All

Heres a one off / prototype I made for myself that after some interest I will be doing a small batch of, Enjoy! Its a seatpost steepening shim: Reduces effective top tube length by 8-10mm (at 350mm extension from collar) Specs: 30.9mm to 34.9 mm Actual seatpost angle : ~ +1.0 degree Effective seatpost angle : ~ +0.6 degree Maximum :~280mm (Full depth on a 2020 Enduro) https://www.instagram.com/zencomponents

Never was.

The spool valve is affected by pressure (resulting from flow...) just like a cone valve as it's a capped off cylinder with ports in the cylindrical wall with a spring pushing on the capped surface. So when the oil pushes on the capped end surface, the spring gets compressed and moves the valve and thus opens the ports. The manner the cone valve achieves this is a bit different to what the spool valve does, but the end result is very similar. You can change the spring under the cone or the angle of the cone with a given spring...

If you look at damping force as felt at the wheel for a given vertical wheel speed at 0mm and 60mm, there is a 56% increase for the wreckoning and a 21% increase for the enduro. This is due to the majority of the progression on the wreckoning happening early in travel. Personally I think this is where progressive suspension designs get the reputation for being less predictable. When you have a large change in leverage ratio over a short amount of travel the bike will react very differently with pretty small changes in wheel position. A ton of progression...

If this is true, Specialized have done an amazing job keeping it under wraps prior to the bike landing in shops. Not a single spy shot has surfaced and it's not been spotted under any of the team riders at an EWS (or whatever it's called now). Prior to the current version's release, there were a number of pics like these floating around. Did NSMB's whining have an effect?

Pretty sure lower shock linkage on dirt bikes are needle bearings. At least they were 6 years ago when I was still racing and working on my own bike.

Using the crown as a connection could potentially make it possible to use the damper side lowers as a spring as well. In that case the wipers would have to hold the pressure. Unlikely, but the catch is that sealing the stanchion into the crown (and sealing the crown-steerer interface) would be a bit of a challenge, that's why I imagined a connection all the way across could be made. Thus also the lubricating oil. Searching for how Fox made the 38 spring (they use a cartridge instead of relying on the stanchions as the spring housing) I came across...

From the other site, right on time:

The fun thing with patent law, at least in the US, is you can patent anything if you are specific enough. For example DW link and Horst link are conceptually identical. DW link is pretty much a Horst link set up where the lower link is super short instead of being the entire chainstay. If the Horst link patent had been written in a more broad manner it’s likely DW would never have been patentable. So it will be interesting to see how this Norco one plays out. It would be easy to do a Santa Cruz link set where...

No. This has been discussed in the past (not sure if here or not), but bike brakes are mounted with a lot more support than radial mount brakes on motorbikes. The caliper being offset means the caliper isn't only pulled perpendicularly to the bolts, but is actually pushed onto the fork/frame/adapter axially as well. This takes a lot of the load off the bolts and the mounting interface and we can thus run smaller bolts than what would be needed with radial mounting. Plus changing rotor sizes might become a lot more limited (running a 200 or a 220 mm...

As for patenting it, I think it could be argued it's not patentable (in the shape we assume it's in). Unless it's specifically the chainstay shape and attachement of the linkage. You could argue the currently public demo uses the same layout - a horst link with a linkage driven shock where a pull link (the vertical one) actuates the shock.

Definitely some variant of the DW6 then; nice pauses @uina. I went ahead and laid out a very rough draft in Linkage, but without a clear side view it's fairly difficult to get any sort of accuracy, and I don't know if we'll ever get a clear look at the tiny linkage driving the chainstay. The finer characteristics are very sensitive to small link adjustments, so again take this with a heavy grain of salt (changing the orientation of the two short links for anti-squat could make the end of the leverage curve regressive, linear, or progressive; I went with...

I'm 5'8" and have been on the conservative side of short for about a year - 165. Previously on 175 my entire biking life (~20 years, I'm 34 just so we have all the metrics out there). After about a month, I got 165s for my gravel bike, too. I'd love to try 155s but it's not in the budget right now and I love the 165s. After a year, I've noticed numerous benefits that I'm confident are no placebo at this point. Mtb-wise, this year has been spent on the same bike and parts: Banshee Rune V3 w/same drivetrain...

I have Hope 155mm cranks on my DH bike and love them. Like Brash wrote, feels more like a moto bike with feet not so staggered. For DH and ebike, I don't see a reason not to use 155mm.

Gotta love a DH bar that is not compatible with their DH stem

all - cut the petty ebike/non-ebike bullshit in here. battle all you want in a diff thread. if it's not a legit discussion about the bikes or the tech, beat it to somewhere else.

The derailleur stays stationery once the axle is tightened, as detailed in this Wheelbased entry: https://wheelbased.com/2021/04/08/rear-gearshift-mechanism-for-coaxial-…