will there be a lefty version?
the fronty (tm)yes, moar hefty
will there be a lefty version?
the fronty (tm)yes, moar hefty
I just pulled the trigger on one, can't wait. 110lbs with what looks to be decent rear suspension and my 26" Fox 40 Float in front. It's supposed to have plenty of power with the down-geared sprocket kit I included. The slow boat from LA to Maui is gonna take 5-6 weeksMight have to get one of these
I see another epic dw/Sideways battle brewing. Rep if you remember those!Pinkbike comment highlight - Ryan from Structure:
It's about time the linkage concept got the attention it deserves!
And now for my complaint:
Dave says: "What happens if you build a device that lets the stability of the front-end of a bicycle or motorcycle increase on corner entry rather than decrease? It's a simple question that I don't think anybody has ever asked."
Not only have we asked it, this is nearly a copy of the language we use for our Stability on Demand technology.
Focus on stability, rather than axle path: yep, that's the core of our technology.
Dynamic geometry: yep, that's us, too.
Constant trail: in pitch, ditto; in heave, ours increases trail for ultimate stability.
Sealed bearings at all pivots with a lifetime warranty: ditto.
Proprietary suspension hardware: nope, ours is off-the-shelf.
$2700: Perfect, makes Structure look like a bargain! Smile
Challenge accepted, Dave. Time for a group test!
I thought the medium was the flow enabler and the message was the the truth. See, I'm catching on."The medium is the message"
Baffle them with bullshit and sell the hype.
Interesting, from a physics nomenclature point of view.Pinkbike comment highlight - Ryan from Structure:
Dave says: "What happens if you build a device that lets the stability of the front-end of a bicycle or motorcycle increase on corner entry rather than decrease? It's a simple question that I don't think anybody has ever asked."
That's OK, we all know dentists don't really corner.Interesting, from a physics nomenclature point of view.
In all my racing days, regardless of vehicle, stable (in a handling/cornering sense) = resistance to inputs, wanting to continue on its path, NOT wanting to change direction.
If anyone would ask me a simple question, such as "What happens if you build a device that lets the stability of the front-end of a bicycle or motorcycle increase on corner entry rather than decrease?", the quick and necessary answer is : it won't turn as well.
By definition, we want UNSTABLE on corner entry, to allow quick change of direction, it is absolutely needed. We do want stability shortly thereafter, which is always the challenge.
I don't think they are intentionally misleading, but similar to the Naild guys and others, there are reasons why they can't be specific about what they are feeling.
It's a complicated matrix. "I did enough math":....whatever. No such thing.
Well fuck me. I just learned I'm nothing but a poor dentist.That's OK, we all know dentists don't really corner.
4 years in devoa small company like them
I was skeptical until I saw Weagle's bowl cut.the pinkbike article actually has some cool info about the development that i haven't seen elsewhere, but jesus H don't read the comments
https://www.pinkbike.com/news/trust-performances-the-message-carbon-fiber-linkage-fork.html
Totally agree with your definition of stability.Interesting, from a physics nomenclature point of view.
In all my racing days, regardless of vehicle, stable (in a handling/cornering sense) = resistance to inputs, wanting to continue on its path, NOT wanting to change direction.
If anyone would ask me a simple question, such as "What happens if you build a device that lets the stability of the front-end of a bicycle or motorcycle increase on corner entry rather than decrease?", the quick and necessary answer is : it won't turn as well.
By definition, we want UNSTABLE on corner entry, to allow quick change of direction, it is absolutely needed. We do want stability shortly thereafter, which is always the challenge.
I don't think they are intentionally misleading, but similar to the Naild guys and others, there are reasons why they can't be specific about what they are feeling.
It's a complicated matrix. "I did enough math":....whatever. No such thing.
Ok Juan. If that's your REAL NAMEFWIW, string theory is pretty much dead. Stick to the Maldacena Conjecture for now.
The AdS/CFT correspondence? Nah, not a death of string theory at all. Au contraire, it is a pet toy for the string theorists working on the UFT.FWIW, string theory is pretty much dead. Stick to the Maldacena Conjecture for now.
Nonono Nobody's fault but mineThe AdS/CFT correspondence? Nah, not a death of string theory at all. Au contraire, it is a pet toy for the string theorists working on the UFT.
(we live in a simulated hologram anyway and quantization of spacetime makes it possible with finite computing resources of our lizard overlords )
ImI actually Luis, told you so in a PM about a week ago. Please, remember to take your memory pills.Ok Juan. If that's your REAL NAME
Actually think the fork looks pretty decent and the price, all things considered, isn't too bad. Looking forward to seeing a proper review of the forks though.
Fork in action here: https://www.instagram.com/p/BpXA8WFBtH9/?taken-by=steezygiese765
Yah, I was hoping for some gratuitous slow mo footage of those bad boys. Dude was hitting some big sets though and he pinned those corners. Hmm.Sooo... The best way they found to show how good the fork is was a guy doing a helluva MANUAL???
i could ride my skateboard on that trail......Fork in action here: https://www.instagram.com/p/BpXA8WFBtH9/?taken-by=steezygiese765
bolt on some old school kona links......So trying to make a really long travel version out of this will almost guarantee that it will have a LOT of hardware mass and/or a LOT of swing to the axle...
To give them some credit, they might have created a perfect nose wheelie fork there.Sooo... The best way they found to show how good the fork is was a guy doing a helluva MANUAL???
Lets take a step back here. Other forks are not all so good, but the reason why IMO is damping. Springs to a much smaller extent, as in the excessively restrictive factory high speed circuits make you over-compensate by running compression "open" which exacerbates the flat mid-stroke air-spring issue, so if you had better compression circuits that are better tuned that can offer supports without becoming a jackhammer, you can make up for this significantly and the air spring ain't that bad (and a coil is even better). That's my issue 99% of the time, not whether or not it's a lnkage fork and having brake-drive tuned out. So the bottom line for me is that TrustCo™ better have some absolutely amazing damping, high and low speed circuits, otherwise it's just one in the heap of failed linkage forks. Some forks HAVE made some good progress here though, Grip2 in particular. So again, this better be some goddamn fancy ass damping for $2700.It's dw, so I'm confident it will ride well and be expensive. I live goofy forks but this is like the gearbox of front suspension. Very expensive but hard to justify when other forks are so good.
go for it, we're not gonna stand in your way.The final point that makes me want to hit my head against the wall
Actually think the fork looks pretty decent and the price, all things considered, isn't too bad. Looking forward to seeing a proper review of the forks though.
Fork in action here: https://www.instagram.com/p/BpXA8WFBtH9/?taken-by=steezygiese765
It's dw, so I'm confident it will ride well and be expensive. I live goofy forks but this is like the gearbox of front suspension. Very expensive but hard to justify when other forks are so good.
You are probably right and they are just doing a terrible job communicating. He keeps talking about stability in steering and handling and cornering, when in reality, such stability may be "pitch" stability. If the fork isn't diving up and down, corner entry would be more consistent and arguably more "stable"Totally agree with your definition of stability.
Although I interpreted the 'stability' commentary as having a lot to do with pitching rather than steering. With any amount of anti-dive (or even simply less 'pro-dive' than what you have with telescopic forks), the front is going to maintain its ride height better when braking, and is therefore more stable.
Re-reading it now, they talk a lot more about steering rather than dive. But I still think that if it proves to have any significant performance improvements over telescopic forks, it will be mostly due to anti-dive, rather than trail control (via axle path).
It's worth noting that in theory, with this type of linkage, anti-dive and axle path can be tuned independently, so one doesn't dictate the other (which is what DW suggested). Although once you take into consideration the physical constraints of where pivots can/should be located (for appearance or structural reasons), and practical means of incorporating the spring/damper, then it reduces the independence.
I thought since you were invoking, Luis was just your RM alter ego where you hang out to avoid holographic calculations.ImI actually Luis, told you so in a PM about a week ago. Please, remember to take your memory pills.
"The suspension feel of the Message isn’t going to be to everyone’s liking, either............ Those seeking a pillowy-soft ride won’t find it here — at least not with how Trust has tuned things currently — and what you feel in your hands doesn’t always jive with how your front wheel is interacting with the ground, or how the fork apparently behaves in the lab."Initial ride impressions starting to roll in - https://cyclingtips.com/2018/10/trust-performance-message-fork-review/
This has actually been my experience with linkage forks on scooters. I used to ride a Vespa and then some high-end Hondas (for a scooter) back in the day, and the vagueness I experienced in handling/feeling on flat corners is the thing I remember the most about this type of front suspension. And it certainly isn't inviting me to test this thing.Or what your hands feel isn't really happening.