45 of 59
Previous Photo: "←" (left arrow)
Next Photo: "→ (right arrow)
Start/Stop Slideshow: "Ctrl + Space"
8/29/2013 1:04 AM
2014 Trail, All-Mountain & Enduro Bikes at Eurobike 2013 40 - 52 of 59 ← Previous Next →
9/10/2013 7:19 AM
go get a room
9/10/2013 7:39 AM
Congrats, you're only a week late to be relevant
9/3/2013 2:37 PM
So it also should have better bump compliance than dual short link/dw and better pedal efficiency than fsr/split pivot.
9/3/2013 2:48 PM
I won't comment on that, since i havent' thought about that much (well, i'm lying, i have thought about it a lot, but i haven't done a single calculation). Maybe i can say more on the topic in about a year. Hopefully.
9/3/2013 2:23 PM
It will be stiffer than Horst and easier on the bearings than dual short. Only time will tell if they execute it well.
9/3/2013 2:22 PM
bearing spacing width has no positive effect on stiffness
9/3/2013 2:32 PM
THen why is having widely spaced pivots a good thing? Granted, it's on the frame where you can have more than 12 mm axles, but still. THe further appart they are, the more movement you have for a certain degree of torsion. Stiff only gives out so much movement, so with wider spacing you get less torsion.
9/3/2013 2:55 PM
You don't want that movement, its what makes FSR's/Horstlink so flexy. Swingarm travel good, lateral flex and torsion bad.
9/3/2013 3:16 PM
I know. THat's why i said wider bearings are better, since they give you less flex (if a bearing moves up or down 10 mm, it will give more torsional flex, if it's 5 cm from it's counterpart, than a 15 cm spacing will give you). And trust me, you ain't seen nothing yet as far as flex goes until you've ridden the old banana style Commencal Meta.
9/3/2013 3:32 PM
Having pivots so far back (at the chainstays) causes the flex. The width between the bearings in irrelevant.
9/3/2013 2:20 PM
If it were a floating or cantilevered pivot that be true. On the non-drive side the bearing is at a junction, the drive side support is offset a mere 3 inches. There's no way a Horst is stiffer unless Breezer used memory foam instead of bearings to pack the pivot.
9/3/2013 3:17 PM
The white link is basicly cantilevered.
9/3/2013 3:26 PM
Suspended a little, but not cantilevered. Cantilevers overhang their last connection point without attachment to another.
EDIT: not to be confused with a suspended pivot bridge
2nd EDIT: Take the bearing out of the design and crank on both sides. 4 to five inches of aluminum is very strong at that diameter. Put the bearings back in and its totally stable.
9/3/2013 2:13 PM
Oh, and another thing. Depending on design, a horst link enables you to make the chainstay shorter than a dual short link.
9/3/2013 2:09 PM
Well the closer the pivot is to the axle, the more the 12 mm helps. It's the best for split pivot or ABP designs, since the pivot is linked with a 12 mm axle. Besides, the bearings are spaced wide appart, much farther than on the frame.
I'm still certain MLink has it the worst, since it has no left to right connection near the pivot. A horst link has it much nearer and a short link is directly connected. Even if you take into account that the swingarm is traingually reinforced, the white link isn't.
9/3/2013 2:07 PM
if the shock was direct mounted to the chainstay at the seattube/BB that force would be relevant, but that would be very odd.
9/3/2013 2:11 PM
9/3/2013 2:27 PM
Odd, case and point. That would maximize the force acting laterally against the shock.
9/3/2013 2:04 PM
12mm has helped as much as it helps every other design. The chainstay pivot point is a relic and still prone to flex. I'm glad you agreed with me that the dual short link is stiffer. My point was that it's a great solution, but created a bearing stress issue universal to all iterations of that concept. You might be right about the direct link of the shock to the swingarm, but there would have to be considerable lateral deflection to have any consequence. But with this design, the fulcrum for this deflection would exert a small force over a long distance (ie like trying to lift a big boulder with a level and putting the pivot near you not the boulder). So that would have very little effect.
9/3/2013 1:35 PM
But a horst link has a stiff 12 mm axle quite near the pivot. A dual short link is a single piece with the link and the axle or bearing seats on the swingarm completely connected. Which is way more stiff. This has no reinforcments between the drive and nondrive side. Okay, the left has a triangulation reinforcment, but that's a neccessety. The drive side is even more of a problem.
And a direct mount of the shock to the swingarm is more of a negative than a positive. f the swingarm flexes, it will put stress on the shock. If it's rocker/linkage driven, the flex is taken out by the rocker or linkage, not the shock. So the seals and bushings last longer.
9/3/2013 1:28 PM
Yes, and Horst isn't know for being stiff. This bike attempts to remedy that by getting away from the link near the junction of the chainstay and the seatstay (well known flex issue). Also the direct mount of the shock to the swing arm and the seatstay stiffeners will help stiffen the rear. The dual short link design fixed this issue, but caused another (extreme bearing stress). The longer links and low rotation should solve that issue.
9/3/2013 1:14 PM
Um... What now, do they look simmilar and stuff or not? I'm fully aware what the differences are, this is basicly just a short dual link suspension, that has the bottom link stretched out. In principle a horst-link is the same, but it has the bottom link stretched out to the max.
I suspect the CS bearing failed first because it rotates the least. prolly closely followed by the BB pivot, which also probably has some quite high loads. This might just be worse, depending on the finess of the design. Besides the radial stresses you will probably have some torsional stresses on the bearing coming from the lack of stiffness of the design (it is without a doubt less stiff than a horst link or a short dual link, but who cares what i'm saying, i'm riding a 2008 Meta that's as flexy as butter...).
9/3/2013 1:07 PM
Enduro has the chainstay pivot back further, link mount up 2-3 inches on seat tube and no seatstay stiffeners. Granted, they may look similar, but should perform differently. All my FSR type bikes have had the chainstay bearings fail first, shortly followed by the BB pivot bearing. I once even broken an FSR link in half and had to whittle a small chunk of wood to lock the suspension out and get me down the last 7 miles of a 20 mile DH.
9/3/2013 11:51 AM
Yeah, i was just randomly typing along and it came out that it's flexy. And how is this a 27" Enduro? o.O
Chainslap and grime are the least of the problems here. The main pivot near the BB is much more problematic, since it's in direct path of the dirt comming off the tyre.
9/3/2013 11:22 AM
Smart design solution. Anyone who assumes this would be flexy has no engineering knowledge. The reinforcement of the chainstay/seatstay (ie what looks like a mini seatstay) should make this a very stiff rear triangle. There's been some speculation about the placement of the pivot along the chainstay regarding chainslap and durability. I think that is easily mitigated with a small top mounted chainslap protector. Pivots located anywhere along the chainstay will always be subject to a lot of grime, so I don't think that factor worsens in this design from any other. I can't wait to give it a test ride and actually see how it functions. It looks like an improved Specialized Enduro [with 27.5 which Specialized has decided to deny the existence of this year ;-) ].
8/30/2013 4:32 AM
Stiffer? This would be the definition of flexy compared to short-linked and horst-linked suspension systems...