[norbar]

The full floater moves the stress, not magicly makes it dissapear. Sandwitch is a bit more literate than me so he put it better. Even if there is less stress on the front it has to go somewhere.

Also no one claims trek is a bad bike so don't get all defensive. It's just that there are a few people who get a nasty rash when they see to much marketing speak and silly myths created by it.

 

[Sandwich]

They got rid of a DU bushing which wears much quicker and needs more replacement over a cartridge bearing, and the full floater relieves stress on the frame, which means less prone to fatigue and cracking.

Are you sure? I'm willing to bet both eyelets are still DU bushings. All pivots are hopefully sealed cartridges, but I can understand bushes on lighter XC only models. I'd also argue that every single comment about needle bearings in shock eyelets has been negative, that they wear out fast and DU bushings are lighter, simpler, and more easy to replace, and offer no real world disadvantages. Secondly it doesn't relieve stress, just moves it. In this case you might be able to use a lighter downtube, but you'll probably have to use a heavier seat tube and reinforce the BB and pivot areas. It's different, it might be better, but in the real world where there are multiple factors, saying X is better than Y because it's different is not true. I'd argue the trek frames that use ABP and FF are better because they are designed better, though I am also a huge fan of split pivot/abp designs.

As for the comment on enduro bikes...people like options. I think you could get away with a 6" travel bike at a place like highland, but I wouldn't want to run air shocks for the braking bumps and bigger hits...being able to swap shocks gives versatility and can breathe life into an old frame. My old straight six was one of my favorite bikes I've ever owned, but I couldn't justify keeping one around since it used a dead pullshock and 22mm Hayes brake, plus it used bushings in several of its pivots.

tl;dr nothing wrong with DVCR nor full floater, just different ways of achieving a given result.

 

[davec113]

In the Trek FF, the force from the shock compressing is evenly divided between the main pivot and the rocker link pivot. On a regular non-ff frame the force usually goes into the downtube. IMO there is a big advantage in sending the force into the main pivot since it already has to deal with the force of the rear tire, so there is a potential to save weight.

The drcv shock does use bearings to mount the shock to the rocker link, the shock body is taller than a normal rp23 and there is no room for a normal du bushing. With minor modification, a regular shock can be mounted to the drcv-shocked trek models.

And I seriously doubt the drcv shock does not fade, even the vivid air fades somewhat, I know a couple pro riders that have rode both vivid coil and air shocks prefer the coil for longer race runs and the air only for shorter tracks because of that issue. If you think the drcv air shock does not fade I think you just don't notice it, the only question is how bad the issue is.

 

[p-spec]

You clearly have no idea at all, do you?

 

[tuumbaq]

Really dont see what the fuss is all about the DRCV, Its absolutely replaceable if one wishes to do so...Ive seen it done several times on Remedy's . . .
Here's a DIY : http://forums.mtbr.com/trek/diy-trek-remedy-10-11-drcv-coil-conversion-719504.html

Speaking of which, the DRCV shock on the Remedy was what got me worried a bit @ first when I was eyeing the Slash a few months back.Ive tested every generations of Remedy's with the DRCV shock (including a 2012 ) and that shock was the exact reason why I wouldn't get ride of my 2009 Remedy...The tune on the Remedy requires no more than 20% sag to perform decently therefore : air shock + minimal sag = poor grip.The shock blows thru its travel, its extremely wallow-y, bottoms out on nothing and not stable at all in the chunder.

Now for the Slash , it seems to be a very different story.I wouldnt want any other shock at this point...not even a coil.The shock is superb to say the least.Its balanced , stays up in its travel and as a very linear feel (which is what P-spec might be refereeing as "plush " perhaps lol . . . Nonetheless no harsh sudden ramp up on this guy.

@ 30% sag, the bike plows thru **** like no other trail bikes Ive had and the grip on this thing is phenomenal...It doesn't feel like a sticky air shock back there, small bumps compliance is very , very good...Full floater or not, the bike really does feel bottomless.I have NOT tested it on long 45 min descent and Im sure it would fade but on my local 15 -20min DH trails, the shock truly feels similar to a coil shock.I had a coil shock on both my last Nomad and Remedy and both were custom valved.I had air shocks on both of them @ first so Im well aware of the performance upgrade a coil can provide over an air shock.

Believe the hype or not but everything Ive read about this bike so far turned out to be 100% true...It does precisely what Trek said it would do...Homework well done if you ask me.

I do enjoy flicking the propedal ON going uphill, something I couldnt do with a coil and I've surprised myself liking the "ride" (or more LSC) position on the shock for jumpy, hardpack trails.Like I've already said, Im very pleased with the performance of this bike, very similar to a DH bikes in terms of suspension performance and geo in action.Now will I take it to the park next summer ? . . . proly not ! lol.Im sure it'll be an entirely different story in Whislter and I like my Session just fine for the park.