Trust me...
- Thread starter dump
- Start date
Parking Lot Cred
A pretty thorough in-depth review.
I'd love to try it to see how the handling is different.
I don't see how how that handling could make up for a too-linear spring that still rides harsh, though. Those 2 aspects seem irreconcilable: If you are riding very aggressively, over the front and don't care about harshness so much, you would want a heavier and progressive spring.
Or if you like to roll a mellow couch-like set-up, a linear spring isn't a show-stopper, but you'd expect plushness.
I'd love to try it to see how the handling is different.
I don't see how how that handling could make up for a too-linear spring that still rides harsh, though. Those 2 aspects seem irreconcilable: If you are riding very aggressively, over the front and don't care about harshness so much, you would want a heavier and progressive spring.
Or if you like to roll a mellow couch-like set-up, a linear spring isn't a show-stopper, but you'd expect plushness.
not exactly. it's not the static geometry that changes, but the dynamic; ie as the fork progresses through its travel, it gets slacker (more stable) due to a non-linear axle path vs telescoping forks where it gets steeper*. the disclaimer here that in the case of telescoping forks it's ignoring the fact that when rear travel compresses, it generally (and i mean very generally) helps to offset the steepening of the front end. however from the review it sounds that the difference in the real world is enough to be noticeable.
one thing not touched on, but i've read elsewhere, is in regards to how many/most pros run their suspension stiffer** which the "average" rider would consider "harsh". I wonder if that's an element of what's going on here.
**whether or not they're faster because their suspension is stiffer, or they have to run it stiffer because they're naturally faster is a topic for another time
No, go back and re-read it. The fork preserves handling characteristics when pushed into travel, something that telescopic forks are completely unable to do.
As someone who's actually ridden one of these, I also found the review to be mostly objective. Although I'm curious as to why Levy so casually mentioned that when he put the fork onto each one of his bikes they instantly became the best cornering bikes he's ever ridden. That right there speaks volumes, or at least it should for fellow "function before form" riders.
Unfortunately, the general population cares only about form and operates mostly on conjecture. So he's correct when he states his opinion that this fork probably isn't for most riders.
in the article he mentions there's a token system to increase the progressiveness of the spring. one thing also touched on in the review is that over time, he didn't feel like he had to weight the front end as much as with traditional forks.
That was the most puzzling part for me on all the reviews of this fork I have read so far. Having ridden several scooters equipped with linkage forks during my teenage years, what I hated most about them was the anti-diving built into those forks, which led me into several crashes because the front end liked to wash away pretty easily on highly banked turns. I felt I had to put extra pressure onto the handlebar in order to make the front wheel hook the ground.
I guess not all the linkage forks are built equal.
Yeah, his line there seems a bit hyperbolic. Since you've ridden one, do you agree?
If it's that much of a difference, it seems like a rider would need a lot of time on the fork, re-learning how to corner.
If it's that much of a difference, it seems like a rider would need a lot of time on the fork, re-learning how to corner.
I summarize the review as
“Yeah...well *maybe*...but probably no”
given he indicated it took him a few weeks just to get it set up properly, i'd be inclined to say yea, there would be an adjustment period. especially if his statements about not needing to weight the front end as much are true. you'd be needing to make some adjustments to riding position for sure.
reminds me a little bit of the 40 world cup edition Fox released.... ten years ago? it was basically the pro tune (stiffer spring and heavier compression damping) than the production models..... which most riders really wouldn't benefit from.
I didn't slap that fork on every bike I own, but I could feel the cornering confidence within 10 minutes of riding it. Definitely noticeable in a good way.
In full disclosure I had a friend of similar body weight and riding style set it up and spend a few weeks riding, so I didn't have to do any of that. I just hopped on and started riding, so I can't comment on how difficult it is to set up.
While I certainly don't think that you need to re-learn how to corner to ride it, it takes what you already know about cornering and removes the shortcomings of a telescopic fork. Pretty cool if you can stay open-minded, objective and just ride it.
After about an hour of riding I gave him his bike back and went back to a different bike with a Fox 36. For the first few minutes I can tell you THAT felt strange, and not all that great until I got used to it again.
Last edited:
What I got from his review was he should be running more pressure and LSC in his Fox if he wants it to be composed and fast. But he likes it plush so he doesn't. But when the Trust forces that tune on him he appreciates the composure.
Take away: Almost every recreational rider runs their fork too soft because they like comfort.
Take away: Almost every recreational rider runs their fork too soft because they like comfort.
When I'm bashing downhill at race pace, like last night, control IS comfort for me, but I get it and I even think that Push tunes a little too much on the comfort side still. I want it composed so I can just plow through those roots at top speed and have the fork be ready for each subsequent impact. If it compresses a bunch and makes my front end way too low, that's when I have problems. I think that super-plush progressive feel sells bikes in parking lots, but more linear with more damping lets you ride harder.
so...it's a good chassis/concept with a shit damper?
That much seemed apparent right out of the gate. For Trust Fund™ money, it damn better be coming with a custom tuned damper to make avalanche and push pale...
i don't know if i'd go as far to call it a shit damper, its probably just stiffer than most riders are accustomed to.
Sounds like a lefty.
that was my biggest fear. For a crapton of money, you can get something like a fox 36 that can feel exactly how you want it to. For a crapper ton of money, you can get a fork that only works a certain way, and tough luck if you don't like it. Why they didn't have fox come in and do the damper is beyond me.
I'm more inclined to believe the kind/rate of forces the damper is going through as it compresses would require a much more sophisticated damper. Kind of a position sensitive damper combined with a speed sensitive one. Since the compression rate isn't as linear as in a telescopic fork, the damper needs to compensate for it.
but it works for rear shocks, right? Is a Fox RC4 more sophisticated than a FIT cartridge? I'd argue that they are pretty similar, and that the RC4 works just fine despite all kinds of weirdness going on with leverage rates on the back end.
Perhaps better adjustability of spring rate and compression would allow the fork to work better than it does.
I also think we're virtually at the "moto" stage, where inferior technology is so well ironed out that even fancy shit doesn't make you faster, because riders understand how the outdated crap works, and can work it harder.
Perhaps better adjustability of spring rate and compression would allow the fork to work better than it does.
I also think we're virtually at the "moto" stage, where inferior technology is so well ironed out that even fancy shit doesn't make you faster, because riders understand how the outdated crap works, and can work it harder.
one thing worth pointing out here, is that it has a non 1:1 leverage unlike telescoping forks
To add to that, designing a damper for TRUST THE MASSAGE could be customized to the exact chassis and leverage curve, whereas rear shock dampers have to accommodate a myriad of tunes for all the frame possibilities.
But why would TRUST THE MASSAGE want to work with Fox... if the project is a sales success, Fox would release their own massager for $1200.
But why would TRUST THE MASSAGE want to work with Fox... if the project is a sales success, Fox would release their own massager for $1200.
I'm quoting both messages, as I realized I was typing mine while @Sandwich was typing his. And to @jonKranked , yes, the NON-LINEAR nature of the linkage fork was the main driver of my previous comment. I'm nowhere near a suspension guru, but having delved into several forks and rear shocks I'm inclined to think a fork damper is simpler than a rear shock's one. Or tuned differently at least. The spring rate is also different, and surely tuned to account for the non-linear compression rate established by the linkage.
But ultimately I agree with Sandwich, they should have gone the Lefty way and partner up with Fox, Rock Shox or any other well established damper brands.
Last edited:
not to be pedantic, but can a damper be stiff? I thought it was the chassis...
At first I was disappointed with the Vorsprung tune I got for my fork over the winter (a Pike that got the revalve and Luftkappe kit). I didn't really feel it made much of a difference. But as the season marches on, and I'm ditching my fat-biking bad habits (mostly leaning waaaaay far back while going downhill and through corners), I'm starting to notice the difference. I've been working on staying more centered and even over the bars going DH and in cornering. Yesterday I finished my ride with a run down a DH trail I'm getting to know more. The fork felt composed and I felt in complete control the whole run down. My hands were a little sore from the thrashing they took (it's a particularly rough trail, with some good steeps, rocky sections, and a few tight berms up top), but again, no loss of traction, and much more composure than in the past.
TL;DR I think Vorsprung has managed to find a way to keep the damper comfy and plush at slow speeds, yet remain composed and controlled in high-speed situations.
(and all this for much less than a Trust)
depends on the context. stiff refers to the tune. can also be referred to as heavy. either way its inferring more damping.
gotcha. so then... in the case of the Trust fork, is it the damping tune that is too stiff, or the chassis? Levy made the effort to address spring rate and volume, but I guess that doesn't address damping tune... gah, I'm spending too much time thinking about a product I will not buy (at least not in the foreeable future. never say never I guess).
he indicated that yes, the chassis is stiff, and yes he felt the damping felt too stiff in comparison to his 34. so both things
So, his 34 is too soft and his massage is to stiff.
Does he even know where to look for a clue?
Does he even know where to look for a clue?
LBS has one of these for demo for $100 for two days. Maybe I should grab one for a weekend trip to KT.
Does that include tanning salon or massage session?
I didnt read the article just the coments. I asked Weed and he never answered me. Does the fork have LSC/HSC and LSR/HSR? Also how easy is it ti rebuild can anyone do it? ALso has it started to leak yet. Him not responding seems to have answered those in an indirect way maybe. Also its $2K so yeah...
Last edited:
Demo it locally on the chunk.
You’ll waste a days rental on driving time, not to mention that KT is pretty tame if you stay off Burke.
yeah but I ain't payin' $100 to fuck around harold parker for 45 minutes
Meanwhile in Montreal, a guy is working on a linkage fork with a fox spring/damper:
https://www.instagram.com/p/By78DPqlKgM/
