Racetech emulators

Originally Posted by Lozzo

If this was happening to my bike, I'd be looking at the way I rode it or the setup.

Having seen Rob race, and witnessed quite a few of his previous 'suspension jobs' circulating the race tracks of Great Britain, he knows what he's talking about - it would be a foolish man or an engineering genius who questions his word.

so,if I tell you I am faster and better racer than him and guys on my suspension circulate more tracks would that mean I know more than him?
we are not talking about Rob here.if he sets it up right and have no problem with set up it does not mean problem does not exist.it just means he has not run in to problem,or experience it,or recognize it,or he did but changed settings to get around it.
no need to turn this in to Rob against me because that is not what it is.all I am saying there is flaw in instructions.you are free to do it any way you like it.
I still did not get answer why drilling holes bigger is not better or problem.

Originally Posted by zadar

I still did not get answer why drilling holes bigger is not better or problem.

Why? We thought you knew bigger holes are better already; you said so!

As long as the compression is eliminated then you can do it either way.

I havn't done the maths but i dont think you get the same overall hole size by enlarging the existing holes to 11mm

[northwind]

Zadar knows stuff. That's all I'm saying. The internet is a big place you know

I fitted my emulators as per instructions, should I be worried?
Mind you, I have no intention of racing...

[yorkie_chris]

Originally Posted by Robw#70

As long as the compression is eliminated then you can do it either way.

I havn't done the maths but i dont think you get the same overall hole size by enlarging the existing holes to 11mm

From somebody who knows little of suspension but a bit about fluid mechanics:

The area is not the be all and end all of how much resistance there is to flow, the fluid is quite thick (viscous), so will be affected by the boundaries of the hole, i.e a smaller hole will not flow proportionally less than a big one, the effect will be greater than this, especially as the speed increases. (speed of fluid flow through the hole that is)

Originally Posted by Robw#70

As long as the compression is eliminated then you can do it either way.

I havn't done the maths but i dont think you get the same overall hole size by enlarging the existing holes to 11mm

I trawled old, deep suppressed memories and after a bit of work with a calculator, have to admit that 4 x 10mm holes (stock holes are 8mm) have slightly more surface area than 6 x 8mm.

But of course, 10 mm holes are going to seriously weaken the tube so much it will collapse the first time the forks compress.

[yorkie_chris]

But oil behaves in a more complex way then that, the overall effect will be different

Originally Posted by yorkie_chris

But oil behaves in a more complex way then that, the overall effect will be different

all you doing is making emulator more restricted than stock holes.

Originally Posted by Robw#70

As long as the compression is eliminated then you can do it either way.

in your previous post you agree there is 10mm of travel with 0 rebound.
do you set up fork to not use this part of travel or you just ignore it?is that what you mean by 'compression is eliminated'?