do all day long. Agree IF you had a Re-Valved & Re-sprung shock then you completely do not need an aftermarket shock, true. This all confirms my point that the stock shock (not re-valved) is poor on bumpy roads ridden fast and needs either a re-valve with re-spring if heavy rider Or a Replacement shock upgrade fitted and that just re-springing alone is not a cure. Many folk can’t re-valve a shock right or get their shock re-valved by paying Dave etc. A Re-valving should be a cheaper option than another shock.... However, getting a quality aftermarket shock fitted is still a good option. What is crystal clear (for bumpy road riding) is that a Re-Valve or a Replacement shock is necessary for enjoyable brisk riding. Interesting the stock forks can be adjusted to cope sufficiently for my needs. And the stock forks are adjustable in tune with my well upgraded Nitron rear end, lol.
|
|
|
Post by X Plane on Jun 14, 2019 19:20:32 GMT
Honestly forget about the fitting of a stronger / harder spring... A stronger spring is not a good idea on the stock shock; As the original OEM shock’s damping is much to weak in both compression and rebound directions to start with. Fitting on a stronger spring on the OEM shock will not help the ride or the handling... in fact a stiffer spring will further strain the rebound damping (& over rebound) far more and in an even more uncontrolled undamped in a way to quickly fashion. You’d only be wasting good time and money etc. The Only answer is to fit a Better replacement shock with a similar spring or harder spring only if rider is over 80kg in riding gear. A Better non-stock shock (believe me) transforms the bike in to a / the gem handling wizard machine with a gorgeous better ride to; which makes it the full amazing bike that it should always have been with that brilliant chassis and engine combo. Your response is definitive and absolute, as if your answer is not debatable. But Dave Moss, worldwide renowned suspension guru and also MT-10 owner says definitively that the stock shock is absolutely fine with a re-valve and re-spring for weight. He says it plain as day in one of his MT10 videos inside the paywall. Young man weighing 230 with an MT10 is at a track day, Dave Moss is tuning his suspension. Dave Moss laughs at the question "should I buy an aftermarket shock"? He says "absolutely not". The rear shock on the R1 and MT10, although not perfect, is thoroughly adequate for most all riding except at the peak competitive levels. Dave Moss says just get it properly re-sprung and re-valved for your weight. Unless you're in a naked standard race class.....a re-spring is fully sufficient...... Your argument that the rebound damping would be overwhelmed by a stronger spring is not backed up by facts. Plenty have re-sprung the stock shock of an R1 and R6, and MT10 without the having this phenomenon you describe. The rebound damping of this shock is known to be the strongest aspect of the shock. I'm not sure where you got this idea... $150 for a re-spring for an 80% improvement vs $1500 for a shock with a 95% improvement.... I think I'll take the 80%. And that's what Dave's argument was. If you want to throw $1350 at a 15% improvement.... by all means.... Happy to debate, I knew, some may misunderstand... Yes, 100% agree that, a Revalve is fine; which confirms my point that, as is, the stock 2016 shock is not great (with standard valving). I therefore very happily stand over that just adding on a strong stiffer spring (as you proposed) is not an appropriate cure, for undisputed weak rear suspension, Dave, and many confirms that. No apologies for being absolute, I was very lucky to get a £850 Nitron shock with 300 miles done for £425, re-valving should be a few hundred pounds. Though I believe that a revalve is not as good as a far more adjustable, low friction (single seal) R3 Nitron shock.
|
|
|
Post by blitzed on Jun 14, 2019 19:23:45 GMT
Still disagree...
Dave was only saying to revalve for that guy because that bike had 28K miles on it and had a service coming. Revalve not absolutely necessary. He said a lot of good things about that shock.... I'm not saying it's great. But I think people throw money at performance and see modest gains, when they don't need to to get almost the same performance from other options.
Not everyone can find a Nitron at half price....
|
|
|
Post by X Plane on Jun 14, 2019 19:47:24 GMT
Disagree, we must....
As only trying to help advise: If anyone alive can adjust the adjusters and can get a 2016 MT-10’s stock rear end suspension (without revalve or Replacement) to match in with and be in balance with the stock front end suspension forks then they are a) a genius or b) never ride quick on any bumpy real world roads or c) are only 10kg in weight or d) delusion-ally bliss on their city tootle down to the supermarket shops.
Yep, fast engine, with taut chassis frame, decent forks and a weak ass stock 2016 shock that bottoms out and then rebounds excessively quickly due to weak damping in both compression and rebound circuits. Fine if you soften the forks right off and just cruise around smooth streets. And I’ll repeat that a stronger stiffer spring alone on a 2016 stock shock is not a bumpy road cure, cheap ass yes, but not the required fix for any serious road riding.
Any quick use on bumpy roads with 60 kg + rider shows up the stock 2016 shocks inadequate damping weakness as you’ll need to pray and slow down for any humpback bridges. Yes, I’m lucky I know, because I searched for a 2nd hand shock damper and I got one.
I would have happily paid £850 for a quality shock, lucky (I work hard and) can afford upgrade.
You are just sore that I point out that your proposed stiff spring alone won’t sort out the issue; if it did there’d be loads of sellers marketing and selling (false) wonder cure springs.
I’ve over 18000 miles done on the MT and the better shock fitted allowed me to use it much much more, more safely and more joyfully and quicker faster and do trips as well.
I would have had the stock shock re-valved if I could have found someone local do it (and do it right) but as I didn’t want a new bike sitting unusable with no shock in it, so I went for Nitron upgrade shock; which balances up with the stock front end brilliantly.
You could buy my old stock shock and get it revalved and re-sprung which would mean no long off road bike times for ya.
I have nothing to gain other than sharing and trying to help. Good luck if you persist on with your proposal of just fitting a stiffer re-spring alone; I’ve tried to highlight that falsehood. Great if it works out for you, I doubt it, but not for me.
I really love my better much shock (especially with every bump I hit as bike soaks them up) for the transformational quicker ride.
Hope that this helps some.
|
|
|
Post by theculturalattache on Jun 15, 2019 22:34:51 GMT
|
|
|
Post by beacon on Jun 16, 2019 20:56:58 GMT
Hi folks sorry to but in but I took ma bike to a suspension guru who sets up bikes for some riders in British super bikes he’s been doing it for years so I think he knows his stuff and he told me that the rear shock was absolutely shit and throw it in the bin 🗑 lol Why spend good cash on the standard shock just to make it slightly better when u could go aftermarket and get a really good shock that u know that’s gonna work yes u pay more but u know the old saying u get what u pay for And it’s the mod I have done Cheers beacon
|
|
mario
Full Member
Posts: 72
|
Post by mario on Jun 17, 2019 14:39:27 GMT
....bottoms out and then rebounds excessively quickly due to weak damping in both compression and rebound circuits. Sorry X Plane, but dyno graphs do not lie! Yes, the compression is not great, and it's biggest issue is that it is tied in with the rebound circuit, so adjusting rebound dampening will also adjust compression dampening quite significantly, adjusting only the low speed compression only makes marginal difference and adjusting the high speed compression does basically nothing. Graphs shown in the image below. Middle left is the compression adjustment, middle right is the rebound adjustment, bottom 3 graphs are for the high speed compression. As you can see, adjusting the LSC dampening does alter the compression damping at speeds above 1.5 - 2.0 inches / second, each line represents 4 clicks difference. Adjusting the rebound dampening makes quite significant changes to both rebound and compression. Each line represents 4 clicks difference and makes a noticeable change on the dyno graphs. Adjusting the HSC makes absolutely no change at all, each line represents 1 turn of adjustment and the 3 graphs are done with the rebound & LSC set to different settings to see if they affect the sensitivity of the HSC, which they do not. HSC adjuster does nothing at all, regardless of where the other adjusters are in their range. So as you can clearly see from real dyno tests instead of "seat of the pants" stuff, the rebound circuit is actually reasonably good. The LSC adjuster works, but is overwhelmed by the rebound adjuster and the HSC adjuster does nothing. Revalving will drastically improve the situation for both rebound and compression, if done correctly.
|
|
|
Post by X Plane on Jun 17, 2019 17:27:07 GMT
....bottoms out and then rebounds excessively quickly due to weak damping in both compression and rebound circuits. Sorry X Plane, but dyno graphs do not lie! Yes, the compression is not great, and it's biggest issue is that it is tied in with the rebound circuit, so adjusting rebound dampening will also adjust compression dampening quite significantly, adjusting only the low speed compression only makes marginal difference and adjusting the high speed compression does basically nothing. Graphs shown in the image below. Middle left is the compression adjustment, middle right is the rebound adjustment, bottom 3 graphs are for the high speed compression. As you can see, adjusting the LSC dampening does alter the compression damping at speeds above 1.5 - 2.0 inches / second, each line represents 4 clicks difference. Adjusting the rebound dampening makes quite significant changes to both rebound and compression. Each line represents 4 clicks difference and makes a noticeable change on the dyno graphs. Adjusting the HSC makes absolutely no change at all, each line represents 1 turn of adjustment and the 3 graphs are done with the rebound & LSC set to different settings to see if they affect the sensitivity of the HSC, which they do not. HSC adjuster does nothing at all, regardless of where the other adjusters are in their range. So as you can clearly see from real dyno tests instead of "seat of the pants" stuff, the rebound circuit is actually reasonably good. The LSC adjuster works, but is overwhelmed by the rebound adjuster and the HSC adjuster does nothing. Revalving will drastically improve the situation for both rebound and compression, if done correctly. Ok not a problem Mario. So it is reckoned that graph lines show the stock shock as a fantastic and brilliant bump absorber then. Although, for me when all is said and done, the stock 2016 shocks felt awful on the road, and was not adjustable or great. Even a nit pick here or there on extracted words around the rebound speed will not change what i wanted to say (&illustrate in video) that a stiffer spring could speed up what is an already fast-ish rate of rebound for Irish roads. And as you show tuning the shock to behave is not achievable as it is severely compromised as rebound adjustment alters compression as well 🙄 and that makes ideal settings a nah on impossible task. Stock shock was / is basically a mid end shock that can’t be independently dialled in enough to get it adequately right for me. I was always amazed at setting up suspension of my off and on road bikes I.e. first part of shock stroke softer that the later travel and so on and how adjusting made a good nice difference. However, no matter want I did or tried or did with that stock shock I could not get it to behave and not bottom out or be in control. Hence, I changed and upgraded it and boy what a positive difference was made as the bike’s suspension is now superb for me. Stick with your stock shocks if you like them and are happy that it behaves as good as the front end. As I say I don’t sell shocks I’ve nothing to gain. My stock shock rests on a shelve in my garage. You guys can certainly retain the stock shock.
|
|
mario
Full Member
Posts: 72
|
Post by mario on Jun 17, 2019 20:04:16 GMT
1. So it is reckoned that graph lines show the stock shock as a fantastic and brilliant bump absorber then. 2. Although, for me when all is said and done, the stock 2016 shocks felt awful on the road, and was not adjustable or great. 3. Even a nit pick here or there on extracted words around the rebound speed will not change what i wanted to say (&illustrate in video) that a stiffer spring could speed up what is an already fast-ish rate of rebound for Irish roads. 4. And as you show tuning the shock to behave is not achievable as it is severely compromised as rebound adjustment alters compression as well 🙄 and that makes ideal settings a nah on impossible task. Stock shock was / is basically a mid end shock that can’t be independently dialled in enough to get it adequately right for me. 5. ....are happy that it behaves as good as the front end. 1. I did not say that! The graphs show quite clearly that the stock shock has its limitation, but they are predominantly centred around compression damping, whereas all your previous comments have focused on rebound being poor, which is actually the 1 place the shock performs quite reasonably in. Hence as I said, proper dyno testing does not agree with your "seat of the pants" theories. 2. That's fair enough, you were not happy with the stock shock for whatever reason, but you love your Nitron, nothing wrong with that. 3. Again, the rebound circuit is the 1 decent damping circuit in the whole shock, so it would probably cope fine with 1 or 2 rates stiffer, dyno graphs don't lie. 4. My main point with my entire post was that the 1 thing you picked on the most (the rebound) was actually half decent in this shock. I 100% agree it is not the best shock out there, and there were compromises made by KYB when they developed it for Yamaha, so yes, it can't be setup perfectly as it comes out of the box, however it CAN be revalved to eliminate or at least largely mitigate the issues the shock has from stock. 5. That right there says it all to me. That's the funny thing with suspension, it's all so personal. To me, the worst part about the stock setup is the front end. In stock form it's too light on the front, hence it always lift in stock form, the front is way over damped in terms of compression and the springs are too stiff. Then again I weigh less than 70kg, but if you are heavier the front will probably work better for you. What I have found is the rear end of these bikes in stock form is more suited to someone lighter, and the front is more suited to someone heavier.
|
|