[norbar]

http://www.pinkbike.com/news/crankworx-2010-shaums-march-marin.html#cid170968

I wanted to like the bike but they lost me on this:

But it gets cooler: the actual location of the virtual pivot changes depending on where the bike is in it's travel, letting it behave differently depending on the terrain and needs of the rider.

Are they trying to compete with ellsworth by any chance?

The 10 inch travel also suprises me a bit. I thought vpp guys were the only ones who thought it was needed.
Still - it looks nice.

 

[Vrock]

I remember that a few years ago I saw the mathematical function of their rear axle path in the Marin website, do you really think that they can give that kind of information to the journalist or to an average rider???????? what I'm trying to say it's that Marin designers know what are they doing, they try to explain things in simple terms when they talk to Journalist because you know, they usually don`t understand anything...

 

[norbar]

I only hope its the jurnalist being stupid and not their statement that their virtual pivot is better than other virtual pivots because its a virtual pivot...

 

[MinorThreat]

^^ That's virtually what I was going to say . . . .

 

[Vrock]

Well, there are a lot of differents Virtual pivots in the market and some are betters than other. How do you explain it to a Journalist in simple terms???? It's not easy at all. You can be a F1 Designer but if you try to explain something to a 6 year old you can sound like a noob.

 

[norbar]

Well, there are a lot of differents Virtual pivots in the market and some are betters than other. How do you explain it to a Journalist in simple terms???? It's not easy at all. You can be a F1 Designer but if you try to explain something to a 6 year old you can sound like a noob.

Seriously, he is probably not that stupid as you suggest(not at all probably). . Its hard to mishear something so precise. Even if he understood like 50% of it he wouldnt put out such claim. Dont really belive that an experienced jurnalist (yeah, I know pinkbike , but I doubt he is that silly) produced sth like this on his own. Also if they tried to explain it to him in terms of qualities why there is no mention of it? He would be wrong but on topic and he is waaay of what Id explain If I were to present a susp system to someone.

 

[Percy]

Fail!

Its not rootbeer!

But serially, it looks nice, and slack, and compact, and has shiny bits.

 

[Hesh To Steel]

AND there's one for sale in the classifieds.

 

[OGRipper]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but thought the virtual pivot point pretty much always changes as you move through the travel with that sort of design, not just with ellsworth and scb's vpp stuff...?

 

[kidwoo]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but thought the virtual pivot point pretty much always changes as you move through the travel with that sort of design, not just with ellsworth and scb's vpp stuff...?

The only thing constant is that the entire weight of the swingarm is about a foot above your bottom bracket

 

[norbar]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but thought the virtual pivot point pretty much always changes as you move through the travel with that sort of design, not just with ellsworth and scb's vpp stuff...?

Thats why they lost me. Though in the comments the guy who wrote that tried to convince me that there are some crazy virtual designs that have a constant pivot point.

 

[Cabdoctor]

Not trying to be a jerk, but it's basically like a 303. Look at the pivot locations on the swing arm and how they move in relation and proportion to the frame and shock travel. This thing probably eats square edge bumps.

 

[Muttely]

Not trying to be a jerk, but it's basically like a 303. Look at the pivot locations on the swing arm and how they move in relation and proportion to the frame and shock travel. This thing probably eats square edge bumps.

Yeah i mean look at those rai....oh wait, no, it doesnt.


Holy ****, that bike looks like a bike, wtf.

 

[Vrock]

Thats why they lost me. Though in the comments the guy who wrote that tried to convince me that there are some crazy virtual designs that have a constant pivot point.

Yep, they are called FSR, ICT, SmoothLink and OST. I have had HUGE discussions with a lot of people that insist that these bikes are Virtual Pivots too, and I had to give up because in the end, they are right. You can't draw a line and say that a Virtual Pivot needs to move XX Cm to be a "Real Virtual Pivot"...

 

[Slater]

You guys are missing the point. You have to read between the lines.

This bike's virtual pivot has its own virtual pivot.

 

[Delimeat]

Seriously, he is probably not that stupid as you suggest(not at all probably). . Its hard to mishear something so precise. Even if he understood like 50% of it he wouldnt put out such claim. Dont really belive that an experienced jurnalist (yeah, I know pinkbike , but I doubt he is that silly) produced sth like this on his own. Also if they tried to explain it to him in terms of qualities why there is no mention of it? He would be wrong but on topic and he is waaay of what Id explain If I were to present a susp system to someone.

I'm always down for some criticism, its how things get better But you're right, it is hard to explain something when the reader base is so large and you want everyone to understand it, especially when a percentage of those people are like yourself and have the knowledge and desire to get into more detail.

But just to clear things up a bit, those are my own words, and they do accurately describe what is going on and I make no mention of the Marin Quad Link being "better than other virtual pivots because its a virtual pivot...", I merely state what is happening... that the pivot point does change as the bike goes through it's travel. Better wording next time? I guess so

As for virtual pivot bikes that have a constant arc axle path, I may be wrong, but I've had the shock off my old Shocker and traced the path... it is about as concentric as my old Oranges were! There are more of those dual link bikes out there that don't actually need/use the virtual pivot design than you'd think - although I'm betting that it is due to patents and that sort of thing.

 

[Cabdoctor]

Yeah i mean look at those rai....oh wait, no, it doesnt.


Holy ****, that bike looks like a bike, wtf.

Dude.....go back to geometry class.

look at the aft link. its designed to keep the pivot on the swing arm moving in a direction that's parallel to the seat tube while the forward linkage is designed to keep that pivot moving parallel to the shock. This is the same methodology that Yeti was accomplishing with their rails. Marin is trying to do the same thing with linkages. Use common sense or do you need more pictures.

 

[norbar]

I'm always down for some criticism, its how things get better But you're right, it is hard to explain something when the reader base is so large and you want everyone to understand it, especially when a percentage of those people are like yourself and have the knowledge and desire to get into more detail.

But just to clear things up a bit, those are my own words, and they do accurately describe what is going on and I make no mention of the Marin Quad Link being "better than other virtual pivots because its a virtual pivot...", I merely state what is happening... that the pivot point does change as the bike goes through it's travel. Better wording next time? I guess so

As for virtual pivot bikes that have a constant arc axle path, I may be wrong, but I've had the shock off my old Shocker and traced the path... it is about as concentric as my old Oranges were! There are more of those dual link bikes out there that don't actually need/use the virtual pivot design than you'd think - although I'm betting that it is due to patents and that sort of thing.

I just thought it was misinforming the already misinformed pinkbike kids. With such descriptions we will get ppl beliving ICT is 123.2231% better than any other susp, that fsr pushes you of obstacles and that vpp has an s shaped wheelpath Its good to be precise about things when talking to kids.

btw. In case of the shocker there is a small movement.


Vrock - Ive never thought about it but I just put into linkage the most precise model of any FSR bike I could find and it shows some IC migration. I may be wrong so Id like someone with more knowledge to step it but I always thought an FSR bike with a constant IC would essentialy be a trek session 88 or a split pivot

 

[Cabdoctor]

 

[Slater]

Also what is all this talk about Instant Centers and Axle path?

Instant Center has nothing to do with axle path. If a virtual pivot bike has a near circular axle path then its Center of Curvature does not migrate very much (Demo is perfect example). However its Instant center may or may not migrate a large distance.

On the other end of the spectrum would be something like a Sunday that has a equal/larger Center of Curvature migration than its Instant Center migration IIRC.

 

[norbar]

Also what is all this talk about Instant Centers and Axle path?

Instant Center has nothing to do with axle path. If a virtual pivot bike has a near circular axle path then its Center of Curvature does not migrate very much (Demo is perfect example). However its Instant center may or may not migrate a large distance.

On the other end of the spectrum would be something like a Sunday that has a equal/larger Center of Curvature migration than its Instant Center migration IIRC.

Yeah I know that but I assume when talking about moving of the pivot point I assume he meant the IC. Still - in virtual bikes both move even if by a little.
btw. I dont think no 1 stated anywhere that IC has sth to do with axle path.



What Im really interested though is - Do we really need 10 inch bikes anymore?

 

[dilzy]

What Im really interested though is - Do we really need 10 inch bikes anymore?

Santacruz seem to think so. The V10 is also one of the most regular at the pointy end on any podium.

 

[norbar]

Santacruz seem to think so. The V10 is also one of the most regular at the pointy end on any podium.

Im pretty sure thats due to the riders not the bike. Intense has a lot of talented riders and almost as much travel and they fare a bit worse. Does this mean that either 8 inch or 10 but nothing in between? Also the Vpp guys are almost the only ones on the WC circut (if not the only ones) who use that much travel.

 

[Slater]

Also the Vpp guys are almost the only ones on the WC circut (if not the only ones) who use that much travel.

If you're trying to insinuate that VPP bikes are inferior to other designs then the bike industry is going to be having a chat with you, mister!

Nobody specifically said IC determines axle path, but it seemed like some people were confused, and thought that it did. Just setting things straight.

Also whether or not you design a bike with 10" depends one one thing imo. Presuming you are not using an idler (which no big companies do anymore due to lack of marketability), it comes down to axle path. Do you want a better axle path, or more travel. You cannot have both, without an idler. Sure I know someone is saying, with a Center of Curvature with huge migrations, it could be done. However no company has managed to create a linkage yet that can do this, so it's a bit of a moot point as of yet. If SC, Intense, DW, etc could have done this easily, they would have. So it stands that you have a larger rearward path on a shorter travel bike, or a less rearward path on a longer travel bike. Essentially it comes down to the quantity vs. quality decision.

 

[Vrock]

You can have a good Axle Path without an Idler and without a ton of Pedal-Kickback....

 

[Slater]

Yes you can, but as far as marketing is concerned, having all three of those is difficult. The floating bottom bracket systems are a good way to do it, but they don't sell very well.

 

[slyfink]

One thing I'm curious about, and this is an honest question, is the shock stroke length. From the pictures, it looks like a short shock for 10" of travel. Which leads me to believe it would have a high leverage rate. But... I can't really tell by looking at pictures, which is why I'm asking the question. Anyone know? When will a bike test be performed?

 

[norbar]

If you're trying to insinuate that VPP bikes are inferior to other designs then the bike industry is going to be having a chat with you, mister!

Nobody specifically said IC determines axle path, but it seemed like some people were confused, and thought that it did. Just setting things straight.

Also whether or not you design a bike with 10" depends one one thing imo. Presuming you are not using an idler (which no big companies do anymore due to lack of marketability), it comes down to axle path. Do you want a better axle path, or more travel. You cannot have both, without an idler. Sure I know someone is saying, with a Center of Curvature with huge migrations, it could be done. However no company has managed to create a linkage yet that can do this, so it's a bit of a moot point as of yet. If SC, Intense, DW, etc could have done this easily, they would have. So it stands that you have a larger rearward path on a shorter travel bike, or a less rearward path on a longer travel bike. Essentially it comes down to the quantity vs. quality decision.

The captains of industry have nothing on me!

Also - I never stated that, simply stated that they are the only bikes on the wc circut with that much travel. Every other system has less. Though I have to say I dont like vpp bikes.

As for the rearward path - mine is more rearward and it doesnt have an idler. Dont feel the kick really.

btw. Moar travelz doesnt give the same as moar rearwardz. A bike that is less rearward but has more travel wont carry speed better over stuff. I dont know why do you suggest that.

 

[William42]

well, no idea how it will fair on the interwebs, since they're a vicious place, but my roomie has a quake, and heres what I have to say about it:

at 7 inches of travel, it gobbles small bumps like no other bike I have ever touched in my life. you just don't feel them, and the bike holds speed. it feels pretty fuggin good in chundery sections too.

my main complaints with it are that it feels fycking high, its got a super high cog, lots of weight up top, and the bb is 14.5. looks like they took care of the bb with this one, and it'll probably sag lower too. but the weight is still high, so I'm curious to ride it. its also steep - looks like with the dh, it'll be significantly slacker and sag lower in the back, so they took care of that too. my last complaints have to do with the pivots - they're flexy as fyck, they wear out quick, and they're a complete bear to replace, and have the added benefit of making it a bear to adjust the shock.

Basically, I don't think I'll be in line to buy one of these, but I love seeing more plough and chunder and terrain gobbling bikes out there. I would absolutely love to ride one and give it a shot, because my main complaints with the quake seem to have been addressed. I'm looking forward to seeing them on trails, and would love to try one (but not on the internet, because they're super lame and not cool on the internet)

 

[Slater]

btw. Moar travelz doesnt give the same as moar rearwardz. A bike that is less rearward but has more travel wont carry speed better over stuff. I dont know why do you suggest that.

I agree completely. I much prefer a shorter travel bike with a better axle path. Hence why I said Quality vs. Quantity. I'll take quality every day.