All

Respectfully, were you able to change rear spring rate on both bikes? I can see that the V10 has a coil, but I can't tell on the TR11 because the shock is behind your leg. I ask because one of the worst days of bike riding in my life was when I rented a V10 from a shop in Creekside (maybe Coastal Culture Sports? I can't remember) that had a coil rear shock. I hadn't ridden a DH bike in years at that point and had been loving my XL 29" Megatower, so I was excited to see what a...

Oh so THAT'S why you made me ride that crap T type... (jk)

Yeah that's why I like your slippy tape idea. Undo the grippiness whilst retaining some squish. I don't really feel the need for squish for my hands but a relatively hard TPU should be a little better at withstanding crush impacts between handlebar/ground. Will report back... There are quite a few designs circulating on Instagram/makerworld/printables etc. It's cool to see everyone's different takes on something relatively simple.

Yeah I pondered a few orientations, this is strongest since: - weakest point is flange to bar insert joint and there's not much you can do about the stress concentration there... So don't want layers coinciding with it if you lay it flat. The flange will just pop off. - failure mode for me was bending moment on rear edge, probably because my angled flange now means it's the main point of impact. This orientation keeps main bending moment in xy plane I like the foil tape idea though, thanks! I might revisit TPU

Even though that looks like a huge amount of grease (and more than needed), it makes a negligible difference to negative volume in a modern fork so that example isn't an issue at all. The problem more comes from people wiping out too much grease and the fork quickly runs dry and feels horrific. I've been meaning to post a thermal image video of a recent lyrik that was running like this and you could see the stanchion warming up while cycling the air shaft by hand! Air springs are more forgiving with the amount of grease needed since the...

The key difference is where the main restriction actually comes from. With something like the Charger 3, the flow path leading to the shim stack is restricted, so that restriction effectively sits in series with the shim stack. With the ZETA Tune Adjuster, the ports and the fluid paths leading to them are sized so that the shim stack itself remains the main restriction in the flow path. There are always open ports, and the ports themselves are non-restrictive until the flow reaches the shim stack opening. When additional ports are opened, they essentially add another flow path in parallel...

A new v10 isn’t comming out next month lol

A big part of the braking discussion is completely ignoring gradient and suspension performance. On flat tracks you can brake relatively evenly; the front wheel gets load transferred to it and can do more braking. On steep tracks you are already loading the fork a lot, heavy braking causes even more load which on a progressive air spring now means a firmer spring rate and less traction. That is probably even a secondary effect from the increased weight transfer and pitch forward when you start trying to brake heavily on the front. Think about exiting a typical rock roll on...

I've seen in interviews before WC DH pros talking about how on some (steeper) tracks they are dragging the rear brake a TON, which makes the bigger rear rotor make sense just from a thermals perspective; it's the thing that's probably doing 90% of the cooling.

It has little to do with engine braking. Everything to do with grip. Tldr: Front slows you down with large bursts of power, rear keeps your speed in check with longer duration braking events. Don't need data acquisition to try going 20km/h on just about any surface,then using each brake individually and see how fast can you stop. Or ride down in'n'out burger with front only vs rear only. Pretty sure only one of those options is viable. I imagine the reasoning behind big rotor in the back is heat dissipation, as you'll do a lot more braking in the...