New cone valves and trax from WP?

Luxon MX wrote:

Some info about coatings to clear things up: You can DLC (or TiN) aluminum, but it happens at such a high temperature that would kill the...

Some info about coatings to clear things up:

You can DLC (or TiN) aluminum, but it happens at such a high temperature that would kill the temper of the aluminum and you'd lose a bunch of strength. That's why you don't see much DLC coated aluminum, certainly nothing structural.

In order of higher to lower friction (stiction if you will):
Hard chrome, TiN, DLC, with a pretty big difference between TiN and DLC. Not so much between chrome and TiN.

While DLC will be lower friction than hard chrome, one a shock it doesn't matter all that much since there are hardly any side loads on the shaft. The swingarm takes all the side loads applied to the bike and the shock is mounted on spherical bearings so it really can't take any off-axis loading.

The side loads on a fork can be huge and coatings make a MUCH greater difference on a fork than on a shock.

All that said, the only reason I could see them moving from DLC to hard chrome on the shock shaft is cost reduction. But for a manufacturer DLC coating a shock shaft isn't that expensive... Seems like an odd move. Unless the shock shaft is aluminum?

jacko186 wrote:

those pictured are the Cone Valve AER fork, as far as changes I believe the only changes for the forks are settings, branding and colours. As...

those pictured are the Cone Valve AER fork, as far as changes I believe the only changes for the forks are settings, branding and colours. As for the shock, there are some huge updates, I have been told that there is no longer a trax mechanism but a dual adjust high/low speed rebound as seen on the shock in the second pic posted. Id expect more info from WP shortly...

ML512 wrote:

The Trax system has been redesigned per se, instead of being in the base of the clevis, my understanding is it’s now a sleeve inside the...

The Trax system has been redesigned per se, instead of being in the base of the clevis, my understanding is it’s now a sleeve inside the shaft but outside of the rebound needle, with a spring at the top that allows it to completely open the rebound circuit in a way like the old system. But this new version is adjustable through a clicker on the clevis which allows you to fully open, close or tune in between for the system. That’s how it was explained to me...hopefully I can stop by there soon and get a better look at it for a video.

cody41 wrote:

Previous gen. cvs and trax just got a whole lot cheaper.

jacko186 wrote:

those pictured are the Cone Valve AER fork, as far as changes I believe the only changes for the forks are settings, branding and colours. As...

those pictured are the Cone Valve AER fork, as far as changes I believe the only changes for the forks are settings, branding and colours. As for the shock, there are some huge updates, I have been told that there is no longer a trax mechanism but a dual adjust high/low speed rebound as seen on the shock in the second pic posted. Id expect more info from WP shortly...

ML512 wrote:

The Trax system has been redesigned per se, instead of being in the base of the clevis, my understanding is it’s now a sleeve inside the...

The Trax system has been redesigned per se, instead of being in the base of the clevis, my understanding is it’s now a sleeve inside the shaft but outside of the rebound needle, with a spring at the top that allows it to completely open the rebound circuit in a way like the old system. But this new version is adjustable through a clicker on the clevis which allows you to fully open, close or tune in between for the system. That’s how it was explained to me...hopefully I can stop by there soon and get a better look at it for a video.

Underground wrote:

Could it be a sleeve/push rod that runs outside of the rebound adjuster needle that preloads the spring?

cody41 wrote:

Previous gen. cvs and trax just got a whole lot cheaper.

T-Fish wrote:

I wouldn't be so certain of that.

Underground wrote:

I was thinking it would be a heat treating issue. Is there a normal chrome layer put on first before the DLC? Or is DLC a...

I was thinking it would be a heat treating issue. Is there a normal chrome layer put on first before the DLC? Or is DLC a variation of chrome?

313 wrote:

[img]https://p.vitalmx.com/photos/forums/2019/05/13/346863/s1200_wpsupertrax.jpg[/img] First ride is done. I didnt expect too much from the new generation shock, because I was already happy with my "old" trax shock. What...

First ride is done. I didnt expect too much from the new generation shock, because I was already happy with my "old" trax shock. What stood out was first part of stroke was plusher. It gave little more comfort on choppy parts of the track. I think it is because of the bladder system.
The standard settings that WP manual recommends are really good. There are different recommendations for 125, 250, 350 and 450 models and also for US and EURO models. It started raining and I didnt mess with settings too much, but to be honest I didnt wanted to change anything. The standard setting was really good for my 350

313 wrote:

[img]https://p.vitalmx.com/photos/forums/2019/05/13/346863/s1200_wpsupertrax.jpg[/img] First ride is done. I didnt expect too much from the new generation shock, because I was already happy with my "old" trax shock. What...

First ride is done. I didnt expect too much from the new generation shock, because I was already happy with my "old" trax shock. What stood out was first part of stroke was plusher. It gave little more comfort on choppy parts of the track. I think it is because of the bladder system.
The standard settings that WP manual recommends are really good. There are different recommendations for 125, 250, 350 and 450 models and also for US and EURO models. It started raining and I didnt mess with settings too much, but to be honest I didnt wanted to change anything. The standard setting was really good for my 350

aees wrote:

Can you post the settings from WP? Curious to see what direction they went from 2018.

Luxon MX wrote:

Some info about coatings to clear things up: You can DLC (or TiN) aluminum, but it happens at such a high temperature that would kill the...

Some info about coatings to clear things up:

You can DLC (or TiN) aluminum, but it happens at such a high temperature that would kill the temper of the aluminum and you'd lose a bunch of strength. That's why you don't see much DLC coated aluminum, certainly nothing structural.

In order of higher to lower friction (stiction if you will):
Hard chrome, TiN, DLC, with a pretty big difference between TiN and DLC. Not so much between chrome and TiN.

While DLC will be lower friction than hard chrome, one a shock it doesn't matter all that much since there are hardly any side loads on the shaft. The swingarm takes all the side loads applied to the bike and the shock is mounted on spherical bearings so it really can't take any off-axis loading.

The side loads on a fork can be huge and coatings make a MUCH greater difference on a fork than on a shock.

All that said, the only reason I could see them moving from DLC to hard chrome on the shock shaft is cost reduction. But for a manufacturer DLC coating a shock shaft isn't that expensive... Seems like an odd move. Unless the shock shaft is aluminum?

MUTHERFUKER wrote:

So we're all still left wondering, why did WP drop the DLC coating? Seems from your posts on the matter that it is a benefit to...

So we're all still left wondering, why did WP drop the DLC coating?

Seems from your posts on the matter that it is a benefit to have DLC. And from other commentary the DLC is still marketable.

MUTHERFUKER wrote:

So we're all still left wondering, why did WP drop the DLC coating? Seems from your posts on the matter that it is a benefit to...

So we're all still left wondering, why did WP drop the DLC coating?

Seems from your posts on the matter that it is a benefit to have DLC. And from other commentary the DLC is still marketable.

Austin_Rankin wrote:

They have a finish on the lowers that performs or out performs the old stuff.

MUTHERFUKER wrote:

Is it the same finish that comes on their OE forks? Or is it a “newer” and “harder” chrome? And if not, nobody to my knowledge...

Is it the same finish that comes on their OE forks? Or is it a “newer” and “harder” chrome?

And if not, nobody to my knowledge has ever explained what is so much better about the chrome? All you did was parrot their press release on the matter.

I assume none of the KTM team bikes run DLC anymore?

MUTHERFUKER wrote:

Is it the same finish that comes on their OE forks? Or is it a “newer” and “harder” chrome? And if not, nobody to my knowledge...

Is it the same finish that comes on their OE forks? Or is it a “newer” and “harder” chrome?

And if not, nobody to my knowledge has ever explained what is so much better about the chrome? All you did was parrot their press release on the matter.

I assume none of the KTM team bikes run DLC anymore?

Langhammx wrote:

Take this with a grain of salt, but I was told that they got rid of the DLC as a cost saving measure to keep the...

Take this with a grain of salt, but I was told that they got rid of the DLC as a cost saving measure to keep the price down. I was always told that True DLC was harder than chrome and had less stiction than chrome, making it resistant to pitting.
If DLC wasn’t better than chrome, KYB and Showa would stop using it as well. It’s not all looks, there’s a purpose to it.

The Factory 52mm forks are aluminum lowers and DLC does not work over aluminum. This is my understanding…

MUTHERFUKER wrote:

Is it the same finish that comes on their OE forks? Or is it a “newer” and “harder” chrome? And if not, nobody to my knowledge...

Is it the same finish that comes on their OE forks? Or is it a “newer” and “harder” chrome?

And if not, nobody to my knowledge has ever explained what is so much better about the chrome? All you did was parrot their press release on the matter.

I assume none of the KTM team bikes run DLC anymore?

Langhammx wrote:

Take this with a grain of salt, but I was told that they got rid of the DLC as a cost saving measure to keep the...

Take this with a grain of salt, but I was told that they got rid of the DLC as a cost saving measure to keep the price down. I was always told that True DLC was harder than chrome and had less stiction than chrome, making it resistant to pitting.
If DLC wasn’t better than chrome, KYB and Showa would stop using it as well. It’s not all looks, there’s a purpose to it.

The Factory 52mm forks are aluminum lowers and DLC does not work over aluminum. This is my understanding…

MUTHERFUKER wrote:

This is exactly my question. Cost saving is always a possible underlying factor. As are marketing optics. And if the factory bikes arent running DLC, for...

This is exactly my question. Cost saving is always a possible underlying factor. As are marketing optics.

And if the factory bikes arent running DLC, for the reason you stated, I could see that being a conflicting marketing issue with the A-Kit stuff having DLC instead of the same chrome the aluminum team forks have.

All they have to say is “chrome is better” and most people will believe it and settle for chrome a-kit.

Im waiting for Luxxon to chime in. I suspect he’ll tell us DLC is still an upgrade over chrome A-kit WP stuff.

MUTHERFUKER wrote:

This is exactly my question. Cost saving is always a possible underlying factor. As are marketing optics. And if the factory bikes arent running DLC, for...

This is exactly my question. Cost saving is always a possible underlying factor. As are marketing optics.

And if the factory bikes arent running DLC, for the reason you stated, I could see that being a conflicting marketing issue with the A-Kit stuff having DLC instead of the same chrome the aluminum team forks have.

All they have to say is “chrome is better” and most people will believe it and settle for chrome a-kit.

Im waiting for Luxxon to chime in. I suspect he’ll tell us DLC is still an upgrade over chrome A-kit WP stuff.

MUTHERFUKER wrote:

This is exactly my question. Cost saving is always a possible underlying factor. As are marketing optics. And if the factory bikes arent running DLC, for...

This is exactly my question. Cost saving is always a possible underlying factor. As are marketing optics.

And if the factory bikes arent running DLC, for the reason you stated, I could see that being a conflicting marketing issue with the A-Kit stuff having DLC instead of the same chrome the aluminum team forks have.

All they have to say is “chrome is better” and most people will believe it and settle for chrome a-kit.

Im waiting for Luxxon to chime in. I suspect he’ll tell us DLC is still an upgrade over chrome A-kit WP stuff.

Luxon MX wrote:

See my post here: https://www.vitalmx.com/forums/Moto-Related,20/Rainbow-fork-coatings-and-other-color-coatings,1371534?page=2 The factory bikes running 52mm forks use aluminum lowers, not steel. They can't DLC coat those lowers as the process would...

See my post here:
https://www.vitalmx.com/forums/Moto-Related,20/Rainbow-fork-coatings-an…

The factory bikes running 52mm forks use aluminum lowers, not steel. They can't DLC coat those lowers as the process would be too hot and it would ruin the temper of the aluminum. They're using some other lower temperature coating instead. And I'm sure, in part, they picked what they did as it looks like the current a-kit forks that consumers can buy.

MUTHERFUKER wrote:

Thx for your input. So with all that in mind, the DLC is still better than the A-kit customer stuff? And just outta curiosity, is the...

Thx for your input. So with all that in mind, the DLC is still better than the A-kit customer stuff?

And just outta curiosity, is the chrome that WP uses on showroom bikes the same chrome that comes on a-kit? Or is the a-kit chrome a “betterer” type of chrome?

Luxon MX wrote:

We haven't tested any of it to know one way or another. The only people who would know are WP, and I'm not sure they'd share...

We haven't tested any of it to know one way or another. The only people who would know are WP, and I'm not sure they'd share that info aside from the general marketing fluff that's already out there...

As far as I know, DLC is the best performing coating available for lower fork tubes.

Luxon MX wrote:

We haven't tested any of it to know one way or another. The only people who would know are WP, and I'm not sure they'd share...

We haven't tested any of it to know one way or another. The only people who would know are WP, and I'm not sure they'd share that info aside from the general marketing fluff that's already out there...

As far as I know, DLC is the best performing coating available for lower fork tubes.

Luxon MX wrote:

We haven't tested any of it to know one way or another. The only people who would know are WP, and I'm not sure they'd share...

We haven't tested any of it to know one way or another. The only people who would know are WP, and I'm not sure they'd share that info aside from the general marketing fluff that's already out there...

As far as I know, DLC is the best performing coating available for lower fork tubes.

MUTHERFUKER wrote:

Correction on my last post: a lil birdie that may or may not work at WP R&D may or may not have just cleared this up...

Correction on my last post: a lil birdie that may or may not work at WP R&D may or may not have just cleared this up for me...

Internal tests at WP indeed showed their chrome process to have less stiction than DLC. Same chrome on OE stock stuff as a-kit.

Interestingly, it was the opposite of my assumption. Marketing was actually pushing for DLC anyways because DLC sells. WP/KTM chose to go with what they felt performed better and essentially told marketing that they would have to figure it out (how to convince the public).

Interesting anecdotes.

Langhammx wrote:

Not sure I buy that… but I have nothing to back that up.