Goodbye Elka Rear - Spyder RT-S ('10)

[SilverSurfer]

Well, after a year of suffering with it, I've determined the Elka Rear on my 2010 RT-S just isn't for me.

Reasons:

The shock is shorter than stock. It affects normal ride height.
It rides hard as a rock
It clunks and pops (my tech and I believe it is topping (vs. bottoming) out, reinforcing the theory that it is too short for the Spyder.
It could be (a stretch) that most Can Am/BRP techs don't know how to deal with it, requiring that one can/should only travel to where an Elka Rep is to install/service it.
I've had to remove all pre-load just to get a semi-decent ride.
It compresses the bike ride height so that ASC is almost inconsequential
My original dealer mechanic incorrectly installed it (not Elka's fault) resulting in a bent lower pin.
Adjustments are inaccessible unless you have a garage and lift
I can buy five stock shocks for the price of one Elka Stage 1 Rear, and even Elka will tell you that the rear isn't worth it (my observations aside) unless you are replacing a defective stock shock.

This Thursday, I'm taking 'Charlotte' up to Hanover PA where a trusted tech with 126 hours of Can Am/BRP certification will competently return me to a stock rear and re-calibrate ASC.

If anyone is in the market for an Elka Rear Stage I with 4k miles on it, let me know.

Let me not fail to mention -- My front Elka Stage I+'s are phenomenal!

~ Surfer

[Chupaca]

hear allot about them and how amazing they are but mostly about the fronts. They are all to pricey for us. But good to know. I also ordered the fox kit when they said they would work on the 2012 but they don't. Sway bar too big and the shocks lower the front end way to much. Progressive also is not making updated shocks. But BajaRon sway bar has helped enormously...good luck you know stock works well...!!

[daveinva]

hear allot about them and how amazing they are but mostly about the fronts. They are all to pricey for us. But good to know. I also ordered the fox kit when they said they would work on the 2012 but they don't. Sway bar too big and the shocks lower the front end way to much. Progressive also is not making updated shocks. But BajaRon sway bar has helped enormously...good luck you know stock works well...!!

I thought you owned an RS? How do the Fox shocks not work on a 2012? I've got a 2010 RS and I was able to put the Fox shocks on just fine, I though the 2012 RS was essentially identical in the suspension setup (unlike the new 2013's).

[SilverSurfer]

Nonetheless, what he says is right on insofar as the front shocks. The '10 front shocks were ka-ka, so Elka was the Panacea for that. Putting one on the rear of my RT-S was a mistake. However, I can see why an Elka might work better (when needed) on the back of an RS. The RS is designed to ride lower in the back than an RT and its frame angle is different than an RT, ergo, the theory of better fit on an RS. Another thing I discovered this weekend: When I put the ASC setting up to one notch below max, the shock behaves better and doesn't clunk as much. This tells me that the ASC is pulling the shock taught under the frame so it is behaves more calmly, instead of makeing that god-awful "clop"! on short bumps (thats half-way between a clunk and a pop). When the Elka is on my RT, it rides 1.5" lower than a stock RT. Anyway, like I said, the price of one stock shock is 1/5th of what on basic Elka Stage 1 rear costs. That means I've got lotsa econo-space to get this right.

[2NFrnt]

This is hard for me to believe. I put a Elka Stage 4 shock on the rear of my 2010 RT-S about 2.5 years ago and it is great. None of the problems you describe and nothing but a great ride and the air ride works just like you would expect and the ride heigth was not affected. Great combination in my book.

[cjackg]

I just had a rear Elka installed on my 2012 RT Ltd at SpyderFest and the packaging was poorly marked, so they laid out the Elka beside the OEM shock to make sure it was the right one.... the RS Elka was shorter than my oem but the RT Elka was exactly the same length as the oem.

I rode the RT about 200 miles since the install with none of the problems you described. My wife says the ride is smoother and bumps are not as hard since the upgrade.

Is it possible an RS Elka was installed on your RT ? Might be worthwhile to talk to John at Elka about all this...

[spyder3]

I also have the elka rear on my RT, no issues with it. My better half thinks it is better for her on the rear seat. I didn't notice a difference when riding solo.

[SilverSurfer]

Well, I'm equally pleased to hear from those who have Elka rears on the back of their RTs with NO problems, or even improvements. And for those who've asked, I have been back to Elka on this, and I have spoken with John ... twice during my ownership of the product. John sold me the shock I have. We verified it by part number. The only thing I can say gang, is that my rear shock adventure has been grim. Noting 2nFront's comments about an Elka Stage 4, John sold me just the Elka Stage 1 ... also noting that mine is a '10 RT-S. Don't know if the Stage 4 is longer than the Stage 1. John avers it is set up for the bike and rider/load weight at the factory. John told me ... and stressed ... no further adjustments required or recommended. It's been a boondoggle ever since. This is not to reflect poorly on Elka ... They have a superbo product. I'm just saying on mine, something didn't work out right. Three mechanical inspections and a pin repair ... still iffy ... The only note to self I'm getting is ... "Start over!"

The one thing I will check once the shock is off (sans tech input), is anthing having to do with the ride height nut at the bottom (assuming such exists on a Stage 1.). This in itself could be the problem, and I can almost imagine that it was set for an RS, not an RT. Like I said before, when I crank my ASC up to just below max, the problem lessens. Then too, if I ever get fortunate enough to trek the hundreds or thousands of miles to SpyderFest, or anywhere else Elka is installing these puppies, I will take another look. I just don't have the time or money or to keep taking the thing back to the shop to deal with vaporous variables, and this is a problem that makes me wish I had my own lift and tools for. Unfortunately, I'm a slave to external expertise.

Best,

Paul

[RAYYOU]

We have a 2010 RT that went through 3 factory rear shocks in less than 10,000 miles. When the third started going bad we replaced it with an ELKA stage 1 and set it to Lens recommendations and I have nothing but praise for what this shock has done for the ride and handling for my bike. Sounds like you may have the RS shock. Because when we bought ours there was an RS & RT shock setting side by side and the RS was defiantly shorter.

[SilverSurfer]

We have a 2010 RT that went through 3 factory rear shocks in less than 10,000 miles. When the third started going bad we replaced it with an ELKA stage 1 and set it to Lens recommendations and I have nothing but praise for what this shock has done for the ride and handling for my bike. Sounds like you may have the RS shock. Because when we bought ours there was an RS & RT shock setting side by side and the RS was defiantly shorter.

Yours and others like it seems to be the most probable hypothesis. I'm curious as to anything in particular that's blowing out the stock shocks. What was the symptom of them 'blowing'? Bottom-out? On the 2010s there was a maintenance bulletin that came out circa Jul 11 that advised the ACS needed to be re-calibrated to prevent top-out (a clunk heard when pushing down on the back and releasing ... it would clunk at the top of the travel). Had that done. My tech tells me that in mid 2012, BRP did 'something' to change the stock shock

It would also seem that ultimately, there might be a more robust, economical alternative from a manufacturer other than Elka. It just can't be this difficult. It appears other manufacturers who make them (for the RT) are Penske and Race Tech. Progressive Suspensions only makes for the RS. Until I understand exactly what happened here and a clear path ahead, I've gotta stick with stock shocks.

~ Paul

[RAYYOU]

The first time the rear shock fell off and took out the swing arm, shock and rear harness. Second and third time rear shock lost all dampening causing ruff ride and sever vibration, almost like wheel was loose. Just got tired of bike spending so much time at dealer for rear shock problems. We now have 20,000 miles on the bike and have had no more shock problems.

[NancysToy]

Yours and others like it seems to be the most probable hypothesis. I'm curious as to anything in particular that's blowing out the stock shocks. What was the symptom of them 'blowing'? Bottom-out? On the 2010s there was a maintenance bulletin that came out circa Jul 11 that advised the ACS needed to be re-calibrated to prevent top-out (a clunk heard when pushing down on the back and releasing ... it would clunk at the top of the travel). Had that done. My tech tells me that in mid 2012, BRP did 'something' to change the stock shock

It would also seem that ultimately, there might be a more robust, economical alternative from a manufacturer other than Elka. It just can't be this difficult. It appears other manufacturers who make them (for the RT) are Penske and Race Tech. Progressive Suspensions only makes for the RS. Until I understand exactly what happened here and a clear path ahead, I've gotta stick with stock shocks.

~ Paul

The problem with the early 2010 RTs was topping out the shocks, not bottoming out. It was most prevalent with those that kept the suspension level set high, or ran a high pressure in the manual version. Hitting bumps them coming up hard eventually pounded out the top snap ring groove, the way I understand it.

There are other aftermarket shocks for the RT, but most cost as much or more than the Elkas.

[SilverSurfer]

The problem with the early 2010 RTs was ....

Yes, I have the 2010 rear shock bulletin. The actual problem, as I stated, was the ASC had to be recalibrated to lower the back end slightly so it would accommodate all ride settings without topping out the shock. Nothing mentioned on bottom-out except to ask others what the 'blown' stock shock experience was.

I listed the shocks available for the RT rear besides Elka. As Toy points out, no cheaper if not more expensive than Elka. I am narrowed down to my Elka either being an RS shock, despite John's assurances it was for the RT (and the printing on the sales order as well), or there may be a ride height nut at the bottom of the shock that's set incorrectly, or I've simply been pointed at by the fickle finger of fate and we have a bonafide question, surrounded by mystery and wrapped in an enigma. Any way one cooks this, my Elka has to come off and I've got to go back to stock to even get near figuring out what the problem has been for the past year, with two techs looking at it.

Think we've ....

I thank everyone for their input.

[Bob Denman]

Well Good Luck! Please let us know what happens next...

[BajaRon]

Yes, I have the 2010 rear shock bulletin. The actual problem, as I stated, was the ASC had to be recalibrated to lower the back end slightly so it would accommodate all ride settings without topping out the shock. Nothing mentioned on bottom-out except to ask others what the 'blown' stock shock experience was.

I listed the shocks available for the RT rear besides Elka. As Toy points out, no cheaper if not more expensive than Elka. I am narrowed down to my Elka either being an RS shock, despite John's assurances it was for the RT (and the printing on the sales order as well), or there may be a ride height nut at the bottom of the shock that's set incorrectly, or I've simply been pointed at by the fickle finger of fate and we have a bonafide question, surrounded by mystery and wrapped in an enigma. Any way one cooks this, my Elka has to come off and I've got to go back to stock to even get near figuring out what the problem has been for the past year, with two techs looking at it.

Think we've ....

I thank everyone for their input.

Sounds like you have an RS rear shock on your RT. That would explain the length issue you're having.

[SilverSurfer]

So here's the close-out report after having my Elka Rear removed this past Thursday and replaced with a new stock shock (used the spring from my original stock shock).

It was the RIGHT decision. My Spyder RT-S is back to its normal ride height, takes bumps in stride, rides firm … no popping or clunking (tight). My new tech in Hanover, PA observed more of the sh***y job my original dealer did on the install of the Elka. The top bolts were maxed out with lock-tite. And the top sleeve was never lubricated on install, so had already begun to rust. I’ve examined the Elka once off the Spyder. The Stage I they sold me is a very VERY basic shock. While it's a pretty red, and it may have good internals, that’s about it. There is no ride height adjustment as I see on pretty much everything else Elka sells. My Elka rear was the $595.00 Stage I version. My vote: Don’t put it on an RT. Just replace your stock shock with another stock if you need to, unless you want to upgrade to an Elka Stage 3 or above … and for the types of ryding most of us do on RT's … It’s not worth it. My tech also tells me they ‘changed’ the stock rear shock absorber design as of 2012, which is now the standard replacement part for the RT's 2012 and before. The 2013 rear stock shock will not fit earlier models. So, I assume replacing the original 2010 rear shock with a 2012 is an improvement. So again, with the Spyder good the rear, returned to responding as an integral part of the vehicle, I’m very pleased.

Paul

[spydajohn]

Hi guys just reading your problems with the rear elka shock I have series 4 on rear and 5s on front and we have very poor roads hear in Australia so the spyder gets a pretty good work out ,since fitting the Elkas to our 2010 rt techno the windshield doesn't shake any more and a very smooth and forgiving ride .it is quite common for my wife and I to spend 14 hours on the bike in one day so good shocks are important to us so maybe the fault is just with the series 1 ,I don't know what they are worth in the USA but I paid $3,280.00 here but the difference they made to the handling and comfort was well worth it .i do understand how frustrating it can be when you buy a so called better product for your bike and it does not do what you expect of it.the shocks I got hear I was asked what type of spyder and how much we both weigh so they could pre set them before sending them.hope you have solved your problem .

[SilverSurfer]

Hi guys just reading your problems with the rear elka shock I have series 4 on rear and 5s on front and we have very poor roads hear in Australia so the spyder gets a pretty good work out ,since fitting the Elkas to our 2010 rt techno the windshield doesn't shake any more and a very smooth and forgiving ride .it is quite common for my wife and I to spend 14 hours on the bike in one day so good shocks are important to us so maybe the fault is just with the series 1 ,I don't know what they are worth in the USA but I paid $3,280.00 here but the difference they made to the handling and comfort was well worth it .i do understand how frustrating it can be when you buy a so called better product for your bike and it does not do what you expect of it.the shocks I got hear I was asked what type of spyder and how much we both weigh so they could pre set them before sending them.hope you have solved your problem .

Good comments. As I'd mentioned before, my experience seems to be a costly fluke. The shock I had didn't fit the Spyder. John at Elka and I covered the make/model, all the height/weight and type of ryding issues in excruciating detail; and then when problems surfaced, we drilled down on part number ... still nothing remarkable. Alas, it just didn't (pop-clunk-ouch) work for me. Noted also that you purchased a Stage 4, compared to my Stage I. Stage 4 has a ride height bolt on the bottom that would normally be used to set the extension of the shock on install. Again, this thread was to report my experience, not to sully Elka's great products. I do feel on the Stage I they may have gone a bit wide on a one-size-fits-all concept.

Paul

[ThreeWheels]

Good comments. As I'd mentioned before, my experience seems to be a costly fluke. The shock I had didn't fit the Spyder. John at Elka and I covered the make/model, all the height/weight and type of ryding issues in excruciating detail; and then when problems surfaced, we drilled down on part number ... still nothing remarkable. Alas, it just didn't (pop-clunk-ouch) work for me. Noted also that you purchased a Stage 4, compared to my Stage I. Stage 4 has a ride height bolt on the bottom that would normally be used to set the extension of the shock on install. Again, this thread was to report my experience, not to sully Elka's great products. I do feel on the Stage I they may have gone a bit wide on a one-size-fits-all concept.

Paul

Has Elka requested the shock back as part of QC ?
At this point, I wouldn't rule out some kind of manufacturing error that isn't immediately apparent from visual observation.

I know at work, when we get complaints from customers, this triggers an investigation, and sometimes the results help to prevent future occurrences.

In my opinion, 10% of the cost of the vehicle for shock absorbers is just WAY too much money.

[BajaRon]

Good comments. As I'd mentioned before, my experience seems to be a costly fluke. The shock I had didn't fit the Spyder. John at Elka and I covered the make/model, all the height/weight and type of ryding issues in excruciating detail; and then when problems surfaced, we drilled down on part number ... still nothing remarkable. Alas, it just didn't (pop-clunk-ouch) work for me. Noted also that you purchased a Stage 4, compared to my Stage I. Stage 4 has a ride height bolt on the bottom that would normally be used to set the extension of the shock on install. Again, this thread was to report my experience, not to sully Elka's great products. I do feel on the Stage I they may have gone a bit wide on a one-size-fits-all concept.

Paul

I am still puzzled by the length issue. Seems like that should have been a red flag from the start.

The RT shock is quite a bit longer than the RS shock (1-1/2" I believe). The fact that your Elka shock was too short seems to indicate that you had the wrong shock all along, no way could it do the job.

This coupled with the overwhelming customer satisfaction with the rear Elka shocks (on RS and RT models), also seems to indicate that your problem was an RS shock on an RT.

[DrewNJ]

Paul, send that crappy shock my way. I'll try it on my RS and report back about the length....haha.
At least you got things straightened out and can enjoy riding...
Doug


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SilverSurfer]

I am still puzzled by the length issue. Seems like that should have been a red flag from the start.

The RT shock is quite a bit longer than the RS shock (1-1/2" I believe). The fact that your Elka shock was too short seems to indicate that you had the wrong shock all along, no way could it do the job.

This coupled with the overwhelming customer satisfaction with the rear Elka shocks (on RS and RT models), also seems to indicate that your problem was an RS shock on an RT.

Well then, that would place the blame on John at Elka, who was so painstaking at making sure I had the right part ... for an RT ... and again, I'm not throwing Elka under the bus. I guess mistakes can be made by even the best.

[SilverSurfer]

In my opinion, 10% of the cost of the vehicle for shock absorbers is just WAY too much money.

I'll be checking with Elka on the QC issue ... and to your right-on statement re cost, like I said, one can buy five new stock shocks for the price of one Elka Stage I rear. So, right now my new 2012 stock rear (on the back of my 2010 RT) is working great ... and if it blows, then I can slay the dragon four more times with sheer numbers.

[SilverSurfer]

This is hard for me to believe. I put a Elka Stage 4 shock on the rear of my 2010 RT-S about 2.5 years ago and it is great. None of the problems you describe and nothing but a great ride and the air ride works just like you would expect and the ride heigth was not affected. Great combination in my book.

An Elka Stage 4 is much more of a shock than a Stage 1 ... more flexibility on set-up and a heartier part.

[BajaRon]

Well then, that would place the blame on John at Elka, who was so painstaking at making sure I had the right part ... for an RT ... and again, I'm not throwing Elka under the bus. I guess mistakes can be made by even the best.

Trying hard not to Just thinking there may be a better way to go.

Though the Stage 4 is a better unit than the Stage 1, the Stage 1 is no slouch and worlds better than stock.

Seems obvious that you were sold the wrong unit. Not trying to find fault but I'm thinking maybe if you explained the situation to Elka, they might well decide to make it right and send you the correct shock for your RT. It may be that, early on, they didn't know the RT took a longer rear shock.

My feeling is that if you had the correct shock (which you should have had from the beginning) you'd be a very happy camper. You've put out a load of dough, you should get what you paid for. Again, not trying to find fault or tell Elka what to do. Believe me, I know that stuff happens. Just suggesting what might be a better solution than going back to stock and eating the expense.

Good luck whatever direction you decided to go.