mtb suspension on dirt bikes?

ChrisKring · Jun 30, 2009

why? What problem are you trying to solve?

My first thought is that the driving force of the wheel would be a problem with the canfield design used in a moto application.

jonKranked · Jun 30, 2009

My $0.02:

If it ain't broke don't fix it. Companies like honda and kawasaki spend huge amounts on R&D, and have been developing moto suspension for decades. If there was a better design than what they're currently using, don't you think they'd be producing it by now?

Also, a little lesson from History:

When Cannondale began R&D on their own Dirtbike and motorsports division, it eventually force them to file for bankruptcy.

edit: I'm not one to discourage innovation or new ideas, but in this case it would require a substantial investment of time & money, and there's no guarantee of an ROI.

Sandwich · Jun 30, 2009

I thought DW was working on moto suspension already.

And didn't the honda MTB have some direct relation to their moto program?

And Mert Lawwill designed his suspension system for circle track racers....see the street tracker bike.

Finally, most bike suspensions are more complicated to counteract pedaling forces. On a moto, you have no pedaling forces, just the motor, so cornering and big jump absorption would come first...low pivots are best for both of those.

I do wonder if a VPP style/dual link setup could be used on a car though, to achieve better cornering.

ChrisKring · Jun 30, 2009

the honda mtb deal was a platform for developing the CVT. The Honda bike suspension was just a single pivot and a showa engineer.

jonKranked · Jun 30, 2009

I'd still kill for a showa DH fork.

dw · Jun 30, 2009

jonKranked said:
My $0.02:

If it ain't broke don't fix it. Companies like honda and kawasaki spend huge amounts on R&D, and have been developing moto suspension for decades. If there was a better design than what they're currently using, don't you think they'd be producing it by now?

In order to fix it, you need to know that something is broke first. I've worked with one of the largest MX forces in the world, sat down and talked with their race staff at length, etc.. The moto world has a good deal to learn IMO, and a good deal of improvement is possible still. In early 2005 I applied for patents on a linkage suspension specifically for engine powered vehicles called Orion. There is no doubt in my mind that 20 years from now, motorcycles will look a lot different than they do today.

jonKranked said:
Also, a little lesson from History:

When Cannondale began R&D on their own Dirtbike and motorsports division, it eventually force them to file for bankruptcy.

edit: I'm not one to discourage innovation or new ideas, but in this case it would require a substantial investment of time & money, and there's no guarantee of an ROI.

Yeah, Cannondale was a disaster in some ways, but I think that they really just bit off more than they could chew. The Folan engine especially screwed them.

Jason4 · Jun 30, 2009

I don't really buy into the idea that it can't be done better just because a bunch of engineers have already tried and a few companies have spent lots of money on it. I do agree though that I don't see what benefit you will get from applying a bicycle suspension design to a motorcycle. The frequency of force inputs on the chain is drastically different between the two, to the point that you can consider the torque input on the motorcycle chain to be almost constant (not quite if you follow the big bang ideas in MotoGP). A bicycle suspension is much more sophisticated (expensive, maintenance intensive, time consuming to engineer) due to the larger variation in forces that are applied and also due to direct feedback to the rider through the drivetrain.

I've heard rumor that DW was satisfied with the Revolt suspension when the leverage curve looked a lot like the current Honda supercross bike's curve. Can't wait for him to weigh in on this topic. Lance from Canfield will be another interesting one to hear from.

jonKranked · Jun 30, 2009

dw said:
In order to fix it, you need to know that something is broke first. I've worked with one of the largest MX forces in the world, sat down and talked with their race staff at length, etc.. The moto world has a good deal to learn IMO, and a good deal of improvement is possible still. In early 2005 I applied for patents on a linkage suspension specifically for engine powered vehicles called Orion. There is no doubt in my mind that 20 years from now, motorcycles will look a lot different than they do today.

I don't disagree that there isn't room for improvement, I was more pondering if garage engineering would be the source for the next big thing in moto suspension evolution.

dw said:
Yeah, Cannondale was a disaster in some ways, but I think that they really just bit off more than they could chew. The Folan engine especially screwed them.

From what I had heard at the time, what eventually ran them into the ground was a lot of minute changes between the engine and the suspension; when there was a minor tweak to one, the other needed to be adjusted. But after that was adjusted, the original had to be readjusted again. My understanding was that it was this continual back and forth that was really time (and financially) consuming that eventually exhausted their resources.

If you have any more info in regards to the engine (or their moto program in general) that you can legally publicly share, I'd love to hear it. I'd heard from the people that rode it that it was an amazing dirt bike.

boogenman · Jun 30, 2009

can anyone here confirm that Honda's DH project was used as R&D for the shocks and forks for the motor sports division?

spornographer · Jun 30, 2009

not much of a contribution to the thread other than to spark someone's history knowledge, but i have a vague memory of reading that lawwill tried to apply his mtb design to dirt bike and said that it was just too efficient when paired with the power of the motor. something along the lines of the rider not being able to handle the power applied to the ground because the suspension was too efficient. anyone?

slow-mo video from thunder valley on saturday for a little moto squish analyzing : )

http://www.vitalmx.com/videos/member/2009-Thunder-Valley-SlowMo-Goods,726/GordoMX,15810

dw · Jun 30, 2009

Jason4 said:
I've heard rumor that DW was satisfied with the Revolt suspension when the leverage curve looked a lot like the current Honda supercross bike's curve. Can't wait for him to weigh in on this topic. Lance from Canfield will be another interesting one to hear from.

I can't tell if you were making a joke with the Honda leverage rate thing or not, but the Revolt Leverage rate is REALLY different than any MX leverage rate that I've seen.

I don't even consider what's going on with MX leverage rates (all of which are pretty similar in the grand scheme of things) when I'm working on bicycle projects.

The applications are pretty different anyways, so from a leverage rate standpoint, the needs of an MX bike and DH bike are just not exactly comparable.

dw · Jun 30, 2009

jonKranked said:
I don't disagree that there isn't room for improvement, I was more pondering if garage engineering would be the source for the next big thing in moto suspension evolution.

Yeah, hard to tell. The first time around, the big changes came from garages in the USA, I think of Britten in that respect too. Regardless of the location, a garage or the most high tech lab in the world, there is usually a visionary person or two behind big innovations.Who knows where the next one will come from, right?

jonKranked said:
From what I had heard at the time, what eventually ran them into the ground was a lot of minute changes between the engine and the suspension; when there was a minor tweak to one, the other needed to be adjusted. But after that was adjusted, the original had to be readjusted again. My understanding was that it was this continual back and forth that was really time (and financially) consuming that eventually exhausted their resources.

If you have any more info in regards to the engine (or their moto program in general) that you can legally publicly share, I'd love to hear it. I'd heard from the people that rode it that it was an amazing dirt bike.

Yeah, that's basically along the lines of what I was told also. The original intent with the was a layout with engine was spun in the chassis and the intake went through the headtube, with the airbox above and in front of the engine. Apparently some key personnel left Folan, and this left a huge amount of unfinished development work that added a lot of strain to the program. That's all secondhand info, maybe there are some people on the board here with some more detailed info on the deal there.

It's too bad, I was really pulling for Cannondale. It would be awesome to have an American MX and SX competitor. I could get behind that.

IH8Rice · Jun 30, 2009

dw said:
Yeah, that's basically along the lines of what I was told also. The original intent with the was a layout with engine was spun in the chassis and the intake went through the headtube, with the airbox above and in front of the engine. Apparently some key personnel left Folan, and this left a huge amount of unfinished development work that added a lot of strain to the program. That's all secondhand info, maybe there are some people on the board here with some more detailed info on the deal there.

i heard the same thing too. because of the where the intake was the for the engine, it consumed a lot of dirt into the engine, particularly indoors on SX tracks. they didnt seem to have a fix for it and kept dumping money into the project .

xy9ine · Jun 30, 2009

kinda neat - the lawwil streettracker:

Jason4 · Jun 30, 2009

dw said:
I can't tell if you were making a joke with the Honda leverage rate thing or not, but the Revolt Leverage rate is REALLY different than any MX leverage rate that I've seen.

I don't even consider what's going on with MX leverage rates (all of which are pretty similar in the grand scheme of things) when I'm working on bicycle projects.

The applications are pretty different anyways, so from a leverage rate standpoint, the needs of an MX bike and DH bike are just not exactly comparable.

DW-

I wouldn't say a joke but I wasn't really serious. I hear lots of little bits of info and that was along with it. Trying not come across as a DW fanboi, I appreciate your work and have enjoyed two bikes with your suspension and currently have a bunch of e.13 components on my bike.

Can you explain further about the shape of the leverage curve and a comparison between bicycles and motorcycles. If you look at my post above you'll see that I agree about the different forces involved but I'm curious to learn more about the subject.

To the idea of VPP being applied to cars: check out Audi's front suspension from the B5 chassis onward and also all unequal length a-arm setups. What we refer to as axle path loosely translates to a camber curve. Again, there are different forces involved as a car tire is turned 90 degrees to the direction of travel when compared to a bike unless you are looking at some sort of trailing arm.

MttyTee · Jun 30, 2009

jonKranked said:
If you have any more info in regards to the engine (or their moto program in general) that you can legally publicly share, I'd love to hear it. I'd heard from the people that rode it that it was an amazing dirt bike.

If you have access to Google and a few minutes to browse you can find some patent info and spy shots of a blue 2010 bike with a very similar engine set up.

ChrisKring · Jun 30, 2009

Suspension improvements would be more accepted with the off road racing crowd. There would be some benifit to being able to put more power down across rough terrain.

I don't see any rapid changes in suspension design on a supercross track. The tracks are realitively smooth. The suspension is set up for the whoops and for a mis-time on a jump. Riding techniques have adapted to the current design and it's really hard to convince someone to jump a 75' triple jump on a different design. Something as little as changing a sproket can change how the bike reacts on a jump.

So again, what are you trying to improve? What type of riding do you do and what level are you at?

ChrisKring · Jun 30, 2009

MttyTee said:
If you access to Google and a few minutes to browse you can find some patent info and spy shots of a blue 2010 bike with a very similar engine set up.

The are also in the latest issue of dirt rider. I tohught they were photochopped.

So, I know you know the answer, are they real for 2010 or not? What is GL saying?

freeridefool · Jun 30, 2009

jonKranked said:
I don't disagree that there isn't room for improvement, I was more pondering if garage engineering would be the source for the next big thing in moto suspension evolution.

From what I had heard at the time, what eventually ran them into the ground was a lot of minute changes between the engine and the suspension; when there was a minor tweak to one, the other needed to be adjusted. But after that was adjusted, the original had to be readjusted again. My understanding was that it was this continual back and forth that was really time (and financially) consuming that eventually exhausted their resources.

If you have any more info in regards to the engine (or their moto program in general) that you can legally publicly share, I'd love to hear it. I'd heard from the people that rode it that it was an amazing dirt bike.

The cannondale dirt bike was a piece of ****. We still have one in our store. The fuel injection as sketchy at best and always had problems. The bike was obscenely heavy. Even with the fuel injection the bike wasnt faster, snappier or smoother through the power curve. The bike was a great idea but very poorly executed.

buildyourown · Jun 30, 2009

spornographer said:
not much of a contribution to the thread other than to spark someone's history knowledge, but i have a vague memory of reading that lawwill tried to apply his mtb design to dirt bike and said that it was just too efficient when paired with the power of the motor. something along the lines of the rider not being able to handle the power applied to the ground because the suspension was too efficient. anyone?

Lawill came from moto. His suspension was orginally developed for flat track.

As for the Cannondale, IIRC, they were trying to push the 4-stroke when the entire moto world was convinced that there would never be a viable 4-stroke MX bike.

To the OP: I'm sure a linkage MX bike would have some benefits. There are lots of DH bike designs and they all have their pros and cons. What works is mainly up to the rider.

ohio · Jun 30, 2009

The very last gen of Cannondale's were sick, but it was too little too late.

For anyone that doesn't think the suspension is that important, getting power to the ground is a huge challenge on both motocross and street bikes and the more powerful these bikes get the bigger a problem it becomes. It's not about improving efficiency, it's all about improving traction, and there's still plenty of room to get better. Right now the formula is completely incremental: make the swingarm as long as possible, dial-in in enough low-speed compression damping to keep the wheel from hopping.

Whoops · Jul 1, 2009

dw said:
... I think of Britten in that respect too...

I tell you, there's something in the water down here. Come on down DW, and drink teh kool aid.

ianjenn · Jul 1, 2009

boogenman said:
can anyone here confirm that Honda's DH project was used as R&D for the shocks and forks for the motor sports division?

When the team was still together a friend who is RD engineer at SHOWA/HARLEY saw info on the fork and shock. He also believed they were looking into improving the motorcycle suspensions with the data.

3D. · Jul 1, 2009

I think it would be interesting to see the AMA drop there weight restrictions for SX bikes and allow factory and privateer teams to push up what ever they want to the gate, inside of the appropriate bore/stroke/power classification of course.

ianjenn · Jul 1, 2009

3D. said:
I think it would be interesting to see the AMA drop there weight restrictions for SX bikes and allow factory and privateer teams to push up what ever they want to the gate, inside of the appropriate bore/stroke/power classification of course.

Bring back smokers! :rant:

IH8Rice · Jul 1, 2009

3D. said:
I think it would be interesting to see the AMA drop there weight restrictions for SX bikes and allow factory and privateer teams to push up what ever they want to the gate, inside of the appropriate bore/stroke/power classification of course.

i didnt know they had a weight limit. do you know what it is?

go-ride.com · Jul 1, 2009

ohio said:
The very last gen of Cannondale's were sick, but it was too little too late.

For anyone that doesn't think the suspension is that important, getting power to the ground is a huge challenge on both motocross and street bikes and the more powerful these bikes get the bigger a problem it becomes. It's not about improving efficiency, it's all about improving traction, and there's still plenty of room to get better. Right now the formula is completely incremental: make the swingarm as long as possible, dial-in in enough low-speed compression damping to keep the wheel from hopping.

Hey guys, Cannondales are still being made in the US of A. http://www.atkusa.com/

IMO MX suspension is hurting in acceleration and braking chop, but if you create an active suspension to accelerate better in chop you will probably lose the ability to absorb big hits with the throttle, skimming whoops may be harder, and they probably wont jump as far. MX racers use acceleration torque to make the bike handle better in whoops, jumps and big hits. The negative is less than perfect performance in accel and braking chop. At this moment in time whoops, jumps and big hits are more important than annoying accel chop.
For pure off-road MX such as GNCC or Enduro I would think an active suspension system may be better than what we currently have overall, but even in those disciplines higher skilled riders use accel torque to launch over obstacles and moves like these are what often separate them from the slower classes.
These are just some quick thoughts on the subject. I know DW has been working on his ideas for a few years, so Ill be really interested to see what hes come up with in the future.

spornographer · Jul 1, 2009

buildyourown said:
Lawill came from moto. His suspension was orginally developed for flat track.

yeah, i know that. i guess i should have said MX bike instead of dirt bike in my original message.

ChrisKring · Jul 1, 2009

3D. said:
I think it would be interesting to see the AMA drop there weight restrictions for SX bikes and allow factory and privateer teams to push up what ever they want to the gate, inside of the appropriate bore/stroke/power classification of course.

please don't. The homologation rule is the reason why you can buy a bike 95% capable of the same bike that Stewart rides. Just try to go out and buy a car 95% of the capability of a F1 car.

The other problem with "works" bikes is that the cost becomes too much for privateers.

bikedumpdave · Jul 3, 2009

I have a 2008 FX mountain moto, and have exprimented with the original fork ,
the monster tee, which works good , havent been able to snap it, and it doesnt bottom out!
tried a manitou durado / no subility to loose and bottomed out at speed
next was a boxxer / it broke first ride and put the monster back on

to find more on these moto style DH bikes visit April forums, and scrol down to find my posts, enjoy;

http://www.apriliaforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=135255&page=14

stgil888 · Jul 3, 2009

I agree with the thread starter that it would be great to see more experimentation in motorcycle suspension design. Like many others have posted before me, riding techniques have adapted to take advantage of 'problems' with current motorcycle suspension design that wouldn't be well tolerated by cyclists.

I don't think firing order changes, like "Big Bang" GP motors, really affect torque through the chain to the rear wheel that much. Those motors are turning such high RPM's under race conditions that I imagine the torque output is fairly smooth, even with the unusual firing order.

Off-road racing buggies, like limited VW air cooled classes, will often use one 'spec' cylinder with three over-sized cylinders to increase power and still be able to pass inspection when an official demands to cc a cylinder through the spark plug hole. Talk about uneven power delivery. I haven't seen engine-stand dyno numbers for these type of 3+1 mutant motors, but I bet their power delivery is even more unusual than "big bang" GP motors.

Torque at the rear axle/hub plays a big role in motorcycle suspension design. Also, if you're using a chain drive, I'm not sure it's possible to have a multi-link design with a chain length that changes throughout the suspension's travel cycle. There's no derailleur to keep tension on the chain.

Check out BMW and other shaft-drive suspension designs. They sometimes use parallel or semi-parallel control arms to help alleviate torque induced issues at the hub. These designs have issues similar to pinion climb and driveshaft/pinion angle changes on solid-rear axle car and truck rear suspension designs.

stgil888 · Jul 4, 2009

those flexible remote control shafts wouldn't be my first choice. At high speed they'd want to swing around like a jump rope. Also, take a look at the diameters available. I don't think a .098 inch steel cable is going to transmit moto power levels to the wheel.

jcaramia · Jul 5, 2009

ChrisKring said:
please don't. The homologation rule is the reason why you can buy a bike 95% capable of the same bike that Stewart rides. Just try to go out and buy a car 95% of the capability of a F1 car.

The other problem with "works" bikes is that the cost becomes too much for privateers.

P.T.W · Jul 5, 2009

jcaramia said:

Sorry try again, as you can see from these lap times at the Ferrari test track,the Enzo isn't even close to %95 as quick as a F1 car

Oh an to the OP...do some research on the Boyesen Link, it was a prototype linkage rear end from the early 80s....but i do wonder that if a small issue like chain tension is a struggle for you, that maybe your biting off wayyy more than you can chew

Fiorano Circuit Record Lap Times
Ferrari F2004 (2004, Michael Schumacher) 0.55.999
Ferrari F2003-GA (2003, Michael Schumacher) 0.56.33
Ferrari 248 F1 (2006, Felipe Massa) 0.57.099
Ferrari F2007 (2007, Felipe Massa) 00'58.360
Ferrari F2005 (2005, Michael Schumacher) 0.57.146
Ferrari F2002 (2002, Michael Schumacher) 0.57.476
Ferrari F310B (1997, Michael Schumacher) 0.59.00
Ferrari F399 (1999, Luca Badoer) 1.00.226
Ferrari 412T1 (1994, Jean Alesi) 1.00.31
Maserati MCC (Andrea Bertolini) 1.11.711
Ferrari 333SP (slicks) 1.11.90
Ferrari 333SP (slicks & restrictor) 1.13.00
Ferrari FXX (Andrea Bertolini) 1.16.20
Ferrari 360 GT 1.17.00
Ferrari 360 N-GT (2003) 1.18.90
Ferrari Enzo (2003) 1.22.30
Ferrari 360 Challenge (2003) 1.22.40
Maserati Trofeo 1.23.848
Ferrari 355 Challenge 1.24.40
Maserati Trofeo 1.25.00
Ferrari 575 1.25.23
Ferrari 355 Challenge (1997?, wing, slicks, Nicola Larini) 1.25.40
Ferrari 355 Challenge (1995, no wing, streets) 1.26.50
Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano (2006) 1.26.500
Ferrari F50 1.27.00
Ferrari 360 Challenge Stradale 1.28.00
Ferrari F430 1.28.50
Ferrari F40 1.29.60
Ferrari 360 Modena 1.31.00
Ferrari 550 Maranello 1.32.528
Ferrari 348 Challenge 1.33.00
Ferrari F355 F1 (1997) 1.33.00
Ferrari F355 (1994) 1.34.00
Ferrari F512M (1995) 1.35.00
Ferrari 512TR (1992) 1.35.00
Ferrari 456GT 1.35.00
Maserati 4200 GT 1.35.00
Ferrari 288 GTO 1.36.00
Ferrari Testarossa (1984) 1.36.00
Ferrari 348TB (1989) 1.37.00
Ferrari 288GTO 1.37.00
Ferrari F512M 1.37.00
Porsche 959 1.37.00
Ferrari 456GT (1992) 1.40.00
Ferrari 328 GTB 1.44.00

jcaramia · Jul 5, 2009

P.T.W said:
Sorry try again, as you can see from these lap times at the Ferrari test track,the Enzo isn't even close to %95 as quick as a F1 car

Oh an to the OP...do some research on the Boyesen Link, it was a prototype linkage rear end from the early 80s....but i do wonder that if a small issue like chain tension is a struggle for you, that maybe your biting off wayyy more than you can chew

Fiorano Circuit Record Lap Times
Ferrari F2004 (2004, Michael Schumacher) 0.55.999
Ferrari F2003-GA (2003, Michael Schumacher) 0.56.33
Ferrari 248 F1 (2006, Felipe Massa) 0.57.099
Ferrari F2007 (2007, Felipe Massa) 00'58.360
Ferrari F2005 (2005, Michael Schumacher) 0.57.146
Ferrari F2002 (2002, Michael Schumacher) 0.57.476
Ferrari F310B (1997, Michael Schumacher) 0.59.00
Ferrari F399 (1999, Luca Badoer) 1.00.226
Ferrari 412T1 (1994, Jean Alesi) 1.00.31
Maserati MCC (Andrea Bertolini) 1.11.711
Ferrari 333SP (slicks) 1.11.90
Ferrari 333SP (slicks & restrictor) 1.13.00
Ferrari FXX (Andrea Bertolini) 1.16.20
Ferrari 360 GT 1.17.00
Ferrari 360 N-GT (2003) 1.18.90
Ferrari Enzo (2003) 1.22.30
Ferrari 360 Challenge (2003) 1.22.40
Maserati Trofeo 1.23.848
Ferrari 355 Challenge 1.24.40
Maserati Trofeo 1.25.00
Ferrari 575 1.25.23
Ferrari 355 Challenge (1997?, wing, slicks, Nicola Larini) 1.25.40
Ferrari 355 Challenge (1995, no wing, streets) 1.26.50
Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano (2006) 1.26.500
Ferrari F50 1.27.00
Ferrari 360 Challenge Stradale 1.28.00
Ferrari F430 1.28.50
Ferrari F40 1.29.60
Ferrari 360 Modena 1.31.00
Ferrari 550 Maranello 1.32.528
Ferrari 348 Challenge 1.33.00
Ferrari F355 F1 (1997) 1.33.00
Ferrari F355 (1994) 1.34.00
Ferrari F512M (1995) 1.35.00
Ferrari 512TR (1992) 1.35.00
Ferrari 456GT 1.35.00
Maserati 4200 GT 1.35.00
Ferrari 288 GTO 1.36.00
Ferrari Testarossa (1984) 1.36.00
Ferrari 348TB (1989) 1.37.00
Ferrari 288GTO 1.37.00
Ferrari F512M 1.37.00
Porsche 959 1.37.00
Ferrari 456GT (1992) 1.40.00
Ferrari 328 GTB 1.44.00

Those times are wrong... and who the hell is Michael Schumacher?
:rofl:

P.T.W · Jul 5, 2009

Isnt he the stig??? :rofl:

mtb suspension on dirt bikes?

Chimp

Turbo Monkey

Detective Dookie

Pig my fish!

Turbo Monkey

Detective Dookie

Wiffle Ball ninja

Monkey

Detective Dookie

Turbo Monkey

Monkey

Wiffle Ball ninja

Wiffle Ball ninja

I'm Mr. Negative! I Fail!

Turbo Monkey

Monkey

Monkey

Turbo Monkey

Turbo Monkey

Monkey

Turbo Monkey

The Fresno Kid

Turbo Monkey

Chimp

Turbo Monkey

Monkey

Turbo Monkey

I'm Mr. Negative! I Fail!

Monkey

Monkey

Turbo Monkey

Chimp

Monkey

Chimp

Monkey

Chimp

Monkey

Monkey

Monkey

Monkey