Who wants their Ricor Intiminators to work better?
#1
01-14-2012, 08:20 AM
Who wants their Ricor Intiminators to work better?
First let me say that I never intended to make this info public domain because I have invested so much time, energy and money into it, and I honestly didn’t want to give my findings away so Ricor can benefit from it. Anyway, I’ve realized that I will never gain anything by holding onto the info, and it is an unbelievable improvement in performance so I would like to share it with you, my fellow forum members.
Anyway, I have spent countless hours experimenting, reconfiguring, modifying and evaluating the Ricor Intiminators with different springs. After riding all summer on my latest configuration, I am comfortable claiming that I have found a reliable combination that works much better than the seemingly fantastic out-of-the-box drop-in Intiminators, I know that’s hard to believe. I have only sent this info to one other member, and he was unfortunately in an accident that trashed his bike just days before he was going to try my modification. I have never ridden a premium cartridge front suspension system for comparison, but I can tell you that my modified Intiminators have superb compliance characteristics, while maintaining the brake dive resistance in the chassis circuit. I think this is a great winter project that folks can work on without the pressure to get it done quickly.
Preliminary note: I’m not going to entertain discussions about the use of progressive, or more accurately, multi rate springs. I have used them both, and no doubt about it, properly weight matched single rate springs provide superior results. Its really quite simple, the main job of the spring is to provide the suspension with a ”neutral buoyancy” condition at a desirable point in the total travel; it only takes a single rate spring to accomplish that and a multi-rate spring does not do the job better. In fact a multi rate spring make it more difficult to tune and you have to compromise to achieve “ok” performance within the different zones of the spring rate, instead of achieving very good results in the one zone of single rate springs. The valve provides the dampening and control not the spring. If you want to try this mod with progressive springs, go for it, it may work but it won’t work nearly as well.
A brief background; I got the Intiminators when they were first released and they were fantastic. After two seasons of riding on them, the “wow” effect wore off and I started thinking maybe they could be tweaked to work better. I can’t claim complete credit for figuring this out all on my own, I did find some info about this mod on a dual sport site, but I took it quite a bit further and tweaked them for the HD touring platform. I started by swapping out my 06 springs for the 33% stiffer 09 springs and Brian at Ricor sent me a different shim pack configuration that he felt would be better. I ended up getting more brake dive with the new set up, because the basic shim pack configuration had changed since I had first ordered my Intiminators. I tried a stiffer shim pack and it worked great to improve the brake dive but the springs were just too stiff. The OEM springs are dual rate, but the softer section compresses completely within about the first inch of travel, then the rest of the travel is in the stiffer rate section. So then I tried the weight matched Race Techs, and I could tell the springs were right but something else was still not right.
I started looking into modifying the “circuits” of the Intiminators. I dissected mine, disassembled, analyzed the construction, studied the patent claims, and made numerous calls to Ricor. I wrote down all of my assumptions about how all of the circuits functioned and sent it to Brian at Ricor, requesting that he confirm if what I thought I knew was correct. Surprisingly he called me and questioned my intent and then he told me he thought for sure I was a counterfeiter because my reverse engineering analysis of the Intiminators was spot on, everything that I thought I figured out about how they function was exactly correct. Having confirmed my assumptions were correct I started looking at the best possible ways to modify them to make them work better and although I don’t think I have achieved absolute maximum potential yet with my bike, I’m very close and I know how to get there.
So onto the down and dirty; The major modification to the Intiminators is to enlarge the adjacent 4 ports under the RIV piston, from the original oval .082 X .165 to .125 X .165. This increased total port area from 28.56 mm to 44.37 mm. This may seem like an extreme increase, but it really isn’t. Prior to the mod the area of the 4 ports were the limiting factor, but after enlarging the 4 small ports, the main port becomes the limiting factor with an area of only 31.6 mm, or roughly 10% increase over original. If necessary, future flow increase can easily be achieved by simply drilling out the main port in gradual steps, up to a max area of 44.37mm to match the area of the 4 RIV ports. I also raised the port from .045 below the shoulder to .025 below the shoulder. Raising the ports closer to the top of the RIV piston means the piston doesn’t have to travel as far to un-shroud the bleed ports, so the system reacts more quickly to wheel inputs. The larger port area produces better low, mid, and high velocity compliance, hence better damping for larger bumps. Since more fluid can pass through the RIV ports at low and mid velocity, there is less dependence on the secondary function of the chassis circuit for high velocity compliance, so the chassis circuit can be kept firmer without making high velocity compliance too harsh. I used a milling machine to cut the ports but I think good results could be achieved by cautiously hand working with a needle file, because like I said the center port will become the limiting factor, so the 4 adjacent ports don’t necessarily have to be perfectly shaped, just don’t raise them too high or the valve will fire errantly.
I included a complete disassembly pic with the parts labeled but you won’t need to take apart the lower assembly. Ricor has changed their lower assembly design, since they first released this product, the original type lower housing retaining collar was threaded but the newer version has a light press fit that sort of snaps together with light force. Both types are pretty delicate and can be damaged if you’re not careful, but the threaded version is a little tougher. You’ll need to separate the upper and lower assemblies. The method I used on the thread together type lower housing in the pic was to wrap the lower housing with a piece of heavy oil line and lightly clamp in the vice, while applying pressure to loosen the main stem, I slowly tightened the vise at the same time until it got just tight enough to break the stem loose. The threads are not left handed but looking down on the bottom of the lower assemble you will turn clockwise to loosen because you're threading the port stem down and out of the lower assembly, it’s right handed but you are looking at it from the back side. You don’t want to just clamp the lower housing in the vise because too much pressure will squeeze it out of round, then you got an unusable piece of junk. If you have the newer style snap together lower assembly, do not clamp it in the vise, it will get squeezed out of round and the return valve spring and disc will drag or bind, disabling the function. You will need to make a spanner or buy the disassembly tool from Ricor.
During this process I had my front end apart more times than I can even remember, but you can skip past the pains of trial and error and go right to an exceptional tune with only one tear down. The recipe for success is the modified ports, Race Tech or any brand single rate springs matched to your weight and bike application, and 3 x .015 shims. I did make mention that my bike is not perfect yet, but to clarify that is only because I inadvertently increased my un-sprung weight with my hybrid touring wrap fender that I added after the last tune tweak, and it changed my front suspension performance a little, but not enough to tear it back apart to correct it. The Recipe I described here should work quite well with any touring front end configuration that doesn’t exceed the un-sprung weight of a stock SG, in fact it likely works much better with any wheels lighter than my 18 lb SG wheels, or a fender lighter than stock. What does this mod achieve? You know how well the Intiminators work now. Well, this mod will provide better compliance across the board, quicker reaction to inputs, and provides more resistance to brake dive without compromising high velocity compliance. I am absolutely satisfied with my front suspension now and I won't be looking for an upgrade. If you wish to engage this modification I will provide as much assistance as I can, and answer your questions.
My Intiminator Notes: these are my notes to me I didn't rewrite them for a particular audience
The Intiminators affect a profound improvement in the function of antiquated damper rod type forks, and literally transform them to function like current high-tech performance racing shocks. They work fantastic as a drop in, straight out of the box product, but they can perform much better. I have dissected them and studied them extensively; I disassembled them, read all of the patent claims, and had many phone conversations with Ricor, and I believe there are many functional variables that could be manipulated to achieve nearly infinite tuning capability. I know they can be tuned by changing shims, but I am taking my Intiminator tuning experiments far beyond what Ricor intends for users to do.
Before I started, I asked Brian at Ricor to confirm my evaluation of how the Intiminators work. The patent claims were helpful to fill in some blanks but they were still a little vague because they apply to the “technology” and not the specific product. Ricor’s automotive shock RIV circuits are different from the Intiminator RIV circuits; both in their mechanical design and the way they function. It would also seem that the design of Intiminators vary for different applications. I’ve also read a lot of forums, and folks have a lot of theories, but best as I can tell, nobody really knows or understands how they “actually” work, beyond the advertising blurb description. In order to formulate reasonable assumptions, and predict the effect of modifications, I need a detailed understanding of the circuits, their events, and how they function individually and in concert, during normal operation.
So, here’s what I figured out so far
There are three circuits incorporated in the Intiminators:
*Wheel input circuit-The RIV, Ricor Inertia Valve, Serves to manage low to mid velocity wheel inputs, upward wheel input reveals ports shrouded by the RIV piston, fluid flows up through the center shaft port and out the exposed adjacent 4 ports. For Hi velocity inputs or big bumps, it works in conjunction with the chassis input circuit disc valve. The combined area of the 4 ports is less than the center shaft port area, so in original configuration, flow is effectively limited by the size of the 4 ports.
*Chassis input circuit- Deflective disc valve (shims) serves primarily to resist low velocity chassis inputs aka “brake dive”, and act as an over flow for high velocity inputs that exceed the flow capacity of the wheel input circuit RIV ports. Fluid flows up through the 6 ports on the bottom of the lower housing and past the deflected discs. Flow is limited by the deflective discs and can be altered by changing quantity and thickness. Changes affect both chassis dive and high velocity compliance.
*Rebound circuit- Serves to direct fluid return to lower leg and control the speed of rebound. Fluid flows downward through the narrow gap between the outside diameter of the deflective discs and the inside diameter of the lower housing. The spring supporting the narrow shim is relatively weak, offering little resistance to promote “free flow” return. The area of the gap far exceeds the combined area of the 6 ports in the lower housing, so rebound is effectively limited by the size of the 6 ports. There is no evidence that return flow needs to be increased or decreased.
Relative tuning info:
* The shims in the Deflective Disc Valve are stainless spring steel and they actually flex under pressure allowing fluid to pass, commonly used in high performance shock valves. So, more shims = more resistant to fluid pass, less shims = less resistant to fluid pass.
*Combined thickness of all the shims in the shim pack is not as important as the thickness of the individual shims in the pack, i.e. .012” X 5 ea. = .060” total, and .015” X 4 ea. =.060” total also, but the 4 ea. X .015” shims will be much stiffer and resistant to deflection. So they would have more resistance to brake dive but also more resistant to yield to high velocity input making big bumps a little harsher.
*Individual shim thickness increases resistance exponentially, i.e. 1 ea. .015 shim is equal to the effect of approximately 2.75 ea. .012 shims.
*Raising the fluid level will increase resistance to bottoming out but it has no other noticeable effect on the operation of the system. There is no significant benefit to modifying fluid levels outside the range of the OEM specification. If you are bottoming out you likely need stiffer main springs or more preload on the existing main springs.
*Changing to a higher viscosity will add resistance to compression but it will also slow down rebound, which would be undesirable. Use only the recommended 5wt Amsoil fluid.
*Assembly torque value for the RIV port shaft to lower housing is 15ft/lbs with blue/medium strength loctite.
Additional Observations
*Valve events can occur independently, overlapping, and/or simultaneously.
*The 6 shallow notches in the top of the RIV piston serve to prevent a vacuum seal that could cause hydra-lock.
*RIV valve top nylon locknut torque value is 60 in/lbs.
*In a shim stack of multiple thickness, the position of the thicker shims, top or bottom, does not matter.
*Ricor claims the Intiminators were designed to work best with OEM springs but I am positively convinced weight matched single rate springs work best.
*An occasional “clunk” is not uncommon, or indicative of a “problem”, on large bumps or high velocity inputs. The valves can’t fully compensate for the increased fluid pressure from a large bump; the excess fluid pressure in the lower leg below the Intiminator will actually overwhelm the springs’ force pushing down on top of the Intiminators, and momentarily “float” the whole Intiminator housing off its seat atop the damper rod, and when the pressure is finally relieved through the valve, the main spring slams it back down, making a clunking noise. I found the clunk was greatly reduced, almost eliminated, after enlarging the 4 RIV ports, because more fluid is allowed to flow and relieve more pressure faster.
*Adding a flat washer under the top nut of the upper assembly, provides something for mechanical fingers to grab hold of, it makes it a lot easier to pull the Intiminators out of the fork tubes during subsequent disassembly.
Anyway, I have spent countless hours experimenting, reconfiguring, modifying and evaluating the Ricor Intiminators with different springs. After riding all summer on my latest configuration, I am comfortable claiming that I have found a reliable combination that works much better than the seemingly fantastic out-of-the-box drop-in Intiminators, I know that’s hard to believe. I have only sent this info to one other member, and he was unfortunately in an accident that trashed his bike just days before he was going to try my modification. I have never ridden a premium cartridge front suspension system for comparison, but I can tell you that my modified Intiminators have superb compliance characteristics, while maintaining the brake dive resistance in the chassis circuit. I think this is a great winter project that folks can work on without the pressure to get it done quickly.
Preliminary note: I’m not going to entertain discussions about the use of progressive, or more accurately, multi rate springs. I have used them both, and no doubt about it, properly weight matched single rate springs provide superior results. Its really quite simple, the main job of the spring is to provide the suspension with a ”neutral buoyancy” condition at a desirable point in the total travel; it only takes a single rate spring to accomplish that and a multi-rate spring does not do the job better. In fact a multi rate spring make it more difficult to tune and you have to compromise to achieve “ok” performance within the different zones of the spring rate, instead of achieving very good results in the one zone of single rate springs. The valve provides the dampening and control not the spring. If you want to try this mod with progressive springs, go for it, it may work but it won’t work nearly as well.
A brief background; I got the Intiminators when they were first released and they were fantastic. After two seasons of riding on them, the “wow” effect wore off and I started thinking maybe they could be tweaked to work better. I can’t claim complete credit for figuring this out all on my own, I did find some info about this mod on a dual sport site, but I took it quite a bit further and tweaked them for the HD touring platform. I started by swapping out my 06 springs for the 33% stiffer 09 springs and Brian at Ricor sent me a different shim pack configuration that he felt would be better. I ended up getting more brake dive with the new set up, because the basic shim pack configuration had changed since I had first ordered my Intiminators. I tried a stiffer shim pack and it worked great to improve the brake dive but the springs were just too stiff. The OEM springs are dual rate, but the softer section compresses completely within about the first inch of travel, then the rest of the travel is in the stiffer rate section. So then I tried the weight matched Race Techs, and I could tell the springs were right but something else was still not right.
I started looking into modifying the “circuits” of the Intiminators. I dissected mine, disassembled, analyzed the construction, studied the patent claims, and made numerous calls to Ricor. I wrote down all of my assumptions about how all of the circuits functioned and sent it to Brian at Ricor, requesting that he confirm if what I thought I knew was correct. Surprisingly he called me and questioned my intent and then he told me he thought for sure I was a counterfeiter because my reverse engineering analysis of the Intiminators was spot on, everything that I thought I figured out about how they function was exactly correct. Having confirmed my assumptions were correct I started looking at the best possible ways to modify them to make them work better and although I don’t think I have achieved absolute maximum potential yet with my bike, I’m very close and I know how to get there.
So onto the down and dirty; The major modification to the Intiminators is to enlarge the adjacent 4 ports under the RIV piston, from the original oval .082 X .165 to .125 X .165. This increased total port area from 28.56 mm to 44.37 mm. This may seem like an extreme increase, but it really isn’t. Prior to the mod the area of the 4 ports were the limiting factor, but after enlarging the 4 small ports, the main port becomes the limiting factor with an area of only 31.6 mm, or roughly 10% increase over original. If necessary, future flow increase can easily be achieved by simply drilling out the main port in gradual steps, up to a max area of 44.37mm to match the area of the 4 RIV ports. I also raised the port from .045 below the shoulder to .025 below the shoulder. Raising the ports closer to the top of the RIV piston means the piston doesn’t have to travel as far to un-shroud the bleed ports, so the system reacts more quickly to wheel inputs. The larger port area produces better low, mid, and high velocity compliance, hence better damping for larger bumps. Since more fluid can pass through the RIV ports at low and mid velocity, there is less dependence on the secondary function of the chassis circuit for high velocity compliance, so the chassis circuit can be kept firmer without making high velocity compliance too harsh. I used a milling machine to cut the ports but I think good results could be achieved by cautiously hand working with a needle file, because like I said the center port will become the limiting factor, so the 4 adjacent ports don’t necessarily have to be perfectly shaped, just don’t raise them too high or the valve will fire errantly.
I included a complete disassembly pic with the parts labeled but you won’t need to take apart the lower assembly. Ricor has changed their lower assembly design, since they first released this product, the original type lower housing retaining collar was threaded but the newer version has a light press fit that sort of snaps together with light force. Both types are pretty delicate and can be damaged if you’re not careful, but the threaded version is a little tougher. You’ll need to separate the upper and lower assemblies. The method I used on the thread together type lower housing in the pic was to wrap the lower housing with a piece of heavy oil line and lightly clamp in the vice, while applying pressure to loosen the main stem, I slowly tightened the vise at the same time until it got just tight enough to break the stem loose. The threads are not left handed but looking down on the bottom of the lower assemble you will turn clockwise to loosen because you're threading the port stem down and out of the lower assembly, it’s right handed but you are looking at it from the back side. You don’t want to just clamp the lower housing in the vise because too much pressure will squeeze it out of round, then you got an unusable piece of junk. If you have the newer style snap together lower assembly, do not clamp it in the vise, it will get squeezed out of round and the return valve spring and disc will drag or bind, disabling the function. You will need to make a spanner or buy the disassembly tool from Ricor.
During this process I had my front end apart more times than I can even remember, but you can skip past the pains of trial and error and go right to an exceptional tune with only one tear down. The recipe for success is the modified ports, Race Tech or any brand single rate springs matched to your weight and bike application, and 3 x .015 shims. I did make mention that my bike is not perfect yet, but to clarify that is only because I inadvertently increased my un-sprung weight with my hybrid touring wrap fender that I added after the last tune tweak, and it changed my front suspension performance a little, but not enough to tear it back apart to correct it. The Recipe I described here should work quite well with any touring front end configuration that doesn’t exceed the un-sprung weight of a stock SG, in fact it likely works much better with any wheels lighter than my 18 lb SG wheels, or a fender lighter than stock. What does this mod achieve? You know how well the Intiminators work now. Well, this mod will provide better compliance across the board, quicker reaction to inputs, and provides more resistance to brake dive without compromising high velocity compliance. I am absolutely satisfied with my front suspension now and I won't be looking for an upgrade. If you wish to engage this modification I will provide as much assistance as I can, and answer your questions.
My Intiminator Notes: these are my notes to me I didn't rewrite them for a particular audience
The Intiminators affect a profound improvement in the function of antiquated damper rod type forks, and literally transform them to function like current high-tech performance racing shocks. They work fantastic as a drop in, straight out of the box product, but they can perform much better. I have dissected them and studied them extensively; I disassembled them, read all of the patent claims, and had many phone conversations with Ricor, and I believe there are many functional variables that could be manipulated to achieve nearly infinite tuning capability. I know they can be tuned by changing shims, but I am taking my Intiminator tuning experiments far beyond what Ricor intends for users to do.
Before I started, I asked Brian at Ricor to confirm my evaluation of how the Intiminators work. The patent claims were helpful to fill in some blanks but they were still a little vague because they apply to the “technology” and not the specific product. Ricor’s automotive shock RIV circuits are different from the Intiminator RIV circuits; both in their mechanical design and the way they function. It would also seem that the design of Intiminators vary for different applications. I’ve also read a lot of forums, and folks have a lot of theories, but best as I can tell, nobody really knows or understands how they “actually” work, beyond the advertising blurb description. In order to formulate reasonable assumptions, and predict the effect of modifications, I need a detailed understanding of the circuits, their events, and how they function individually and in concert, during normal operation.
So, here’s what I figured out so far
There are three circuits incorporated in the Intiminators:
*Wheel input circuit-The RIV, Ricor Inertia Valve, Serves to manage low to mid velocity wheel inputs, upward wheel input reveals ports shrouded by the RIV piston, fluid flows up through the center shaft port and out the exposed adjacent 4 ports. For Hi velocity inputs or big bumps, it works in conjunction with the chassis input circuit disc valve. The combined area of the 4 ports is less than the center shaft port area, so in original configuration, flow is effectively limited by the size of the 4 ports.
*Chassis input circuit- Deflective disc valve (shims) serves primarily to resist low velocity chassis inputs aka “brake dive”, and act as an over flow for high velocity inputs that exceed the flow capacity of the wheel input circuit RIV ports. Fluid flows up through the 6 ports on the bottom of the lower housing and past the deflected discs. Flow is limited by the deflective discs and can be altered by changing quantity and thickness. Changes affect both chassis dive and high velocity compliance.
*Rebound circuit- Serves to direct fluid return to lower leg and control the speed of rebound. Fluid flows downward through the narrow gap between the outside diameter of the deflective discs and the inside diameter of the lower housing. The spring supporting the narrow shim is relatively weak, offering little resistance to promote “free flow” return. The area of the gap far exceeds the combined area of the 6 ports in the lower housing, so rebound is effectively limited by the size of the 6 ports. There is no evidence that return flow needs to be increased or decreased.
Relative tuning info:
* The shims in the Deflective Disc Valve are stainless spring steel and they actually flex under pressure allowing fluid to pass, commonly used in high performance shock valves. So, more shims = more resistant to fluid pass, less shims = less resistant to fluid pass.
*Combined thickness of all the shims in the shim pack is not as important as the thickness of the individual shims in the pack, i.e. .012” X 5 ea. = .060” total, and .015” X 4 ea. =.060” total also, but the 4 ea. X .015” shims will be much stiffer and resistant to deflection. So they would have more resistance to brake dive but also more resistant to yield to high velocity input making big bumps a little harsher.
*Individual shim thickness increases resistance exponentially, i.e. 1 ea. .015 shim is equal to the effect of approximately 2.75 ea. .012 shims.
*Raising the fluid level will increase resistance to bottoming out but it has no other noticeable effect on the operation of the system. There is no significant benefit to modifying fluid levels outside the range of the OEM specification. If you are bottoming out you likely need stiffer main springs or more preload on the existing main springs.
*Changing to a higher viscosity will add resistance to compression but it will also slow down rebound, which would be undesirable. Use only the recommended 5wt Amsoil fluid.
*Assembly torque value for the RIV port shaft to lower housing is 15ft/lbs with blue/medium strength loctite.
Additional Observations
*Valve events can occur independently, overlapping, and/or simultaneously.
*The 6 shallow notches in the top of the RIV piston serve to prevent a vacuum seal that could cause hydra-lock.
*RIV valve top nylon locknut torque value is 60 in/lbs.
*In a shim stack of multiple thickness, the position of the thicker shims, top or bottom, does not matter.
*Ricor claims the Intiminators were designed to work best with OEM springs but I am positively convinced weight matched single rate springs work best.
*An occasional “clunk” is not uncommon, or indicative of a “problem”, on large bumps or high velocity inputs. The valves can’t fully compensate for the increased fluid pressure from a large bump; the excess fluid pressure in the lower leg below the Intiminator will actually overwhelm the springs’ force pushing down on top of the Intiminators, and momentarily “float” the whole Intiminator housing off its seat atop the damper rod, and when the pressure is finally relieved through the valve, the main spring slams it back down, making a clunking noise. I found the clunk was greatly reduced, almost eliminated, after enlarging the 4 RIV ports, because more fluid is allowed to flow and relieve more pressure faster.
*Adding a flat washer under the top nut of the upper assembly, provides something for mechanical fingers to grab hold of, it makes it a lot easier to pull the Intiminators out of the fork tubes during subsequent disassembly.
The following users liked this post:
davidneth (04-13-2023)
#2
01-14-2012, 09:56 AM
Seasoned HDF Member
#3
01-14-2012, 10:19 AM
Road Captain
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Nc
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the report . I guess I'm just to lazy to mess with them . I have close to 35000 miles on my intiminators . The last time I changed the fork oil I replaced the fork caps with the ones that have holes on the top so all I have to do is take the fork drain screws out and pour the new fork oil in the tops( I have the 1200r so I either had to take the handle bars off or pull the forks off the bike to change the fork oil) . Also have the dual rate fork springs . Again thanks for the heads up .
Last edited by turn8a; 01-14-2012 at 10:23 AM.
#4
01-14-2012, 01:50 PM
Road Master
Fantastic research and writeup, Fabricator! And many thanks for sharing not only the results, but the how-to.
My 3/3's were ordered from Howard just yesterday, and I've been checking into front end alternatives. It appears from your pic's that the weak points with the Ricor system would be the rebound circuit and inertia collar springs - is this even a valid concern? Am just starting to investigate all options, so it may be that all systems have these basic components...
I'm also playing a waiting game to see what Howard's developing. I'd prefer to maintain continuity with matched components, particularly when playing with chassis geometry.
One last question. Usually when a component is modified there is an inevitable trade-off at some other point. From what I gather, you haven't found this to be the case?
My 3/3's were ordered from Howard just yesterday, and I've been checking into front end alternatives. It appears from your pic's that the weak points with the Ricor system would be the rebound circuit and inertia collar springs - is this even a valid concern? Am just starting to investigate all options, so it may be that all systems have these basic components...
I'm also playing a waiting game to see what Howard's developing. I'd prefer to maintain continuity with matched components, particularly when playing with chassis geometry.
One last question. Usually when a component is modified there is an inevitable trade-off at some other point. From what I gather, you haven't found this to be the case?
#6
01-14-2012, 02:38 PM
#7
01-14-2012, 02:51 PM
Fantastic research and writeup, Fabricator! And many thanks for sharing not only the results, but the how-to.
My 3/3's were ordered from Howard just yesterday, and I've been checking into front end alternatives. It appears from your pic's that the weak points with the Ricor system would be the rebound circuit and inertia collar springs - is this even a valid concern? Am just starting to investigate all options, so it may be that all systems have these basic components...
I'm also playing a waiting game to see what Howard's developing. I'd prefer to maintain continuity with matched components, particularly when playing with chassis geometry.
One last question. Usually when a component is modified there is an inevitable trade-off at some other point. From what I gather, you haven't found this to be the case?
My 3/3's were ordered from Howard just yesterday, and I've been checking into front end alternatives. It appears from your pic's that the weak points with the Ricor system would be the rebound circuit and inertia collar springs - is this even a valid concern? Am just starting to investigate all options, so it may be that all systems have these basic components...
I'm also playing a waiting game to see what Howard's developing. I'd prefer to maintain continuity with matched components, particularly when playing with chassis geometry.
One last question. Usually when a component is modified there is an inevitable trade-off at some other point. From what I gather, you haven't found this to be the case?
Trending Topics
#8
01-14-2012, 02:57 PM
#10
01-15-2012, 12:04 PM
Sorry bout that dstrat1, I didn't see your post but I did answer your PMs. For others' benefit though, the shims (deflective disks) can be purchased from Ricor, I'm pretty sure they are Sandvik Stainless shims but can't go wrong if you get them from Ricor. It doesn't really matter which version of the lower housing you have, other than the press together version is easily damaged if you try to hold it directly in the vise, like the pic in the original post. I attached a pic of my home made disassembly tool that will prevent damaging the lower housing. It is a little robust, aka overkill but you get the idea, the two pins serve as a spanner to catch two of the port holes on the bottom, and the center hole is just access for the hex wrench. Critical dimension is the .810" CTC center-to-center, of the pins. The pins themselves are .165" diameter, my center hole is .500 but it only needs to be big enough for the hex key to fit through. Mine is built fairly precise with a mill, but you should be able to build this with just a drill press, or even a hand drill if you're carefull. Just lay it out carefuly and use slightly smaller diameter pins to make up for being a little off on hole placement. Makes disassembly a lot easier, just set the housing down on the pins, and turn the wrench counter clockwise as you look down on the valve assembly.