Kinda the opposite of that. Lots of ramp deep in the travel, so it'll be tougher to bottom out. Slightly regressive up to around sag, which likely takes away some midstroke support.
I wouldn't call it ideal, but it doesn't look terrible.
Random new bike thread
- Thread starter Sandro
- Start date
I wouldn't call it ideal, but it doesn't look terrible.
Thanks guys, I'm pretty clueless with these graphs.
I do prefer the spring rate adjustability and bottom out support of an air shock, so I will most likely be running one on whatever frame I end up with.
I do prefer the spring rate adjustability and bottom out support of an air shock, so I will most likely be running one on whatever frame I end up with.
Question for the nerds: when we're talking "mid-stroke" support, are we talking middle of between sag and bottom-out, or middle of 0-travel and bottom-out?
Yep, seems that it would be very unsupportive in mid-stroke, regardless of coil or air, with air, you'd probably get deep-stroke harshness that feels like spiking and even less mid-stroke support. 2.6 to 2 is a pretty dramatic leverage change, so it definitely makes me wonder "WTF?" with that shape...
E-riding at it's best.
I don't think it matters much, whether it's 50% of travel or 50% of travel past the sag point, that isn't going to be a very different point in the travel and it's more about this "area", as in plus or minus a %. There is no accepted "standard" for this that I know of, but when you look at an air shock, from it's start to end travel, it starts of progressive, goes flatter in the mid-travel, then gets progressive again at the end. There we are measuring from zero travel. Ideally, an air-shock bike will start off somewhat regressive to offset this, go progressive in the mid-travel, then go flatter at the end, to offset the air-shock effects. It gets trickier if you are going to try and design the bike as a compromise for both air and coil shocks. In general, there are going to be advantages (you can run both) and disadvantages (not optimized for either), but done right, it can work. Typically, these tend to still taper off a bit at the end of travel and can run into bottoming issues with coil shocks, requiring bigger bumpers to help add a little progression back, but they have to do this because they tend to beef-up the mid-stroke support with a more linear mid-stroke.
So back to that curve that goes digressive and then progressive, it's the opposite of what you want for an air shock. It goes flatter in mid travel, and the air shock goes flatter in mid travel, so the mid-stroke travel will be very linear. And with the ramp up at the end, due to air getting very progressive at the end of travel, the end of travel on that leverage curve will amplify this.
You want a constant progressive curve for coil shocks with a decent amount of progression (beginning/end LR), but again, that curve pictured above goes linear in the mid-stroke, so it'll use the mid-travel easier than the beginning and end. You at least NEED some progression (beginning/end LR) for a coil shock to work, which the bike has. It will probably at least not have the deep-stroke harshness as bad with a coil shock, but if that's the real leverage curve for that bike, it seems fairly crazy.
This is predicated on this being the correct leverage curve, the guys that convert these over sometimes make mistakes and slight placement errors can change the curve quite a bit. In general, they do a pretty good job, but it's important to realize that it's not a perfect process, especially if they are basing it on pictures.
Last edited:
Wheel rate is what you need to look at. It combines both leverage curve and and spring curve of the shock. It is expressed in N/mm in the metric world.
I seem to like bikes with a linear (not constant) rising wheel rate starting around 8 to 12 N/mm and finishing around 20 to 30 N/mm. That would be with a coil shock installed. (Air most of time shows a falling and then rising wheel rate which kind of feels hollow around SAG and shortly after...)
FWIW
I seem to like bikes with a linear (not constant) rising wheel rate starting around 8 to 12 N/mm and finishing around 20 to 30 N/mm. That would be with a coil shock installed. (Air most of time shows a falling and then rising wheel rate which kind of feels hollow around SAG and shortly after...)
FWIW
But a high pivot has a rearward path, so it would be less reactive to say landings than it would be to bumps?
Last edited:
My current possible trail bike short list, which has been pushed back as it looks like I can get my Burner back to fully functional is:Guys... talk me out of ordering one of these. What are the drawbacks?
(besides the price and color options.)
Leverage ratio, suspension design, shock size... does any of it suck? I haven't shopped for a "trail bike" in I don't know how long.
Review: Deviate Highlander - There Can Only Be One - Pinkbike
Is this the most capable "trail bike" on the market?www.pinkbike.com
Rid Egg Smash
Commencal Meta TR
Banshee Prime V3
Santa Cruz Hightower
Things which have fallen off the list:
Pivot Switchblade - don't want superdooperbooster
Transition Sentinel
Norco Optic
YT Jeffsy - can't fit a proper water bottle
Nukeproof Reactor RS
Nicolai Saturn 14 ST
Forbidden Druid
Zerode Katipo
Lots of good options there.
I bet the Jeffsy will get more tweaks for 2021 model.
YT geo is always about 1 year out of date due to their off-cycle product release calendar and strategy of selling previous year’s components. The magnetic water bottle is silly.
I bet the Jeffsy will get more tweaks for 2021 model.
YT geo is always about 1 year out of date due to their off-cycle product release calendar and strategy of selling previous year’s components. The magnetic water bottle is silly.
As much as I like the evil Egg
that Meta looks nice. Heavy, but yea so is my bike.
Yeah, that coil rear race version could be fun. I have the same issue with their new sizing as with lots of brands though, 6'2" and I'm suddenly always between L and XL sizing. L's tend to look a little small in the top tube and I worry about XL's being super tanker like.As much as I like the evil Egg
It seems odd to me that the Meta isn't a Horst.
No Commy is a Horst Link. The closest they got was the concentric pivot in the old Clash. The 2021 version they recently introduced changed it to a faux bar, with the same dropouts as the Meta.
Which saddens me. I've the prior version, and it's really too damn bad they went away from that design. I had hopes they were going to move it to more of their bikes.
Not sure if it was a patent issue or something else.
You for sure need to get to the HQ and see about a test ride, if you haven't already.
I like my current gen very much, but would be all over the newest version as a daily-driver bike if living out west again.
Why? Horst vs. pivot on the seatstay is one of the biggest frauds pulled over our eyes in mtb, in that Specialized made the horst and pivot on the chainstay out to be such hot shit, but for bike handling, as in braking, the lack of some squat was downright dangerous at times and the pedaling wasn't any better. 1x drivetrains make this even less of a contest. I'm not sure why Yurp has such as hard-on for horst-links. All that soggy-pedaling accounted for, I always felt they tended to hang up big time on square edged bumps too, improved with custom valving, but again, not the hot shit that Spec made them out to be. Turner Highline was seatstay pivot goodness (and massive BB height).
God, you'd need some headset spacers on the PP frame if you went 650b, L has a 110mm HT with a shitty Campy headset.
Nah, no patent issues there. They just consolidated the design and the number of shared pieces among some models on their lineup. This also adds to the shared design language.
I too hoped they would add the concentric pivot to other models, but given how they praise the faux bar design it was a natural move on their side.
I remember asking why GG didn't use the Horst Link. @mtg explained there wasn't really a huge benefit, you could design around the shortfalls of seatstay pivots (aka linkage driven single pivot) pretty easily. But he said (and I'm paraphrasing) that he caved to the requests of the unwashed masses because they kept asking for it. So it's not just a European thing.
Personally, I feel I like HL bikes because I appreciate the bike remaining active under braking. But that's probably all in my head, and I'm also far less "militant" about it now... That said, I've spent no time on newer single pivot bikes...
This. Times. 10,000.
Either Special Ed has a notorious lack of understanding of how the main pivot affects AS/bob, or they figured out most of their customers would end up running a smaller chainring than the one the bike has as OEM
. Then they try to fix their shitty pedaling characteristics with damper modifications which make the shock work well for a minority of the potential users, or slight variations on the position/shape of the shock-driving links.But, apart from the fact that a bit of brake squat in turns and in the steeps is helpful, it's also structurally better to not have a pivot between the main pivot and the rear axle, it builds a stiffer bike. I agree above that the "low horst link" bikes are pretty terrible and that they don't *have* to be built that way, but even with that, I still don't see any reason why a HL would be beneficial. It seems to me more the result of decades of Specialized marketing...The GG experience above is unfortunately what I suspect in many of these cases.This. Times. 10,000.
Either Special Ed has a notorious lack of understanding of how the main pivot affects AS/bob, or they figured out most of their customers would end up running a smaller chainring than the one the bike has as OEM
Every climb, everywhere, is on a smooth fireroad.
Last edited:
Yes, implementation matters far more than which suspension layout is used. There are some things you can achieve with some platforms that are limited/not possible with others, but the overwhelming majority of how the suspension rides is from the implementation, not just because it's X platform or Y platform.
Early on we did use simple single pivot on the GG/DH and linkage driven single pivot on the Megatrail, and they worked well. You're right, though, there still exists a significant sect of mountain bikers that cannot be convinced that a single pivot can ride well, or have preconceived negative connotations. Then, we decided to switch to a different platform for the 2016 Trail Pistol. The bikes rode like a GG before, and they still do now, albeit with multiple generations of refinement.
Whenever somebody says "all horst link bikes ride like <blank>", take it with skepticism, as what it really means is "the limited designs of horst link bikes I've ridden all ride like <blank>".
Last edited:
I think it was probably the lack of availability and concerns about long term support.
I took a linkage design course in college as an elective. We explored what my professor called patent cracking algorithms which allowed you to get one linkage configuration to perform the same way as another. Which other being a nerdy story just confirms that there are multiple ways to achieve the same performance. The configuration becomes a packaging problem as much as anything.
True, but there's some inherent disadvantages that just make no sense compared to the seat-stay pivot bikes IMO. One of those is the horst-link pivot in between the main pivot and the rear axle. This will always make for a flexier design than a solid arm between the main pivot and rear axle. It can be compensated for of course, but that adds weight that's not necessary on the other design. I get that many users of the horst link have been flattening out the AS profile, rather than just jacking the line way up to start at 150%, but in practice this is more rare and there seem to be many more non-horst link bikes achieving this. I'm definitely not against a properly designed horst link...but it still makes me question "why"? What was the "advantage" they were going for?
Don't take this the wrong way, GG would be near the top of my list if I had to get a new ride. I just see the obsession with HL, especially from euro manufacturers, bizarre.
Last edited:
Gotcha. I very much enjoy my Meta TR29, but find myself riding the Clash on local stuff more than I thought, just because it pedals so damn well for what it is.
Have had/tried a few Horst, VPP and other bikes over the years, but always seem to end back on some sort of linkaged SP.
We like what we like.
I really enjoy the concentric pivot on my Rallón, and briefly considered a Clash in order to switch to a newer ride. The pedaling efficiency you talk about was one of the most appealing points. I quickly had to back off the modernization project once our poor peso hit a 100:1 exchange rate to the US dollar
.
Antonio Osuna (@Vrock ) makes an excellent point about Horst Links: you can think of them as dual links with an extremely long lower link, and a tiny rear triangle. They decouple the braking from the suspension, but to an extent, and it all depends on where the Horst Link is located in relation to the rear wheel's axle.
Yeah, remember 15 years ago when everyone was going crazy about "needing" floating braking mounts to decouple the brake?, but then if your front end compresses due to weight shift and your rear end doesn't, you've stink-bugged your bike (even if the rear mount doesn't cause extension) and put it in to a more unfavorable position for going DH, riding anything steep, etc. Then those floating brake mounts just vanished into thin air in just a few years. I'm pretty sure it was because the conclusion was some brake squat is useful/helpful during braking.
Last edited:
My LG (S3) Specialized Stumpy EVO weighs 35LBS. It is as much as my Zerode was.....As much as I like the evil Egg
Having just read through the empty beer thread, what size and shock are you looking at? From memory you're close to my 6'2". I'd have to look at XL as the low stack height on the L would shorten stuff even more with 20mm of spacers.Guys... talk me out of ordering one of these. What are the drawbacks?
(besides the price and color options.)
Leverage ratio, suspension design, shock size... does any of it suck? I haven't shopped for a "trail bike" in I don't know how long.
Review: Deviate Highlander - There Can Only Be One - Pinkbike
Is this the most capable "trail bike" on the market?
Deviate Cycles
Thought I would start a thread for Deviate Cycles. They just launched the Highlander and, boy, it is a looker! I don't own any of their bikes but plan to pick up the Highlander once an XL frame is available. What do you guys think of this new bike? https://www.deviatecycles.com/
forums.mtbr.com
You made me go back and look at their site, I do like the sizing on their XL...