If it's not the exact product in the book, it's not "by the book" - not all 5w fork oils are the same. spent too long discussing that with my forks!You should check the table I linked to. His current steed is a 1984 Kwak 1300 6cyl. No seriously, I think he does like talking all things bikes. and pick my mech's brains heaps throughout! He loves that. But yep, I'll try to take some pics midway through etc. but, being a lighter rider (64Kg wet), maybe I could look into 2.5W. I think they're the furry white ones Frodo?!). Well, I'm simply going to my mechanic down the road (I can pay him in Guinness) - but we've landed on the 5W, as per the book (I think he's partial to Motol?). The oils are blendable to get in-between weights.įuchs and Silkolene are brands from the same group.īrilliant guys, thank you heaps.
I switched to the equivalent (warm viscosity) RSF instead as it performs better on track (less fade) and it's less crashy feeling when cold. Here's a nice table of comparative viscosities of fork oils:įor reference, I found that in my Showas (fresh) 5w Silkolene "maintain" was adequate for compression, but the rebound needed to be closer to 20w when warm. So the 2.5 is the perfect starting point. So a balance needs to be found, and in the absence of adjusters, it will tend to satisfying the compression needs first, in the name of comfort. So whilst this was fine in the Showa units as one leg did compression and the other did rebound, it's less ideal in the Marzocchi and Sachs forks where I don't believe it's separated like that. Unfortunately the spec for the forks, no matter the manufacturer it seems, results in too little rebound damping. RSF 2.5 would be ideal yes, it's thicker than the grade number would suggest because it's more like a shock oil in that it doesn't thin out as much as it heats up.
0 kommentar(er)
