Yeah, the "spring" part of the tyre comes from the casing so there is very little pressure change, also a sharp impact will compress the tyre...
Yeah, the "spring" part of the tyre comes from the casing so there is very little pressure change, also a sharp impact will compress the tyre easier and have the least change in pressure too so it wouldn't be reliable. Cars use pressure monitoring to infer load on the tyre but they are almost always sitting on flat ground so would be a little bit more accurate.
Pressure sensors are cool though - I'm tempted to back it but does it only work with Garmin? I should read that a bit closer
Currently, the Outrider is only compatible with Garmin brand head units because of their publicly available SDK, which allows us to develop the pressure change alert features. While it is possible, developing these features for Wahoo and other head units is more challenging for us and is something we are working on currently. Because of this, we are not able to offer compatibility with other brands at launch.
Because the firmware is not updatable remotely, the version of the Outrider offered on Kickstarter will not work with head units other than Garmin. Our goal going forward is to launch a new version of the Outrider, which will be compatible with a wider range of head units.
"A low-cost, real-time tire pressure sensor made to improve the safety and performance of your bike's only two contacts with the ground. It fits securely inside of your tubeless tires and gives real-time pressure readings and alerts to your Garmin device via wireless transmissions."
I'd love this. As much as I love my bikes being reliable and maintenance-free, I check tire pressures every ride. If I could connect to it with a phone just to check before a ride, I'd be happy. All the puncture features are neat too.
As long as it can stretch around a schrader though, ain't going back to that roadie nonsense.
That's one reason for the various air cans, and in a world where you can get a Starling with 0% progression or a Privateer with 44%...
That's one reason for the various air cans, and in a world where you can get a Starling with 0% progression or a Privateer with 44% progression, big brands like Rockshox and Fox need OEM options to fit a super wide range of suspension parameters. There are other benefits to more air volume though, like more mechanical leverage to overcome seal drag. In the coil vs. air battle, more volume is a pretty powerful tool to help air chase performance. That's what they did with the new Boxxer air spring: bigger volume, smaller piston size, more PSI ===> "coil like feel." The new SDLX can doesn't offer a smaller piston size, but it does offer the same piston size and more air volume, which accomplishes the same goal.
So is this Linear XL just the opposite of a MegNeg? I remeber a lot of people hating the MegNeg on a lot of bikes, but...
So is this Linear XL just the opposite of a MegNeg? I remeber a lot of people hating the MegNeg on a lot of bikes, but great on a couple. Will the Linear XL only be okay on something like the Stumpy 15?
I swapped out the linear can for the linear XL for the sole purpose of gaining the extra negative chamber volume, in other words making it a megneg. Setup the linear XL can so that it had about the same bottom out resistance and sag but gained some suppleness off the top as well as some support through the midstroke. Would have simply bought the progressive can but the linear XL was the next best thing once it got discontinued. Considering the price of a seal kit, its decent value and in some cases can make a fairly noticeable difference.
"A low-cost, real-time tire pressure sensor made to improve the safety and performance of your bike's only two contacts with the ground. It fits securely inside of your tubeless tires and gives real-time pressure readings and alerts to your Garmin device via wireless transmissions."
Those are quite the accuracy claims for the cost. What do they know that Sram doesn't? And how would it work with a tire insert other...
Those are quite the accuracy claims for the cost. What do they know that Sram doesn't? And how would it work with a tire insert other than a tannus?
yea, that level of accuracy at that price is certainly something. i've learned enough about metrology over the years that cost goes up with increased accuracy, not down.
edit: the tirewiz at 2% accuracy would be 0.5 psi at 25 PSI. i'm not sure increased resolution at those pressures would produce any tangible benefits or discernable differences except for maybe fat tires, where pressures are often <10psi
yea, that level of accuracy at that price is certainly something. i've learned enough about metrology over the years that cost goes up with increased accuracy...
yea, that level of accuracy at that price is certainly something. i've learned enough about metrology over the years that cost goes up with increased accuracy, not down.
edit: the tirewiz at 2% accuracy would be 0.5 psi at 25 PSI. i'm not sure increased resolution at those pressures would produce any tangible benefits or discernable differences except for maybe fat tires, where pressures are often <10psi
Fat tires has been my use case for these bike TPMS. I currently use SKS Airspy with +-1% accuracy for enduro fat biking where 0.5 PSI difference matters and you have to adjust pressure each lap. I start off with roughly 8-9 PSI for the forest road climb and then release a bunch of air while looking at my Garmin until the pressure is dialed for the descent (1.5 - 5 PSI). It just takes away one step of connecting a pressure gauge on and off in the cold. Another cool thing is seeing how much your pressure drops when take the bike from indoor temps to -10C.
The whole puncture detection thing is a bit gimmicky because if you are riding the bike you can easily tell by the feel. If there is rapid air loss, you will hear that too.
Just pledged for Outsider to see how it compares. The stealth look is pretty nice compared to the Airspy valve wart. Also 1/4th the price
radness from manitou. we had one of the originals in the office at decline. i always thought it was the coolest looking bike even if it...
radness from manitou. we had one of the originals in the office at decline. i always thought it was the coolest looking bike even if it was probably poorly functioning.
That's a cool project, but I much prefer the round tube aesthetic from the original bike. The Gamux bikes look they're made from leftover pieces of shelving or track flooring.
That's a cool project, but I much prefer the round tube aesthetic from the original bike. The Gamux bikes look they're made from leftover pieces of...
That's a cool project, but I much prefer the round tube aesthetic from the original bike. The Gamux bikes look they're made from leftover pieces of shelving or track flooring.
You can make any shock "bottomless" if the graph just never reaches 100%!They also normalised all of the springs at sag, which isn't realistic - the...
You can make any shock "bottomless" if the graph just never reaches 100%!
They also normalised all of the springs at sag, which isn't realistic - the linear can would probably have the least sag and the progressive one the most if you plotted what a rider would actually use.
Sag is a good starting point but in practise the "progressive" cans will run with more sag or else they build force too fast in the...
Sag is a good starting point but in practise the "progressive" cans will run with more sag or else they build force too fast in the middle of the travel. Likewise coil shocks will have a different sag measurement again. I guess the graph does a good job of amplifying the differences between each option, by fixing that one variable but it might help if they included what pressure produced all of those curves too.
Dougal, I know you are not a believer in sag as a primary set up tool, but I disagree with you.
They did it right by normalizing around the same base sag number, imo.
Sag is a good starting point but in practise the "progressive" cans will run with more sag or else they build force too fast in the...
Sag is a good starting point but in practise the "progressive" cans will run with more sag or else they build force too fast in the middle of the travel. Likewise coil shocks will have a different sag measurement again. I guess the graph does a good job of amplifying the differences between each option, by fixing that one variable but it might help if they included what pressure produced all of those curves too.
Dougal, I know you are not a believer in sag as a primary set up tool, but I disagree with you. They did it right by normalizing...
Dougal, I know you are not a believer in sag as a primary set up tool, but I disagree with you.
They did it right by normalizing around the same base sag number, imo.
Good to see you around D.
if @TheSuspensionLabNZ is Dougal, I'm going to eat my helmet. There is no way the same thoughtful, approachable, nice, knowledgable person that posts here is the same knowledgable troll that posts elsewhere.
Isn't Suspension Lab NZ Jonno that stopped posting in the MTBR Suspension Forum after banging his head against the desk 10 thousand times arguing with Dougal?
if @TheSuspensionLabNZ is Dougal, I'm going to eat my helmet. There is no way the same thoughtful, approachable, nice, knowledgable person that posts here is the...
if @TheSuspensionLabNZ is Dougal, I'm going to eat my helmet. There is no way the same thoughtful, approachable, nice, knowledgable person that posts here is the same knowledgable troll that posts elsewhere.
Sag is a good starting point but in practise the "progressive" cans will run with more sag or else they build force too fast in the...
Sag is a good starting point but in practise the "progressive" cans will run with more sag or else they build force too fast in the middle of the travel. Likewise coil shocks will have a different sag measurement again. I guess the graph does a good job of amplifying the differences between each option, by fixing that one variable but it might help if they included what pressure produced all of those curves too.
if @TheSuspensionLabNZ is Dougal, I'm going to eat my helmet. There is no way the same thoughtful, approachable, nice, knowledgable person that posts here is the...
if @TheSuspensionLabNZ is Dougal, I'm going to eat my helmet. There is no way the same thoughtful, approachable, nice, knowledgable person that posts here is the same knowledgable troll that posts elsewhere.
Sag is a good starting point but in practise the "progressive" cans will run with more sag or else they build force too fast in the...
Sag is a good starting point but in practise the "progressive" cans will run with more sag or else they build force too fast in the middle of the travel. Likewise coil shocks will have a different sag measurement again. I guess the graph does a good job of amplifying the differences between each option, by fixing that one variable but it might help if they included what pressure produced all of those curves too.
if @TheSuspensionLabNZ is Dougal, I'm going to eat my helmet. There is no way the same thoughtful, approachable, nice, knowledgable person that posts here is the...
if @TheSuspensionLabNZ is Dougal, I'm going to eat my helmet. There is no way the same thoughtful, approachable, nice, knowledgable person that posts here is the same knowledgable troll that posts elsewhere.
This is the perfect summary. Going to jono for advice is always an enjoyable and informative conversation, getting talked at by old mate makes you regret your decisions
So bikes were too linear and we needed to use air shocks to fix it, but now bikes are more progressive, so we need to increase...
So bikes were too linear and we needed to use air shocks to fix it, but now bikes are more progressive, so we need to increase the air volume in our shocks to make them more linear. Makes sense to me!
That's one reason for the various air cans, and in a world where you can get a Starling with 0% progression or a Privateer with 44%...
That's one reason for the various air cans, and in a world where you can get a Starling with 0% progression or a Privateer with 44% progression, big brands like Rockshox and Fox need OEM options to fit a super wide range of suspension parameters. There are other benefits to more air volume though, like more mechanical leverage to overcome seal drag. In the coil vs. air battle, more volume is a pretty powerful tool to help air chase performance. That's what they did with the new Boxxer air spring: bigger volume, smaller piston size, more PSI ===> "coil like feel." The new SDLX can doesn't offer a smaller piston size, but it does offer the same piston size and more air volume, which accomplishes the same goal.
I totally understand the need, just making fun of trends in the industry haha. It's interesting to me that there hasn't been experimentation from the more performance side of the industry to increase air volume by lengthening the shock body, at least that I am aware of. If my math is correct, that would make the spring rate more linear than increasing it through a higher diameter. Lower friction, less progressive, lower pressures. I know that there are restrictions in length since it has to fit into frame, no getting around that, and most riders wouldn't want a shock that's massively long, but bikes like the Digit Datum, Trek Super Caliber, Spesh Epic WC etc... could use most of the top tube as an air chamber to make it very linear, if that's what they're looking for anyways.
we claim Russell Crowe, Sam Neill and split enz as our own but there are some we won't take lol. I genuinely love the NZ ethos on solving problems with fk all resources. The engineering talent is insane, the motorsport development is world class, with a population the size of a suburb in America.
we claim Russell Crowe, Sam Neill and split enz as our own but there are some we won't take lol. I genuinely love the NZ ethos...
we claim Russell Crowe, Sam Neill and split enz as our own but there are some we won't take lol. I genuinely love the NZ ethos on solving problems with fk all resources. The engineering talent is insane, the motorsport development is world class, with a population the size of a suburb in America.
By the way, we are claiming Liam Lawson.
Amazing what you can do with a bit of number 8 wire.
"A low-cost, real-time tire pressure sensor made to improve the safety and performance of your bike's only two contacts with the ground. It fits securely inside of your tubeless tires and gives real-time pressure readings and alerts to your Garmin device via wireless transmissions."
I check my air pressure before every ride and I probably don’t often do long enough rides for this to make sense. This isn’t an improvement over my electric inflator for routine air filling and top up. But, it looks to be an affordable solution for people who want to know how their air pressure fluctuates throughout a ride…
Sag is a good starting point but in practise the "progressive" cans will run with more sag or else they build force too fast in the...
Sag is a good starting point but in practise the "progressive" cans will run with more sag or else they build force too fast in the middle of the travel. Likewise coil shocks will have a different sag measurement again. I guess the graph does a good job of amplifying the differences between each option, by fixing that one variable but it might help if they included what pressure produced all of those curves too.
Dougal, I know you are not a believer in sag as a primary set up tool, but I disagree with you. They did it right by normalizing...
Dougal, I know you are not a believer in sag as a primary set up tool, but I disagree with you.
They did it right by normalizing around the same base sag number, imo.
Good to see you around D.
oh wow, theres probably only 2 people who I would genuinely be offended by getting confused with so I must have phrased that post very poorly sorry....I thought the fact I still acknowledged a good reason why the plot would use sag would be the biggest giveaway?
Seen a picture of a blue Norco with the HP-VPS layout rocking a zeb and coil rear shock, didn't think much of it at the time but it doesn't lineup with any of the current builds. Conclusion leads me to think it is a longer travel Sight?
yeah i guess not, you only compress a a small portion of the tyre's total volume when slamming into a rock. Bummer.
Theoretically, could somebody get that measurement from distance-based sensors? Maybe something like a magnetometer that tracks records anytime a magnet on the inside of the tire gets within X mm of a sensor on the rim? Obviously it’d take a lot of magnets & sensors (or a really long ride) to get a large enough sample of hits across the whole circumference of a rim.
Seen a picture of a blue Norco with the HP-VPS layout rocking a zeb and coil rear shock, didn't think much of it at the time...
Seen a picture of a blue Norco with the HP-VPS layout rocking a zeb and coil rear shock, didn't think much of it at the time but it doesn't lineup with any of the current builds. Conclusion leads me to think it is a longer travel Sight?
Yeah, the Sight 170 will be replacing the Range in Norco's line up. Not sure if they are doing a dedicated new frame for it, or if they're just over forking and long stroking the shock on the existing Sight frame. Probably the same frame as the Sight 150.
Yeah, the Sight 170 will be replacing the Range in Norco's line up. Not sure if they are doing a dedicated new frame for it, or...
Yeah, the Sight 170 will be replacing the Range in Norco's line up. Not sure if they are doing a dedicated new frame for it, or if they're just over forking and long stroking the shock on the existing Sight frame. Probably the same frame as the Sight 150.
From my understanding, this is exactly what they are doing. Good friend of mine has already long-shocked his HP Sight and is loving it. He is still running a Lyric at 160mm.
So bikes were too linear and we needed to use air shocks to fix it, but now bikes are more progressive, so we need to increase...
So bikes were too linear and we needed to use air shocks to fix it, but now bikes are more progressive, so we need to increase the air volume in our shocks to make them more linear. Makes sense to me!
That's one reason for the various air cans, and in a world where you can get a Starling with 0% progression or a Privateer with 44%...
That's one reason for the various air cans, and in a world where you can get a Starling with 0% progression or a Privateer with 44% progression, big brands like Rockshox and Fox need OEM options to fit a super wide range of suspension parameters. There are other benefits to more air volume though, like more mechanical leverage to overcome seal drag. In the coil vs. air battle, more volume is a pretty powerful tool to help air chase performance. That's what they did with the new Boxxer air spring: bigger volume, smaller piston size, more PSI ===> "coil like feel." The new SDLX can doesn't offer a smaller piston size, but it does offer the same piston size and more air volume, which accomplishes the same goal.
I totally understand the need, just making fun of trends in the industry haha. It's interesting to me that there hasn't been experimentation from the more...
I totally understand the need, just making fun of trends in the industry haha. It's interesting to me that there hasn't been experimentation from the more performance side of the industry to increase air volume by lengthening the shock body, at least that I am aware of. If my math is correct, that would make the spring rate more linear than increasing it through a higher diameter. Lower friction, less progressive, lower pressures. I know that there are restrictions in length since it has to fit into frame, no getting around that, and most riders wouldn't want a shock that's massively long, but bikes like the Digit Datum, Trek Super Caliber, Spesh Epic WC etc... could use most of the top tube as an air chamber to make it very linear, if that's what they're looking for anyways.
Making the diameter bigger does nothing for the compression, it's the starting vs. ending volume that is the factor. So compression ratio.
All else being the same (lengths wise), increasing the diameter will only increase the compression ratio and thus the progressivity.
Adding length is one way to do it, adding volume at the end (a bulgy aircan or shock eyelet) is another that also fits within the constraints of current ETE and stroke lengths.
Speaking of, has anybody done any calculations (or even though about it, it just occurred to me) how understroked shocks compare at a given travel? So going from a 65 mm to a 57,5 mm stroke shock on a 160 mm frame - frame leverage ratio increases, requiring higher pressures, but removing the stroke spacer volume (RS at least compensates the volume to keep the characteristic of the shock the same with a very large stroke spacer) would decrease the compression ratio and give some more linearity? Would that be useful at all?
if @TheSuspensionLabNZ is Dougal, I'm going to eat my helmet. There is no way the same thoughtful, approachable, nice, knowledgable person that posts here is the...
if @TheSuspensionLabNZ is Dougal, I'm going to eat my helmet. There is no way the same thoughtful, approachable, nice, knowledgable person that posts here is the same knowledgable troll that posts elsewhere.
Making the diameter bigger does nothing for the compression, it's the starting vs. ending volume that is the factor. So compression ratio. All else being the same...
Making the diameter bigger does nothing for the compression, it's the starting vs. ending volume that is the factor. So compression ratio.
All else being the same (lengths wise), increasing the diameter will only increase the compression ratio and thus the progressivity.
Adding length is one way to do it, adding volume at the end (a bulgy aircan or shock eyelet) is another that also fits within the constraints of current ETE and stroke lengths.
Speaking of, has anybody done any calculations (or even though about it, it just occurred to me) how understroked shocks compare at a given travel? So going from a 65 mm to a 57,5 mm stroke shock on a 160 mm frame - frame leverage ratio increases, requiring higher pressures, but removing the stroke spacer volume (RS at least compensates the volume to keep the characteristic of the shock the same with a very large stroke spacer) would decrease the compression ratio and give some more linearity? Would that be useful at all?
To make the air shock as linear as possible is imo a good thing, as it's easy to make it progressive with simple tuning via volume reducers, but very hard or impossible the other way around. One thing that doesn't attract anywhere near as much attention as pos/neg volumes is eq port location, it makes a big difference and is often difference between meh air spring and a good one.
I looked it up:
What if I do not have a Garmin device?
Currently, the Outrider is only compatible with Garmin brand head units because of their publicly available SDK, which allows us to develop the pressure change alert features. While it is possible, developing these features for Wahoo and other head units is more challenging for us and is something we are working on currently. Because of this, we are not able to offer compatibility with other brands at launch.
Because the firmware is not updatable remotely, the version of the Outrider offered on Kickstarter will not work with head units other than Garmin. Our goal going forward is to launch a new version of the Outrider, which will be compatible with a wider range of head units.
It uses your existing valve, as long as the rim seal is removable. So most insert-compatible valves should work
I'd love this. As much as I love my bikes being reliable and maintenance-free, I check tire pressures every ride. If I could connect to it with a phone just to check before a ride, I'd be happy. All the puncture features are neat too.
As long as it can stretch around a schrader though, ain't going back to that roadie nonsense.
I swapped out the linear can for the linear XL for the sole purpose of gaining the extra negative chamber volume, in other words making it a megneg. Setup the linear XL can so that it had about the same bottom out resistance and sag but gained some suppleness off the top as well as some support through the midstroke. Would have simply bought the progressive can but the linear XL was the next best thing once it got discontinued. Considering the price of a seal kit, its decent value and in some cases can make a fairly noticeable difference.
yea, that level of accuracy at that price is certainly something. i've learned enough about metrology over the years that cost goes up with increased accuracy, not down.
edit: the tirewiz at 2% accuracy would be 0.5 psi at 25 PSI. i'm not sure increased resolution at those pressures would produce any tangible benefits or discernable differences except for maybe fat tires, where pressures are often <10psi
Fat tires has been my use case for these bike TPMS. I currently use SKS Airspy with +-1% accuracy for enduro fat biking where 0.5 PSI difference matters and you have to adjust pressure each lap. I start off with roughly 8-9 PSI for the forest road climb and then release a bunch of air while looking at my Garmin until the pressure is dialed for the descent (1.5 - 5 PSI). It just takes away one step of connecting a pressure gauge on and off in the cold. Another cool thing is seeing how much your pressure drops when take the bike from indoor temps to -10C.
The whole puncture detection thing is a bit gimmicky because if you are riding the bike you can easily tell by the feel. If there is rapid air loss, you will hear that too.
Just pledged for Outsider to see how it compares. The stealth look is pretty nice compared to the Airspy valve wart. Also 1/4th the price
That's a cool project, but I much prefer the round tube aesthetic from the original bike. The Gamux bikes look they're made from leftover pieces of shelving or track flooring.
Dougal, I know you are not a believer in sag as a primary set up tool, but I disagree with you.
They did it right by normalizing around the same base sag number, imo.
Good to see you around D.
if @TheSuspensionLabNZ is Dougal, I'm going to eat my helmet. There is no way the same thoughtful, approachable, nice, knowledgable person that posts here is the same knowledgable troll that posts elsewhere.
Isn't Suspension Lab NZ Jonno that stopped posting in the MTBR Suspension Forum after banging his head against the desk 10 thousand times arguing with Dougal?
When in Rome...
https://thesuspensionlab.nz/ != https://www.shockcraft.co.nz/
typical Kiwi's 🤣
This is the perfect summary. Going to jono for advice is always an enjoyable and informative conversation, getting talked at by old mate makes you regret your decisions
I totally understand the need, just making fun of trends in the industry haha. It's interesting to me that there hasn't been experimentation from the more performance side of the industry to increase air volume by lengthening the shock body, at least that I am aware of. If my math is correct, that would make the spring rate more linear than increasing it through a higher diameter. Lower friction, less progressive, lower pressures. I know that there are restrictions in length since it has to fit into frame, no getting around that, and most riders wouldn't want a shock that's massively long, but bikes like the Digit Datum, Trek Super Caliber, Spesh Epic WC etc... could use most of the top tube as an air chamber to make it very linear, if that's what they're looking for anyways.
we claim Russell Crowe, Sam Neill and split enz as our own but there are some we won't take lol. I genuinely love the NZ ethos on solving problems with fk all resources. The engineering talent is insane, the motorsport development is world class, with a population the size of a suburb in America.
By the way, we are claiming Liam Lawson.
Amazing what you can do with a bit of number 8 wire.
You're welcome to Russel Crowe to be honest.
He's an arse, and the worst DJ I ever saw on the decks in Auckland back in the day.
I check my air pressure before every ride and I probably don’t often do long enough rides for this to make sense. This isn’t an improvement over my electric inflator for routine air filling and top up. But, it looks to be an affordable solution for people who want to know how their air pressure fluctuates throughout a ride…
oh wow, theres probably only 2 people who I would genuinely be offended by getting confused with so I must have phrased that post very poorly sorry....I thought the fact I still acknowledged a good reason why the plot would use sag would be the biggest giveaway?
@ebruner your hat is safe!
Seen a picture of a blue Norco with the HP-VPS layout rocking a zeb and coil rear shock, didn't think much of it at the time but it doesn't lineup with any of the current builds. Conclusion leads me to think it is a longer travel Sight?
Theoretically, could somebody get that measurement from distance-based sensors? Maybe something like a magnetometer that tracks records anytime a magnet on the inside of the tire gets within X mm of a sensor on the rim?
Obviously it’d take a lot of magnets & sensors (or a really long ride) to get a large enough sample of hits across the whole circumference of a rim.
this might already be out here somewhere, but the 2025 Sight LT 170/160 is out
Yeah, the Sight 170 will be replacing the Range in Norco's line up. Not sure if they are doing a dedicated new frame for it, or if they're just over forking and long stroking the shock on the existing Sight frame. Probably the same frame as the Sight 150.
From my understanding, this is exactly what they are doing. Good friend of mine has already long-shocked his HP Sight and is loving it. He is still running a Lyric at 160mm.
Making the diameter bigger does nothing for the compression, it's the starting vs. ending volume that is the factor. So compression ratio.
All else being the same (lengths wise), increasing the diameter will only increase the compression ratio and thus the progressivity.
Adding length is one way to do it, adding volume at the end (a bulgy aircan or shock eyelet) is another that also fits within the constraints of current ETE and stroke lengths.
Speaking of, has anybody done any calculations (or even though about it, it just occurred to me) how understroked shocks compare at a given travel? So going from a 65 mm to a 57,5 mm stroke shock on a 160 mm frame - frame leverage ratio increases, requiring higher pressures, but removing the stroke spacer volume (RS at least compensates the volume to keep the characteristic of the shock the same with a very large stroke spacer) would decrease the compression ratio and give some more linearity? Would that be useful at all?
Lol yeah, is this a joke? 😂
To make the air shock as linear as possible is imo a good thing, as it's easy to make it progressive with simple tuning via volume reducers, but very hard or impossible the other way around. One thing that doesn't attract anywhere near as much attention as pos/neg volumes is eq port location, it makes a big difference and is often difference between meh air spring and a good one.
Post a reply to: MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation