Suspension Setup theories

I’ve tried both styles, I think there is a time in place for both types of set ups.  Using data acquisition tools. It’s really easy to get this bike set up one way or another. 
 For me, less spring and more damper feels better on Terrain that is firmer(hardpack) and maybe less grip. Also less pitch, so like a moderate grade type trails.

I like more spring and less/medium damping on the front once things get a little steeper, softer, like sandy or loam conditions. 

 I think it’s very  case and situational. Also, I think it depends on lots of other parts that on your  which can make one feel too soft or too stiff   like a whole package has to go with one set up or the other.
 

The big question that needs to be answered is how to set up suspension to mute braking bumps. Switching from air to coil helped a lot, but I want more!

I think @carlinojoevideo put it really well comparing the two setups, especially since he’s tested with data acquisition. I’ll add my long-winded reply just based on feel.

My recent experience was comparing a smashpot Mezzer to an Avy hybrid 38 on the same bike. The Mezzer had a higher spring rate and is less damped when compared to my 38 setup. Obviously different forks and dampers, so not a perfect comparisons. 

First thing to note is setup, I run a higher static bar height with the the 38, which makes sense given the increased static sag. Dynamic I’d guess they work out pretty similar. I would say the benefit here is that as you approach bottom out, your bars are higher and this feels like it helps preserve my body position when getting close to end of stroke. It’s a smaller difference, but worth noting. 

Next is feel. I think comparing these two setups you really notice the statement “spring rate controls how much stroke you use, and damping controls how fast you use it”. My experience has been that the (Mezzer) higher spring and less damping sits higher during rider inputs but uses travel more freely on mid-big impacts, and it’s also more stable when you’re constantly loading the fork. It feels classically “plush but supportive”. The (38) softer spring rate and higher compression damping feels “controlled and efficient”, it doesn’t feel like it uses travel excessively despite the softer spring. When you hit smaller bumps, the fork can move quite a bit, but this means it tracks the ground quite nice and calm. But the harder your hit things, the more the damper works to dissipate that energy, rather than it going back stored by the spring. This setup can give the feel of “soft but firm”. So despite sitting deeper statically, the damper works hard to maintain the available stroke and not blow through it. The 38 setup also prefers to be “worked” when you want support, it wants to be pushed into when you want support, rather than just shifting your weight forward like the Mezzer setup. 

Like mentioned by Joe above, I think both setups have there benefits, either for certain terrain/tracks or certain riders. And I think that Loic and Jackson’s riding style both highlight those setups. Loic stays very centered on the bike, letting the suspension work under him while he makes sure to put the wheels where they need to go. Jackson however is much more active and aggressive over the front end, pumping and popping. I also think that the new electronic lockouts really benefit the softer spring/higher damping setup. Being able to further stiffen this setup would offer a bigger improvement for the riders to pump and generate speed on smoother sections of track. 

Friction is a big part so switching to coil is a good start but the first thing is tyres - appropriate casing/width and pressures set about as low as you can get away with. If those aren't dialled then damping changes won't make much difference, and usually you would want less low speed damping but high speed can go either way - both too much and too little can be harsh.

As for the original question - spring rate comes first and dictates the "feel" of the bike (poppy/supportive vs planted and comfortable). It's not necassarily as simple as soft spring/more damping  or vice versa since they are normally adjusted relative to each other, not inverse. So you can increase the spring AND damping if needed. Often the different "preferences' are more driven by the limitations of the damper range - if your damper can't produce enough damping theres often not much choice other than increasing spring rate instead, and use less sag than you might prefer

Wanted to say this too. If you’re Loic or Jackson you have some freedom (but not unlimited freedom) to change damper architecture and get the feel you want, but most of us mere mortals are boxed in by our forks and shocks regarding how stiff or soft we can go on damping, before they get too harsh or too open. And there’s a lot of crosstalk between compression, rebound, high speed, and low speed. What I’m saying is that most of the time the tail is wagging the dog to an extent when any of us are trying to set up our suspension (i.e. the suspension is setting up us).

Another thought about these setups, say one rider is at 18-20% and rider B is 28-30%. That is measured as dynamic sag when riding by using data acquisition tools on specific trail. So in a parking lot you can be 20% and on a steep trail with a lot of braking you might be at 27%. So this rider might need to start the day at 15%, but when riding he’s not really sitting that high.

And vice versa, the rider wanting 30% on a loamy steep trail might be at 22% in the parking lot, but the forces and rider weight make him sit lower when actually riding.

I still have these issues and have different settings I’m using based on what my goal is that day, testing, hanging with friends or just taking cruiser runs. For me, I have never found one setup that works best everywhere, but you can find something that works OK on many trails.

 

My observation about damping vs spring is,

When I've been off the bike for a while I feel like I need more spring rate or the bike feels like it sinks into holes and feels too soft. Without enough trail speed (and therefore low damper shaft speed), the damping can't generate force to hold up and provide support.

As I get up to speed again I can drop a couple of PSI and the bike feels good relying more on the damping. The suspension needs more trail speed (to create shaft speed on the damper) before the damping can provide enough force to provide support. 

It feels like the better I'm riding, the more I can rely on damping for support. 

I'm curious how terrain factors into this too, i.e., East Coast vs West Coast.  There used to be a downhill trail at Windham Mountain that was literally just a dry creekbed, nothing but sharp edge rocks.  Would "all spring no damping" would be better here?  

Depending on the gradient and depending how much "spring" by all spring you mean". Hahhaa this is all so hard to say if one way works vs the other.

Yeah it can't really be generalised that way - every damper has such a different range of adjustment that one products "less damping" is higher than another ones "more damping". We could give a theoretical "ideal" damping rate for each situation but its not realistic you could achieve that so you are always tuning to a best compromise. 

Going back to the maths side of it, damping is normalised by comparing it to the mass & spring rate of the vehicle to give a damping ratio. Which means that if you increase the spring rate but don't change the damper, your damping ratio is lower and therefore you technically have "less" damping already. These are how we describe the "feel" of a bike (along with natural frequency) so a low damping ratio and high natural frequency translates to a poppy/lively bike while a higher damping ratio and low frequency gives a planted/dead feeling ride. 

The target ratios normally fit within quite a small range so if you are at a theoretically ideal point, you shouldn't really need to make drastic changes to the adjusters, since a small increase in spring rate plus a click or 2 less damping would swing that ratio quite far. This is probably where a lot of mistakes come in, people assume too much so will bump up the spring rate then automatically make a huge change to the damper because they thought that was "right" and it doesn't work out

As for the sharp rocks terrain - I agree that would depend on gradient and speed, the faster the trail the stiffer spring you would need and damping wise it could go either way. Less damping would help carry speed and not get hung up on slower/flatter sections but more damping would keep the bike up in its travel so you skip over the bumps and again don't get hung up in faster terrain. So it probably goes back to adjusting the damping proportionally to the spring, which will mostly depend on the speed.

sooooo.... in summary, Go Fast, take chances, hesitation kills.  

Sounds like my dream trail.