MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation

Related:
3/27/2022 7:07pm
Primoz wrote:
That didn't take long... Re reach, X fore-aft movement on a longer reach bike (which usually means a longer wheelbase bike as well) will give you...
That didn't take long...

Re reach, X fore-aft movement on a longer reach bike (which usually means a longer wheelbase bike as well) will give you less of an effect on either the front or rear wheel. So that means you can be sloppier with your inputs and of course more precise with them on a shorter reach frame.

With a longer reach (longer wheelbase) you also get additional stability at higher speeds, which makes it more comfortable mentally, enabling 'lesser' riders to go faster. The negative is of course the tighter stuff, where long bikes ARE cumbersome (riding a 1292 mm wheelbased 150 mm trail bike, I know what I'm talking about).

If you can deal with less stability and can be more precise with your positioning, a shorter bike will give you more nimbility (yeah yeah, I know...) in the tighter stuff. I'm guessing this is a benefit the pros take advantage of.
Fred_Pop wrote:
I'm afraid I'm going to have to call bs on this. Shorter bikes are more tiring because you need more strength to keep the bike inline...
I'm afraid I'm going to have to call bs on this. Shorter bikes are more tiring because you need more strength to keep the bike inline on the rough stuff. You need a lot more force on your arms to keep from folding over and going over the bars.
Weight distribution on longer bikes is actually easier because the bike is more balanced and you have a longer range of stable motion. Long bikes allow you to remain centered and the long chainstays are more stable and make it easier to drift the rear end. You tend to turn more with the backend like with a motorbike.
Climbing steeper stuff is easier due to long chainstays, steep seat angle and long front end which makes it less likely for the front end to lift and wander.
Tight stuff works fine but you do have to adjust your technique, either be more aggressive, lean more or simply learn to nose turn.
Using the pros as a reference isn't ideal as they a) tend to stick to what they know, b) don't test everything and c) don't have access to all different sizes.
The two bikes i own have a wheelbase roughly 90 mm apart in the same size. Neither is better they are different. It really comes down to the trails you are riding. It’s not surprising a lot of ews guys have historically rode a bigger bike at ews whistler where the trails are way more bike specific.

1
brash
Posts
941
Joined
4/24/2019
Location
AU
3/27/2022 8:57pm
Primoz wrote:
That didn't take long... Re reach, X fore-aft movement on a longer reach bike (which usually means a longer wheelbase bike as well) will give you...
That didn't take long...

Re reach, X fore-aft movement on a longer reach bike (which usually means a longer wheelbase bike as well) will give you less of an effect on either the front or rear wheel. So that means you can be sloppier with your inputs and of course more precise with them on a shorter reach frame.

With a longer reach (longer wheelbase) you also get additional stability at higher speeds, which makes it more comfortable mentally, enabling 'lesser' riders to go faster. The negative is of course the tighter stuff, where long bikes ARE cumbersome (riding a 1292 mm wheelbased 150 mm trail bike, I know what I'm talking about).

If you can deal with less stability and can be more precise with your positioning, a shorter bike will give you more nimbility (yeah yeah, I know...) in the tighter stuff. I'm guessing this is a benefit the pros take advantage of.
Fred_Pop wrote:
I'm afraid I'm going to have to call bs on this. Shorter bikes are more tiring because you need more strength to keep the bike inline...
I'm afraid I'm going to have to call bs on this. Shorter bikes are more tiring because you need more strength to keep the bike inline on the rough stuff. You need a lot more force on your arms to keep from folding over and going over the bars.
Weight distribution on longer bikes is actually easier because the bike is more balanced and you have a longer range of stable motion. Long bikes allow you to remain centered and the long chainstays are more stable and make it easier to drift the rear end. You tend to turn more with the backend like with a motorbike.
Climbing steeper stuff is easier due to long chainstays, steep seat angle and long front end which makes it less likely for the front end to lift and wander.
Tight stuff works fine but you do have to adjust your technique, either be more aggressive, lean more or simply learn to nose turn.
Using the pros as a reference isn't ideal as they a) tend to stick to what they know, b) don't test everything and c) don't have access to all different sizes.
all correct I think. My new bike is 1336mm wheelbase
It's a whole 106mm longer than my last bike. The new one is way less fatiguing, you simply stand up over the bottom bracket and look where you want to go. Fore and aft stability is ridiculous.

Yes, it's a boat in tight switchbacks, you just have to throw it in a bit more aggressive. For me as an intermediate rider its been fantastic. For a pro, I don't think there is a huge gain. Particularly in EWS.
5
Verbl Kint
Posts
590
Joined
9/13/2013
Location
Quezon City PH
3/27/2022 9:10pm
Just by looking at yesterday's photos from Lourdes, it does look like Loic and Finn finally ditched their old reliable sharpied DHR II's and went for the new Cannibals.
7
JCL
Posts
65
Joined
9/14/2010
Location
CA
3/27/2022 9:47pm
sspomer wrote:
linkage difference between loic and finn's bikes today from pit bits. thoughts on what differences are? [img]https://p.vitalmtb.com/photos/forums/2022/03/24/12253/s1200_20220324_UCI_DH_WorldCup_Lourdes_84T0716.jpg[/img] [img]https://p.vitalmtb.com/photos/forums/2022/03/24/12254/s1200_Finn_will_be_on_the_pinky_this_weekend.jpg[/img]
linkage difference between loic and finn's bikes today from pit bits. thoughts on what differences are?



Primoz wrote:
The shape of leverage ratio through the travel. The overall leverage ratio (rear wheel travel vs. shock stroke) is likely the same or very similar. So...
The shape of leverage ratio through the travel. The overall leverage ratio (rear wheel travel vs. shock stroke) is likely the same or very similar. So tuning linearity and progressivity.
@sspomer @bigbird https://www.pinkbike.com/news/bike-check-finn-iles-custom-specialized-demo-leogang-world-cup-2021.html I played around on linkage a bit to see the differences in the link. In last years bike check, linked, they comment on...
@sspomer @bigbird

https://www.pinkbike.com/news/bike-check-finn-iles-custom-specialized-d…

I played around on linkage a bit to see the differences in the link. In last years bike check, linked, they comment on it being more progressive. While this is true, it's done in a slightly different way than you'd normally see. Generally, when the comment of "more progressive" is made, the starting leverage rate is higher, and the ending leverage rate is generally the same, or slightly lower. This is the case with most of Cascade's linkages. This requires a higher spring rate to actually make more force at the end of travel.
So, in the case of Finn's linkage, the entire rate comes down. Instead of starting around 3.3 and dropping to 2.1ish. His is starting closer to 3 and dropping below 2 at the end of stroke. This makes more end of stroke force with the same spring rate, but can make the top of the travel feel a bit less supple, as you have less leverage overcoming things such as friction. A starting rate of 3 is generally high enough to feel smooth with a coil shock though. Cheers.
Interestingly, if you watch the footage of Finn and Loic’s runs, Loic’s bike isn’t as stable pitch wise as Finn’s. Of course it could be spring rate and damping rather that kinematics, but you can definitely see the rear suspension choking on larger hits. You can see the same with Loris and Reece’s bike. The latter looking more balanced over a full run.

IMO.
3
Zero Cool
Posts
72
Joined
2/14/2014
Location
Bristol GB
3/28/2022 6:18am
Verbl Kint wrote:
Just by looking at yesterday's photos from Lourdes, it does look like Loic and Finn finally ditched their old reliable sharpied DHR II's and went for...
Just by looking at yesterday's photos from Lourdes, it does look like Loic and Finn finally ditched their old reliable sharpied DHR II's and went for the new Cannibals.
Someone ditched the Sharpie for the actual tyres they’re meant to have?

Isn’t this the biggest MTB news story of the century so far?
9
dolface
Posts
1656
Joined
10/26/2015
Location
CA US
3/28/2022 6:26am
Verbl Kint wrote:
Just by looking at yesterday's photos from Lourdes, it does look like Loic and Finn finally ditched their old reliable sharpied DHR II's and went for...
Just by looking at yesterday's photos from Lourdes, it does look like Loic and Finn finally ditched their old reliable sharpied DHR II's and went for the new Cannibals.
Zero Cool wrote:
Someone ditched the Sharpie for the actual tyres they’re meant to have?

Isn’t this the biggest MTB news story of the century so far?
Was thinking the same thing, if Spesh really has a competitive race tire that seems like a big deal (and just anecdotally some of my faster, shreddier friends have been riding the new T9 AND T7 trail and enduro tires and have been impressed).
4
nskerb
Posts
335
Joined
3/3/2020
Location
Kelso, WA US
3/28/2022 6:55am
Verbl Kint wrote:
Just by looking at yesterday's photos from Lourdes, it does look like Loic and Finn finally ditched their old reliable sharpied DHR II's and went for...
Just by looking at yesterday's photos from Lourdes, it does look like Loic and Finn finally ditched their old reliable sharpied DHR II's and went for the new Cannibals.
Zero Cool wrote:
Someone ditched the Sharpie for the actual tyres they’re meant to have?

Isn’t this the biggest MTB news story of the century so far?
dolface wrote:
Was thinking the same thing, if Spesh really has a competitive race tire that seems like a big deal (and just anecdotally some of my faster...
Was thinking the same thing, if Spesh really has a competitive race tire that seems like a big deal (and just anecdotally some of my faster, shreddier friends have been riding the new T9 AND T7 trail and enduro tires and have been impressed).
Those tires honestly do look pretty sweet. I was trying very hard to get the wild enduro's but the front sticky was out of stock everywhere and I'm stupid and want to be matchy matchyfront to back. I looked at the specilized tires but after weeks of internal struggle I ended up with DHR/DHF again. I forget how damn good that combo is until I get a fresh set and think how dumb I would be to want to stray from that. This is all a completely useless point to what I'm getting at though.

I have been surprised that full factory race teams do not have a better solution to the sharpie trick when it comes time for a race run. I'd imagine that if a rider on a team sponsored by Kenda or Vee or some other lower tier tire wanted to run a Maxxis on race day then it wouldn't bee too difficult and could probably fool a lot of people to have a mock sidewall sticker for whatever their tire sponsor is. Minimal effort and I think it would fly under the radar of a lot of people vs just a 5 second sharpie job.
4
dolface
Posts
1656
Joined
10/26/2015
Location
CA US
3/28/2022 7:08am
nskerb wrote:
Those tires honestly do look pretty sweet. I was trying very hard to get the wild enduro's but the front sticky was out of stock everywhere...
Those tires honestly do look pretty sweet. I was trying very hard to get the wild enduro's but the front sticky was out of stock everywhere and I'm stupid and want to be matchy matchyfront to back. I looked at the specilized tires but after weeks of internal struggle I ended up with DHR/DHF again. I forget how damn good that combo is until I get a fresh set and think how dumb I would be to want to stray from that. This is all a completely useless point to what I'm getting at though.

I have been surprised that full factory race teams do not have a better solution to the sharpie trick when it comes time for a race run. I'd imagine that if a rider on a team sponsored by Kenda or Vee or some other lower tier tire wanted to run a Maxxis on race day then it wouldn't bee too difficult and could probably fool a lot of people to have a mock sidewall sticker for whatever their tire sponsor is. Minimal effort and I think it would fly under the radar of a lot of people vs just a 5 second sharpie job.
Re-branding a tire with another brands hot-patch sounds like a quick way to get sued and generate a TON of negative publicity for the re-branded tire...
14
Primoz
Posts
4519
Joined
8/1/2009
Location
SI
3/28/2022 7:18am
They generate a ton of publicity for even running sharpie tyres, let alone faking the brand...

@dolface have you tried Assegais?
nskerb
Posts
335
Joined
3/3/2020
Location
Kelso, WA US
3/28/2022 7:39am
dolface wrote:
Re-branding a tire with another brands hot-patch sounds like a quick way to get sued and generate a TON of negative publicity for the re-branded tire...
I guess I'm not arguing that it would or wouldn't cause a lawsuit. But do you think KHS paid trek some type of royalty or whatever to slap their brand over session frames a few years ago? More or less the same thing. Same with all the times Intense or Giant frames were ran by everybody back in the day right?
The thing I was thinking is that if they had a glued on or ironed on patch I think it would definitely not get noticed.
1
Fred_Pop
Posts
214
Joined
11/26/2017
Location
FR
3/28/2022 9:47am
Primoz wrote:
Which part is BS?
Longer wheelbase makes it easier to weight front and back and makes it easier to feel when one or the other is about to lose traction.
Longer reach does make it easier for "lesser" riders to go faster due to the added stability but it does the same for "pro" riders.
Tighter stuff is fine so you as you change riding style/technique. Obviously, if you try to ride a longer bike off the back like a short bike it won't work.
2
3/28/2022 11:37am
nskerb wrote:
Those tires honestly do look pretty sweet. I was trying very hard to get the wild enduro's but the front sticky was out of stock everywhere...
Those tires honestly do look pretty sweet. I was trying very hard to get the wild enduro's but the front sticky was out of stock everywhere and I'm stupid and want to be matchy matchyfront to back. I looked at the specilized tires but after weeks of internal struggle I ended up with DHR/DHF again. I forget how damn good that combo is until I get a fresh set and think how dumb I would be to want to stray from that. This is all a completely useless point to what I'm getting at though.

I have been surprised that full factory race teams do not have a better solution to the sharpie trick when it comes time for a race run. I'd imagine that if a rider on a team sponsored by Kenda or Vee or some other lower tier tire wanted to run a Maxxis on race day then it wouldn't bee too difficult and could probably fool a lot of people to have a mock sidewall sticker for whatever their tire sponsor is. Minimal effort and I think it would fly under the radar of a lot of people vs just a 5 second sharpie job.
dolface wrote:
Re-branding a tire with another brands hot-patch sounds like a quick way to get sued and generate a TON of negative publicity for the re-branded tire...
Exactly. Might be able to fool people on the photos and film but somebody walking around the pits will notice and call you out.
3/28/2022 11:40am
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJsM-jJQrqc&ab_channel=VitalMTB
If you stop the video at the 5:16 mark you can see they did some grinding on Reece's bike near the idler. Harrisoon is using a different chainstay altogether as we have seen previously. Neko also talked about the chain rubbing on the frame at bottom out on his Trek copy (he copied the idler layout).
On a different topic, it looks like everyone on the new supreme is running an air shock.
1
chriskief
Posts
720
Joined
4/15/2017
Location
New York, NY US
3/28/2022 12:03pm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJsM-jJQrqc&ab_channel=VitalMTB If you stop the video at the 5:16 mark you can see they did some grinding on Reece's bike near the idler. Harrisoon is using...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJsM-jJQrqc&ab_channel=VitalMTB
If you stop the video at the 5:16 mark you can see they did some grinding on Reece's bike near the idler. Harrisoon is using a different chainstay altogether as we have seen previously. Neko also talked about the chain rubbing on the frame at bottom out on his Trek copy (he copied the idler layout).
On a different topic, it looks like everyone on the new supreme is running an air shock.
Not everyone...

8
Primoz
Posts
4519
Joined
8/1/2009
Location
SI
3/28/2022 12:13pm
Primoz wrote:
Which part is BS?
Fred_Pop wrote:
Longer wheelbase makes it easier to weight front and back and makes it easier to feel when one or the other is about to lose traction...
Longer wheelbase makes it easier to weight front and back and makes it easier to feel when one or the other is about to lose traction.
Longer reach does make it easier for "lesser" riders to go faster due to the added stability but it does the same for "pro" riders.
Tighter stuff is fine so you as you change riding style/technique. Obviously, if you try to ride a longer bike off the back like a short bike it won't work.
A longer wheelbase makes it harder to weight each wheel as it will require more of a movement to reach the same effect than on a shorter wheelbase.

I don't exactly understand if you meant that the "Longer wheelbase makes it easier to weight front and back and makes it easier to feel when one or the other is about to lose traction." is the BS part or that you're claiming that. If it's the BS part, I never said that, I said the opposite, the same as I said in the beginning of this post. And that what makes a longer reach bike more forgiving and easier to ride.

I really think you misread something in my post as you were mostly saying similar things to what I said, that's why I replied only with the 'which part is BS', hoping you'd reread my post.

As for longer bikes being slower in the tight stuff, 100 % yes. Try riding some switchbacks. The longer the bike is, the more you need to do front pivots. And I've had cases where it felt the front wheel will fold under me on fairly tight switchback berms as the angle of attack of the front wheel was getting to be too big.

And look at me go, off-topic yet again.
8
1
dolface
Posts
1656
Joined
10/26/2015
Location
CA US
3/28/2022 3:27pm
Primoz wrote:
They generate a ton of publicity for even running sharpie tyres, let alone faking the brand...

@dolface have you tried Assegais?
Yep! One of my favorite tires...
DirkT
Posts
28
Joined
3/5/2021
Location
CA
3/28/2022 4:03pm
dolface wrote:
Re-branding a tire with another brands hot-patch sounds like a quick way to get sued and generate a TON of negative publicity for the re-branded tire...
nskerb wrote:
I guess I'm not arguing that it would or wouldn't cause a lawsuit. But do you think KHS paid trek some type of royalty or whatever...
I guess I'm not arguing that it would or wouldn't cause a lawsuit. But do you think KHS paid trek some type of royalty or whatever to slap their brand over session frames a few years ago? More or less the same thing. Same with all the times Intense or Giant frames were ran by everybody back in the day right?
The thing I was thinking is that if they had a glued on or ironed on patch I think it would definitely not get noticed.
Not a lawyer, but once you pay money for an item, the manufacturer loses the rights to what you do with that item. Scratch the logo out...put your own logo on it...throw it in an old drum and light it on fire. You paid for it, you do what you like.

Where you can get in trouble is if you start infringing on trademarks. A solid example...Deadmau5 and the Purrari. Ferrari couldn't do anything about him painting it up like an ice cream cone, but they had a potential case with him creating his own fake Ferrari logos.
https://www.stites.com/resources/trademarkology/deadmau5-gets-in-tradem…

So...If you took your DHF's and created a fake "Maxxes Moanin' DHEFF" logo on it...you might get sued. Slap a Michelin logo on it and I don't think Maxxis could do anything. Buy 'em in bulk, do the same and try to sell them in a store might be a different issue. But maybe not?

There was a case in Vancouver a few years ago. The guy used to drive down to Bellingham/Seattle every week, load up his car with Trader Joe's merch, and come back to Vancouver and sell it at his store called "Pirate Joes". In the end, he lost, but it was mostly just down to Trader Joes having deeper pockets. They couldn't do anything to stop him from re-selling their stuff, but they had a potential case on trademark for the name.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirate_Joe%27s

I promised a Trade Joe's boycott after this...but I couldn't hold myself to it.
3
1
Onawalk
Posts
344
Joined
7/5/2021
Location
CA
3/28/2022 5:52pm
Primoz wrote:
Which part is BS?
Fred_Pop wrote:
Longer wheelbase makes it easier to weight front and back and makes it easier to feel when one or the other is about to lose traction...
Longer wheelbase makes it easier to weight front and back and makes it easier to feel when one or the other is about to lose traction.
Longer reach does make it easier for "lesser" riders to go faster due to the added stability but it does the same for "pro" riders.
Tighter stuff is fine so you as you change riding style/technique. Obviously, if you try to ride a longer bike off the back like a short bike it won't work.
Primoz wrote:
A longer wheelbase makes it harder to weight each wheel as it will require more of a movement to reach the same effect than on a...
A longer wheelbase makes it harder to weight each wheel as it will require more of a movement to reach the same effect than on a shorter wheelbase.

I don't exactly understand if you meant that the "Longer wheelbase makes it easier to weight front and back and makes it easier to feel when one or the other is about to lose traction." is the BS part or that you're claiming that. If it's the BS part, I never said that, I said the opposite, the same as I said in the beginning of this post. And that what makes a longer reach bike more forgiving and easier to ride.

I really think you misread something in my post as you were mostly saying similar things to what I said, that's why I replied only with the 'which part is BS', hoping you'd reread my post.

As for longer bikes being slower in the tight stuff, 100 % yes. Try riding some switchbacks. The longer the bike is, the more you need to do front pivots. And I've had cases where it felt the front wheel will fold under me on fairly tight switchback berms as the angle of attack of the front wheel was getting to be too big.

And look at me go, off-topic yet again.
Gents,
Wonder if you’re interested in moving this pissing match to another thread, I couldn’t care less about your thoughts on which you believe is easier or harder to ride. Keep your feelings somewhere else please.

I am interested in more info on that updated Boxxxer I keep seeing…you know, new tech and such

Also, the updated Zeb, buttercups and all that, when will we see those forks on bikes?
Got a 22 Spire coming, and it would be cool if it was the the newest and greatest gadget
22
3
NateMob
Posts
20
Joined
3/18/2020
Location
Ogden, UT US
3/28/2022 6:13pm
Onawalk wrote:
Gents, Wonder if you’re interested in moving this pissing match to another thread, I couldn’t care less about your thoughts on which you believe is easier...
Gents,
Wonder if you’re interested in moving this pissing match to another thread, I couldn’t care less about your thoughts on which you believe is easier or harder to ride. Keep your feelings somewhere else please.

I am interested in more info on that updated Boxxxer I keep seeing…you know, new tech and such

Also, the updated Zeb, buttercups and all that, when will we see those forks on bikes?
Got a 22 Spire coming, and it would be cool if it was the the newest and greatest gadget
This, a hundred percent.

I'd like to know more about Magnus Manson running his Dreadnaught in Lourdes with 180mm of rear travel. Has anyone actually confirmed that the Cascade link for the Druid also works on the enduro sled to up the travel?
4
1
3/28/2022 7:11pm
Onawalk wrote:
Gents, Wonder if you’re interested in moving this pissing match to another thread, I couldn’t care less about your thoughts on which you believe is easier...
Gents,
Wonder if you’re interested in moving this pissing match to another thread, I couldn’t care less about your thoughts on which you believe is easier or harder to ride. Keep your feelings somewhere else please.

I am interested in more info on that updated Boxxxer I keep seeing…you know, new tech and such

Also, the updated Zeb, buttercups and all that, when will we see those forks on bikes?
Got a 22 Spire coming, and it would be cool if it was the the newest and greatest gadget
NateMob wrote:
This, a hundred percent. I'd like to know more about Magnus Manson running his Dreadnaught in Lourdes with 180mm of rear travel. Has anyone actually confirmed...
This, a hundred percent.

I'd like to know more about Magnus Manson running his Dreadnaught in Lourdes with 180mm of rear travel. Has anyone actually confirmed that the Cascade link for the Druid also works on the enduro sled to up the travel?
It is not a 3rd party link. It is a link from Forbidden themselves. Rumour has it that it only works on the L and XL, that is why Connors bike is still 154.
8
3/28/2022 7:20pm
@sspomer @bigbird https://www.pinkbike.com/news/bike-check-finn-iles-custom-specialized-demo-leogang-world-cup-2021.html I played around on linkage a bit to see the differences in the link. In last years bike check, linked, they comment on...
@sspomer @bigbird

https://www.pinkbike.com/news/bike-check-finn-iles-custom-specialized-d…

I played around on linkage a bit to see the differences in the link. In last years bike check, linked, they comment on it being more progressive. While this is true, it's done in a slightly different way than you'd normally see. Generally, when the comment of "more progressive" is made, the starting leverage rate is higher, and the ending leverage rate is generally the same, or slightly lower. This is the case with most of Cascade's linkages. This requires a higher spring rate to actually make more force at the end of travel.
So, in the case of Finn's linkage, the entire rate comes down. Instead of starting around 3.3 and dropping to 2.1ish. His is starting closer to 3 and dropping below 2 at the end of stroke. This makes more end of stroke force with the same spring rate, but can make the top of the travel feel a bit less supple, as you have less leverage overcoming things such as friction. A starting rate of 3 is generally high enough to feel smooth with a coil shock though. Cheers.
It also makes the total amount of travel decrease by about 15mm if it does go from 3 to 2.1. This wouldn't increase bottom out resistance in any way over the 3.3-2.1 set up. It would actually decrease it if an identical amount of sag was used. If less sag then could be equal. Just kind of would make it ride like a smaller bike, which may very well be the purpose. Spring rate, shock stroke, and amount of damping is all that dictates bottom out resistance. Leverage curve just makes it feel a certain way as it uses the shock stroke. I would imagine they know exactly what spring rate they need to have sufficient bottom out resistance and are tuning leverage curve to make that spring feel the way they want at the wheel.
13
3/28/2022 9:06pm
NateMob wrote:
This, a hundred percent. I'd like to know more about Magnus Manson running his Dreadnaught in Lourdes with 180mm of rear travel. Has anyone actually confirmed...
This, a hundred percent.

I'd like to know more about Magnus Manson running his Dreadnaught in Lourdes with 180mm of rear travel. Has anyone actually confirmed that the Cascade link for the Druid also works on the enduro sled to up the travel?
The stock Dreadnought's leverage rate is already below 2.0 and falling rapidly at the end of the 154mm travel (see picture), so in order to get an extra 25mm of travel out of it there's definitely a custom link, otherwise the shock stroke would need to be impossibly long. I doubt the Druid link would work, as that's meant for an entirely different shock stroke, travel, and leverage curve.

3
3/28/2022 9:32pm
The stock Dreadnought's leverage rate is already below 2.0 and falling rapidly at the end of the 154mm travel (see picture), so in order to get...
The stock Dreadnought's leverage rate is already below 2.0 and falling rapidly at the end of the 154mm travel (see picture), so in order to get an extra 25mm of travel out of it there's definitely a custom link, otherwise the shock stroke would need to be impossibly long. I doubt the Druid link would work, as that's meant for an entirely different shock stroke, travel, and leverage curve.

The only way you'd be able to do it is with a longer eye to eye shock, but no way you'd be able to get a 225x75 on it. So yeah it has to be through the linkages. Would not be surprised if it can only be done on larger frames since the swing arm has a less limited range of motion on them.

The Druid and Dreadnought do actually use the same link. If you look through parts lists you can find it. We don't market the link for both because it's currently not compatible with half coil shocks you can get as a stock option on the dreadnought frame only.
11
1
Primoz
Posts
4519
Joined
8/1/2009
Location
SI
3/28/2022 10:39pm
@Onawalk it was mentioned in this topic the embargo lifts in May with the Boxxer embargo lifting in March 2023. The Zeb/Lyrik/Pike combo will very likely be a MY23 product line (as with the Ultimate series of the Super Deluxe and Pike/Lyrik in spring 2019, which were MY20), so it's unlikely you will see it on this years bikes.
3
Roots_rider
Posts
85
Joined
5/8/2010
Location
Jackson, WY US
3/28/2022 10:50pm
@sspomer @bigbird https://www.pinkbike.com/news/bike-check-finn-iles-custom-specialized-demo-leogang-world-cup-2021.html I played around on linkage a bit to see the differences in the link. In last years bike check, linked, they comment on...
@sspomer @bigbird

https://www.pinkbike.com/news/bike-check-finn-iles-custom-specialized-d…

I played around on linkage a bit to see the differences in the link. In last years bike check, linked, they comment on it being more progressive. While this is true, it's done in a slightly different way than you'd normally see. Generally, when the comment of "more progressive" is made, the starting leverage rate is higher, and the ending leverage rate is generally the same, or slightly lower. This is the case with most of Cascade's linkages. This requires a higher spring rate to actually make more force at the end of travel.
So, in the case of Finn's linkage, the entire rate comes down. Instead of starting around 3.3 and dropping to 2.1ish. His is starting closer to 3 and dropping below 2 at the end of stroke. This makes more end of stroke force with the same spring rate, but can make the top of the travel feel a bit less supple, as you have less leverage overcoming things such as friction. A starting rate of 3 is generally high enough to feel smooth with a coil shock though. Cheers.
It also makes the total amount of travel decrease by about 15mm if it does go from 3 to 2.1. This wouldn't increase bottom out resistance...
It also makes the total amount of travel decrease by about 15mm if it does go from 3 to 2.1. This wouldn't increase bottom out resistance in any way over the 3.3-2.1 set up. It would actually decrease it if an identical amount of sag was used. If less sag then could be equal. Just kind of would make it ride like a smaller bike, which may very well be the purpose. Spring rate, shock stroke, and amount of damping is all that dictates bottom out resistance. Leverage curve just makes it feel a certain way as it uses the shock stroke. I would imagine they know exactly what spring rate they need to have sufficient bottom out resistance and are tuning leverage curve to make that spring feel the way they want at the wheel.
Not sure exactly if, or what, you are disputing that I said. About half of your comment agrees with what I typed, and the other half ignores it.
So, as I stated, Finn’s bike is more progressive, while using a lower leverage rate. As I said, “below 2”. Not 2.1, as 3/2.1 would be less progressive. I’m guessing Loic’s bike is in the low to mid 30% range. 3.3/2.1 is 36.5%, I’m speculating that’s on the upper end, but without having the bikes in front of me with a good way of measuring, I can’t tell 100%. I also can’t tell if they have different chainstay lengths, or if one has a custom shock other than what appears to be a stock 225/75, (although there’s no indication to assume that’s not what they’re both using). What I can tell by obvious visual difference in the design, and drawing out Finn vs Loic’s bikes, is that Finn’s bike is more progressive. Albeit at a lower overall leverage rate. 3/1.8 is 40%, although I’d guess he’s in the mid to upper 30 range. 40 is hitting the more extreme side of things. And yes, Finn probably has less travel, I’m gonna say 6-8mm, putting him in mid 190’s, while Loic is prob around 200 or slightly over. I didn’t feel the travel difference was worth bringing up as most brands already use these numbers more for marketing, and they are a bit arbitrary.
How many bikes claim 160mm travel, but actually make exactly that? High 150s to low 160s can all be claimed this way. While brands such as Raaw use different linkages to drop the overall leverage rate for larger riders, while increasing shock stroke to maintain same travel numbers, but decrease the spring rate necessary to support the heavier riders.

So back to the original topic. Finn’s bike with a 480lb spring (see video), is going to make more force at bottom out than Loic’s bike, if they are running the same spring rate. While Loic’s bike would sag deeper with the same weight rider on each bike, and again same spring.
I’m assuming this is why on your website you guys generally suggest running a firmer spring than stock? With most your links, same spring rate would result in deeper sag, and no additional bottom out force (for links that don’t drop lower than stock at end of travel).
Damping is unnecessary to talk about in the variation of these links, as it’s not something we can measure by looking at the pivot points, and I don’t speak Ohlins race code. Damping is also not going to change the force applied to the wheel based off of travel used in this discussion. We are not discussing the speed at which they reach bottom out or return to top of travel, although I’ll indulge @JCL and go into that briefly. Damping is a measure of velocity/force while spring is travel/force and is why we speak in terms of damping as low speed/high speed. In the realm of momentary impacts on a race track, damping is important in discussing travel used. In discussing the differences of these linkages, force applied to the rear wheel will reach a certain amount of travel regardless of time passed, based solely off spring rates. One will just get there more quickly than the other, which is irrelevant to what we can visually discern.

Now for the off the rails speculations. If Finn’s bike is making more bottom out force, I’d assume his tune includes more high speed rebound. This would appear to be visible by Loic’s scary front wheel ride, the moment I’m assuming @JCL is referring to. He appeared to be bucked forward out of the hole before the rock, as his rear suspension unloaded, indicating a potentially faster end of stroke rebound velocity. Or he was simply just unweighting the rear tire, moving his weight forward at a bit less than ideal time, causing the near OTB moment. Again, all more speculation, but hopefully some clarity as well.
5
2
3/29/2022 3:55am Edited Date/Time 3/29/2022 4:06am
Onawalk wrote:
Gents, Wonder if you’re interested in moving this pissing match to another thread, I couldn’t care less about your thoughts on which you believe is easier...
Gents,
Wonder if you’re interested in moving this pissing match to another thread, I couldn’t care less about your thoughts on which you believe is easier or harder to ride. Keep your feelings somewhere else please.

I am interested in more info on that updated Boxxxer I keep seeing…you know, new tech and such

Also, the updated Zeb, buttercups and all that, when will we see those forks on bikes?
Got a 22 Spire coming, and it would be cool if it was the the newest and greatest gadget
I'll copy my post from a few pages back as it seems to have gone under the radar

"The Zeb, Lyrik, and Pike will all get refreshed in line with the the same chassis as the ones that came out with flight attendant. IE bleed valves, buttercups, new lowers castings. The new 38 mm Boxxer was marked as embargoed until March 2023, can't believe that though as in the spy shots it looks production ready, plus the first WC is just around the corner"

The new signature lyrik colour is this army green sort of colour and it doesn't look good 😆
The new shocks with HBO and HSC adjustment are also due for launch in May

Also they might be appearing on new bikes as they have apparently been available to order for OEM for a little while now
10
3/29/2022 4:12am
Charger 3 will be using spring backed IFP like in the patent documents.
New air spring for ZEB will be compatible with older chassis.
8
3/29/2022 9:06am


Something new from Guerilla Gravity, but still a single crown bike. Is it just a new colourway for Barelli or is it a new bike?
1
3/29/2022 9:48am
Not sure exactly if, or what, you are disputing that I said. About half of your comment agrees with what I typed, and the other half...
Not sure exactly if, or what, you are disputing that I said. About half of your comment agrees with what I typed, and the other half ignores it.
So, as I stated, Finn’s bike is more progressive, while using a lower leverage rate. As I said, “below 2”. Not 2.1, as 3/2.1 would be less progressive. I’m guessing Loic’s bike is in the low to mid 30% range. 3.3/2.1 is 36.5%, I’m speculating that’s on the upper end, but without having the bikes in front of me with a good way of measuring, I can’t tell 100%. I also can’t tell if they have different chainstay lengths, or if one has a custom shock other than what appears to be a stock 225/75, (although there’s no indication to assume that’s not what they’re both using). What I can tell by obvious visual difference in the design, and drawing out Finn vs Loic’s bikes, is that Finn’s bike is more progressive. Albeit at a lower overall leverage rate. 3/1.8 is 40%, although I’d guess he’s in the mid to upper 30 range. 40 is hitting the more extreme side of things. And yes, Finn probably has less travel, I’m gonna say 6-8mm, putting him in mid 190’s, while Loic is prob around 200 or slightly over. I didn’t feel the travel difference was worth bringing up as most brands already use these numbers more for marketing, and they are a bit arbitrary.
How many bikes claim 160mm travel, but actually make exactly that? High 150s to low 160s can all be claimed this way. While brands such as Raaw use different linkages to drop the overall leverage rate for larger riders, while increasing shock stroke to maintain same travel numbers, but decrease the spring rate necessary to support the heavier riders.

So back to the original topic. Finn’s bike with a 480lb spring (see video), is going to make more force at bottom out than Loic’s bike, if they are running the same spring rate. While Loic’s bike would sag deeper with the same weight rider on each bike, and again same spring.
I’m assuming this is why on your website you guys generally suggest running a firmer spring than stock? With most your links, same spring rate would result in deeper sag, and no additional bottom out force (for links that don’t drop lower than stock at end of travel).
Damping is unnecessary to talk about in the variation of these links, as it’s not something we can measure by looking at the pivot points, and I don’t speak Ohlins race code. Damping is also not going to change the force applied to the wheel based off of travel used in this discussion. We are not discussing the speed at which they reach bottom out or return to top of travel, although I’ll indulge @JCL and go into that briefly. Damping is a measure of velocity/force while spring is travel/force and is why we speak in terms of damping as low speed/high speed. In the realm of momentary impacts on a race track, damping is important in discussing travel used. In discussing the differences of these linkages, force applied to the rear wheel will reach a certain amount of travel regardless of time passed, based solely off spring rates. One will just get there more quickly than the other, which is irrelevant to what we can visually discern.

Now for the off the rails speculations. If Finn’s bike is making more bottom out force, I’d assume his tune includes more high speed rebound. This would appear to be visible by Loic’s scary front wheel ride, the moment I’m assuming @JCL is referring to. He appeared to be bucked forward out of the hole before the rock, as his rear suspension unloaded, indicating a potentially faster end of stroke rebound velocity. Or he was simply just unweighting the rear tire, moving his weight forward at a bit less than ideal time, causing the near OTB moment. Again, all more speculation, but hopefully some clarity as well.
It's a fairly safe assumption that it's a 75mm stroke. Ohlins doesn't make a longer stroke trunnion shock and 75 is sufficiently long that there wouldn't be a huge driver to do custom shock bodies just for that. So there's either a significant travel difference or the leverage for Finn's bike is a little higher. 3-1.8 would put it at 180. +/- 5mm is not especially significant. I've run across bikes that are that far off from stated travel and you wouldn't be able to tell just from riding it. 20mm is a much different story. That would lend itself to the idea that maybe 180mm bikes are good on certain courses since the long travel Dreadnoughts seemed to fair well.

Shock stroke and spring rate are the primary factors when comparing bottom out resistance between two linkage systems. Damping can largely be ignored because it can be set to whatever you want, but it's an important part of the bottom out resistance on a whole. I can't tell if you think force at bottom of travel is bottom out resistance or not. Force at bottom of travel only tells you the amount of support that is offered at that point, which is different from bottom out resistance. If you look only at force at bottom of travel it disregards all the work the shock does between it's starting point and there to absorb an impact. Total bottom out resistance varies by impact and is a sum of the potential energy the spring can store and the amount of work the damper does, which is the bit that varies by impact. With all our links, or any link on any bike with the same shock stroke, technically the thing that increases bottom out resistance is an increase in spring rate/pressure and not the link. Leverage ratio has just about nothing to do with bottom out resistance because it's a conservation of energy equation and the linkage system absorbs no energy. The link is about making that increase actually feel good to ride. You could get the exact same bottom out resistance by slapping the same heavier spring on with the stock link, but you'd be pretty over-sprung and it would track like crap. For example, at my weight on the Nomad 4 the recommended spring rate with the stock link is 400lbs. I can bottom out that set up in the parking lot so it doesn't work on the trail at all. Swapped to a 500lb spring which fixed that, but it no longer rode that well. Then made a link that brought the sag back to around 30% and that was fixed. A common misconception that is perpetuated frequently in bike reviews is that more progressive linkages allow you to run a softer spring, whereas it's actually the exact opposite.

If you factor in damping you can make any low spring rate have a high bottom out resistance by throwing a stiffer damping tune at it, but there is no magic stiff damping tune that doesn't adversely impact how the shock responds to high frequency impacts. With high frequency impacts the shock speed is very high for a very small duration of time so a stiff damping tune results in spikes in damping force that can prevent the shock from moving significant amounts. This is why short stroke coil shocks aren't worth the while usually. To make up for the loss in bottom out resistance due to the stroke being shorter they have to make up for it with very stiff damping tunes which often negates some of the primary benefits of a coil shock.
7
1
Post a reply to: MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation

This forum thread has been locked.

The Latest