[img]https://p.vitalmtb.com/photos/forums/2020/12/30/10245/s1200_p5pb19573620.jpg[/img]
New DH helmet from 100% ? It looks like they're Trajecta helmet but the visor says Aircraft 2 and they're are a few other differences!
New DH helmet from 100% ? It looks like they're Trajecta helmet but the visor says Aircraft 2 and they're are a few other differences!
That’s a hell of a catch! Definitely not the original Aircraft.
What CP did with Reading´s bike was mostly to offset what heavier wheels would do to sprung/unsprung mass ratio with him running cushcore there and then...
What CP did with Reading´s bike was mostly to offset what heavier wheels would do to sprung/unsprung mass ratio with him running cushcore there and then. Why others don´ t do it? Most pros don´t know pretty much anything about suspension, not even really basic stuff, then there is marketing that still pushes lighter bikes (yes, even DH bikes, just go back to new Gambler press release...Hey, look at us, we made the lightest DH frame in the world. Awesome, now we have heavy as fuck 29er wheels transfering all the energy to the super light frame and to the rider). Do you think there is many racers who would hazard with what is their only income to experiment with something that goes against everything they have been hearing all those years? Of course not, same as with geometry, it took approx. million years to get to where we are now from what basically was full suss road bikes with wider tires for christ sake.
Would it be hard to hide t from view? Not really, there is plenty of space on the bike where you can easily fit heavy inserts, some of those multipurpose inserts are very popular in non DH MTBing (edc,swat, bontrager tools etc), you have a lot of room in the crank spindles, seat tubes etc...So if you really want to, there is plenty of space and no one would notice...Only company that was doing something that could have gone mass market is (or was) orange with 329 frame.
I do agree with alot here, i am not saying they are. But it would make a lot of sense to test this. As you said, it took a long time to get geo right, so what about weight?
I get that there are alot of point again this, specially from factory teams, but gravity racing? They Are in the business of going fast.
I'm not sure there is the money in DH racing to bring in the anal and knowledgable talent into the scene to drive to push these things... When you have reputable bike brands having the frame development outsourced and only a few 'weirdos' pushing the envelope (does anybody else do data acquisition and development to the level of Jack racing? We lost Dave Garland and Fabien Barel I think pushed it a bit with Canyon, anyone else?), you can see how this hasn't been investigated fully yet.
There are a ton of things that could be tested besides weight, I'm surprised we don't see more adjustable test mules testing out the geometry. In reality, like I've said before, DH racing is more like touring car or rally racing (not WRC though!) with near production equipment under the riders. It's far from the F1 status some have tried to paint it as. Funny though, with the number of bikes sold it would make sense to go full F1 and more or less ignore production bikes in that regard, if it wasn't for the rules (selling the stuff you ride) and if the budget was there.
I'm not sure there is the money in DH racing to bring in the anal and knowledgable talent into the scene to drive to push these...
I'm not sure there is the money in DH racing to bring in the anal and knowledgable talent into the scene to drive to push these things... When you have reputable bike brands having the frame development outsourced and only a few 'weirdos' pushing the envelope (does anybody else do data acquisition and development to the level of Jack racing? We lost Dave Garland and Fabien Barel I think pushed it a bit with Canyon, anyone else?), you can see how this hasn't been investigated fully yet.
There are a ton of things that could be tested besides weight, I'm surprised we don't see more adjustable test mules testing out the geometry. In reality, like I've said before, DH racing is more like touring car or rally racing (not WRC though!) with near production equipment under the riders. It's far from the F1 status some have tried to paint it as. Funny though, with the number of bikes sold it would make sense to go full F1 and more or less ignore production bikes in that regard, if it wasn't for the rules (selling the stuff you ride) and if the budget was there.
I agree that this is probably the case. Sure, anyone can buy a telemetry kit now, but what do you do with it? What do the numbers mean, what's good and what's slow? Sometimes having more data is just as big a problem. Those that have been developing the telemetry and pushing it forward will know and have their own 'secret formula's but to anyone else it's just more numbers to confuse yourself and the rider with.
I agree that this is probably the case. Sure, anyone can buy a telemetry kit now, but what do you do with it? What do the...
I agree that this is probably the case. Sure, anyone can buy a telemetry kit now, but what do you do with it? What do the numbers mean, what's good and what's slow? Sometimes having more data is just as big a problem. Those that have been developing the telemetry and pushing it forward will know and have their own 'secret formula's but to anyone else it's just more numbers to confuse yourself and the rider with.
You are overthinking stuff here, 99% of people can see if two curves are similar or not and if you can do that telemetry could be beneficial to every one of those people. A lot info can be gathered without it though just using well located go pro.
The BOTY is the Stumpjumper Evo over at pb. Great choice and fantastic bike. I would love one😍
I'm very happy the big S listened to the previous gen owners of the Evo. It seems they addressed all the issues we had with these great bikes. The big one was the suspension kinematic, Cascade came up with a great fix with their linkage and seems like Spec did too. Another major gripe was for some of us who overforked these things, the head angle go into the 62 degree area with was awesome when pointed down some World cup trails, but for 99% of the time resulted in front end understeer, the adjustment cups would solve this.
As much as people love to hate on Spec, they are kicking some goals with their bikes lately.
I agree that this is probably the case. Sure, anyone can buy a telemetry kit now, but what do you do with it? What do the...
I agree that this is probably the case. Sure, anyone can buy a telemetry kit now, but what do you do with it? What do the numbers mean, what's good and what's slow? Sometimes having more data is just as big a problem. Those that have been developing the telemetry and pushing it forward will know and have their own 'secret formula's but to anyone else it's just more numbers to confuse yourself and the rider with.
You are overthinking stuff here, 99% of people can see if two curves are similar or not and if you can do that telemetry could be...
You are overthinking stuff here, 99% of people can see if two curves are similar or not and if you can do that telemetry could be beneficial to every one of those people. A lot info can be gathered without it though just using well located go pro.
You are overthinking stuff here, 99% of people can see if two curves are similar or not and if you can do that telemetry could be...
You are overthinking stuff here, 99% of people can see if two curves are similar or not and if you can do that telemetry could be beneficial to every one of those people. A lot info can be gathered without it though just using well located go pro.
What if you need them to be different? Or what if the two similar curves are not what is needed? What do the curves even mean?
I doubt more than 10 % of MTB riders actually know what the leverage ratio means on an in-depth basis, why it changes through the stroke, why it changes differently for different bikes, etc. Let alone more complicated stuff.
As for a lot of info can be gathered using a GoPro, that's just data acquisition. You can use potentiometers (in pivots), linear potentiometers, LVDTs, accelerometers, pressure sensors on brakes, GoPros, etc. Whatever you want. You choose the solution that gives adequate granularity of the data that you need for your case and fits the packaging.
That's the "easy part", as you said, a lot of info can be gathered. There are two important bits here:
1. is the data useable? For example, using a GoPro, so using the method from the video, won't be particularly precise as the camera itself will move quite a lot as well. Plus you have smearing of the image (due to fast movements), making it hard to accurately position the point in space, giving you additional errors and fluctuations (this would be important if you were to calculate velocities and accelerations of movements from that data, for example for the suspension designer to calculate the loads, as the accelerations could fluctuate wildly due to the error in measured position). Tracking two points (for example top and bottom of the shock - effective ETE) would make it better and would remove the issue of camera movement, but still, not ideal, as you keep the errors of reading the position from an image. Details like these, limitations of the chosen equipment and the desired result, influence the choice of data acquisition method and require some knowledge to make the correct choice. Thus if you can use something it doesn't necessarily mean you should use that something or that it will perform well for the desired purpose.
2. When you have tons of (supposedly usable) data, the hard bit is making that data make sense and use it to make changes on the bike or the riding style to go faster.
With the data acquisition system available off the shelf, point 1 is mostly taken care of (there is a system that even enables you to wire strain gauges to it to measure the stress and strain of a frame in development). It's nr.2 that's the issue. That requires either tons of passion (and some connections to get into the position) or tons of money to pay an expert to do it. In the real world, people are paid tons of money to do that for example in F1, but then the money involved drops VERY quickly as you go towards lower tiered racing series and you quickly get to students, young professionals learning their craft and similar people in series that otherwise look very professional.
Ah, you're right. I saw a black shock and instantly thought it's DVO. It is in fact a blacked out set of Ohlins stuff. Weird, I wonder if the shock is custom painted or something.
OH, I completely forgot Giant ditched DVO and went for Fox with their suspension a while ago...
I really shouldn't watch videos passively (more like listening to them only).
Maybe now that the Spez partnership has ended, Giant is looking to spec some OEM Ohlins? Commencal and many other brands are already speccing some of it but Giant would no doubt be a lucrative contract for the Swedish gold
What if you need them to be different? Or what if the two similar curves are not what is needed? What do the curves even mean...
What if you need them to be different? Or what if the two similar curves are not what is needed? What do the curves even mean?
I doubt more than 10 % of MTB riders actually know what the leverage ratio means on an in-depth basis, why it changes through the stroke, why it changes differently for different bikes, etc. Let alone more complicated stuff.
As for a lot of info can be gathered using a GoPro, that's just data acquisition. You can use potentiometers (in pivots), linear potentiometers, LVDTs, accelerometers, pressure sensors on brakes, GoPros, etc. Whatever you want. You choose the solution that gives adequate granularity of the data that you need for your case and fits the packaging.
That's the "easy part", as you said, a lot of info can be gathered. There are two important bits here:
1. is the data useable? For example, using a GoPro, so using the method from the video, won't be particularly precise as the camera itself will move quite a lot as well. Plus you have smearing of the image (due to fast movements), making it hard to accurately position the point in space, giving you additional errors and fluctuations (this would be important if you were to calculate velocities and accelerations of movements from that data, for example for the suspension designer to calculate the loads, as the accelerations could fluctuate wildly due to the error in measured position). Tracking two points (for example top and bottom of the shock - effective ETE) would make it better and would remove the issue of camera movement, but still, not ideal, as you keep the errors of reading the position from an image. Details like these, limitations of the chosen equipment and the desired result, influence the choice of data acquisition method and require some knowledge to make the correct choice. Thus if you can use something it doesn't necessarily mean you should use that something or that it will perform well for the desired purpose.
2. When you have tons of (supposedly usable) data, the hard bit is making that data make sense and use it to make changes on the bike or the riding style to go faster.
With the data acquisition system available off the shelf, point 1 is mostly taken care of (there is a system that even enables you to wire strain gauges to it to measure the stress and strain of a frame in development). It's nr.2 that's the issue. That requires either tons of passion (and some connections to get into the position) or tons of money to pay an expert to do it. In the real world, people are paid tons of money to do that for example in F1, but then the money involved drops VERY quickly as you go towards lower tiered racing series and you quickly get to students, young professionals learning their craft and similar people in series that otherwise look very professional.
The most important thing in suspension setup is balance, that is something that can be quite easily seen in travel usage graphs that I believe every telemetry available offers. You can have everything else wrong, as long as front and back of the bike work in the same manner the bike will be predictable. Now, from the very same curve you can read how much travel it uses and in what situations, does it use too much travel in single big impact (if so, add spring rate or damping) or does it go deep int travel on repeated high frequency bumps (if so, fasten the rebound a bit).
I´m not saying that detailed analyse of every single number it can give you is easy, of course it isn´t. All I´m saying is that every rider out there could benefit from taking the very basic data, thinking for a minute or two what they mean and making informed decision what to do to make suspension work better. The great thing is, with data logging you can go back and see if the change you did improved the issue or not. At this point there is just so much products that have gimmicky adjusters on them that having something to help you see what does something (and what it actually is doing) could be major benefit.
We all have super capable devices in our pockets that are mostly used for googling stuff and to watch porn, I don´t think data logging would be more wasteful than that lol
Too bad that more susp. tuners don´t offer this kind of service, buying telemetry just to setup suspension once and then put it in the drawer is unreasonable investment for most, paying 100quids or whatever for getting the data would be no problem for most people though, at least I think so.
Don't get me wrong, I agree more data related decision making would be a good thing. And some aspects of it might be easy. But still, for quite a few riders it's probably more of a headache than a benefit at face value, before they are educated in it. And I'd be afraid quite a few of them would go on the cool factor bravado of 'eh, I've got talent, I don't need this stuff'. Which usually ends when the new kids using telemetry pass them left and right for example.
As for phones, yeah, they could enable quite a bit, but then you're again on the teeter of do you want the raw data and analyse it yourself? Or do you want an app that will tell you 'increase rebound damping in the front, lower spring rate in the rear'. That will be more useable to the average rider, as they will be told what to do, but more advanced people might not trust it because it's a black box. And you need to make that black box work, reliably.
So yeah... Lots of options. But I think we'll see more data acquisition happen in the coming years. Or maybe quite a lot more of it is already being used, but not at the races, instead it's used in tests away from cameras?
Don't get me wrong, I agree more data related decision making would be a good thing. And some aspects of it might be easy. But still...
Don't get me wrong, I agree more data related decision making would be a good thing. And some aspects of it might be easy. But still, for quite a few riders it's probably more of a headache than a benefit at face value, before they are educated in it. And I'd be afraid quite a few of them would go on the cool factor bravado of 'eh, I've got talent, I don't need this stuff'. Which usually ends when the new kids using telemetry pass them left and right for example.
As for phones, yeah, they could enable quite a bit, but then you're again on the teeter of do you want the raw data and analyse it yourself? Or do you want an app that will tell you 'increase rebound damping in the front, lower spring rate in the rear'. That will be more useable to the average rider, as they will be told what to do, but more advanced people might not trust it because it's a black box. And you need to make that black box work, reliably.
So yeah... Lots of options. But I think we'll see more data acquisition happen in the coming years. Or maybe quite a lot more of it is already being used, but not at the races, instead it's used in tests away from cameras?
Given the options you brought up, I would chose seeing data and making my own adjustments, then verifying it in the next run. But since we have black boxes now telling us what to do, how about they give us the reason why they recommend what they recommend? Should be pretty simple as it has to have some input data in the first place so why not show them to the end user together with recommendation (maybe the input quality is the main issue here, as shockwiz only uses air pressure as far as I know?).
There is absolutely a point where having too much data available is more harmful than helpful, that´s why I wouldn´t go overboard with number of sensors and logged data.
On the other hand, I´m pretty sure that especially more knowledgeable riders like to overly analyse what the bike does and why, but without any hard data there is so small probability that your guess is correct that it´s likely better to focus only on what feels better/worse rather than why it does what it does. It´s way too easy to gown down this rabbit hole and end up with worse setup than you started with.
Well, I went for more or less all the clickers with my current bike - Lyrik RC2 and Super Deluxe RCT (yeah, Fox has more clickers, but servicing wise it's out of the question). Because more clickers, more better. On the other hand I also bought a shockwiz, set the suspension as it told me and left it at that.
The key is I'm too lazy to do back to back runs and test things (should really go to a bikepark with that intention some day...), when I'm riding I just ride and love it. Having more data might help, yeah, as I'm also afraid I won't really feel much of a difference between different settings, even though I know what they do and what to look for! So yeah, it's probably not easy for the racers too.
As for Shockwiz, yeah, it's air pressure only. And honestly I'm not even sure how (if) they handle the leverage ratios. I'm guessing they just generalise the shapes of the movements, so the amplitudes and the number of movements to determine if the damping or spring rate is not OK...
Having more clickers is what sells though, the biggest issue is not the number of them but that they don´t always do what they should be doing (some of them don´t do anything at all in big part of their range, charger 2 or Grip 2 for example), the other is interference of them that can confuse quite easily (LSR interference with LSC in some shocks). Going with what feels the best is all we can realistically do without data, and unless your base setup is completely wrong it works reasonably well, if you are racing stopwatch is pretty cheap too.
I´m guessing that shockwiz somehow can estimate what leverage curve is like from pressure change amplitude and time it takes? Linear frame should see slower and more steady rise in pressure for given number of tokens I think?
So, is a new session coming? They definitely need an actual xl frame and their current design might need a revamp. An high pivot abp (split pivot) session could be nice. If it's coming, then when?
The setup process only requires to make a reading (with the spring deflated at 0 % of travel) at 0 and 100 % of travel. That gives them the 'progressivity' of the spring (token influenced) and then I'd say it just goes linearly through that range. The actual achieved travel will differ from that, but on the other hand having a linear pot in the rear shock and measuring the stroke of it will also be different to the travel on the rear axle. Plus then you could have vertical rear axle travel, arc travel, etc. etc.
I think they make quite a few assumptions as that's easier and still gives the user much more info than just feel would. If it's correct of course.
As for clickers selling, guilty, though having a low speed compression setting in an open shock (if you have a switch) is a must for me now. I leave my suspension open (well duh for the fork...) and want to tune the LSC to have some pedalling platform at all times. So a set it and forget it mode that works well when pedalling and descending.
On another note, I remember seeing on that other mtb site that ohlins should be releasing the aftermarket rxf38 in the first quarter of 2021. Does anybody have any more info on it? I'd be very interested to see how it stacks up against the zeb/38/mezzer
New DH helmet from 100% ? It looks like they're Trajecta helmet but the visor says Aircraft 2 and they're are a few other differences!
I get that there are alot of point again this, specially from factory teams, but gravity racing? They Are in the business of going fast.
It is just a thought.
There are a ton of things that could be tested besides weight, I'm surprised we don't see more adjustable test mules testing out the geometry. In reality, like I've said before, DH racing is more like touring car or rally racing (not WRC though!) with near production equipment under the riders. It's far from the F1 status some have tried to paint it as. Funny though, with the number of bikes sold it would make sense to go full F1 and more or less ignore production bikes in that regard, if it wasn't for the rules (selling the stuff you ride) and if the budget was there.
As much as people love to hate on Spec, they are kicking some goals with their bikes lately.
I doubt more than 10 % of MTB riders actually know what the leverage ratio means on an in-depth basis, why it changes through the stroke, why it changes differently for different bikes, etc. Let alone more complicated stuff.
As for a lot of info can be gathered using a GoPro, that's just data acquisition. You can use potentiometers (in pivots), linear potentiometers, LVDTs, accelerometers, pressure sensors on brakes, GoPros, etc. Whatever you want. You choose the solution that gives adequate granularity of the data that you need for your case and fits the packaging.
That's the "easy part", as you said, a lot of info can be gathered. There are two important bits here:
1. is the data useable? For example, using a GoPro, so using the method from the video, won't be particularly precise as the camera itself will move quite a lot as well. Plus you have smearing of the image (due to fast movements), making it hard to accurately position the point in space, giving you additional errors and fluctuations (this would be important if you were to calculate velocities and accelerations of movements from that data, for example for the suspension designer to calculate the loads, as the accelerations could fluctuate wildly due to the error in measured position). Tracking two points (for example top and bottom of the shock - effective ETE) would make it better and would remove the issue of camera movement, but still, not ideal, as you keep the errors of reading the position from an image. Details like these, limitations of the chosen equipment and the desired result, influence the choice of data acquisition method and require some knowledge to make the correct choice. Thus if you can use something it doesn't necessarily mean you should use that something or that it will perform well for the desired purpose.
2. When you have tons of (supposedly usable) data, the hard bit is making that data make sense and use it to make changes on the bike or the riding style to go faster.
With the data acquisition system available off the shelf, point 1 is mostly taken care of (there is a system that even enables you to wire strain gauges to it to measure the stress and strain of a frame in development). It's nr.2 that's the issue. That requires either tons of passion (and some connections to get into the position) or tons of money to pay an expert to do it. In the real world, people are paid tons of money to do that for example in F1, but then the money involved drops VERY quickly as you go towards lower tiered racing series and you quickly get to students, young professionals learning their craft and similar people in series that otherwise look very professional.
https://youtu.be/l7GNEuW6EeY
OH, I completely forgot Giant ditched DVO and went for Fox with their suspension a while ago...
I really shouldn't watch videos passively (more like listening to them only).
I´m not saying that detailed analyse of every single number it can give you is easy, of course it isn´t. All I´m saying is that every rider out there could benefit from taking the very basic data, thinking for a minute or two what they mean and making informed decision what to do to make suspension work better. The great thing is, with data logging you can go back and see if the change you did improved the issue or not. At this point there is just so much products that have gimmicky adjusters on them that having something to help you see what does something (and what it actually is doing) could be major benefit.
We all have super capable devices in our pockets that are mostly used for googling stuff and to watch porn, I don´t think data logging would be more wasteful than that lol
Too bad that more susp. tuners don´t offer this kind of service, buying telemetry just to setup suspension once and then put it in the drawer is unreasonable investment for most, paying 100quids or whatever for getting the data would be no problem for most people though, at least I think so.
As for phones, yeah, they could enable quite a bit, but then you're again on the teeter of do you want the raw data and analyse it yourself? Or do you want an app that will tell you 'increase rebound damping in the front, lower spring rate in the rear'. That will be more useable to the average rider, as they will be told what to do, but more advanced people might not trust it because it's a black box. And you need to make that black box work, reliably.
So yeah... Lots of options. But I think we'll see more data acquisition happen in the coming years. Or maybe quite a lot more of it is already being used, but not at the races, instead it's used in tests away from cameras?
There is absolutely a point where having too much data available is more harmful than helpful, that´s why I wouldn´t go overboard with number of sensors and logged data.
On the other hand, I´m pretty sure that especially more knowledgeable riders like to overly analyse what the bike does and why, but without any hard data there is so small probability that your guess is correct that it´s likely better to focus only on what feels better/worse rather than why it does what it does. It´s way too easy to gown down this rabbit hole and end up with worse setup than you started with.
The key is I'm too lazy to do back to back runs and test things (should really go to a bikepark with that intention some day...), when I'm riding I just ride and love it. Having more data might help, yeah, as I'm also afraid I won't really feel much of a difference between different settings, even though I know what they do and what to look for! So yeah, it's probably not easy for the racers too.
As for Shockwiz, yeah, it's air pressure only. And honestly I'm not even sure how (if) they handle the leverage ratios. I'm guessing they just generalise the shapes of the movements, so the amplitudes and the number of movements to determine if the damping or spring rate is not OK...
I´m guessing that shockwiz somehow can estimate what leverage curve is like from pressure change amplitude and time it takes? Linear frame should see slower and more steady rise in pressure for given number of tokens I think?
I think they make quite a few assumptions as that's easier and still gives the user much more info than just feel would. If it's correct of course.
As for clickers selling, guilty, though having a low speed compression setting in an open shock (if you have a switch) is a must for me now. I leave my suspension open (well duh for the fork...) and want to tune the LSC to have some pedalling platform at all times. So a set it and forget it mode that works well when pedalling and descending.
Jakub and Primoz, good stuff, but maybe a diffrent thread?
The new forbidden will be called the dreadnought and have 150 something travel
it should drop this month