All

Pivot says they change kinematics on each size, but I don't think they manufacture a different set of links to do it, I think they just shift mounting points on the front triangle: https://www.pivotcycles.com/en-us/technology/size-specific-design-and-r… Pivot says: "For bikes where chainstay length varies with size, suspension kinematics naturally change. However, we modify pivot points to ensure optimal curves for each size. We optimize the kinematics for each frame size based on a rider’s center of gravity and average saddle height per size to ensure consistent suspension kinematics for every size rider." Other than that, the only other company I can think...

Nah. Top tube straight continuous to seat stays is very 2020. Now it’s all about the grasshopper. Steep down tube to low flat chainstay. And I’m all for it. Maybe your right, straight line is industrial design where grasshopper, is sex. as long as no one does steeper chainstays than top tube. 🤮

Compared the S1 to the S4 at the same center of gravity (650mm above BB ) and at adjusted CoG for the shortest and tallest riders on Forbidden's chart (160cm and 198cm). Turns out that Forbidden knows how to design bikes and that moving the BB on the front triangle is the way to do it. A change in CoG has a much bigger impact on kinematics than the rear center length. With that being said, there's probably a (marginal) benefit to slightly changing the main pivot height on the smaller frames to reduce the anti-squat and compensate for the...

Awesome! So it’s something any reasonable fox serving company could do. Here’s a Hail Mary, do you have any dyno charts/actual data showing the improvements over the previous gripx2? I think it would be really appreciated to see some numbers behind the claims.

My understanding is that manufacturers mostly build carbon frames from the ground up (as opposed to being assembled from pre-manufactured tubes, a la Atherton Bikes), and that layup patterns don't vary much or at all between sizes ( with a few notable exceptions). But that might be old wisdom on my part, and perhaps the industry is more sophisticated in the way it designs layup patternds now. Maybe everyone is tuning thickness and layup pattern between sizes, but only a few brands are explicitly advertising it. Here's an example of Unno's layup for the Dash 130:

Show us on the doll where the X2 touched you.

By all accounts, the new Nomad is a 4-bar, like the new Tallboy. So, most likely not.

Thanks for running these numbers so we could nerd out. It's super interesting. Respectfully, I don't think the differences in anti-squat or anti-rise represented in the graphs could be felt by anyone on the trail. Maaaaaybe a dedicated in-house suspension tester at one of the brands could tell a difference between 138% AS and 134% AS at full-travel, or between 85% AR and 78% AR at sag, but those are really small differences in practice. Anti-squat and Anti-rise are already hard parameters to isolate and feel out on the trail, and it takes pretty big differences in those numbers to...

Nothing the Fox shill said in this thread was anything to do with Tech Rumours or Innovation, which should be the topic as stated in the title. It's a real cool story that they came to post propaganda here, but maybe if they're going to cherry pick questions to answer, maybe it should go in it's own thread.

I agree. I compared the S2 (photos are from S2) to the S4 with a quick Matlab script. Obviously if the chainstay and seatstays grow (red line), the leverage ratio changes and so does the travel. As you said, if you move the BB forward (yellow line), the changes in kinematic are somewhat minor, but considerable. This is assuming the rocker links are the same. Also not specific to the Reya, applies to all bikes with significant changes in rear centre. I wonder if @CascadeComponents could chime in.

With all due respect Crinkle.. IT IS Awesome Fox now has a presence on this hardcore site. They still have not answered my question on here..Or the Suspension thread. But the ahowing up at the table is a cool start.

I would think its just a case of moving the BB forward relative to the pivot points, similar to what the did on the V1 dread? That way the stays and rocker can all be the same across all models. Also means the (actual) lever arm from the axle to the shock is the same across all models, meaning FEA may not be need to be re done on the rear end for each front triangle size. Just my semi-educated guess.

What's also funny is it's just as much of an outlier in Size S (my size) at 420cs. Which is crazy short. I'll be looking elsewhere for a 435ish cs on my next 120 bike. Nevertheless, it's super cool to see the proportional model scale well to the L and XL sizes in the short travel cat. I have plenty of great choices elsewhere.

Change the name (X3?) so people know it's different??

https://racing.trekbikes.com/stories/tfr-cross-country/why-trek-unbroke…

Honestly, the Reya is the first XC bike that I really, really want to try as a 6'3" individual. I feel like that jack nichelson nodding meme as I work my way down the geo chart on the XL. Edit: Can we also agree that peak bike industrial design is a straight top tube that aligns directly with the seat tube... connecting the top of the head tube to the rear axle with an un-interrupted straight line?

Here you go, the new Reya is officially official now: https://www.vitalmtb.com/news/press-release/forbidden-launches-reya.

No, look at the bridge with the topology optimized arch. Finally a damper that "sits higher in the travel", never heard of that before. Probably should end up at full lockout with how many times the iterations sat higher in the travel than the ones before

This so much. Like many others (SC, especially), you usually get one fun color and one safe color. Here it is more blah on both ends. I will say, weight on s2 is pretty impressive for Forbidden. Claimed 2.27Kg/5lbs on S2, if Spur is 2.54Kg/5.5lbs on MD. Now to see if they do get any S4 frames in.