active under braking suspension
- Thread starter saruti
- Start date
i'm no suspension expert, but when i was riding the Session88, it felt like it was active even when braking.
It also depends if the used design is designed well. And then there is a good suspension setup what really makes the difference. If you setup your suspension like crap, your bike will ride like crap. And then there are other aspects like geometry and riders preferences.
As for the split pivot/abp design, I must say it works well, although I'm not so happy about the low pivot point and therefore the forward axle path on my Session 88...
Count me as one of the few who value braking. Maybe it's because I spend most of my time on steeper rockier trails, where you're on the brakes more often, or maybe it's because I'm slow, but I love a very active platform for braking. My ABP fuel and Racelink were really pretty great when it got hectically steep. My sunday feels a bit more choppy in the chunder.
I think I'd put axle path, pedaling, braking, then leverage rate in that order. There are a good variety of shocks on the market to bandaid a goofy leverage rate (ie RC4 vs. CCDB). I'm beginning to value the performance of a good pedaling platform too. Rode a Trek Session 10 this weekend that pedaled superbly....but there's no replacement for a good high axle path in the chunder.
I think I'd put axle path, pedaling, braking, then leverage rate in that order. There are a good variety of shocks on the market to bandaid a goofy leverage rate (ie RC4 vs. CCDB). I'm beginning to value the performance of a good pedaling platform too. Rode a Trek Session 10 this weekend that pedaled superbly....but there's no replacement for a good high axle path in the chunder.
brake before brake bumps, not in them.
I'm on a new V10C and it feels active under braking. Its almost hard for me to get used too. I'm coming off a Revolt which would let you know that you were on the brakes too hard. The V10C seems like it just keeps eating the bumps even with the brakes on.
I'm still on the fence as to whether this is a good thing or not.
I'm still on the fence as to whether this is a good thing or not.
yes but the bike designer can't design their customers
I do not understand the 1st sentence though
hmmm, ride DH trails, not DHBMX trails. Real trails have bumps all the time. The only place I've ever seen "braking bumps" has been on DHBMX trails.
I think he's saying a suspension system is entirely dependent on the quality of its design. IE, a sunday knockoff may perform like crap because they didn't optimize the leverage rate or arrange the pivots appropriately. Or, a very low single pivot vs. an "optimized" single pivot at chainring height.yes but the bike designer can't design their customers
Well, that was not my best english...
I meant, that you can take any suspension design on the market (split pivot, horst link, vpp...) and make it work really well.Or like crap.
Same feeling here. I had some test rides on an Alutech Keiler (horst link) wich was way easier to start drifting with a bit of input of my rear brake. On my bike, sometimes I have a bit of hard time to start a drift, because there's so much grip. It takes a bit of time to get used to it.
On the other hand, you'll get an Evil Undead (well sometime), so you can always go back on your accustomed suspension system.
Edit:
@ Sandwich: Thanks for the good explanation
Last edited:
Want to quickly check if your suspension will be active under braking? In stationary position, jump on your bike and bounce up and down on your rear end without touching the brakes. Take note on how plush and active your rear end is. Now lock both front and rear brakes and bounce up and down? Notice your suspension stiffening? How stiff your suspension gets determine how less active it will be under braking.
Yeah but thats why axle path and leverage curves are important. I didn't understand because it looked like there is something extra that influences the susp quality.
Why would it be a bad thing?
MOAR gripz in the rough, therefore you can't set up a drift as easily and show off your mad roost skillz brah.
Hmmm......
I have never ridden either bike but I was under the impression that the DW link was better at isolating breaking force from the suspension than the VPP.
LOL WUT?
True or not, the Revolt is not DW link.
Revolt isn't a DW link. Its a linkage actuated SP (DELTA Link). The two Sundays I had felt quite different from the DELTA link.
I'm not saying its a bad thing; I'm just saying its very different. The Revolt gave me more feedback when I was doing something stupid like grabbing too much brake through the rough stuff. The V10 doesn't do that and I'll need to try and adjust my riding accordingly.
good point
Depends who you ask. There are good and bad traits about bikes that squat under braking - some like it, some don't.
When I first started riding my Single Pivot bikes I wasn't a fan, but now really enjoy the ability to load the rear end with the tap of the rear brake. Also being able to whip the back end around on right corners by initiating a drift is pretty sweet. But during the process of getting used to it, I also ate sh|t a lot after using a bit too much rear brake in corners - which in turn made me more aware of when to brake and when to let it go.
But at high speeds, you need to be very careful and pay close attention to where you use your brakes. Riding DW and Mestro bikes all these years made me lazy and SP bikes made me realized how much (too much) brakes I was using. Fully active suspensions are more forgiving in those "oh sh|t" situations where you need to quickly (and unexpectedly) shut it down, that's definitely a characteristic I miss about some of my older bikes.
Choose your drug and indulge...
When I first started riding my Single Pivot bikes I wasn't a fan, but now really enjoy the ability to load the rear end with the tap of the rear brake. Also being able to whip the back end around on right corners by initiating a drift is pretty sweet. But during the process of getting used to it, I also ate sh|t a lot after using a bit too much rear brake in corners - which in turn made me more aware of when to brake and when to let it go.
But at high speeds, you need to be very careful and pay close attention to where you use your brakes. Riding DW and Mestro bikes all these years made me lazy and SP bikes made me realized how much (too much) brakes I was using. Fully active suspensions are more forgiving in those "oh sh|t" situations where you need to quickly (and unexpectedly) shut it down, that's definitely a characteristic I miss about some of my older bikes.
Choose your drug and indulge...
I think people here use the term "active" as a suspension that is isolated from braking forces.
Good article on "active" suspension
http://www.tonyfoale.com/Articles/Active/active.htm
Good article on "active" suspension
http://www.tonyfoale.com/Articles/Active/active.htm
For me it like this.
The rear wheel on my V10 seems to keep tracking along the ground even when I grab a mitt full of rear brake. It feels like I can lock the wheel and not even know it.
On the Revolt the rear wheel would track the ground but not the same as when I wasn't on the brakes. I'd know that the wheel wasn't spinning because of the way the bike reacted.
Here's a question I've been wondering for awhile...
Can you give us a ranking on how each of your suspension systems rate for pedaling and braking?
Which one pedals best? DW link, DELTA, Split Pivot? Which one has the best braking characteristics? If there is another way or other attributes to rank/rate them I'm all ears.
that's your tape worm making you all bouncy - Active x 2
Good point. Maybe we need bikes with truly active suspension. Remember those old Inifiniti Q45's? The ones that would actually extend the outside suspension around a turn - active response to mass transfer - but that still allowed bump compliance?
Is that what you've been up to Dave? The new "DW-A"?
Is that what you've been up to Dave? The new "DW-A"?
There's so much more that goes into a bike than just the name of its pivot system. There are some rough characteristics that each exhibit, but it's the sum of the execution that really defines how each works. For example:
1. VVP original rides and pedals differently than VPP2
2. The different manufactures of DW bikes create bikes that ride differently for a given category
3. Single pivots can be radically different such as the older low pivot and linkage Turner DHR compared to the very high pivot non-linkage BB7
4. Two systems that have similar appearances, DW and Maestro, ride differently in both pedaling and bump compliance
Ahhhh, No. This is not true.
Last edited:
the first thing I have felt when doing my first run on a sunday bike in 2006 was how the bike was less forgiven under braking
Coming from a SGS ironhorse.....
The other thing was how the SGS was slacker then the sunday. (fixed that with angle set headset that I made a week after I bought the bike)
I have the sunday for 5 years now and I really love it. But I wish it was active like FSR...)
Coming from a SGS ironhorse.....
The other thing was how the SGS was slacker then the sunday. (fixed that with angle set headset that I made a week after I bought the bike)
I have the sunday for 5 years now and I really love it. But I wish it was active like FSR...)
I am so confused by your post. I designed both of those bikes. The Sunday had a roughly 2.5 degree slacker head angle than the SGS, and more constant (more consistent lever feel) and similar levels of braking squat than the SGS. I was doing a LOT of data acquisition at the time, not like this crappy little 2 channel 250Hz systems that you see cobbed onto random bikes, I am talking about full scale rally level data at high frequencies. The Sunday was superior to the SGS from both rider feedback and in every measurable data parameter. We put Sam Hill and Bryn Atkinson on the bikes and Sam dropped ~7 seconds and Bryn ~14 from their race runs that same day.
seconded
Yes, I've been working on it in all of my spare time.. Seeing as it's 6 something AM here and I expect to be in the office at 8PM tonight, how am I doing? hahGood point. Maybe we need bikes with truly active suspension. Remember those old Inifiniti Q45's? The ones that would actually extend the outside suspension around a turn - active response to mass transfer - but that still allowed bump compliance?
Is that what you've been up to Dave? The new "DW-A"?
I want a bike so active I feel like Nigel Mansell.
DW - get to it!
DW - get to it!
Each design is really only as good as its pivot locations. When I design a new bike for one of my partners, say Turner 5 Spot vs Pivot Mach 5.7, I am looking at the desired end result and designing towards that. Everything is a tradeoff. As a designer, I know of no other system with the ability to make less compromises than the dw-link design. There is a real separation of anti-squat, braking squat, leverage ratio, layout, packaging that can be tactically and independently manipulated. No amount of marketing BS that you read in a magazine is going to change that. It is what it is. With Split Pivot, I can do some really cool things too, I think of it as the best possible single pivot suspension, with a dialed in floating brake and leverage ratio. Obviously it is a single pivot for acceleration, and a multi link for braking, so again it comes down to very careful pivot placement. With Delta I have to trade off acceleration and braking. They are controlled by one common pivot location, but the design has AWESOME flexibility with leverage ratios and geometry control. You can change the two independently and that is a huge feature for some riders.
give me cold fusion and I will deliver
You give me 1.21 gigawatts and I'll give you cold fusion...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_of_magnitude_(power)#gigawatt_.28109_watts.29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_of_magnitude_(power)#gigawatt_.28109_watts.29
Yeah I nearly fainted when I got the news, and that was on the first prototypes, (the final bikes were much lighter and had further refined suspension) and Sam I believe had won earlier that day on the SGS as well. That was pretty crazy stuff.That must have been somewhat encouraging that you'd got things right.
I had the SGS with 8" fork (888) so the bike was slacker than it was in your design
But I can definitely say that the FSR link on the SGS was better when braking...
I am not Sam or Brian, and maybe they dont care about things like that, (when I race I dont care about it too) but if you ride for the fun of riding, it is important. (For me)
Your new design look like it combines the single pivot with the FSR.
I want to know if under braking it acts like FSR and remain active.
Thanks.
(Love your work)
My point really had nothing to do with Sam or Bryn, the point was that the data, actual measurements taken with computer equipment during riding clearly showed that the Sunday was performing better under braking. In a back to back test, this leads me to setup. On your particular bike(s) I am expecting that the "feel" that you have in your mind is related to setup, or is not exactly equivalent.I had the SGS with 8" fork (888) so the bike was slacker than it was in your design
But I can definitely say that the FSR link on the SGS was better when braking...
I am not Sam or Brian, and maybe they don’t care about things like that, (when I race I don’t care about it too) but if you ride for the fun of riding, it is important. (For me)
Your new design look like it combines the single pivot with the FSR.
I want to know if under braking it acts like FSR and remain active.
Thanks.
(Love your work)
Just something to consider; Many of the best test riders have a hard time making comparisons from week to week, so without a back to back test ride it is pretty difficult to make comparisons. That's why most forms of racing rely on data. It never forgets and is always accurate.
Also, on the SGS, steering angle was ~67 with a 550AC height, the Sunday was ~64.5 with a 571AC height. You would need to make the AC height on the SGS massive to equal the Sunday's steering angle. Like Marzocchi Supermonster Massive.
So to answer your question, the Split Pivot design has some variability in what can be done from a braking standpoint, as does the FSR design. I am building Split Pivot bikes with a braking squat curve closer to the dw-links than the SGS. The SGS was pretty inconsistent in it's braking, it started with a good deal of squat and tapered to very little at the end. I am shooting for more constant braking squat as that has proven to be more confidence inspiring for the vast majority of riders, as well as shown to have better traction through data acquisition. The flatter braking squat curve that I work to incorporate into many of my designs also gives a more consistent lever feel than a radically changing design.
My whole goal is to improve rider confidence through engineering improvement.