Unfortunately, many in MTBing, are often confused on the roles played by first the spring rate and how it's used primarily to manage chassis attitude, balance...
Unfortunately, many in MTBing, are often confused on the roles played by first the spring rate and how it's used primarily to manage chassis attitude, balance and support and is mostly specific to rider/ bike combined weight & weight distribution; vs. second the role of damping which is utilized to control the rate of the movement of the suspension and is much more specific to the rider and their aggression level and terrain.
To put it in the most basic terms, a linear rear suspension with a coil would either a) bottom excessively, or b) have to utilize too much compression damping to prevent bottoming therefore rendering the rear suspension to be harsh on chatter and other hits. This is because inherently a spring and damping reacts very differently to a force input. A too stiff spring for instance, can still be a pogo stick going through all of it's travel easily without appropriate damping. The spring doesn't really serve to slow down the rate of shock movement outside of extremes. Stiff damping, when combined with not enough spring rate can still not have enough support and end up riding low, while simultaneously being too stiff to react quickly to bumps. You could of course go the other way with too stiff of a spring and lighter damping to prevent bottom outs, but then the rear suspension doesn't work correctly off the top and skips along with excessive initial spring rate.
I'm happy, that your happy with your set-ups. But really, the bikes work better when the rear shock is selected mostly to fit the leverage ratio of the bicycle.
You'll also notice on that very page where Craig shows the set up recommendations for a customer's E29 in the directions it says" If the fork bottoms, turn the compression in 2 clicks, etc. He never says to change the spring rate.
This was true of last-gen shocks from 10 years ago. Back then compression damping was too primitive and few people put coils on frames with less...
This was true of last-gen shocks from 10 years ago. Back then compression damping was too primitive and few people put coils on frames with less than 170mm of travel anyways. Now they perform excellent. We can go back and forth on the hows and the whys, but ultimately it comes down to inductive vs deductive reasoning: go out and ride a 150mm enduro bike with a coil and a flat leverage curve. If the coil is of decent quality and tuned properly, it will ride very well, and better for most enthusiast/expert riders than an air.
Sorry, but just no. Valving has not magically just now became a thing.
In fact the Woodie Coil was dead dialed in about 2 decades ago and if it fit modern sizing, better than 99% of what's out there right now. MX shocks have been dialed in for 30 years as they combine a coil with 30% progression.
And I have tried a coil on my SJEvo, an EXT revalved 2x, seven different springs & 2 different links, and it never worked as well as a proper high volume air shock did from the moment it was strapped on. That's not really the fault of the shock itself, as much as it was just a bad match for the leverage chart under a somewhat aggressive rider. However if EXT had utilized a custom sized/ shaped & density bottom out bumper to match the bike's leverage chart (as Avalanche does) that shock would have done a lot better as that bumper adds a lot of spring ramp up right at the end.
No matter how ideal the damping is, if the overall spring rate (shock & bike) isn't right the rear suspension will not operate at it's peak, and changing the damping to try and cover that up, just gives you bad damping, no matter how sophisticated the compression damping is.
Unfortunately, many in MTBing, are often confused on the roles played by first the spring rate and how it's used primarily to manage chassis attitude, balance...
Unfortunately, many in MTBing, are often confused on the roles played by first the spring rate and how it's used primarily to manage chassis attitude, balance and support and is mostly specific to rider/ bike combined weight & weight distribution; vs. second the role of damping which is utilized to control the rate of the movement of the suspension and is much more specific to the rider and their aggression level and terrain.
To put it in the most basic terms, a linear rear suspension with a coil would either a) bottom excessively, or b) have to utilize too much compression damping to prevent bottoming therefore rendering the rear suspension to be harsh on chatter and other hits. This is because inherently a spring and damping reacts very differently to a force input. A too stiff spring for instance, can still be a pogo stick going through all of it's travel easily without appropriate damping. The spring doesn't really serve to slow down the rate of shock movement outside of extremes. Stiff damping, when combined with not enough spring rate can still not have enough support and end up riding low, while simultaneously being too stiff to react quickly to bumps. You could of course go the other way with too stiff of a spring and lighter damping to prevent bottom outs, but then the rear suspension doesn't work correctly off the top and skips along with excessive initial spring rate.
I'm happy, that your happy with your set-ups. But really, the bikes work better when the rear shock is selected mostly to fit the leverage ratio of the bicycle.
You'll also notice on that very page where Craig shows the set up recommendations for a customer's E29 in the directions it says" If the fork bottoms, turn the compression in 2 clicks, etc. He never says to change the spring rate.
This was true of last-gen shocks from 10 years ago. Back then compression damping was too primitive and few people put coils on frames with less...
This was true of last-gen shocks from 10 years ago. Back then compression damping was too primitive and few people put coils on frames with less than 170mm of travel anyways. Now they perform excellent. We can go back and forth on the hows and the whys, but ultimately it comes down to inductive vs deductive reasoning: go out and ride a 150mm enduro bike with a coil and a flat leverage curve. If the coil is of decent quality and tuned properly, it will ride very well, and better for most enthusiast/expert riders than an air.
Sorry, but just no. Valving has not magically just now became a thing.
In fact the Woodie Coil was dead dialed in about 2 decades ago...
Sorry, but just no. Valving has not magically just now became a thing.
In fact the Woodie Coil was dead dialed in about 2 decades ago and if it fit modern sizing, better than 99% of what's out there right now. MX shocks have been dialed in for 30 years as they combine a coil with 30% progression.
And I have tried a coil on my SJEvo, an EXT revalved 2x, seven different springs & 2 different links, and it never worked as well as a proper high volume air shock did from the moment it was strapped on. That's not really the fault of the shock itself, as much as it was just a bad match for the leverage chart under a somewhat aggressive rider. However if EXT had utilized a custom sized/ shaped & density bottom out bumper to match the bike's leverage chart (as Avalanche does) that shock would have done a lot better as that bumper adds a lot of spring ramp up right at the end.
No matter how ideal the damping is, if the overall spring rate (shock & bike) isn't right the rear suspension will not operate at it's peak, and changing the damping to try and cover that up, just gives you bad damping, no matter how sophisticated the compression damping is.
GL.
please discuss further per DM or in a new thread, it‘s about rumors hear! thx
+ looks like a freakin e-bike with that massive bb & latch.
I suspect the strategy of many of the big brands (this is especially egregious for Trek) is to fatten up the downtubes of their "natural" bikes so that their ebikes are harder to distinguish from the normal model.
That tread pattern looks identical to the tacky chan, atleast from a distance. Same block layout and pattern and looks to be the same side knobs too. Maybe it’s “old” stock from before they finalized the name??
I suspect the strategy of many of the big brands (this is especially egregious for Trek) is to fatten up the downtubes of their "natural" bikes...
I suspect the strategy of many of the big brands (this is especially egregious for Trek) is to fatten up the downtubes of their "natural" bikes so that their ebikes are harder to distinguish from the normal model.
I suspect you're right, but that's a shame from a structural standpoint. Oversized tubes need to have thin walls to stay reasonably light, which means they're more vulnerable to things like rock strikes and impacts, even if they're technically strong enough to handle the loads of normal riding. I was a huge fan of the gen.1 carbon V10 because the tubes were small in diamter and the walls were super thick, so the front triangle was basically invincible. Plus a smaller diameter tube cross-section is going to have more engineered flex in it (or "compliance" in marketing speak), which I think most companies are looking for anyway. I wonder if there's a different and more reasonable explanation for the inflatable downtubes we're seeing or if it really is a tinfoil hat ebike conspiracy.
Big downtubes allow storage too. That's far more plausible to me than the tinfoil hat ebike conspiracy.
I’d guess that more than appearance companies are growing down tubes to minimize design and manufacturing redundancy. If a company can run the same/similar tubing, hardware, and etc they will save on stock, time, and testing. Most companies would also probably look at aesthetic similaritybetween ebikes and regular bikes as a positive, especially in the enduro category.
I suspect the strategy of many of the big brands (this is especially egregious for Trek) is to fatten up the downtubes of their "natural" bikes...
I suspect the strategy of many of the big brands (this is especially egregious for Trek) is to fatten up the downtubes of their "natural" bikes so that their ebikes are harder to distinguish from the normal model.
I suspect you're right, but that's a shame from a structural standpoint. Oversized tubes need to have thin walls to stay reasonably light, which means they're...
I suspect you're right, but that's a shame from a structural standpoint. Oversized tubes need to have thin walls to stay reasonably light, which means they're more vulnerable to things like rock strikes and impacts, even if they're technically strong enough to handle the loads of normal riding. I was a huge fan of the gen.1 carbon V10 because the tubes were small in diamter and the walls were super thick, so the front triangle was basically invincible. Plus a smaller diameter tube cross-section is going to have more engineered flex in it (or "compliance" in marketing speak), which I think most companies are looking for anyway. I wonder if there's a different and more reasonable explanation for the inflatable downtubes we're seeing or if it really is a tinfoil hat ebike conspiracy.
I don't think its to disguise e-bikes, Scott in particular just love having ultra light bikes, look at the Spark (obviously needs to be ultra light) their design is just carrying over, large tubes = light.
As AndehM also points out, it enables downtube storage.
The issue is rock strikes, and with thin walls you get a single error during layup and its an instant cracked frame. It would tolerable if the frames were made in the US or Europe, where quality control is much higher, but we all know the amount of duds being produced in Asia, it just makes it more likely customers will get unlucky and crack yet another frame.
In my experience it’s a lot less about where something is made and mostly about cost/demand. If bike companies were pushing Taiwan to meet quality control at the price point they wanted vs meeting quotas at the price point they wanted then Taiwan would adjust its processes. Simply the market wants a LOT of bikes at an “affordable” price. The good brands just warranty what they have to and the bad ones just pass the flops onto the customer.
if you buy an American made fender guitar vs a Mexican made fender guitar the quality control is very very similar on most models. Because the American fender chooses to produce a ton of guitars at an affordable price and has to make sacrifices to meet volume.
+ looks like a freakin e-bike with that massive bb & latch.
Its actually reverse psychology, make a bike to blur the line between normal bikes and ebikes, so when I was testing an eLumen and posted a picture to group chat, friends didnt even realize it was an ebike as it looked just like a normal scott bike. You can say thats pretty genius
Does anyone know if the DH22 will come as Enduro version soon? Front tire of Nukeproof Racer Kelan Grant....can hardly imagine they are racing the DH version. Pedals like wet clay...
Does anyone know if the DH22 will come as Enduro version soon? Front tire of Nukeproof Racer Kelan Grant....can hardly imagine they are racing the DH...
Does anyone know if the DH22 will come as Enduro version soon? Front tire of Nukeproof Racer Kelan Grant....can hardly imagine they are racing the DH version. Pedals like wet clay...
It s a front tire, so how it pedals is not that relevant, but if I remember, Sam hill was one of the first racers to test these before they were released to the public, and he didn't mind pedalling around on them front and rear.
It s a front tire, so how it pedals is not that relevant, but if I remember, Sam hill was one of the first racers to...
It s a front tire, so how it pedals is not that relevant, but if I remember, Sam hill was one of the first racers to test these before they were released to the public, and he didn't mind pedalling around on them front and rear.
If sam hill said he didn't mind, it's probably because they are paying him ....
Sorry, but just no. Valving has not magically just now became a thing.
In fact the Woodie Coil was dead dialed in about 2 decades ago and if it fit modern sizing, better than 99% of what's out there right now. MX shocks have been dialed in for 30 years as they combine a coil with 30% progression.
And I have tried a coil on my SJEvo, an EXT revalved 2x, seven different springs & 2 different links, and it never worked as well as a proper high volume air shock did from the moment it was strapped on. That's not really the fault of the shock itself, as much as it was just a bad match for the leverage chart under a somewhat aggressive rider. However if EXT had utilized a custom sized/ shaped & density bottom out bumper to match the bike's leverage chart (as Avalanche does) that shock would have done a lot better as that bumper adds a lot of spring ramp up right at the end.
No matter how ideal the damping is, if the overall spring rate (shock & bike) isn't right the rear suspension will not operate at it's peak, and changing the damping to try and cover that up, just gives you bad damping, no matter how sophisticated the compression damping is.
GL.
please discuss further per DM or in a new thread, it‘s about rumors hear! thx
There's a thread for that! https://www.vitalmtb.com/forums/hub/suspension-component-technologyfunc…
Shots fired at Bold bicycles?
They bought Bold bicycles, i think, that’s why the newest gen Scotts have hidden shocks.
That's right, about five years ago IIRC. I see that as a little tribute.
I do like that they've drawn the spring and dashpot model diagram on the top tube.
That Scott is interesting, is it a 6 bar? i cant quite tell how it works, its got a rotating pivot around the BB?
Too bad its a Scott, so it'll snap after 1 hard weekend in the bike park
It is a 6 bar.
+ looks like a freakin e-bike with that massive bb & latch.
Hunting Holly?
https://www.bikeradar.com/news/schwalbe-hunting-holly/
I was expecting it before the tacky chan
so much so I thought they changed name; but this screenshot is from a bike racing these days so I guess it’s still coming
I suspect the strategy of many of the big brands (this is especially egregious for Trek) is to fatten up the downtubes of their "natural" bikes so that their ebikes are harder to distinguish from the normal model.
That tread pattern looks identical to the tacky chan, atleast from a distance. Same block layout and pattern and looks to be the same side knobs too. Maybe it’s “old” stock from before they finalized the name??
I suspect you're right, but that's a shame from a structural standpoint. Oversized tubes need to have thin walls to stay reasonably light, which means they're more vulnerable to things like rock strikes and impacts, even if they're technically strong enough to handle the loads of normal riding. I was a huge fan of the gen.1 carbon V10 because the tubes were small in diamter and the walls were super thick, so the front triangle was basically invincible. Plus a smaller diameter tube cross-section is going to have more engineered flex in it (or "compliance" in marketing speak), which I think most companies are looking for anyway. I wonder if there's a different and more reasonable explanation for the inflatable downtubes we're seeing or if it really is a tinfoil hat ebike conspiracy.
Big downtubes allow storage too. That's far more plausible to me than the tinfoil hat ebike conspiracy.
I’d guess that more than appearance companies are growing down tubes to minimize design and manufacturing redundancy. If a company can run the same/similar tubing, hardware, and etc they will save on stock, time, and testing. Most companies would also probably look at aesthetic similaritybetween ebikes and regular bikes as a positive, especially in the enduro category.
I don't think its to disguise e-bikes, Scott in particular just love having ultra light bikes, look at the Spark (obviously needs to be ultra light) their design is just carrying over, large tubes = light.
As AndehM also points out, it enables downtube storage.
The issue is rock strikes, and with thin walls you get a single error during layup and its an instant cracked frame. It would tolerable if the frames were made in the US or Europe, where quality control is much higher, but we all know the amount of duds being produced in Asia, it just makes it more likely customers will get unlucky and crack yet another frame.
In my experience it’s a lot less about where something is made and mostly about cost/demand. If bike companies were pushing Taiwan to meet quality control at the price point they wanted vs meeting quotas at the price point they wanted then Taiwan would adjust its processes. Simply the market wants a LOT of bikes at an “affordable” price. The good brands just warranty what they have to and the bad ones just pass the flops onto the customer.
if you buy an American made fender guitar vs a Mexican made fender guitar the quality control is very very similar on most models. Because the American fender chooses to produce a ton of guitars at an affordable price and has to make sacrifices to meet volume.
Its actually reverse psychology, make a bike to blur the line between normal bikes and ebikes, so when I was testing an eLumen and posted a picture to group chat, friends didnt even realize it was an ebike as it looked just like a normal scott bike. You can say thats pretty genius
Does anyone know if the DH22 will come as Enduro version soon? Front tire of Nukeproof Racer Kelan Grant....can hardly imagine they are racing the DH version. Pedals like wet clay...
What I would like to see is an enduro casing Michelin but with the racing line rubber...
Anyone has any info about the Marin DH/FR proto ? I want a bikeparks bike and this one could be great
And without the weight of the DH.
Therein lies the point.
It s a front tire, so how it pedals is not that relevant, but if I remember, Sam hill was one of the first racers to test these before they were released to the public, and he didn't mind pedalling around on them front and rear.
Not everybody is Sam Hill...
If sam hill said he didn't mind, it's probably because they are paying him ....
Post a reply to: MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation