Hello Vital MTB Visitor,
We’re conducting a survey and would appreciate your input. Your answers will help Vital and the MTB industry better understand what riders like you want. Survey results will be used to recognize top brands. Make your voice heard!
Five lucky people will be selected at random to win a Vital MTB t-shirt.
Thanks in advance,
The Vital MTB Crew
If people will forgive the golf analogy, growing up playing a lot I remember the fit stations for clubs in pro shops. The manufactures had slick displays and tools/processes for the pro shop to go through to fit you shaft length, lie angle, etc. Then your clubs showed up a few weeks later. I'm sure that now they are taking videos and looking at clubhead speed, ball trajectory, and maybe even spin rate. Maybe making recommendations on which ball as well.
As all of us nerds on this thread know, we are far too few in number to push more rider-optimized suspension into the mainstream. My guess is that the only way it happens is if a large frame manufacturer partners with a large suspension manufacturer to provide something along the lines of the soon-to-be-shipped (hopefully) Motion Instruments DAQ and dampers along the lines of the Lift, formula's cst, or whatever Vorsprung as come up with. For shocks, the Formula or Vorsprung tech would be key. You'd put it together in a slick package/process and run it through local shops, just like how I'm imagining modern club fitting works.
But I'm not in the industry, so I really have no idea and would be curious to hear more informed opinions. Apologies if this is too off topic, but if we are interested in innovations outside of things with batteries, rider-optimized suspension available from the factory seems like it could be low hanging fruit and a differentiator for brands, IF they package it and explain the value well, which I think is a lot easier said than done.
EDIT - I do not think is going to happen anytime soon. I'm just not sure how else it could happen.
Hot take... Does the average rider want better suspension compared to what he or she has now?
Does he or she know it could be better? If yes, are they willing to act upon that knowledge to actually change things? Or do they just want to ride their damn blue bike?
The SRAM tech support is quite helpful answering questions about the different tunes. They've got some easy to process graphics showing the spectrum of the tunes. I actually really like the new Cxx/Rxx system, because the center of each jump in numbers in each direction corresponds to opening/closing that adjuster for the adjacent number. Smaller numbers is less damped / lighter. So center of C37 LSC is the same as C34 LSC fully closed, meaning there is a good amount of overlap between each tune. If the OEM tune for your bike is only 1 off from the generic retail tune, you can get cover a lot of the same range, but if it diverges more than that it's probably best to hunt down the OEM tune.
Regarding “derailments;“
Every discussion in here is about tech and innovation. If we are discussing damper designs, rubber compounds, frame materials, etc.
How are any of those discussions a derailment? Does everything HAVE to be a rumor? I haven’t seen anybody post a movie review, a story about a riding trip, or the current weather in Iowa. It’s all relevant.
Funny thing about all those links people put up to discuss specific topics. Nobody engages with them. This thread is always active and always interesting. If rumors are sparse, what’s the harm?
As long as "dampen" gets unironically typed every now and then to get us riled up, I think it's all fair game.
As above, this thread is indeed always active and always interesting.
Worse than that is this… when you see it
Are they posted anywhere, got a link? Interrested to see it. Outside of SRAM I've heard both, the tunes are all very similar and they're progressive/linear/dirgressive, which is certainly different.
This is one of the best threads in the MTB world. Awesome tech rumors and new products, but even better are the discussions that follow. People have questions about MTB products. It takes time to sort it out. We’re all still learning, always learning! And the discussions about new products and rumored products are kinda central to our progression. Maybe the discussion gets too granular for some, but in my short time here I have seen what others have mentioned, a natural ebb and flow of topics governed by the actual posting of rumors or releases.
I think that if you don’t like the discussions about the tech, maybe just stick to the front page of vital.
For RockShox, the list of available tunes is available on the shock's service page. For instance here's the Vivid Ultimate: https://www.sram.com/en/service/models/rs-vivd-ult-c1
You can find the shim layouts in the tuning guide: https://www.sram.com/globalassets/document-hierarchy/tuning-manuals/rockshox-rear-shock-piston-tuning-guide.pdf
For Fox, you can find similar info on the shock's parts & drawings page. For instance here's the Float X2: https://tech.ridefox.com/bike/parts-drawings/2863/float-x2-part-information
Those are great but they're missing the detail of what the numbers really mean, the effects of each tune, etc. Like what does R23 achive compared to R55? Spell it out for me like I'm a 5th grader.
Yikes, I'm hoping that was written in someone's second language.
Nope.. but what they will do it just give it a new paint scheme that was inspired by colours kicking around the factory or the offices…. change the parts spec and make no changes whatsoever.
Great bikes… and would happily buy another if there was a ‘ready to paint’ option like specialized does.
There are strong rumors of a new lineup with changes in the design of the frame greater than what we've seen from V2 to V3 Hightower. Talk about the shock being sunk into the downtube and no cable routing for the derailleurs.
The explanation I got on what the numbers correlate to with RockShox tunes are pounds of force generated on a dyno. For example R23 would translate into 230lbs of force and C43 would be 430lbs of force when measured at a constant input velocity.
Friend saw the new Hightower from a dealer person. No info on geo, only the change around shock position as reported with a change to how frame is wrapped around. I believe same is happening to Bronson too.
(Not) Surprisingly Mega and Nomad got a new color scheme so I guess more piles of frames they sit on before pushing any new updates onto market.
The new Nomad and Megatower colors are on the SC site already.
https://www.santacruzbicycles.com/en-US/bikes/megatower
https://www.santacruzbicycles.com/en-US/bikes/nomad
So, it sounds like the consensus view is that the Formula CTS valves (at least the ones pictured in the teardown article of the Selva fork) ARE a simple orifice damper that uses different-sized holes and different hole configurations in the changeable donut-shaped piston as the source of damping. The single shim is likely only there are a one-way check valve to prevent flow through the piston in the opposite direction, and the shim is NOT there as a way to generate damping force in the primary flow direction. So it's a dead simple mechanical system. Bigger holes = less damping.
FWIW I think this qualifies as "tech rumors and innovation," because we're trying to suss out how a relatively new product works and if it does what it claims. Step One: Discover new product. Step Two: Discuss whether it makes sense or not. To me, both seem like valid elements of the same discussion.
Where are these rumours….. direct me to them?
Maybe someone could make a thread specifically for tech rumors so we don't derail this suspension kinematic thread?
Mmmmmmmm, dampening
🤤
In the simplest definition, an orifice damper is just a hole with no needle, check or shim. Oil can freely pass through the hole at low speeds and at high speeds the hole diameter begins to choke the flow thus creating damping. This results in progressive damping.
When you start adding needles, checks, shims or multiple oil paths it's very much a grey area as to whether it could be consider an orifice damper since almost all suspension uses some kind of free bleed. I think a good rule of thumb, if the valve can make non-progressive damping curves, it's not an orifice damper.
Correct. I helped lay out the new tune names etc. We had the issue where a M tune on a Super Deluxe did not match the M tune on a Deluxe and that did not match the M tune on VIVID... Also- we had a shock with extra L1, L2, L3 and L4 tunes (in addition to normal L, M and H), they were not spaced evenly and no one could remember if L1 was lighter or heavier than a L2 tune. So we went to numbers that meant something on the dyno.
We wanted OEMs to be able to test on one shock model (and dial in their tunes), then be able to spec by price up/down the range without having to translate tunes for them on the various different models and price points. Also the ability to do a custom named C36 tune was there- and it makes sense and easy for everyone to know C36 is a tiny bit lighter than a C37.
So a C37 VIVID (with Comp adjustments in the middle settings) should very closely ride like a C37 Deluxe. Of course a VIVID has extra features and adjustments and probably works a bit better, but the general idea was if you pick the tune on one shock- the same tune on other models will work nicely (provided the air springs are also close to equivalent).
Similar thing on Rebound- but wanted to get away from the names as we thought some PMs were being influenced by the names (progressive, linear, digressive). Also again having the ability to make a new tune based on force and curve shape and have a logical name that makes some sense.
I thought that’s where we were already!?
No mention of ‘suspension kinematic’ in the title….. so…. Yeah
I guess we'll have to start a specific "Rumour gets posted, converse about the rumor below" thread each time someone post a new one. Here we'll just post the rumor itself and no one will reply to it so we make everyone happy.
Or start a ‘suspension kinematic’ thread and stop hijacking this one…..
The kinematic conversation started from a post about a new bike. If you allow us we'll call that "innovation." Why do you believe that we should now cease that conversation?
Because I was told to start a ‘tech rumours’ thread when this is the ‘tech rumours’ thread…. Read back over the posts before posting. I was asking about a bike rumour and got told to take it elsewhere.
https://www.vitalmtb.com/forums/hub/definitely-not-toxic-tribalism
Oh, yeah. You missed some obvious sarcasm in the posts you replied to. I'd suggest you take your own advice.