Race Tech springs vs. Progressive springs ...anyone have them? Thoughts?

[ccsct203]

Was wondering how you like them and how the two compare?

[the fan]

I prefer straight rate fork spring over progressively wound. I feel it gives a more linear feel to the forks and I can fine tune the last bit of the stroke with oil height.

[Pat Conlon]

I had both, progressive springs and straight rate springs on my '84 and I found the straight rate springs are superior.
The oem forks springs are weak, so in '86 I converted over to progressive springs (from Progressive Suspension, Hesperia,CA) . They were better than the soft oem, but the initial fork dive, when appling front brakes was still present. As the progressive springs compress they get stiffer. With progressives the first 50% of compression is (close to) oem soft so you get a dive when on the binders.
In the late 80's along comes Race Tech (Corona CA) with their new fangled cartridge emulator conversion for our damper rod forks and the rules changed. Before running straight rate springs in damper rod forks (even with heavy oil) played hell with rebound settings and had a harsh ride. With the cartridge emulators you can now run a much a heavier straight spring (.80kg-1.0kg) The heavier straight rate springs do not have the brake dive that progressive springs suffer from.

HTH

[RichBaker]

I had similar results as Paddy.... went from stock to Progressive Susp., which were much too soft(but not as bad as stock) so then I got RT 1.0kg/mm and emulators and have been riding with that set-up for the last 12-14 years, happily suspended. Especially after putting on the used Ohlins a couple years later.

[markmartin]

+1 to Rich and Paddy

[ccsct203]

Race Techs it will be then
Thanks for the help
I'm running a 1988 FZR1000 front end
I'll have to set the sag wish me luck
at 200 lbs without leathers i'll use the 1.0kg/mm
I owe some people a beer
Thanks