Levo Gen 2 Are you running a FOX X2 on a Levo? then read this

[escrs]

So Ive been running a FOX X2 for 16 months and it has been used for 100 hours according to Strava

FOX recommend servicing every 125 hours

Shock was bought from, stripped down and checked over and set up by TF Tuned before being shipped to me

So as it had done 100 hours i decided to send it back to TF Tuned to have it serviced

Here is the report
I have your X2 shock here for a service today and ideally it needs a couple of new parts.

The damper shaft is starting to wear and has a score in it that is allowing the air and oil to mix, making the shock sound squelchy. The replacement part is £13.70 and we have it in stock ready to go. I would say that this is definitely worth doing.

Your inner air can also has some light scoring. This could allow the shock to compress and not return or sink in the travel and become quite harsh. We don't currently have this in stock but it is on order and should be here in the next couple of days. If you haven't had these issues it may be fine to run the old air can but I am also happy to replace it as preventative maintenance. It's a £43.95 part if you would like to go ahead with it.

Please let me know what you would like to do.



So i replied with the following


I'm quite surprised by this as the shock is only 16 months old and was supplied, checked over and set up by TFtuned

According to my strava account the shock has only been used for 100 hours which is 25 hours short of Fox's recommended service interval time so I would not expect to see wear on any parts

Would the damage be covered under warranty?


The reply i got was this

Both these parts are wear parts which aren't covered by Fox's warranty.

This kind of wear is not uncommon on your particular bike. With the yoke (y-shaped link) that joins this shock to the frame there is a lot more force going through the shock as the rigid connection essentially makes the shock a structural part of the frame and increases the wear on the shock.

I am happy to service the shock with the old air can but i don't think it would be worth it to not change the damper shaft. I wouldn't be able to offer our usual three month warranty on any issues that arise from this part if you take this option however.



So it seems the Levo yoke design causes wear on the shock

Ive asked them to replace the damper and the air can at a cost £56 on top of the £120 or so for the service and return cost so that's £176 spent on a £700+ shock after 100 hours use

I know the 2022 Levo S-Works and Expert come with a FOX X2 so presume they could suffer with the same issue

Can you shed some light on this? @Specialized Rider Care

 

[08mojo]

Seems pretty normal to me, not sure what the problem is....

 

[escrs]

Seems pretty normal to me, not sure what the problem is....

Doesn't seem normal to me, Ive never had a shock that needs a new damper shaft and air can after only 100 hours of use

Ive had the following bikes with air shocks, 2017 Levo, 3 Transitions (Scout x1, Patrol x2) and when their air shocks were serviced at 100 hours it was simply just seals etc..needing replacing, no internal wear, even the coil shocks ive had (Kenevo, Transition TR500, Azonic Eliminator) never had this kind of wear when serviced

This is my first X2 so maybe they are more prone to internal wear?

 

[08mojo]

Maybe? Or maybe it was run through harsher conditions? Maybe a seal was bad? Lots of what ifs, but that is the entire purpose of service intervals: to ensure all is in working condition and to replace what is needed.

 

[Mikerb]

52.5 or 55mm?

 

[Zimmerframe]

It might sound horrible, but I'd say that's just part of it. If we rode 100kg mtb's you could make everything harder wearing.

We don't, so there's a compromise. I think most shocks are 50 hours, so that in itself is a bonus ?

I think we have to accept for what we do to these bikes and what we expect from them, there will be wear and tear and replacements if you want to keep them working at optimal efficiency/effectiveness.

These things are ridiculously expensive, but your paying for performance items, not long term wear. It's a performance bike, not a shopper.

 

[escrs]

@08mojo it hasn't been run through harsh conditions, the seals should have been fine as it was bought from TF Tuned, when you buy a shock from them they strip it down and check everything is ok before setting it up for your bike, your weight and riding style so any bad seals etc.. should of been noticed then

@Mikerb its a 55mm one

@Zimmerframe FOX quote 125hrs for a normal service, mine has done 100 hours

As i said earlier im quite surprised by this as all my other shocks have just needed seals etc... at service time and according to TF Tuned the damper shaft and air can damage is down to the Levo's yoke design and they say its not uncommon for the Levo to do this so they must of seen wear on other Levo owners X2 shocks so i want to make other Levo owners with FOX X2 shocks aware especially as the X2 is coming as standard on the higher end 2022 Levo's

Mine should be all fixed and back with me next week

 

[Bomble]

The extra force thing is interesting as I know cane creek didn’t recommend their inline coils for the levo yoke until they made the damper rod thicker. It could snap the standard rod apparently.

 

[Mikerb]

I asked about 52.5 ( standard) v 55m because when you look at the angles/forces applied by the yoke it could be that the longer stroke applies more forces on the shaft at a more acute angle. Specialized presumably chose ( a relatively uncommon) 52.5 stroke for a reason??

 

[escrs]

@Mikerb maybe but before purchasing the 55mm X2 i checked with Specialized UK who said it would be fine to run one on the 2020 Levo

I think Specialized chose the 52.5mm shock to make the Levo 150mm travel front and rear

Would be interesting to hear from other X2 owners who have had their shocks serviced to see what needed replacing on theirs and then see if there is any differnce between the parts that needed replacing on 52.5mm compared to any 55mm shocks

 

[Aitrui]

When I had problems with oem Fox dpx2 on my bike, they repaired two times in a 3 month timeframe in warranty, and said, it's my bike what making the shock fail, and it will do that again and again, because of the high rear suspension loads to the relative small stroke of the shock.

The third time they replaced the whole unit with a new one, which still works after nearly 3 years of use.

So take everything they say with a grain of salt, and if you are inside the warranty time, and no outside damage, always push them to replace stuffs.

 

[Grannyjones]

Definetely a warranty claim, maybe just don't go overboard on spending money on preventative maintenance then make a warranty claim if it breaks proper

 

[08mojo]

In sorry but ignore the rest of these people. They don't have a clue as usual.

No way should your shock have that damage. Those seals have failed and allowed grit inside or worse there was a burr on the inside which has scored the shaft.

Damage should no occur via normal wear and use. His comments about the levo are stupid. This would happen on any shock if this was the case.

I'd be telling them to fix it or I'd be asking a judge to tell them to do it.

This isn't a service this is a repair due to poor tolerances or failure under warranty.

Good post... Going before a judge is solid advice

 

[Rosemount]

In sorry but ignore the rest of these people. They don't have a clue as usual.

No way should your shock have that damage. Those seals have failed and allowed grit inside or worse there was a burr on the inside which has scored the shaft.

Damage should no occur via normal wear and use. His comments about the levo are stupid. This would happen on any shock if this was the case.

I'd be telling them to fix it or I'd be asking a judge to tell them to do it.

This isn't a service this is a repair due to poor tolerances or failure under warranty.

You are not a suspension specialist .
Don`t give advice about things you don`t know .

And advising to go to court is a sure way to lose money and time .

 

[mxh]

I had a Specialized Enduro (2015) which came with a Cane Creek DBInline shock. Over the years I had lots of issues with it (I won't go into the full saga), and as TF Tuned have stated, it's due to the way the Specialized suspension design puts forces through the shock - there's an element of sideways force which apparently puts a lot more stress on the seals and other components.

It's a well know issue - a quick google will bring up plenty of information on it. If I were you I'd thank TF Tuned for spotting the issue and offering to resolve it now rather than just sticking it back together and have something fail prematurely.

 

[dobbyhasfriends]

I am not at all surprised TBH.

the warranty length and service interval are no the same thing. The shock isn't warrantied for its service life is it, its warrantied for a period of time.
even then, there is such as thing as a wear item, we had a saying in engineering "where there's movement, there's money"

out of interest, do you use a pressure washer at all?

 

[MrSimmo]

@escrs There are quite a lot of differing opinions here so thought it may help to set some context.

Shock wear rate is heavily dependent on how its been used - for example a world cup DH team in the welsh forest in the winter would batter through the seals/dampers etc - so 100 hours is good going; I remember days of mechanics changing out shocks for each race as they were destroyed. On the flip side, if you have been using it only for trail riding in the summer and you are wiping down the stanchion - it should last for way way more than 100 hours.

Fox's 125 hour service is 'recommended' based on a mixture of wet/hard use - its there to protect them in the event someone doesn't maintain it properly and then files a warranty claim.

I'm guessing (probably incorrectly) that as you've upgraded to an X2, you're probably not going to use the bike to ride to the shops and back?

Others are correct that 55mm shocks do cause extra strain - Specialized use a 52.5mm for a number of reasons (leverage curves etc etc) but one principle reason is to help promote longetivity with the suspension components. So a 55mm will result in an increase to wear over a 52.5mm on a Levo - BUT, I wouldn't have thought it would cause the failures you've been told about.

You have an issue where the shock has been used for 16 months, it will be very hard to prove that it's only been used for 100 hours in that 16 months, especially as the shock has now been disassembled and cleaned. TF Tuned could claim that you've battered it, or fitted incorrectly hence the issues you're seeing.

If you have paid with credit card you can use that avenue, but they tend to only really help out once the consumer has exhausted all options directly with the supplier.


If it were me, and as you already have TF Tuned replacing the parts above; I'd see how the shock goes with the new parts. Then if you have further problems, I would contact TF Tuned and state that you want a complete warranty replacement as you 'have lost confidence in the safety of the shock'. In the meantime, it may be worth contacting them to state that you're not happy and you would like a refund for the replacement parts.

 

[escrs]

Right guys im not looking to get a refund or taking TF Tuned to court (that escalated quickly!)

I'm simply pointing out that according to TFTuned the Levo's yoke/suspension design can cause wear to the damper and air can etc...

Just wanted to make other X2 owners aware and get some feedback from @Specialized Rider Care

As already said the shock is being repaired and should be back to me this week

 

[08mojo]

Right guys im not looking to get a refund or taking TF Tuned to court (that escalated quickly!)

I'm simply pointing out that according to TFTuned the Levo's yoke/suspension design can cause wear to the damper and air can etc...

Just wanted to make other X2 owners aware and get some feedback from @Specialized Rider Care

As already said the shock is being repaired and should be back to me this week

TFTuned speaks the truth. There has been a lot of documentation and discussions on the side loading the levo and kenevo imparts on shocks. Just take a look at all of the coil shocks that have failed. Now you have the data point and know what to (potentially) expect the next time you service the shock.

 

[Zimmerframe]

Just take a look at all of the coil shocks that have failed.

I'm not saying the Levo/Kenevo frame does or doesn't add more twisting force on shocks as I don't know. Though if you compare it to most frames it has MORE bracing for the shock.

You have the fairly standard front triangle with Top tube going to Seat tube, but with an additional brace running next to the shock.

If I look at these two and imagine someone twisting the bike from the front wheel to the rear wheel, it's the second one I'd imagine has hugely more sideways leverage forces on the shock bushing.

That's only how I imagine it though, there could be more at play !

On most bikes the shocks just floating out there and with all the possible twisting from the rear shock linkage via the seat tube amplified by the leverage force from the wheel on the rear triangle, you'd imagine the shock has to also put up with endless side loadings through it's stroke.

I don't think the marzocchi shock situation on the Kenevo's proves anything. The shock was widely known already to have issues with a large number of failures. All that happened was that a huge amount more were put into circulation - so there would be even more failures. In hindsight, it was probably a very poor choice of shock on Spesh's part at the time.

Anyway, more importantly :

Right guys im not looking to get a refund or taking TF Tuned to court (that escalated quickly!)

I think we need to be rational about this ... It's time FOR WAR !!!

 

[08mojo]

I'm not saying the Levo/Kenevo frame does or doesn't add more twisting force on shocks as I don't know. Though if you compare it to most frames it has MORE bracing for the shock.

You have the fairly standard front triangle with Top tube going to Seat tube, but with an additional brace running next to the shock.

If I look at these two and imagine someone twisting the bike from the front wheel to the rear wheel, it's the second one I'd imagine has hugely more sideways leverage forces on the shock bushing.

View attachment 59847

View attachment 59848

That's only how I imagine it though, there could be more at play !

On most bikes the shocks just floating out there and with all the possible twisting from the rear shock linkage via the seat tube amplified by the leverage force from the wheel on the rear triangle, you'd imagine the shock has to also put up with endless side loadings through it's stroke.

I don't think the marzocchi shock situation on the Kenevo's proves anything. The shock was widely known already to have issues with a large number of failures. All that happened was that a huge amount more were put into circulation - so there would be even more failures. In hindsight, it was probably a very poor choice of shock on Spesh's part at the time.

Anyway, more importantly :



I think we need to be rational about this ... It's time FOR WAR !!!

Unfortunately, that bracing forces the shock to be slightly offset. Take a look at the yoke on the levo: it's asymmetrical. My other bikes have a symmetrical yoke that puts the shock centered in the frame. My first take is that it shouldn't matter, but evidently there are excessive side loads with the levo design.

 

[08mojo]

Of there was any truth to this all FSR bikes would be having these failures

As far as I can tell its ONLY fox that has problems which says more about fox than anything else.

I wouldn't have swallowed that rubbish I'd have told them to repair and and service it for free or give me a refund and I'll buy a product that works.

Just one thread, there are others: Which Coil Shocks Are Supported on Turbo Levo? - EMTB Forums

 

[Mikerb]

I'm not saying the Levo/Kenevo frame does or doesn't add more twisting force on shocks as I don't know. Though if you compare it to most frames it has MORE bracing for the shock.

You have the fairly standard front triangle with Top tube going to Seat tube, but with an additional brace running next to the shock.

If I look at these two and imagine someone twisting the bike from the front wheel to the rear wheel, it's the second one I'd imagine has hugely more sideways leverage forces on the shock bushing.

View attachment 59847

View attachment 59848

That's only how I imagine it though, there could be more at play !

On most bikes the shocks just floating out there and with all the possible twisting from the rear shock linkage via the seat tube amplified by the leverage force from the wheel on the rear triangle, you'd imagine the shock has to also put up with endless side loadings through it's stroke.

I don't think the marzocchi shock situation on the Kenevo's proves anything. The shock was widely known already to have issues with a large number of failures. All that happened was that a huge amount more were put into circulation - so there would be even more failures. In hindsight, it was probably a very poor choice of shock on Spesh's part at the time.

Anyway, more importantly :



I think we need to be rational about this ... It's time FOR WAR !!!

Before I get "cancelled" for not knowing what the heck I am talking a bout...............These are just my thoughts based only on experience of using bespoke design ( by me!) suspension set ups for racing ( cars not bikes!).
I had not even considered twisting forces @Zimmerframe but I can see what you are referring to. I was thinking more in terms of the in line force to compress the shock. On the Levo the top shock mount can rotate in line with the bike axis, but the bottom mount cannot. At rest the yoke is a straight line with the shock shaft and certainly at the beginning of the compression it is therefore exerting a force that has no lateral elements. I was wondering just how long that state of affairs exists as the rear triangle moves through its arc under compression loads. Does it reach a point where the yoke is not acting in a direct straight line with the shocks shaft, and therefore applying a lateral force to the bushings and seals?? Since the shock is progressive the greatest force is exerted at the limits of its travel and if that coincides with the yoke then applying some lateral force ( up or down) that could allow foreign matter to pass through a seal and wear bushings. On the much slimmer shaft of a coil shock it could even bend the shaft.

 

[Rosemount]

Of there was any truth to this all FSR bikes would be having these failures

As far as I can tell its ONLY fox that has problems which says more about fox than anything else.

I wouldn't have swallowed that rubbish I'd have told them to repair and and service it for free or give me a refund and I'll buy a product that works.

Marzochi and Cane Creek have also had issues .
You speak like an authority on subjects you don`t fully understand .

 

[Thegenerik1]

I just got a takeoff X2 from a 22 Levo S-Works. If there were problems I don't think Specialized would use Fox and have more backlash then they already have with the Brose motor. Will see how it holds up for me.

 

[Grannyjones]

Slightly unrelated but I had a Shock fail on a Stumpjumper FSR Comp 2017 after just 1 year of use.

When I sent it to JTech suspension they said that the Stumpjumper frame puts a higher than normal amount of force on the shock. Seeing as the Levo frame has a lot similarities to the Stumpjumper frame, this is likely to still be the case ?

 

[Bigtuna00]

I'm not saying the Levo/Kenevo frame does or doesn't add more twisting force on shocks as I don't know. Though if you compare it to most frames it has MORE bracing for the shock.

I dunno where this "twisting force" thing came from, but it's not the cause of the problem. Most shocks can rotate freely when grasped by the two eyelets. A "twisting force" isn't going to do anything besides slightly rotate the shaft.

The core issue is the solid lower mount on Specialized's bikes. The related issue is the length of the "yoke" and the leverage it puts on the shaft, once you have a solid interface. In the two photos you posted the detail you missed is the lower mount on the YT has a bushing. The specialized bikes are solid. Therefore the yoke becomes a lever arm putting bending forces on the shock. This is why the shocks break in a vertical direction, when they do break:

On the one hand this design adds stiffness to the rear end. On the other it adds load that the shocks (edit: I'm speaking of Fox coils here, plenty of other shocks work fine) aren't intended to take. You may notice that Push uses spherical bearings in this application, which eliminate these extra load forces by allowing the shock to move freely through its travel (up to the limit of the bearing of course).

(by the way I agree OP's shock was likely just defective, or at least prematurely contaminated; the wear described is from contamination, not load)

 

[08mojo]

Lol. Marzochi IS fox.

Cane creak isn't much cop either. We had one blew a bladder in under 3 rides. Brink didn't rate them at all. Shop swapped it for a RS ultimate free of charge.

Lets not talk about who's an authority on this when you dont even know who owns who.

You learn plenty in this game when your bikes are constantly in the shop for suspension problems.

Its hard to work out who's to blame when there is so much crap being sold in the market.

Another quality post...

Again, the higher forces from the levo (and other specialized frames) has been well discussed and documented. Choose your shock wisely and ride on!

 

[Zimmerframe]

I dunno where this "twisting force" thing came from, but it's not the cause of the problem. Most shocks can rotate freely when grasped by the two eyelets. A "twisting force" isn't going to do anything besides slightly rotate the shaft.

Thanks for all that.

Full disclosure : I haven't got a clue

My premise was based on the proposal that the single sided frame brace was the cause of the failures.

The theory from me being that as the bike twists, the back wheel is no longer aligned with the front wheel. So if a shock is mounted to two points along that line, then it will no longer have a compression force actuating on it in a perfectly straight line - it will have a degree of force applied laterally as it's compressed. If the bottom of the backwheel is to the right of our imaginary line, (as if you'd grabbed both wheels and twisted them in opposite directions) then as the shock compresses it will have more force on the shaft and seals on it's left side. Bushes mean it can move and not just be bent, but the angle of force will still change.

For anyone who does bother to read this gibberish ... if you imagine a hand held bike pump. You have to hold both ends, you can't just put a finger on either end and push them together, it will try to move off to the sides. Of you gripped both ends and tried to push them together, but at the same time tried to bend the pump to make it the shape of a boomerang - it would eventually snap.

Similarly, if you imagine a stand pump where you put your feet on the bottom and push down - you push vertically, if you leaned to one side and pushed down, you'd be applying more force down one side of the shaft and barrel as you compress and eventually, it would fail.

On the FSR setup on the Levo shown it looks like the shock can swing left to right where it mounts to the linkage and up and down is allowed by the first linkage bearings. Though the shock length is increased by the first section of linkage to those bearings - how does every other linkage driven bike do it then ?

On "ye olde Kenevo" there doesn't even seem to be the left and right motion - Clevis mounted shock ? allowed where the shock joins the linkage.

So would you solve the problem if you switched to none clevis mounted and used a Kenevo classic mounting ? It would apply the forces differently, which would have some positives (the shock is supported more laterally/ left and right - do they fail from metal fatigue - slow tiny bends one way and then the other weakening that point, until the primary vertical compression forces just shear it upwards). Or do you need the clevis mount otherwise you add some other force into the equation which causes a different failure ?

Sorry .. that was a very way to start the day.

 

[Bigtuna00]

The theory...

I see what you mean. The shock is offset precisely to counteract this I would say. I think the designers have some idea what they're doing

On the FSR setup on the Levo shown it looks like the shock can swing left to right where it mounts to the linkage and up and down is allowed by the first linkage bearings. Though the shock length is increased by the first section of linkage to those bearings - how does every other linkage driven bike do it then ?

No it can't swing. The mount (the so called "flip chip") is under relatively high torque. It's not meant to be a pivot, there's no bushing.

Though the shock length is increased by the first section of linkage to those bearings - how does every other linkage driven bike do it then ?

The lower shock eyelet usually has a bushing, rarely a bearing, even more rarely a spherical bearing.

So would you solve the problem if you switched to none clevis mounted and used a Kenevo classic mounting ?

It's effectively the same setup, with a solid mount at the bottom that, therefore, makes the whole yoke effectively a solid part of the shock and, in turn, gives the rest of the rear end more leverage to "bend" the shock. Using your bike pump analogy, imagine welding on a 4-6" bar on the end of the pump and grasping that. It would snap even faster, no?