Wasn't the original DW link design or patent positioned in such a way where the lower link did not change direction of rotation? I seem to...
Wasn't the original DW link design or patent positioned in such a way where the lower link did not change direction of rotation? I seem to remember that the IC is supposed to be on the lower link at full compression, though that is still possible with a change of rotating direction. But I think recent designs have gotten more aggressive in the amount the lower link rotates backwards?
But this is very similar to what Switch Infintiy and Sixfinity do - extend the chain length for antisquat early in the travel, make it shorter deep in the travel to prevent pedal kickback.
The best explanation of SI I've heard (or visualised) is that it's a "DW"/VPP/Dual link design, where the bottom link is infinitely long (since it can't rotate at all). Which since it can't rotate, forces that oscillation in movement through the travel of the sliding part.
So incredibly true. I’m all for the excitement of tinkering and bracketing to find out what works best for me but there is definitely a point...
So incredibly true. I’m all for the excitement of tinkering and bracketing to find out what works best for me but there is definitely a point where focusing on being a better rider will make you way faster than focusing on the mm’s of a frame or what new incremental changes are coming to X part.
What sucks is when the opinions of people who have never ridden the thing they have an opinion on drive trends. Just look at the Pinkbike comments or even this forum to find self proclaimed engineers who apparently know what’s best vs the company that invested thousands of R&D to make the final product that you’re immediately sh*tting on the day it’s released. Click on their profile of these “experts” and you’ll find that they’re most often 35-50 yr old dads who think that the bike is holding them back.
Puzzling is cool but people need to get outside more.
Just entertain the thought that maybe, just maybe, the bike is really holding the 35-50 y/o dads back, but in a different way than you might...
Just entertain the thought that maybe, just maybe, the bike is really holding the 35-50 y/o dads back, but in a different way than you might think. Most bikes are designed and developed for and with 25 +/- y/o, fit, incredibly skilled pro riders. That is not me and most others on here are not on that level as well. So that is why trying to emulate a setup that pro riders use and the bike industry sells as the cool new stuff to have might in reality be holding back the average rider. I am not saying this is always the case, there are good examples of improvements and products that the average Joe can benefit from. As you wrote, trying out what works best for you is the way to go. However, that also means that sometimes you can already see from the prodcut announcement that this product most likely will not be beneficial for the average rider, or, in the worst case, even be detrimental for their riding experience. So why not voice this opinion in the comments on forums that are meant to exchange opinions about mountain bike-related topics?
Road cycling has started to figure this out; most people won't be comfortable on a the bike a world tour rider rides so they've started offering bikes for normal (i.e. not world tour) riders.
So Yeti is a DW (suspension link designed by Dave Weagle) historical DW bikes don’t really change such as Ibis, Yeti, Evil. But recent years that...
So Yeti is a DW (suspension link designed by Dave Weagle) historical DW bikes don’t really change such as Ibis, Yeti, Evil. But recent years that hasn’t been 100% true. With Pivot changing their whole line up to a new platform with some of the same DW attributes. Or Devinci changing all their bikes to all 4 bar horst link.
TL;DR: maybe, but I wouldn’t count on it. I definitely wouldn’t count on it being anything other than a DWish platform.
So Yeti is a DW (suspension link designed by Dave Weagle) historical DW bikes don’t really change such as Ibis, Yeti, Evil. But recent years that...
So Yeti is a DW (suspension link designed by Dave Weagle) historical DW bikes don’t really change such as Ibis, Yeti, Evil. But recent years that hasn’t been 100% true. With Pivot changing their whole line up to a new platform with some of the same DW attributes. Or Devinci changing all their bikes to all 4 bar horst link.
TL;DR: maybe, but I wouldn’t count on it. I definitely wouldn’t count on it being anything other than a DWish platform.
Yeti is not and never has been DW. They did all sorts of different things (single pivots, rails, etc.) then went for the bearing executed Switch...
Yeti is not and never has been DW. They did all sorts of different things (single pivots, rails, etc.) then went for the bearing executed Switch suspension, developed further to Switch Infinity which uses links. The e-bike and the DH bike use a 6-bar design that is not dissimilar to Switch Infinity in characteristics, called Sixfinity. The XC bike is a single pivot flex stay, as is normal for XC bikes these days... Looks like the suspension system is not worth as much as less weight is.
Devinci is Split Pivot (not Horst) like it has been for... How long now? Since Split Pivot has been made public by Dawe I guess.
Speaking of Sixfinity, this is what Yeti has at the bottom of the page:
"A TRUE SIX-BAR DESIGN. FRACTIONS OF A MILLIMETER DIFFERENCE IN THE LINKAGE LENGTHS AND PIVOT PLACEMENT IMPACTS ANTI-SQUAT AND ANTI-RISE CHARACTERISTICS. IT’S INCREDIBLY COMPLEX. IT TOOK A HALF DECADE TO REFINE THE SYSTEM. UNLIKE MANY OTHER “SIX-BAR DESIGNS” SIXFINITY USES ALL SIX LINKAGES TO CONTROL THE WHEEL PATH."
I fully believe fractions of a millimeter make a difference, but... I do wonder if companies with such sensitive suspension systems map out the behaviour through the tolerance range prescribed with the parts drawings. If a fraction of a millimeter influences characteristics, realistically with a (for example) +/-0,1 mm tolerance on centre to centre distances within a link or a frame you could have two completely different bikes in feel sitting next to each other in the shop painted and equipped to be 'the same bike'.
All of these bikes were built on the back of the DW/Switch link.
But I see what you're saying. I could have phrased it better mb.
Wasn't the original DW link design or patent positioned in such a way where the lower link did not change direction of rotation? I seem to...
Wasn't the original DW link design or patent positioned in such a way where the lower link did not change direction of rotation? I seem to remember that the IC is supposed to be on the lower link at full compression, though that is still possible with a change of rotating direction. But I think recent designs have gotten more aggressive in the amount the lower link rotates backwards?
But this is very similar to what Switch Infintiy and Sixfinity do - extend the chain length for antisquat early in the travel, make it shorter deep in the travel to prevent pedal kickback.
The best explanation of SI I've heard (or visualised) is that it's a "DW"/VPP/Dual link design, where the bottom link is infinitely long (since it can't...
The best explanation of SI I've heard (or visualised) is that it's a "DW"/VPP/Dual link design, where the bottom link is infinitely long (since it can't rotate at all). Which since it can't rotate, forces that oscillation in movement through the travel of the sliding part.
That's exactly how sliders are evaluated kinematically, draw a perpendicular (infinitely long) line through the pivot on the slider carrier and see where it intersect with the line on the other link. That's how you get the IC.
It's literally like having an infinitely long link.
I wouldn’t doubt it. Flight attendant would make a certain amount of sense on a DH course.
The main problem with electronic suspension in a human-powered vehicle is deterministic vs intelligent suspension; it may seem counter intuitive at first, but intelligent suspension, that makes "decisions" on its own, is actually worse for biking. If there was an electronic fork that adjusted the compression/rebound based on depth of travel, or shaft speed, that would be excellent. Position-sensitive damping is probably easier with electronics than a bunch of bypass ports, sleeves, and tubes. But this is "deterministic", given a set of conditions, it will always give the same output. This allows the rider to adjust the suspension, just like turning a knob, and then know how its going to react. "Intelligent" suspension, like what Fox and RS have, I think makes riding worse. The electronics is trying to decide when you're pedaling or not- no bueno. You don't know what the suspension is going to do in a given situation. Riding a bike is not something done with your brain, its done in your brain stem with reflexes. If you don't know in your brain stem what will happen when you do this or that, you're going to ride slower. A good analogy is if you had two people riding a bike at once, each person with one hand on one side of the handlebars. No bueno.
Man its kind of sad that this is the current era of mountain biking tech and innovation. Colors, small measurements, and the same tread pattern repeated on tires. I miss the 2012-2017 era. Where enduro was just beginning and 29ers on big bikes were becoming a thing. Pros doing sometimes absurd builds… oh and cheaper bikes. Good times.
Man its kind of sad that this is the current era of mountain biking tech and innovation. Colors, small measurements, and the same tread pattern repeated...
Man its kind of sad that this is the current era of mountain biking tech and innovation. Colors, small measurements, and the same tread pattern repeated on tires. I miss the 2012-2017 era. Where enduro was just beginning and 29ers on big bikes were becoming a thing. Pros doing sometimes absurd builds… oh and cheaper bikes. Good times.
Couldn't agree more. In 2014 I bought into the hype and sold my 26" for an Enduro 29er, only for it to have a 67.5 degree HTA and ride like an XC bike on the downhill. I OTB'ed for the first month more than the previous 3 years until I adjusted my technique.
Fast forward a few years, and by 2019 it was hard to buy a bike that had crap geo, and now all bikes have the same geo haha. All suspension is pretty good, all brakes are pretty good, and all high end builds are neon-pastel frame colors so everyone can see from a helicopter how much you spent on your bike.
I feel like the next innovations aren't going to be in performance, per-se, but rather in manufacturing techniques (still mourning that GG bit the dust)
Man its kind of sad that this is the current era of mountain biking tech and innovation. Colors, small measurements, and the same tread pattern repeated...
Man its kind of sad that this is the current era of mountain biking tech and innovation. Colors, small measurements, and the same tread pattern repeated on tires. I miss the 2012-2017 era. Where enduro was just beginning and 29ers on big bikes were becoming a thing. Pros doing sometimes absurd builds… oh and cheaper bikes. Good times.
Couldn't agree more. In 2014 I bought into the hype and sold my 26" for an Enduro 29er, only for it to have a 67.5 degree...
Couldn't agree more. In 2014 I bought into the hype and sold my 26" for an Enduro 29er, only for it to have a 67.5 degree HTA and ride like an XC bike on the downhill. I OTB'ed for the first month more than the previous 3 years until I adjusted my technique.
Fast forward a few years, and by 2019 it was hard to buy a bike that had crap geo, and now all bikes have the same geo haha. All suspension is pretty good, all brakes are pretty good, and all high end builds are neon-pastel frame colors so everyone can see from a helicopter how much you spent on your bike.
I feel like the next innovations aren't going to be in performance, per-se, but rather in manufacturing techniques (still mourning that GG bit the dust)
Would be nice to see the potential of carbon (lighter weights, engineered flex etc.) materialize; 32lbs for a trail bike is not the future we were promised...
Man its kind of sad that this is the current era of mountain biking tech and innovation. Colors, small measurements, and the same tread pattern repeated...
Man its kind of sad that this is the current era of mountain biking tech and innovation. Colors, small measurements, and the same tread pattern repeated on tires. I miss the 2012-2017 era. Where enduro was just beginning and 29ers on big bikes were becoming a thing. Pros doing sometimes absurd builds… oh and cheaper bikes. Good times.
Couldn't agree more. In 2014 I bought into the hype and sold my 26" for an Enduro 29er, only for it to have a 67.5 degree...
Couldn't agree more. In 2014 I bought into the hype and sold my 26" for an Enduro 29er, only for it to have a 67.5 degree HTA and ride like an XC bike on the downhill. I OTB'ed for the first month more than the previous 3 years until I adjusted my technique.
Fast forward a few years, and by 2019 it was hard to buy a bike that had crap geo, and now all bikes have the same geo haha. All suspension is pretty good, all brakes are pretty good, and all high end builds are neon-pastel frame colors so everyone can see from a helicopter how much you spent on your bike.
I feel like the next innovations aren't going to be in performance, per-se, but rather in manufacturing techniques (still mourning that GG bit the dust)
Would be nice to see the potential of carbon (lighter weights, engineered flex etc.) materialize; 32lbs for a trail bike is not the future we were...
Would be nice to see the potential of carbon (lighter weights, engineered flex etc.) materialize; 32lbs for a trail bike is not the future we were promised...
Band do it too much. Enough with the “flex pivot” bs.
Couldn't agree more. In 2014 I bought into the hype and sold my 26" for an Enduro 29er, only for it to have a 67.5 degree...
Couldn't agree more. In 2014 I bought into the hype and sold my 26" for an Enduro 29er, only for it to have a 67.5 degree HTA and ride like an XC bike on the downhill. I OTB'ed for the first month more than the previous 3 years until I adjusted my technique.
Fast forward a few years, and by 2019 it was hard to buy a bike that had crap geo, and now all bikes have the same geo haha. All suspension is pretty good, all brakes are pretty good, and all high end builds are neon-pastel frame colors so everyone can see from a helicopter how much you spent on your bike.
I feel like the next innovations aren't going to be in performance, per-se, but rather in manufacturing techniques (still mourning that GG bit the dust)
Would be nice to see the potential of carbon (lighter weights, engineered flex etc.) materialize; 32lbs for a trail bike is not the future we were...
Would be nice to see the potential of carbon (lighter weights, engineered flex etc.) materialize; 32lbs for a trail bike is not the future we were promised...
Would be nice to see the potential of carbon (lighter weights, engineered flex etc.) materialize; 32lbs for a trail bike is not the future we were...
Would be nice to see the potential of carbon (lighter weights, engineered flex etc.) materialize; 32lbs for a trail bike is not the future we were promised...
Engineered flex encompasses a lot more than flex pivots my dude.
Ya, with how powerful engineered carbon layup can be, with directional flex it allows, I'm shocked it isn't used more. Go ride a steel bike like Starling, and while not a perfect bike, on loose, natural, and/or off camber turns, the traction is amazing (only issue for me is that they are too flexy for burlier riders, or for longer travel bikes with long AtC forks, as seen on Neko's frames; he loved the comfort and grip of his steel triangle, but too flexy for WC racing). Carbon can give you the best of both worlds.
But back to the topic of next-gen manufacturing- Its frustrating seeing bikes (like the GG) reuse parts across models and frame sizes. I get it, for cost reasons its necessary, but innovation in manufacturing could allow for more custom bikes in the future, like Robot/Atherton. The old Privateer 141 shared the same tubesets as the longer travel original, so its going to be too heavy and too stiff for a shorter travel sibling. The same with sharing tubes & molds across sizes. Yes, there are bean pole tall guys on XLs, but its pretty reliable that larger sizes are going to have heavier riders. Taller riders also benefit from longer chainstays, and while moving the main pivot back on larger sizes is a cool trick to allow the reuse of a rear mold across sizes, you still end up with a rear triangle either overbuilt for lighter riders or underbuilt for heavier ones. Imagine if manufacturing technology progressed to the point where it was cost effective to do custom molds for each part for each size for each model, with the carbon fibers being tuned to provide lateral compliance like a steel frame, but in the appropriate amount for each size.
Man its kind of sad that this is the current era of mountain biking tech and innovation. Colors, small measurements, and the same tread pattern repeated...
Man its kind of sad that this is the current era of mountain biking tech and innovation. Colors, small measurements, and the same tread pattern repeated on tires. I miss the 2012-2017 era. Where enduro was just beginning and 29ers on big bikes were becoming a thing. Pros doing sometimes absurd builds… oh and cheaper bikes. Good times.
Don't be sad. I struggle to wrap my head around inflation too. Sometimes I find it helpful to recalibrate like this:
Adjusted for inflation the MSRP of a 2012 Sworks Stumpjumper FSR would be $2,494.63 more than the MSRP of a 2024 Sworks Stumpjumper FSR.
Adjusted for inflation the MSRP of the most affordable 2012 FSR would be $748.51 more than the MSRP of their most affordable 2024 full suspension.
i.e. prices have actually fallen, over 20%; while bikes have certainly improved, significantly.
There are still big innovations like what I'm doing, or Lal, Trust, or ebikes; and there were always less flashy innovations like improvements to tread patterns. Less flashy doesn't mean without value though, tires these days are much improved since a decade ago.
Man its kind of sad that this is the current era of mountain biking tech and innovation. Colors, small measurements, and the same tread pattern repeated...
Man its kind of sad that this is the current era of mountain biking tech and innovation. Colors, small measurements, and the same tread pattern repeated on tires. I miss the 2012-2017 era. Where enduro was just beginning and 29ers on big bikes were becoming a thing. Pros doing sometimes absurd builds… oh and cheaper bikes. Good times.
Couldn't agree more. In 2014 I bought into the hype and sold my 26" for an Enduro 29er, only for it to have a 67.5 degree...
Couldn't agree more. In 2014 I bought into the hype and sold my 26" for an Enduro 29er, only for it to have a 67.5 degree HTA and ride like an XC bike on the downhill. I OTB'ed for the first month more than the previous 3 years until I adjusted my technique.
Fast forward a few years, and by 2019 it was hard to buy a bike that had crap geo, and now all bikes have the same geo haha. All suspension is pretty good, all brakes are pretty good, and all high end builds are neon-pastel frame colors so everyone can see from a helicopter how much you spent on your bike.
I feel like the next innovations aren't going to be in performance, per-se, but rather in manufacturing techniques (still mourning that GG bit the dust)
Man its kind of sad that this is the current era of mountain biking tech and innovation. Colors, small measurements, and the same tread pattern repeated...
Man its kind of sad that this is the current era of mountain biking tech and innovation. Colors, small measurements, and the same tread pattern repeated on tires. I miss the 2012-2017 era. Where enduro was just beginning and 29ers on big bikes were becoming a thing. Pros doing sometimes absurd builds… oh and cheaper bikes. Good times.
Couldn't agree more. In 2014 I bought into the hype and sold my 26" for an Enduro 29er, only for it to have a 67.5 degree...
Couldn't agree more. In 2014 I bought into the hype and sold my 26" for an Enduro 29er, only for it to have a 67.5 degree HTA and ride like an XC bike on the downhill. I OTB'ed for the first month more than the previous 3 years until I adjusted my technique.
Fast forward a few years, and by 2019 it was hard to buy a bike that had crap geo, and now all bikes have the same geo haha. All suspension is pretty good, all brakes are pretty good, and all high end builds are neon-pastel frame colors so everyone can see from a helicopter how much you spent on your bike.
I feel like the next innovations aren't going to be in performance, per-se, but rather in manufacturing techniques (still mourning that GG bit the dust)
Would be nice to see the potential of carbon (lighter weights, engineered flex etc.) materialize; 32lbs for a trail bike is not the future we were...
Would be nice to see the potential of carbon (lighter weights, engineered flex etc.) materialize; 32lbs for a trail bike is not the future we were promised...
Lowest hanging fruit. Fixing geometry is cheaper than engineering flex and seeing what works and what doesn't. But it's likely these smaller things will be the next development war.
After a torrent of development 10 years ago, we have a period of stability. Getting ready for the next torrent. In the field of same same manufacturers will have to find the new thing to stand out by.
@hamncheez2003 Bird used to have the same tubeset across all their full suspension bikes as well. It's just sound engineering and accounting in this world. You can't really do fully custom aluminium if that requires hydroforming. With carbon footprint it is possible to adapt - you can have a different layup in the same mold. But that is also expensive as it requires additional testing. Plus what about resale value? Integrated seatposts are a pain as you can't sell a bike to someone taller than you for example... You can still cut it, but with custom layup it is what it is. Though if you are catering to a market that doesn't need a new bike every year, that might not be as much of an issue. With geometries and technology not progressing as fast it's completely possible to have the same frame for over 5 years.
The best explanation of SI I've heard (or visualised) is that it's a "DW"/VPP/Dual link design, where the bottom link is infinitely long (since it can't rotate at all). Which since it can't rotate, forces that oscillation in movement through the travel of the sliding part.
Road cycling has started to figure this out; most people won't be comfortable on a the bike a world tour rider rides so they've started offering bikes for normal (i.e. not world tour) riders.
There’s not much you can do to an XC bike and the DH bike isn’t on the market…
But I think you might be right.
All of these bikes were built on the back of the DW/Switch link.
But I see what you're saying. I could have phrased it better mb.
That's exactly how sliders are evaluated kinematically, draw a perpendicular (infinitely long) line through the pivot on the slider carrier and see where it intersect with the line on the other link. That's how you get the IC.
It's literally like having an infinitely long link.
but bro i need every opportunity to announce to everyone at the trailhead how much i spent on my bike
Behold, dentist bike!
The main problem with electronic suspension in a human-powered vehicle is deterministic vs intelligent suspension; it may seem counter intuitive at first, but intelligent suspension, that makes "decisions" on its own, is actually worse for biking. If there was an electronic fork that adjusted the compression/rebound based on depth of travel, or shaft speed, that would be excellent. Position-sensitive damping is probably easier with electronics than a bunch of bypass ports, sleeves, and tubes. But this is "deterministic", given a set of conditions, it will always give the same output. This allows the rider to adjust the suspension, just like turning a knob, and then know how its going to react. "Intelligent" suspension, like what Fox and RS have, I think makes riding worse. The electronics is trying to decide when you're pedaling or not- no bueno. You don't know what the suspension is going to do in a given situation. Riding a bike is not something done with your brain, its done in your brain stem with reflexes. If you don't know in your brain stem what will happen when you do this or that, you're going to ride slower. A good analogy is if you had two people riding a bike at once, each person with one hand on one side of the handlebars. No bueno.
They messed up the Factory Orange color on the frame.
Forks with orange lowers and black lowers are the same cost, so what's your point?
Orange lowers is ugly, thats the point
Just buy the black then.
Don’t sweat though the Kashima lowers will be available very soon
Then…don’t buy it. Wild that some people think this way and are allowed to use the internet lol
Man its kind of sad that this is the current era of mountain biking tech and innovation. Colors, small measurements, and the same tread pattern repeated on tires. I miss the 2012-2017 era. Where enduro was just beginning and 29ers on big bikes were becoming a thing. Pros doing sometimes absurd builds… oh and cheaper bikes. Good times.
Couldn't agree more. In 2014 I bought into the hype and sold my 26" for an Enduro 29er, only for it to have a 67.5 degree HTA and ride like an XC bike on the downhill. I OTB'ed for the first month more than the previous 3 years until I adjusted my technique.
Fast forward a few years, and by 2019 it was hard to buy a bike that had crap geo, and now all bikes have the same geo haha. All suspension is pretty good, all brakes are pretty good, and all high end builds are neon-pastel frame colors so everyone can see from a helicopter how much you spent on your bike.
I feel like the next innovations aren't going to be in performance, per-se, but rather in manufacturing techniques (still mourning that GG bit the dust)
Would be nice to see the potential of carbon (lighter weights, engineered flex etc.) materialize; 32lbs for a trail bike is not the future we were promised...
Lets also get rid of orange helmets, terrible trend. /s
Band do it too much. Enough with the “flex pivot” bs.
I thought you guys all liked orange stuff because of Trump.
Or just buy a different colour/brand
Engineered flex encompasses a lot more than flex pivots my dude.
Ya, with how powerful engineered carbon layup can be, with directional flex it allows, I'm shocked it isn't used more. Go ride a steel bike like Starling, and while not a perfect bike, on loose, natural, and/or off camber turns, the traction is amazing (only issue for me is that they are too flexy for burlier riders, or for longer travel bikes with long AtC forks, as seen on Neko's frames; he loved the comfort and grip of his steel triangle, but too flexy for WC racing). Carbon can give you the best of both worlds.
But back to the topic of next-gen manufacturing- Its frustrating seeing bikes (like the GG) reuse parts across models and frame sizes. I get it, for cost reasons its necessary, but innovation in manufacturing could allow for more custom bikes in the future, like Robot/Atherton. The old Privateer 141 shared the same tubesets as the longer travel original, so its going to be too heavy and too stiff for a shorter travel sibling. The same with sharing tubes & molds across sizes. Yes, there are bean pole tall guys on XLs, but its pretty reliable that larger sizes are going to have heavier riders. Taller riders also benefit from longer chainstays, and while moving the main pivot back on larger sizes is a cool trick to allow the reuse of a rear mold across sizes, you still end up with a rear triangle either overbuilt for lighter riders or underbuilt for heavier ones. Imagine if manufacturing technology progressed to the point where it was cost effective to do custom molds for each part for each size for each model, with the carbon fibers being tuned to provide lateral compliance like a steel frame, but in the appropriate amount for each size.
Don't be sad. I struggle to wrap my head around inflation too. Sometimes I find it helpful to recalibrate like this:
Adjusted for inflation the MSRP of a 2012 Sworks Stumpjumper FSR would be $2,494.63 more than the MSRP of a 2024 Sworks Stumpjumper FSR.
Adjusted for inflation the MSRP of the most affordable 2012 FSR would be $748.51 more than the MSRP of their most affordable 2024 full suspension.
i.e. prices have actually fallen, over 20%; while bikes have certainly improved, significantly.
There are still big innovations like what I'm doing, or Lal, Trust, or ebikes; and there were always less flashy innovations like improvements to tread patterns. Less flashy doesn't mean without value though, tires these days are much improved since a decade ago.
Not if you bike where hunting is allowed.
then again nothing new, we know about the new dampers
Soon.
Gold lowers coming for 38 and 40 as well…
innovations will happen in the ebike sector now
I am personally offended!
Lowest hanging fruit. Fixing geometry is cheaper than engineering flex and seeing what works and what doesn't. But it's likely these smaller things will be the next development war.
After a torrent of development 10 years ago, we have a period of stability. Getting ready for the next torrent. In the field of same same manufacturers will have to find the new thing to stand out by.
@hamncheez2003 Bird used to have the same tubeset across all their full suspension bikes as well. It's just sound engineering and accounting in this world. You can't really do fully custom aluminium if that requires hydroforming. With carbon footprint it is possible to adapt - you can have a different layup in the same mold. But that is also expensive as it requires additional testing. Plus what about resale value? Integrated seatposts are a pain as you can't sell a bike to someone taller than you for example... You can still cut it, but with custom layup it is what it is. Though if you are catering to a market that doesn't need a new bike every year, that might not be as much of an issue. With geometries and technology not progressing as fast it's completely possible to have the same frame for over 5 years.