All

That's why I don't understand why they didn't do both. Cane Creek w/ Climb Switch and the Marzocchi 053 (and I may have seen another) have high/low external compression adjust AND a 3 position switch.

That's good to know it can run an IFP. Maybe you should highlight that in the info you provide so those of us that don't want to rebuild every few hours know the shock will work for us without loss of performance. As for max performance, one other benefit of an IFP is the ability to vacuum bleed it and remove additional air mixed in the oil, reducing cavitation.

Yep, that's why I said I don't know if it is beneficial or just a marketing addition.

It isn't a performance enhancer, it keeps the shock consistent over a ride. As you go over bumps the oil heats up. As it heats up it expands and compresses the air chamber, just like if you reduce your air chamber for more bottom out. It also changes viscosity with heat and affects damping. Ribbed reservoir helps regulate the heat. Is it beneficial? I don't know, haven't seen any real data to show. Only a couple less known shock companies in the moto world use it as well, and an aftermarket shop or two.

How easy is it to service at home? Will you have a bleeding procedure and will it be easy enough for average home mechanics to do without leaving air in the damping side? Would it be possible to make the shock accept both a piston or a bladder so the rider can choose? Just like engine rebuilds, suspension rebuilds don't need to be done as often as the manufacturers and tuners like to say. Most big name, respected tuners that rebuild shocks for a living have shown the issue of bladder shocks having air in the oil while IFP shocks...

I come from the moto industry too and it is a known fact that bladders do allow nitrogen to pass through. On a downhill specific race shock that will be rebuilt often, then not an issue, but for those of us that will not rebuild for a couple years, it is an issue. Obviously nothing is perfect, but it would still be nice to see a CS style shock while you are designing a brand new item. Have the ability to dial in high and low speed compression while also having a quick switch lever. Best of both worlds.

Everything is give and take. Links will naturally have more flex. How do you remove that flex? Make them stronger which means more weight. So when it comes down to it, A triangulated 3 link is going to be either stiffer or lighter than a triangulated 4-link. Yes, crappy designs can exist, but that's true for both ways. Again, the only thing that 4-bar systems have done is remove small bump compliancy for some anti-bob. I ride my bikes for the downhill, not the uphill, that's just how I have to get there. I'll take a suspension design that performs...

As I said, 4-bar simply compromise one area (bump absorption) to gain in another (anti-squat). Single pivots are actually stiffer. Every pivot adds a place for flex, single pivots have one less flex spot. As most single pivot bikes use linkage driven shocks, or just use linkages for stiffness (see Foes) they have as many frame contact points and still less pivots, so less flex. I guess I have a different opinion as you, I'd rather give up slight, unnoticeable pedal bob to gain better suspension performance when not only descending but climbing (small bump absorption allows the wheels to...