All

For a unified rear triangle, moving the caliper does not affect kinematics at all. It is applying a moment to the rotor and a reaction to the rear triangle. The center of this moment is exactly the rear axle, which is also the location about which you would rotate the caliper if you were to relocate it, causing no effect. The only difference I can think of would be stiffness characteristics, whereby moving it allows the designers to make one member where the caliper is attached stiffer, and make the other member less stiff in the same plane. This may...

I'd try it in high with a tiny bit more air in it and maybe slightly slower compression. You're raising your LR which makes your suspension at the wheel have a lower spring rate and less damping. It's not a big enough difference to be worth changing it trail-to-trail imo, especially if you need to stuff around with your shock settings to compensate.

Hopefully nothing like the Ford Bronco bike.

shoutout to @CascadeComponents for the being the group member we all wanted in those "beloved" school group projects, cool to see you show your work. p.s. if you were to build a long shock link kit for the stumpy 15, would you build it with high or low anti rise? 😂

SRAM owes me royalties. I called it in June of last year.

Yup good points! Rubber has the highest grip when there is a small amount of slip. Also your front tyre can't brake AND turn in equal amounts so even if you were braking with the front only, you better hope there aren't any turns on that trail! And because the friction coefficient (which is different to tractive efficiency...) gets lower as you increase vertical load, if you were to have 100% weight on the front wheel (which you don't) you would still have much less braking available anyway. Also does anyone know the actual gradient of a "steep" trail? Most...