AER Suspension Options

8/26/2020 7:55pm
First time posting and having a hard time deciding on what direction to go with the forks on my 2020 KTM 300 XC. Have a couple options I narrowed it down to and wanting to get some feed back from people with experience. Also open to other suggestions.

I weigh 175lbs race Novice C for XC and Enduros races. I say I ride 60% single track and 40% MX. So needing something that has a broad range of adjust ability.

What I don’t like about the stock forks:
- Deflect on roots, rocks, or fast fork movements
- Forks get harsh and unsettled when I push and pick up the pace
- Bottoms on larger jumps

I live in Canada so prices are all in Canadian (exchange kills us Canadians). I’ve had my old 18 SXF 350 done by Kreft with good results, but it still wasn’t where I wanted them to be.

My options are:

-Revalve stock forks with MX-tech Leaf Spring Midvalve $400 installed

-Kreft Moto Revalve with Revalve Control $1200 (Have extra cartridges so can remove and keep cartridges when I sell the bike)

-MX Tech Lucky spring conversion
Gen 1 $1500
Gen 2 $1800

- Used AER Cone Valve forks $2500 but would still have to get revalved for me.

-Used Spring Cone Valve Forks $2800

Thanks in advance for the feedback.
|
Bruce372
Posts
6341
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
US
8/26/2020 9:18pm
That mxt mid valve might not do much for woods imo, i liked mine best with a simple check plate.

Why not just do a standard revalave? Or maybe run the air pressure a bit lower?
mxryan25
Posts
175
Joined
11/27/2018
Location
Dayton, OH US
8/27/2020 5:42am
I would recommend looking at ohlins options as well. In my opinion it’s the best performance / cost effectiveness choice
8/27/2020 6:35am
Bruce372 wrote:
That mxt mid valve might not do much for woods imo, i liked mine best with a simple check plate. Why not just do a standard...
That mxt mid valve might not do much for woods imo, i liked mine best with a simple check plate.

Why not just do a standard revalave? Or maybe run the air pressure a bit lower?
I’ve tried air pressures in the fork from 120psi to 155psi with the most compliant being with the fork set to its factory 139psi for woods and 145psi for MX.

The first option is a full revalve from a local tuner that is a MXT dealer that recommended the Leaf Spring Midvalve. But he is really pushing for the Lucky system saying that it is substantial better then just a revalved AER.
Solidkm
Posts
367
Joined
4/6/2018
Location
Aurora, CO US
8/27/2020 8:42am
Bruce372 wrote:
That mxt mid valve might not do much for woods imo, i liked mine best with a simple check plate. Why not just do a standard...
That mxt mid valve might not do much for woods imo, i liked mine best with a simple check plate.

Why not just do a standard revalave? Or maybe run the air pressure a bit lower?
dalonzo96 wrote:
I’ve tried air pressures in the fork from 120psi to 155psi with the most compliant being with the fork set to its factory 139psi for woods...
I’ve tried air pressures in the fork from 120psi to 155psi with the most compliant being with the fork set to its factory 139psi for woods and 145psi for MX.

The first option is a full revalve from a local tuner that is a MXT dealer that recommended the Leaf Spring Midvalve. But he is really pushing for the Lucky system saying that it is substantial better then just a revalved AER.
On my 300, for single track, my tuner pushed me towards the SKF glide kit and leaf spring mid valve. He said the SKF kit was such an upgrade in reducing friction, that many ppl think he did a revalve. Unfortunately I can’t tell you what I think, I haven’t ridden the bike yet.

For my harescramble bike, I have the gen 1 lucky. I am very happy with it. And I am currently talking to him about another lucky set for my MX bike. The lucky is a very good option.

The Shop

wrc777
Posts
2176
Joined
5/21/2020
Location
Greenwood, IN US
Fantasy
1130th
8/27/2020 10:02am
Bruce372 wrote:
That mxt mid valve might not do much for woods imo, i liked mine best with a simple check plate. Why not just do a standard...
That mxt mid valve might not do much for woods imo, i liked mine best with a simple check plate.

Why not just do a standard revalave? Or maybe run the air pressure a bit lower?
dalonzo96 wrote:
I’ve tried air pressures in the fork from 120psi to 155psi with the most compliant being with the fork set to its factory 139psi for woods...
I’ve tried air pressures in the fork from 120psi to 155psi with the most compliant being with the fork set to its factory 139psi for woods and 145psi for MX.

The first option is a full revalve from a local tuner that is a MXT dealer that recommended the Leaf Spring Midvalve. But he is really pushing for the Lucky system saying that it is substantial better then just a revalved AER.
Solidkm wrote:
On my 300, for single track, my tuner pushed me towards the SKF glide kit and leaf spring mid valve. He said the SKF kit was...
On my 300, for single track, my tuner pushed me towards the SKF glide kit and leaf spring mid valve. He said the SKF kit was such an upgrade in reducing friction, that many ppl think he did a revalve. Unfortunately I can’t tell you what I think, I haven’t ridden the bike yet.

For my harescramble bike, I have the gen 1 lucky. I am very happy with it. And I am currently talking to him about another lucky set for my MX bike. The lucky is a very good option.
What year is your 300? I also have a 2020 and could have pretty much copied the original post for how I feel about my forks. I feel like there is a lot of stiction in mine, but it is pretty smooth once it starts moving. Like the OP I have played with air pressure and the stock 139 or a little higher seems best. Running less just made it ride lower in the stroke.
Solidkm
Posts
367
Joined
4/6/2018
Location
Aurora, CO US
8/27/2020 10:23am
dalonzo96 wrote:
I’ve tried air pressures in the fork from 120psi to 155psi with the most compliant being with the fork set to its factory 139psi for woods...
I’ve tried air pressures in the fork from 120psi to 155psi with the most compliant being with the fork set to its factory 139psi for woods and 145psi for MX.

The first option is a full revalve from a local tuner that is a MXT dealer that recommended the Leaf Spring Midvalve. But he is really pushing for the Lucky system saying that it is substantial better then just a revalved AER.
Solidkm wrote:
On my 300, for single track, my tuner pushed me towards the SKF glide kit and leaf spring mid valve. He said the SKF kit was...
On my 300, for single track, my tuner pushed me towards the SKF glide kit and leaf spring mid valve. He said the SKF kit was such an upgrade in reducing friction, that many ppl think he did a revalve. Unfortunately I can’t tell you what I think, I haven’t ridden the bike yet.

For my harescramble bike, I have the gen 1 lucky. I am very happy with it. And I am currently talking to him about another lucky set for my MX bike. The lucky is a very good option.
wrc777 wrote:
What year is your 300? I also have a 2020 and could have pretty much copied the original post for how I feel about my forks...
What year is your 300? I also have a 2020 and could have pretty much copied the original post for how I feel about my forks. I feel like there is a lot of stiction in mine, but it is pretty smooth once it starts moving. Like the OP I have played with air pressure and the stock 139 or a little higher seems best. Running less just made it ride lower in the stroke.
I have a 2018 tx300. So I think the valving is softer than KTM. I actually really liked mine for offroad and single track. I only had them worked BC they were leaking.
Solidkm
Posts
367
Joined
4/6/2018
Location
Aurora, CO US
8/27/2020 12:42pm
Anyone have cone valve and mxt Lucky experience? Worth the extra money for the CV over the lucky?
8/27/2020 4:19pm
I went from the mxt mid valve to the coppersmith ohlins cartridge, I like the ohlins setup alot, just more consistent,still have air on one side but 1/2 the pressure, the stock aer forks are pretty good, just not what I'm use to, wanted a setup that I could go ride some woods with a little moto and not have to change psi all the time, if I just strictly rode moto I wouldn't have messed with them. They are now better than my kyb in my opinion.
8/30/2020 4:51pm
Bruce372 wrote:
That mxt mid valve might not do much for woods imo, i liked mine best with a simple check plate. Why not just do a standard...
That mxt mid valve might not do much for woods imo, i liked mine best with a simple check plate.

Why not just do a standard revalave? Or maybe run the air pressure a bit lower?
dalonzo96 wrote:
I’ve tried air pressures in the fork from 120psi to 155psi with the most compliant being with the fork set to its factory 139psi for woods...
I’ve tried air pressures in the fork from 120psi to 155psi with the most compliant being with the fork set to its factory 139psi for woods and 145psi for MX.

The first option is a full revalve from a local tuner that is a MXT dealer that recommended the Leaf Spring Midvalve. But he is really pushing for the Lucky system saying that it is substantial better then just a revalved AER.
Solidkm wrote:
On my 300, for single track, my tuner pushed me towards the SKF glide kit and leaf spring mid valve. He said the SKF kit was...
On my 300, for single track, my tuner pushed me towards the SKF glide kit and leaf spring mid valve. He said the SKF kit was such an upgrade in reducing friction, that many ppl think he did a revalve. Unfortunately I can’t tell you what I think, I haven’t ridden the bike yet.

For my harescramble bike, I have the gen 1 lucky. I am very happy with it. And I am currently talking to him about another lucky set for my MX bike. The lucky is a very good option.
How big of a difference do you feel from the stock AER to the Lucky Gen 1 kit? Have you gotten out to try out the SKF glide kit and Mid Valve yet?
Solidkm
Posts
367
Joined
4/6/2018
Location
Aurora, CO US
8/30/2020 5:48pm
dalonzo96 wrote:
I’ve tried air pressures in the fork from 120psi to 155psi with the most compliant being with the fork set to its factory 139psi for woods...
I’ve tried air pressures in the fork from 120psi to 155psi with the most compliant being with the fork set to its factory 139psi for woods and 145psi for MX.

The first option is a full revalve from a local tuner that is a MXT dealer that recommended the Leaf Spring Midvalve. But he is really pushing for the Lucky system saying that it is substantial better then just a revalved AER.
Solidkm wrote:
On my 300, for single track, my tuner pushed me towards the SKF glide kit and leaf spring mid valve. He said the SKF kit was...
On my 300, for single track, my tuner pushed me towards the SKF glide kit and leaf spring mid valve. He said the SKF kit was such an upgrade in reducing friction, that many ppl think he did a revalve. Unfortunately I can’t tell you what I think, I haven’t ridden the bike yet.

For my harescramble bike, I have the gen 1 lucky. I am very happy with it. And I am currently talking to him about another lucky set for my MX bike. The lucky is a very good option.
dalonzo96 wrote:
How big of a difference do you feel from the stock AER to the Lucky Gen 1 kit? Have you gotten out to try out the...
How big of a difference do you feel from the stock AER to the Lucky Gen 1 kit? Have you gotten out to try out the SKF glide kit and Mid Valve yet?
We need to be clear on generations. I have seen forks on here for sale stating gen 1 lucky and they’re really still the asymmetrical kit. So i have the true gen 1 full cartridge kit. The asymmetrical kit is still 4cs and not even conversational.

Anyway, mx tech did my luckys first. And they were good. I asked for hare scramble And I got a “fast GP setting.” It was good and I was happy.

This year I had endurospec who is local to me, update the setting for the local offroad series. It’s very good. I ride mx on them too and they’re just a touch too soft for legit mx. But that’s not to say they’re bad. I’m saying they’re excellent for what I asked for and pretty damn good on mx too.

I think what most people notice is float. And I’m not an expert. That first 3-4 inches and even the first 1-2 are always better than the Aer. Not BC of the air bs spring but more so the float or bleed shim in the stock AERs. And the lucky is not much heavier than the AER compared to other spring conversions.

I would buy again. Multiple ppl have purchased them after riding my bike.

I have not tried the other bike yet. 😬


Tuna
Posts
1582
Joined
4/3/2017
Location
CA
8/31/2020 3:46am
Solidkm wrote:
On my 300, for single track, my tuner pushed me towards the SKF glide kit and leaf spring mid valve. He said the SKF kit was...
On my 300, for single track, my tuner pushed me towards the SKF glide kit and leaf spring mid valve. He said the SKF kit was such an upgrade in reducing friction, that many ppl think he did a revalve. Unfortunately I can’t tell you what I think, I haven’t ridden the bike yet.

For my harescramble bike, I have the gen 1 lucky. I am very happy with it. And I am currently talking to him about another lucky set for my MX bike. The lucky is a very good option.
dalonzo96 wrote:
How big of a difference do you feel from the stock AER to the Lucky Gen 1 kit? Have you gotten out to try out the...
How big of a difference do you feel from the stock AER to the Lucky Gen 1 kit? Have you gotten out to try out the SKF glide kit and Mid Valve yet?
Solidkm wrote:
We need to be clear on generations. I have seen forks on here for sale stating gen 1 lucky and they’re really still the asymmetrical kit...
We need to be clear on generations. I have seen forks on here for sale stating gen 1 lucky and they’re really still the asymmetrical kit. So i have the true gen 1 full cartridge kit. The asymmetrical kit is still 4cs and not even conversational.

Anyway, mx tech did my luckys first. And they were good. I asked for hare scramble And I got a “fast GP setting.” It was good and I was happy.

This year I had endurospec who is local to me, update the setting for the local offroad series. It’s very good. I ride mx on them too and they’re just a touch too soft for legit mx. But that’s not to say they’re bad. I’m saying they’re excellent for what I asked for and pretty damn good on mx too.

I think what most people notice is float. And I’m not an expert. That first 3-4 inches and even the first 1-2 are always better than the Aer. Not BC of the air bs spring but more so the float or bleed shim in the stock AERs. And the lucky is not much heavier than the AER compared to other spring conversions.

I would buy again. Multiple ppl have purchased them after riding my bike.

I have not tried the other bike yet. 😬


Curious if the new 21 Aer floating shim stack will improve that feel.
1
wrc777
Posts
2176
Joined
5/21/2020
Location
Greenwood, IN US
Fantasy
1130th
8/31/2020 6:28am
Is the SKF glide kit considered an upgrade over the 2019-2020 standard parts?
Solidkm
Posts
367
Joined
4/6/2018
Location
Aurora, CO US
8/31/2020 8:28am
wrc777 wrote:
Is the SKF glide kit considered an upgrade over the 2019-2020 standard parts?
Yes I believe so. I have heard really good things. I guess WP uses one super tight lip to seal. And the SKF uses multiple lighter ones. I should prob go to the garage and ride that bike and report back 🤦
1
bvm111
Posts
9287
Joined
7/1/2008
Location
Las Vegas, NV US
9/1/2020 12:20pm
anyone have experience with the RT gold valves on the latest gen AER 48s?

Post a reply to: AER Suspension Options

The Latest