Intiminators installed: I'm underwhelmed.

[Waihou Thumper]

so I've got a soft side and a hard side.

You sensitive new age guy you ......

[NordieBoy]

Bloody KLR owners,
5w in both legs, early AT's have 5w as standard, different spacers because of the thickness of the thingy in one leg, so I've got a soft side and a hard side.

There's your slow rebound issue.
Get some 2.5w in there with both 'nators for a test.

[Robert Taylor]

With the greatest respect a lot of you guys just assume so much and the reason for this thread is no different. A purchaser assumed that what the seller was claiming had 100% integrity. if you dredge through any number of other motorcycle related forums you will very quickly reason that the misgivings about the said product are significant.

When we are talking about ''oil weight'' the SAE ratings that suspension oils are rated at to be sold over the counter is ( to not put too fine a point on it ) ''a crock of s..t'' Rating a suspension oil by using a motor oil rating is complete and utter nonsense.
The only way to compare apples for apples is by using the centistoke scale, that far more accurately represents flow rate, one of the major preoccupations when determining what fork oil etc that you require.
Aside from the fact you shouldnt mix oil brands without starting with completely dry components ( and thats another story ) DIFFERENT BRANDS OF OIL SHOWING THE SAME SAE RATING ON THE BOTTLE WILL OFTEN HAVE SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT CENTISTOKE FLOW RATINGS. Which in this one case will affect rebound response.

EG

Belray fork oil ( sae ) 2.5 wt 9.2 centistokes at 40 degrees celsius

Silkolene Pro RSF ( sae ) 2.5 wt 14.0 centistokes at 40 degrees celsius ( in my opinion an excellent oil )

Maxima 5wt fork oil ( sae ) 5 wt 16.9 centistokes at 40 degrees celsius ( in my opinion also an excellent oil )

Get the picture? You could have had Maxima 5wt and then in all innocence purchased a bottle of Silkolene 2.5 and noticed for all practical intent no useful difference. Certainly not what you were looking for

To the best of my knowledge ( but I am prepared to be corrected ) Ohlins are the only company that have the foresight and decency to have the centistoke rating included in the labelling on the bottle. With all other manufacturers that I know of you have to access their spec cards off their websites, if all suspension oil manufacturers make this information available on their websites I dont know.

[cs363]

Blah, blah, blah etc

To mildly correct you RT, suspension fluid should in fact be referred to in centipoise (cP), being the measurement of the oils dynamic (or absolute) viscosity - the oils resistance to flow, whereas centistokes (cSt) is the measurement of the oils kinematic viscosity - the ratio of the dynamic viscosity to the density of the fluid. However, either way works for your purpose as they are effectively equal, that is 1 centipoise equals 1 centistoke.

Handy chart attached that shows many common suspension fluids sae rating and cSt rating attached which backs up your post above (you'll need to click on the window that opens again to get it to open in it's own browser page so that it can be enlarged enough to read!).
It amazes me that more manufacturers haven't gone down the centipoise/centistoke path with suspension fluid given that there is a much greater awareness of suspension upgrades etc., these days.

[marks]

this thread is certainly very edumacational

I'm learning heaps

[400sm]

Too true marks.

Things I've always wondered:

Do orifices control low speed bump?
Does shim stack control hi speed bump?
Do the clicker adjusters only alter orifices?

[Woodman]

this thread is certainly very edumacational

I'm learning heaps

Yup agreed, best thing on KB in yonks.

[Underground]

Handy chart attached

thanks! I spent ages looking for something like that, I'd read that what is written on the bottle doesn't necessarily relate to what is actually in it.
Does that mean that the Spectro 5w I've been using is pretty much on the money?
Otherwise its just guesswork isn't it.

[husaberg]

Too true marks.

Things I've always wondered:

Do orifices control low speed bump?
Does shim stack control hi speed bump?
Do the clicker adjusters only alter orifices?

to save Robert a bit of time try google ........
you might be surprised.....
have look at the racetech site the dude writes a fair few articles......
http://www.sportrider.com/tech/sport...spension-guide
http://www.sportrider.com/technicali...hardware-terms
http://racetech.com/page/id/30
http://racetech.com/articles/CartridgeForks.htm
http://www.sportrider.com/suspension...learning-lingo
http://www.sportrider.com/technicali...te-and-preload
http://www.sportrider.com/technicali...valve-emulator
http://www.sportrider.com/technicali...artridge-forks
http://www.sportrider.com/technicali...back-to-basics
http://www.sportrider.com/technicali...ebound-damping
http://www.sportrider.com/technicali...ension-damping


mono vs twin tubes diagrams
http://www.tein.co.jp/e/special/ni_toryu/index.html

basic shock types
http://www.racetech.com/page/title/G3S%20Shock%20Types
http://www.showa1.com/en/product/mot...bsorber_r.html
http://www.showa1.com/en/product/aut...unrikaatsu.jpg
http://www.showa1.com/en/product/aut...doubletube.jpg


forks Big Piston
http://www.showa1.com/en/product/mot...bsorber_f.html

Separate function forks
Mazzocchi did this years ago BTW
http://www.showa1.com/en/product/mot..._shock_sff.jpg

nice overview
http://books.google.co.nz/books?id=J...0japan&f=false

Ohlins TTX
does it different
http://www.hardracing.com/shocks%20&...20damp/TTX.htm

[cs363]

Does that mean that the Spectro 5w I've been using is pretty much on the money?
Otherwise its just guesswork isn't it.

Depends what you mean by 'on the money' I guess - if it's providing you with the performance you want then I suppose the answer would be hesitant yes.
Whether it's the perfect oil (and oil volume, which is yet another factor) for your application, seal/bushing life, long term durability etc., according to what a specialist tuner like KSS or the suspension manufacturer themselves would recommend is another thing.
That's the difference with having a specialist like Roberts company work on your suspension, with their combined expertise and specialist tools (they have a quite impressive suspension dyno if you're interested in those kinds of things) the guesswork is none existent.
They've worked their magic on a few of my bikes as well as quite a few friends of mine and it's money well spent IMHO.

[Robert Taylor]

To mildly correct you RT, suspension fluid should in fact be referred to in centipoise (cP), being the measurement of the oils dynamic (or absolute) viscosity - the oils resistance to flow, whereas centistokes (cSt) is the measurement of the oils kinematic viscosity - the ratio of the dynamic viscosity to the density of the fluid. However, either way works for your purpose as they are effectively equal, that is 1 centipoise equals 1 centistoke.

Handy chart attached that shows many common suspension fluids sae rating and cSt rating attached which backs up your post above (you'll need to click on the window that opens again to get it to open in it's own browser page so that it can be enlarged enough to read!).
It amazes me that more manufacturers haven't gone down the centipoise/centistoke path with suspension fluid given that there is a much greater awareness of suspension upgrades etc., these days.

Theres a general reluctance to accept change, or more pointedly to introduce into mainstream understanding the more technically correct way of rating a suspension fluids flow rate. Most consumers want simple, even if its accuracy is demonstrably flawed.

[Voltaire]

Robert did a series of posts about 3 years ago on damper rod forks, main thing I got was variable loads of oil needing to go from one side of a cylinder to the other via a fixed diameter hole, and the evils of progressive springs. being the cheapskate, DIY sort of guy building up a classic BMW racers went down the Racetech Emulator path. Got linear springs based on my weight and modified the forks.

The alloy rings are not Racetech as they were a sloppy once size fits all.
BMW's use 5wt ( using the engine oil scale), Racetech said to use 10 so I did. A guy who races the same bike in the states gave a depth the oil worked for him ( air gap at top)
I'm pretty slow around the track but I found the bike handled very nicely, the rear is old school Konis with springs I selected for my weight too.
Konis are one up from fixed damper but hey, they were in the shed and I rebuilt them with 10wt as well.
Fast forward a year and rode my mates almost identical bike around the track and found it no where near as nice to ride, progressive springs, 15 wt .... He finds its on the limit, and has had some " moments on turn 6"
I'm 3 secs behind and no issues....

Robert revalved my 900 SS shock when I had it, made it much nicer to ride, and a mate with a Sports Classic 1000 went down and says Robert transformed the bike. As we say at work, " if you can't measure it, you can't manage it"
I'll bugger off back to the Classic Section now.

[Underground]

Depends what you mean by 'on the money' I guess

Or perhaps not, I just looked at the last column none of the rest made much sense to me and saw a number fairly close to the '5' on the spectro bottle.
But below is Ricors list of recomended oils and they seem to have a Cst between 15 and 16 (Ricor set them up for 15.7) whereas the spectro 5w has 21.6
Does that mean it is 'thicker'
As if the 'nator thing wasn't confusing enough there's the oil thing to try to figure out as well!

• Amsoil Shock Therapy 5W
• Shell Advanced 5w
• Motorex Racing Fork Oil (2.5w)
• Maxima Racing Fork Fluid (85/150 5w)
• Motul Fork Oil (very light)
• Ohlins Front Fork Fluid (No.5 1305-01)
• Golden Spectro Cartridge Fork Fluid (85/150, very light) 5w
• Bel-Ray Fork Oil (5wt)

[cs363]

Or perhaps not, I just looked at the last column none of the rest made much sense to me and saw a number fairly close to the '5' on the spectro bottle.
But below is Ricors list of recomended oils and they seem to have a Cst between 15 and 16 (Ricor set them up for 15.7) whereas the spectro 5w has 21.6
Does that mean it is 'thicker'
As if the 'nator thing wasn't confusing enough there's the oil thing to try to figure out as well!

• Amsoil Shock Therapy 5W
• Shell Advanced 5w
• Motorex Racing Fork Oil (2.5w)
• Maxima Racing Fork Fluid (85/150 5w)
• Motul Fork Oil (very light)
• Ohlins Front Fork Fluid (No.5 1305-01)
• Golden Spectro Cartridge Fork Fluid (85/150, very light) 5w
• Bel-Ray Fork Oil (5wt)

Essentially, yes - the Spectro is a 'thicker' oil than Ricor are recommending. Looking at the chart the closest and most readily available, quality oil seems to be Maxima 5w fork oil at 15.9 cSt.
Probably worth questioning Mr Taylor on oil level as well to get the best result. 'best' being a comparative term seeing as the Intiminators aren't the ideal product by all accounts, can't speak personally on the product as I've had zero experience with them.

[chopperT]

For reference, on install of the intiminators (I am so tired of that stupid name), I used Spectro 5w. Which apparently has a higher centistoke rating than that called out by Ricor. Even so the forks were ridiculously underdamped.

As an observation, despite the fact that (centistoke) viscosity varies widely between oil manufacturers, using the SAE rating is still a safe bet provided you stick with the same brand of oil, for comparative purposes at least?

Furthermore, still no reply from Ricor regarding the correct shim dimension/configuration.