RideMonkey How To Series: Throwing a Tantrum in Public
So, back to reality.
Too bad we never got the chance to do the demo, sandwich, but hey, then i would've been accused of creating your profile, getting in as mod and letting the lizard people foist goofy suspension on unsuspecting monkeys. or something.
Because it's pretty difficult for you to understand the benefits of the active geometry until you feel it. You (and everyone else) is used to a range of geometry change that a conventional suspension provides. Some good, some not so good (like too much brake dive, for example).
But, here's an easy thought experiment. If you only climbed, would you generally want steeper of slacker. If you only descend? If you just ride flat XC stuff? We all know the answer. Of course you want different geometry for each of those situations. And having one bike that can provide a wider range of performance allows that.
Yes, you would prefer a consistent suspension that is not compromised anywhere else. Agreed. Although, every suspension, by definition, compromises somewhere.
reaward axle path=high pedal kickback
high AS=loses traction in rough
on and on.
So, maybe the compromise that is the fastest is the one for you. Or maybe the most comfortable. Or has the best traction.
if you put half as much effort into your business as you do engaging in worthless banter on the internet, you might actually be successful.
or maybe its time to lay off the truck stop amphetamines
or maybe its time to lay off the truck stop amphetamines
OK. So you're autistic. it might actiually help you to disclose this.
what's "normal"?
I've been riding XC on bikes with 62deg H/As since the late 90s.. it's really not a problem. up, down or along. Stupidly slack seat angles are. But not H/As around the general DH bike ballpark. Not for general mtb riding. For dirtjumping/street/park/Trials there's definitely more of a problem.
My current full suspesion trail bike has a sub 64deg HA while my 2 main hardtails share 69deg HAs. I ride all of them ALL DAY on the SAME TRAILS. no dramas.
Please go into detail about this one and explain EXACTLY what you are talking about. Use graphs if needs be. (no need to use EXACT figures if they really are such a closely guarded secret.
Do you simply mean the bike sags more when not being pedalled? I more than understand the benefits of running huge amounts of sag. IME there are plenty drawbacks to it too though.
May as well, yeah. go for it.
ok folks, easy with the insults. Differences of opinion are fine but insults aren't tolerated, even if your tiny arms can barely reach the keyboard.
@Tantrum Cycles , can I ask what happens if you stop pedaling briefly to clear a log or time your pedal stroke appropriately? The suspension will return to sag, correct? So you'll go from 0% sag to 30% sag (normal) to 0% sag every time you stop pedaling. Am I correct, or is that off base? My concern with such a system is the bobbing that would occur when you pause pedaling or start it.
@Tantrum Cycles , can I ask what happens if you stop pedaling briefly to clear a log or time your pedal stroke appropriately? The suspension will return to sag, correct? So you'll go from 0% sag to 30% sag (normal) to 0% sag every time you stop pedaling. Am I correct, or is that off base? My concern with such a system is the bobbing that would occur when you pause pedaling or start it.
.[/QUOTE]
Let's take your hardtails. With a 69 degree, static HT, it's pretty close to 69 climbing and somewhat steeper descending or on flat, due to fork sag. My guess is that when descending, you probably have to be more careful to keep your weight behind the front wheel than on you bike with a 64 or 62 degree HT. Right?
Your 64 HT bike is probably a bit slacker on level ground, due to sag. Even more so on a climb, due to weight transfer to the rear. Typically, this bike will take more effort to keep the front wheel on the ground. It will also be harder to pedal. Even if it has a steepish ST angle, it will be silly slack for optimum climbing. You'll spend more effort and energy keeping your body forward and your body position will be behind the pedals, not over. (relatively speaking).
It's not about whether you can. I raced the Kamakazi on a 73 HT angle and climbed my Intense M1 on XC courses. We can adjust to just about anything.
It's about what makes the ride more fun. Faster. More what a bike rider wants suspension to do for ALL of the given requirements. About what you want the bike to do for all of the various conditions and rider requirements.
The Meltdown Race, with a 64 degree HT angle, climbs more like a 70 Degree HT angle. On level ground, feel more like 66. It just makes the geometry more suitable for the conditions at hand.
Normal is everything you are riding. And everything else is riding.
Let's take your hardtails. With a 69 degree, static HT, it's pretty close to 69 climbing and somewhat steeper descending or on flat, due to fork sag. My guess is that when descending, you probably have to be more careful to keep your weight behind the front wheel than on you bike with a 64 or 62 degree HT. Right?
Your 64 HT bike is probably a bit slacker on level ground, due to sag. Even more so on a climb, due to weight transfer to the rear. Typically, this bike will take more effort to keep the front wheel on the ground. It will also be harder to pedal. Even if it has a steepish ST angle, it will be silly slack for optimum climbing. You'll spend more effort and energy keeping your body forward and your body position will be behind the pedals, not over. (relatively speaking).
It's not about whether you can. I raced the Kamakazi on a 73 HT angle and climbed my Intense M1 on XC courses. We can adjust to just about anything.
It's about what makes the ride more fun. Faster. More what a bike rider wants suspension to do for ALL of the given requirements. About what you want the bike to do for all of the various conditions and rider requirements.
The Meltdown Race, with a 64 degree HT angle, climbs more like a 70 Degree HT angle. On level ground, feel more like 66. It just makes the geometry more suitable for the conditions at hand.
This is on the website and of course (has been) and will be made fun of as a paint sketch, but you can get the general idea.
It's not quite as simple as that. Statically, on level ground, no. The sag is the sag. Wherever you set it.
But the faster you go, the more horizontal force pulls the CS to the rear. This causes a rotational torque on the Missing Link, the top of which attaches to the shock. This force has a small compressive effect, which increases the sag, proportional to speed. It's small. It's calculated. But the extra slack and extra neg travel are helpful. They keep your weight off the front, increase stability and increase the ability of the rear wheel to track the ground.
You have to differentiate "climbing" from "pedaling".
The only time you will be at zero sag is a "max" effort climb. So, if you stopped pedaling long enough to return to sag, you would stop moving and fall off. So let's cut it finer and say you have to time your pedal input to lessen slightly to clear a log or root while climbing. Typically, that means you will keep the highest possible effort until the tire impacts the log. At that moment, the wheel must travel up, the relaxation of your pedaling encourages it, but the bike doesn't really sag. It can't, the back wheel is traveling upward. By the time the wheel starts extending on the otherside of the log, you are pack on the power.
What you do know is that you had more travel to attack that log, since it was at full extension before impact.
if you are on level ground and do the same thing, the same thing will happen, but it will all start out at a lower sag level, simply due to lower effort. It still will be a higher sag than a conventional suspension, simply because when you raise the front while pedaling, weight transfer to the rear won't cause the instant squat of most bikes.
To make sure I'm specific here, it cannot go to full ext on level ground pedaling. The Missing Link delivers enough of an anti-compressive force to the top of the shock to keep the bike at static sag, but not enough to extend it.
And if you are fully extended, any cessation of pedaling results in cessation of forward motion, in which case it will return to sag. As long as you are going forward in such a high effort circumstance, the suspension will remain motionless and at full extension, until it hits a bump.
I hope you're not referring to me. it's blatantly obvious (maybe just to me) Tantrum's an Aspie.
No insult... infact far far from it.
I'm sure OCD, ADHD and a few other things as well.......
http://www.webmd.com/brain/autism/mental-health-aspergers-syndrome#1
"When you meet someone who has Asperger's syndrome, you might notice two things right off. He's just as smart as other folks, but he has more trouble with social skills. He also tends to have an obsessive focus on one topic or perform the same behaviors again and again."
I'll buy the self diagnosis... but not the bike.
Nope. not really. (well.. not the whole story anyway)
See... All my bikes are short (reach) and by today's standards completely unridabru for my height in wheelbase. But I'm a rear wheel baised rider happy steering with the rear, manualling everything and never have problems weighting the front. EVER... I also never EVER complain about lack of stability. I've always hated long bikes. I still ride BMX. sometimes on 20 mile XC rides
So No.. I don't actually ever have to consciously keep my weight back on ANY of my bikes.
FWIW I'm 5'11" and All 10* of my bikes have reach of between 380mm and 415mm)
* BMX, Road, HT XC, DJ, DH, 'Duro, slope.
Yes
No. not really.
Like I said. it's really short. when I climb my weight (the bulk of me) is moved forwards. not over the rear. Arms bent. A trait carried over from riding really short bikes everywhere.
for anyone other than me, Yes. Definitely. but I've been riding very steep climbs on bikes like this forever.
Nope. it's actually the easiest bike to climb on I've owned in over 2 decades. (1# it's longer 2# it's lighter 3# it has bags moar traction than anything else I own)
Again. No. I don't use a whole load more energy keeping my weight anywhere on the bike as I have a very strong core and like to alter my position all the time. I most certainly don't keep my bodyweight behind the pedals on any proper climbs.
See... this sort of shit gets on my tits... It absolutely IS about whether you can.
and WTF is anyone else to tell ME what is moar fun?
Every bike design is compromised over ALL various conditions. I have over the years chosen to optimise my bikes and set-ups to convey EXACTLY what makes riding FUN for ME. Maybe I find it FUN riding all British winter on bald/dry weather tyres. riding 20 mile XC loops with a slammed saddle. riding my suspension so stiff I have to manual through everything I can just to be able to hang on to the bottom. Riding a 100mm DJ hardtail when all my buddies are on 170mm 'Duro bikes. maybe it's just good ol' skids n wheelies... but I guess you'll be getting my point by now so I'll stop there.
sorry.. .you've completely lost me here.
if it's 64deg. it feels like 64deg. There is no "like"
I'll be back to read your other replies properly in a while
(have skim read your next two replies and can't quite get my head round how such a simple mechanical link can achieve all the "magic"* you profess it does without some sort of super computer calibrating and finetuning the changes as you ride)
*Not saying you definitely aren't some sort of wizard BTW...
I'm not one to burn an almost drowned witch
Last edited:
"How many books on Asperger’s Syndrome or Autism have you read that begin with Chapter 1: What is Asperger’s Syndrome or Chapter 1: What is Autism? If you or someone you love is on the spectrum, then the answer is probably “a lot.”
The authors’ desire to start at the beginning is commendable but honestly I skip over these introductory chapters. I have the DSM diagnostic criteria memorized and I’m on intimate terms with the signs and symptoms of Asperger’s Syndrome.
Perhaps a more useful opening chapter for aspies would be: What is Neurotypical?
Neurotypical is a term that’s thrown around in the autism community like everyone instinctively knows what it means. If this is a new word for you (like it was for me not so long ago), in the ASD community, neurotypical is often used to refer to people who are not on the autism spectrum. It’s a mash-up of the words “neurologically typical” and is often shortened to NT.
A more correct word for someone who is not autistic is allistic. Technically, you can be non-neurotypical (neuroatypical) even if you aren’t autistic. Having clarified that up front, I’m going to go with the popular usage here.
How Can You Tell if Someone is Neurotypical?
So who are these NTs and how can you tell if someone in your family is neurotypical?
For starters, NTs make up about 99% of the population, so they’re everywhere. It’s very likely that you know neurotypicals and you probably have at least one NT in your family. While there is no widely accepted diagnostic test, NTs are fairly easy to spot once you know what to look for.
Perhaps the most obvious giveaway is an NT’s tendency to make “small talk” or to want to “chat” with you. While small talk appears to be nonfunctional, for NTs it serves a very specific purpose. It’s a good idea to humor them and participate to whatever degree you can tolerate. If you’re patient with them, many NTs will soon feel comfortable enough to move from small talk to more interesting, in-depth conversations.
Another common sign that someone is an NT? Touching. NTs enjoy all sorts of physical contact and often use touch to greet friends, family and even casual acquaintances. While it’s hard to fathom why your real estate agent or hairdresser feels the need to send you off with a hug, try not to be judgmental while fending them off. NTs are simply wired differently.
Sometimes NT behavior can be frustrating. For example, you may notice that NTs have a tendency to say something other than what they mean. If you get a new haircut and you’re not sure how it looks on you, don’t bother asking an NT. Most will tell you it looks great, even if you look like this:
“No, really, I love your new hairstyle!”
Why? Because when a neurotypical woman asks her friend “how do you like my new haircut?” she isn’t looking for her friend’s opinion, she’s looking for validation. When her friend says, “I love it” she may mean I love your hair, but what she’s really saying is I love you and value you as a person.
So when your NT friend says “how do you like my new haircut?” and you, being your aspie self, reply, “It’s a little short in the back but I like it”, your NT friend hears I secretly hate you and think you’re ugly.
Confusing, I know.
And good luck getting an opinion out of an NT when you really need one. It may help to preface your question by explicitly stating that you’re seeking an actual, honest-to-God opinion but, even then, the NT’s dogged adherence to socially appropriate behavior may inhibit their ability to say what they’re really thinking. Try to remember that NTs were born this way and their natural sensitivity to what others are thinking and feeling often makes it hard for them to be completely honest.
Of course all NTs are different, much like all aspies are different, so these are just some general guidelines for recognizing the NTs in your life.
Offended Yet?
If you’re neurotypical, how did reading this make you feel? Offended? Stereotyped? Did you enjoy the patronizing tone? How about the sweeping generalizations?
What if it went on to talk about how some NTs are so socially adept that they get promoted into positions they don’t have the knowledge or skills for? What if it listed good careers for NTs (sales, management, counseling) and authoritatively added that you shouldn’t bother considering engineering or computer science because you’ll probably fail if you do?
Perhaps you’d like to read that your neurotype–the way you were born–will cause significant stress to your family or prevent you from having meaningful relationships? How about some unsubstantiated data on the astronomically high divorce rate among people of your neurotype or the alleged rarity of someone like you ever becoming a parent, let alone a good one?
Yes, We Can Read
My search for books about Asperger’s syndrome has left me surprised at how much there is about Asperger’s that isn’t directed at people who have Asperger’s. The majority of the books that I’ve read are addressed to parents, educators, caregivers and counselors. Which is great. There need to be resources for all of these people.
But there also need to be more good comprehensive materials that are written for aspies, not just about us. We can read. We’re eager to learn more about how our brains work. Why is it so hard to find authors who recognize that?"
Right back at ya Son
Those bikes from the mid 90s that came dripping in Marzocchi parts you couldn't buy off the shelf?
Corrado approves!
isn't that awfully similar to the traits of a very progressive Leverage curve?.
which wouldn't have the drama of the curve changing when speed/pedalling inputs change to get your head around?
Ok. How?
That was a quote from Web MD not from me, hence the quotation marks and supporting link. If you are not familiar with WebMD it provides very basic 101 information. I read your entire post, which I assume was also copy mcpasty and was not offened in anyway. It was funny because its true. Except for the baseball buzz cut, that is awesome."How many books on Asperger’s Syndrome or Autism have you read that begin with Chapter 1: What is Asperger’s Syndrome or Chapter 1: What is Autism? If you or someone you love is on the spectrum, then the answer is probably “a lot.”
The authors’ desire to start at the beginning is commendable but honestly I skip over these introductory chapters. I have the DSM diagnostic criteria memorized and I’m on intimate terms with the signs and symptoms of Asperger’s Syndrome.
Perhaps a more useful opening chapter for aspies would be: What is Neurotypical?
Neurotypical is a term that’s thrown around in the autism community like everyone instinctively knows what it means. If this is a new word for you (like it was for me not so long ago), in the ASD community, neurotypical is often used to refer to people who are not on the autism spectrum. It’s a mash-up of the words “neurologically typical” and is often shortened to NT.
A more correct word for someone who is not autistic is allistic. Technically, you can be non-neurotypical (neuroatypical) even if you aren’t autistic. Having clarified that up front, I’m going to go with the popular usage here.
How Can You Tell if Someone is Neurotypical?
So who are these NTs and how can you tell if someone in your family is neurotypical?
For starters, NTs make up about 99% of the population, so they’re everywhere. It’s very likely that you know neurotypicals and you probably have at least one NT in your family. While there is no widely accepted diagnostic test, NTs are fairly easy to spot once you know what to look for.
Perhaps the most obvious giveaway is an NT’s tendency to make “small talk” or to want to “chat” with you. While small talk appears to be nonfunctional, for NTs it serves a very specific purpose. It’s a good idea to humor them and participate to whatever degree you can tolerate. If you’re patient with them, many NTs will soon feel comfortable enough to move from small talk to more interesting, in-depth conversations.
Another common sign that someone is an NT? Touching. NTs enjoy all sorts of physical contact and often use touch to greet friends, family and even casual acquaintances. While it’s hard to fathom why your real estate agent or hairdresser feels the need to send you off with a hug, try not to be judgmental while fending them off. NTs are simply wired differently.
Sometimes NT behavior can be frustrating. For example, you may notice that NTs have a tendency to say something other than what they mean. If you get a new haircut and you’re not sure how it looks on you, don’t bother asking an NT. Most will tell you it looks great, even if you look like this:
“No, really, I love your new hairstyle!”
Why? Because when a neurotypical woman asks her friend “how do you like my new haircut?” she isn’t looking for her friend’s opinion, she’s looking for validation. When her friend says, “I love it” she may mean I love your hair, but what she’s really saying is I love you and value you as a person.
So when your NT friend says “how do you like my new haircut?” and you, being your aspie self, reply, “It’s a little short in the back but I like it”, your NT friend hears I secretly hate you and think you’re ugly.
Confusing, I know.
And good luck getting an opinion out of an NT when you really need one. It may help to preface your question by explicitly stating that you’re seeking an actual, honest-to-God opinion but, even then, the NT’s dogged adherence to socially appropriate behavior may inhibit their ability to say what they’re really thinking. Try to remember that NTs were born this way and their natural sensitivity to what others are thinking and feeling often makes it hard for them to be completely honest.
Of course all NTs are different, much like all aspies are different, so these are just some general guidelines for recognizing the NTs in your life.
Offended Yet?
If you’re neurotypical, how did reading this make you feel? Offended? Stereotyped? Did you enjoy the patronizing tone? How about the sweeping generalizations?
What if it went on to talk about how some NTs are so socially adept that they get promoted into positions they don’t have the knowledge or skills for? What if it listed good careers for NTs (sales, management, counseling) and authoritatively added that you shouldn’t bother considering engineering or computer science because you’ll probably fail if you do?
Perhaps you’d like to read that your neurotype–the way you were born–will cause significant stress to your family or prevent you from having meaningful relationships? How about some unsubstantiated data on the astronomically high divorce rate among people of your neurotype or the alleged rarity of someone like you ever becoming a parent, let alone a good one?
Yes, We Can Read
My search for books about Asperger’s syndrome has left me surprised at how much there is about Asperger’s that isn’t directed at people who have Asperger’s. The majority of the books that I’ve read are addressed to parents, educators, caregivers and counselors. Which is great. There need to be resources for all of these people.
But there also need to be more good comprehensive materials that are written for aspies, not just about us. We can read. We’re eager to learn more about how our brains work. Why is it so hard to find authors who recognize that?"
Right back at ya Son
Those bikes from the mid 90s that came dripping in Marzocchi parts you couldn't buy off the shelf?
Corrado approves!
This guy
http://ridemonkey.bikemag.com/members/syadasti.2211/
This thread actually needs Dave Weagle to explain why he never chose to design anything remotely like this.
Ok, so too general, and not taking personal preference into account. How bout this: True or false, bikes built for descending generally have slacker angles than bikes built for climbing?
If true, a bike that can automatically change to be steeper while climbing and slacker while descending, might then have a greater capility in one or both directions, apples to apples.?
As for your weight, then you do it subconsiously because you've been riding this way all your life. And you would keep riding that way on any bike, and push it further as well.
You are mitigating it, lessening it, but given a certain grade, it's pretty difficult to avoid weight transfer to the rear, given physics. Yes, I have leaned so far forward I've spun the back tire, which means my efforts to counteract the weight transfer have reached the point of diminished returns.
Same thing on descents. At some point, there is no denying the advantage of slack rake for stability and keeping your weight behind the front wheel. Especially when your ass is draggin on the back tire.
The term " a whole load more energy" is both subjective and telling. I would argue that "any" would be energy I'd rather use for my legs, lungs or heart.
Also, take a given seated climbing position. A steeper bike places a rider further forward over the pedals. It's much more efficient to drive your legs straight down with body weight than to be pushing forward on the pedals (which pushes your weight back) while pulling forward with your arms. Not everyone can or wants to stand on every climb leaning forward. even then, steeper just makes it easier to do so.
I did not make my point clearly. When I say "it's not about whether you can". I should have said Of course you can ride any kind of bike on any kind of terrain and have an absolute blast. Just like I did with a 73 degree HT angle at the Kamikaze and climbing hills on my M1. So my argument is not and will never be that you can't ride any damn thing damn near anywhere. Unicycles included.
But if you had 2 bikes that were exactly the same, but one bike sprung out of corners and up hills like a rabbit and the other felt like you were pedaling in mud and sluggish, which would be more fun? These bikes are exactly the same, one feels heavy and dull, the other light and snappy. You have to ride both and say was more fun to ride.
subjective, I know. Humor me.
But the way I understand it, your design doesn't necessarily get steeper while climbing, it's gets steeper while pedaling. If I was pedaling downhill, the link get would be engaged and reducing sag (until I encountered an impact) Is that correct?
no. not really
Head angles don't really need to be made steeper for climbing. seat angles do. and plenty manufacturers of slack trail/Enduro bikes seem to have finally figured this out.
Plus. the circumstances in which your design switches over to steeper geometry seem to be induced by pedalling forces rather than any conscious information telling the "link" the bike is climbing.
Personally I don't want a bike to change geometry by itself all over a ride. Consistency in suspension/geometry is something I like to be able to trust.
Kinda why I like short travel hardtails with a very stiff fork so much.
No. it's entirely consciously... Yes. it's natural. and controlled by muscle memory and instinct more than thinking hard about it. Subconscious implies something you do without focus and are not aware of at the time.
No. It ONLY gets steeper climbing. There is not enough force pulling the bike to the rear without climbing. You cannot generate enough pedaling force without the added resistance of gravity pulling your weight down the hill.
Pedaling on level ground can only generate enough force to keep the bike at sag level, counteracting any acceleration induced squat. The bike will feel hardtailish on smooth sprints, but at static sag level. Pedaling downhill cannot even generate that much, but will be proprotional as there is less weight transfer to the rear. So the sag will be slightly more, also due to the rearward force on the CS.
Head tube angles have as much or more to do with climbing and descending both. That is the exact reason for the difference you see on XC versus DH bikes. I didn't make that up.
And yes, seat tube angle do as well. Soooo, you agree that a steeper ST angle is better for climbing? To what extent? Would you agree that you could like a steeper ST angle while climbing than on level ground? Or that it might be beneficial in some way?
It's easy for the bike to "tell" if it's climbing. If you are acceleration the bike forward, you are pushing it along with the rear wheel, through the chain stay. On level ground, even from a standing start, there is little resistance to your forward motion. Your rate of acceleration is limited by the resistance against it.
On a climb, you are accelerating, even at a steady pace. if you didn't accelerate against the force of gravity pulling your weight down the hill, you would go backwards. In terms of the force on the wheel, pushing the bike forward through the chainstay, this is much greater on a climb than can possibly be accelerating on level (or DH).
That's how it knows you're climbing
