Quantcast

Prototype Santa Cruz Syndicate V10

kidwithbike

kidwithbike

Monkey
Apr 16, 2007
466
0
Hoboken, NJ
awesome, cool that they made that change... i cant imagine what was wrong with the old leverage ratio!? and did they realize the arguement that the shock was lighter was a bit of a stretch?

Paint job isnt my style, perhaps it will look better built up. but i respect the effort and skill needed to paint a fade like that.

no doubt the syndicate is gonna make that bike go super quick
 
jackalope

jackalope

Mental acuity - 1%
Jan 9, 2004
7,616
5,939
in a single wide, cooking meth...
T!ttylicious paint scheme IMO. As for the leverage ratio, as long as the shock is designed for it, no problem. Hell, I wish the leverage ratio on my trail bike was a little higher to more easily overcome initial seal stiction and get full travel pn occasion . Anyway, it actually wasn't quite what I was expecting, as I saw a proto V-something at Whistler last year. I asked the rider what it was and he just mumbled something about it not being a current gen V-10. It looked a lot like a V-10, but I recall that the brace connecting the seat stays had some definitive shape to it - sorta like the lower arches on Zochs look like a "M".

Nice to see new-ish stuff coming out, especially in the dead of winter.
 
frango

frango

Turbo Monkey
Jun 13, 2007
1,454
5
Sweet :)
Did I understand well, that the ratio has been changed to make shock "suffer" less from hard hits?
 
jackalope

jackalope

Mental acuity - 1%
Jan 9, 2004
7,616
5,939
in a single wide, cooking meth...
^^
Main thing is that the shock is a 3.0" stroke instead of a 2.75" stroke, so the leverage ratio is 3.33:1 compared to 3.63:1

Apparently the 2.75" version did not work at all last season for Greg & Peat. :monkey:

In fact, I recall some SC honks saying that they tried a longer stoke version last year and no one could tell the difference. So who knows...
 
WhiteRavenKS

WhiteRavenKS

Turbo Monkey
Aug 8, 2003
1,270
0
neither here nor there
longer shock, lower leverage ratio, more oil volume. this version will hold up better for top to bottom consistency on longer and rougher world cup courses. the current design can suffer from the shock getting hot and fading. it makes damn good sense for those guys but most us mortals should be just fine with whatever version santa cruz wants to sell us, regardless of what reasoning they want to give.
 
frango

frango

Turbo Monkey
Jun 13, 2007
1,454
5
Acadian, I can only see e13 LG1 2008 and Gammut... do I miss something?
A guy from Fox once told me, that SC used (V10?) bottom out frequently due to ratio? and non-linear rising rate, so shocks suffered quite a lot...
 
SylentK

SylentK

Turbo Monkey
Feb 25, 2004
2,336
881
coloRADo
Sweet action, Litter! Big thanks!

FYI - Here's what SC says about using a 9" or larger shock on the V10. Taken from their FAQ section http://www.santacruzbikes.com/v10/index.php?faq=1&ID=0140)


It seems like everyone is using really long shocks these days- why doesn’t the V10 use a 9.5”x3” or a 10.5”x3.5” shock?
When we were developing the new V10, we tried a couple of versions with longer shocks, as that is what the hypemeisters are hyping these days. After riding both versions, we came to some conclusions:
1) The 9.5” shock and required longer spring added over half a pound to our frame. Trying to develop a light weight race frame requires a lot of gram counting, and a half pound is huge.
2) It didn’t ride any differently. We did blind back-back testing on two prototypes (the only difference was shock stroke, we made a custom frame and link) with a bunch of people, and nobody could identify a difference.
3) The extra ¼” of shock stroke really isn’t that much. Instead of using a 500# spring, you would probably use a 450. Not a big difference for an extra half pound. A 3.5" stroke didn't work with the VPP linkage to get the shock rate curve that we wanted, isn't available from a variety of sources, AND weighs a ton.
4) Our pro race team has been racing V10s since 2001. The frame has always had 10 inches of travel with a 2.75" stroke shock. They don't have problems with shocks, nor could we find any evidence from our personal experience or warranty records to back up claims that lower leverage/longer stroke is better for the shock.

We tried to like it, because we've been asked about this, uh, frequently. But in the end we decided that measurable performance was better than theoretical advantages, and went with the lighter configuration.
 
primo661

primo661

Monkey
Jun 16, 2008
412
0
Pietermaritzburg, South Africa
Both he[Peaty] and Minnaar were quite satisfied with the bike’s bump compliance. They were commenting regularly about the way it stuck to the ground, especially in flatter corners. Using a Freelap timing system, they monitored their final few runs. I won’t say who, but one of them was up, 9 seconds over the other…hahaha.
Click to expand...
Who's 9 seconds up on who?:clue:
 
DirtMcGirk

DirtMcGirk

<b>WAY</b> Dumber than N8 (to the power of ten alm
Feb 21, 2008
6,379
1
Oz
Glad to see SC is thinking a little further down the road for once. Last season's debacle with the V10 made me question my faith in basic humanity.
 
B

ballr

Monkey
Apr 7, 2002
165
0
colorado
Would now be an appropriate time to point out that last year those guys actually did need moar shimz on their shocks?

just sayin'
 
WhiteRavenKS

WhiteRavenKS

Turbo Monkey
Aug 8, 2003
1,270
0
neither here nor there
ballr said:
Would now be an appropriate time to point out that last year those guys actually did need moar shimz on their shocks?

just sayin'
Click to expand...

:rofl:

this rofl emoticon is pretty weak but it's the only one that ridemonkey has.
when's RM going to get some fresh glitter for us to sprinkle? that's the real question in this thread.
 
boogenman

boogenman

Turbo Monkey
Nov 3, 2004
4,317
991
BUFFALO
I said all along that the leverage ratio on that bike was BS. That is why I dropped the extra $$$ to buy a M6 over the V10.
 
WhiteRavenKS

WhiteRavenKS

Turbo Monkey
Aug 8, 2003
1,270
0
neither here nor there
boogenman said:
I said all along that the leverage ratio on that bike was BS. That is why I dropped the extra $$$ to buy a M6 over the V10.
Click to expand...

i've said all along that most people talk too much about magical numbers that have little to no impact on their ability to ride a bike and have fun or race and get predictable results. just because the v-10 starts out with an off the scale leverage ratio for the first pube if it's travel, doesnt make it a debacle or a pile of engineering feces.
 
D

dropmachine

Turbo Monkey
Sep 7, 2001
2,922
10
Your face.
Considering you are only adding 1/4" of shock stroke, and how little that would really effect the bike itself, I have to wonder how much of this is done to "Fix" the suspension and how much is purely to shut those up online that whine about the V10s spring curve and leverage ratio, despite having never ridden one is real life.
 
al-irl

al-irl

Turbo Monkey
Dec 9, 2004
1,086
0
A, A
i don't think shutting people up was the motivation but it was only a matter of time before they changed it. Even if the performance advantage is only minor every little helps. Bikes have been evolving slowly over the last few years as theres been no reall leaps forward in bike design like there was 5 or 6 years ago. I always thought it was a little odd that they didn't run a 3" stroke shock on the v10 when they did there last redesign. Not that it would have put me off buying one. As for the little difference in my experience something small can transform a bike. I had my shock revalved and the bike changed completely for the better it was like night and day. From riding a bike with a very low leverage ratio (sunn radical) i can certainly say it makes a big difference to how the wheel tracks the ground. The only reason I can see for not doing this sooner is so they can drip feed us the upgrades and try and give us reason to upgrade to the newer model the following year.
 
ohio

ohio

The Fresno Kid
Nov 26, 2001
6,649
24
SF, CA
dropmachine.com said:
Considering you are only adding 1/4" of shock stroke, and how little that would really effect the bike itself, I have to wonder how much of this is done to "Fix" the suspension and how much is purely to shut those up online that whine about the V10s spring curve and leverage ratio, despite having never ridden one is real life.
Click to expand...
1/4" of stroke but also a fair bit more oil volume from the 3/4" longer body... wondering if they were getting fade under WC level use.
 
D

dropmachine

Turbo Monkey
Sep 7, 2001
2,922
10
Your face.
Yeah see thats the thing. While I can appreciate that yes there is more oil in that longer shock body, its not a whole lot more, and it seems to me that if the leverage issue was a problem, it would have been addressed in the previous model, since the shock has been 8.75 for a fair while now, since the start really. I think al-irl has it right in that this isn't really a performance gain, so much as a marketing ploy.

Still, its not like thats much different from every other company out there these days, so i suppose its hard to fault them.
 
IH8Rice

IH8Rice

I'm Mr. Negative! I Fail!
Aug 2, 2008
24,524
494
Im over here now
ohio said:
1/4" of stroke but also a fair bit more oil volume from the 3/4" longer body... wondering if they were getting fade under WC level use.
Click to expand...
Dirt's write up on Gee's bike talked about how much more oil his shock flowed over a stock DHX...im sure these guys who push it hard would notice the higher flow rate.

Out the back it&#8217;s pretty much more of the same and yet this new damper is a big improvement on the old DHX. Flowing four times more oil according to Mark Fitzsimons, head of the Fox race programme, it&#8217;s a delicious marshmallow like feel over the small to medium ground textures
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom