Originally posed by @Simmo :
“I've owned one and loved what it did to my Stumpy Evo.
One thing I would like is the changes made to other kinematics to be published please @CascadeComponents ... I bought the link primarily to change leverage ratio curve so I could use a coil shock, but I'm a nerd so I'd be interested in what each link does to all the other curves too.”
I would be interested in this as well. I have had an amazingly positive experience so far with my second hand CC link and Williams Racing Products mullet link, and the customer service provided with it from CC. if you have the data and time would you please be willing to share?
Please keep posts positive in this thread. Constructive criticism is fine, but be a mensch and keep your negativity to yourself.
In the spirit of constructive criticism would you mind fixing the thread title? That ' is killin' me...
I don’t have my computer on my so I can’t dig up the numbers you’re talking about right away. I’ll gladly share them when I get a chance though.
The reason they aren’t listed is because the change is imperceptible. Anti squat and anti rise largely dependent on axle path/IC and it’s hard to really change that without changing more suspension members or moving frame pivot points. There is a bit of a tendency for people to hyper focus on numbers in a way I don’t believe is healthy. For example some links might make the axle path 1-2mm more forward or rearward. In the grand scheme of things that’s nothing. Some links actually increase anti squat at top of travel and then cause it to drop off more towards the end of travel. On paper a lot of people would read into it that it would pedal better, but it doesn’t. So it really comes down to the fact that I want people to make a decision based on the thing that is going to have a very perceptible difference and not get wrapped up in things that might not be noticeable. Of course if anyone asks I’m always happy to oblige.
Here are a couple of plots for you. The first is looking at how fast the chain length is growing. This is pretty much to compare how chain forces will impact pedaling between the two. The higher the number the more chain tension will try and pull the bike up in travel. On some bikes that number can go negative later in travel. That would signify that pedaling would actually pull the bike into its travel at that point. For the Stumpjumper Evo, this number is pretty in line with other bikes in the category. The V3 Hightower is a little lower, but quite similar for example. What I like about looking at this number is it is not dependent on location of CG or what gear your in or any of that. So if you're comparing like to like it's easy to know what to expect. You can correlate it to anti squat in percent value with some scaling. The other thing is it's impossible to fudge this number. You can easily make anti squat show more or less by changing CG height. The other one is axle path. While the lines aren't identical, keep in mind it's less than 1mm difference at most points. Obviously that's not including deep in travel where the link has more travel.
I appreciate this thread and the focus on the stumpy evo. I've struggled with my evo since getting it spring 23, I just blow through the last 1/3 of the travel or have so much spacers/air that it rides too rough in the first 1/3 of travel. This is on the Float X in mullet mode.
Been waiting to jump into the CC link and reading up on it/asking everyone on the trails with a stumpy evo. Either people have no idea what I'm talking about or they are already on a CC link. I'm coming off a Pivot 5.5, and maybe I'm too picky, but a little weirded out how the Big S is pushing out a bike that seems so tricky to set up for 'me'. Mind you, this is my first Stumpy, and I was really excited to finally get on one after all these years.
I had issues setting up mine as well. I scrapped everything, and started from scratch using calipers rather than air pressure alone. I am using the stock Fox Float X. For me, the bike rides nicely sitting a bit deeper in the travel for sag. Not much, but just a tiny bit. With the CC link it definitely reacts better with a little more air for a firmer ride, again, not much, just an extra few pounds once I’ve found sag.
once I get there I used the suggested numbers to start, and then rode a section multiple times the same day playing with compression and rebound. It was a great time and a good learning experience. This is what worked for me, and to be honest, is probably not the plushest, but works for me.
@CascadeComponents thank you for sharing that info! It is interesting to see that the curve for the rear axle path is just over 30ish percent, and probably why my ride is doing better now, rather than fighting the last bit of axle path for the apogee of the curve.
the link has been an amazing addition to the bike for me.
@CascadeComponents thanks for sharing. This raises a more philosophical question for me about mtb suspension design: are the accepted metrics we all currently use to describe ride characterisitics, e.g. AS/AR, axle path etc, actually appropriate for a vehicle with a user-adjustable centre of gravity? The answer in my head is a clear "no", for exactly the reason you've highlighted regarding chain growth/shrink. If that's the case, do you think it's time designers began considering more appropriate metrics that help riders understand feelings vs numbers?
(sorry if this is a slight thread derail).
I experienced the same as you dude. Have had a stevo for 2 1/2 yrs now with float x. Kept on adding tokens to not blow through travel, but this made the bike harsh at the beginning.
Fitted a cc link, removed the tokens and now have it supportive and supple, lubbly.
@CascadeComponents
Any chance you can post up the graphs and numbers from the MY19 alloy stumpy evo, the one that only came in the s2/s3 sizes? I absolutely loved that bike geometry wise and for the fact it was simple with little to no adjustments, but the ride feel was definitely lacking. I actually had a Cascade link for the one I owned, but never got a chance to install it as I had to sell the bike due to hard times. I’m in the market for another one of those frames and would be curious to see the visuals on the upgrade link over the stock lay out.
I bought that bike when it first came out (see sig) I think I blew nearly 10 shocks in 2 years lol.
Cane Creek had a voodoo doll with my photo on it I'm sure. They ended up giving me a DB air for my troubles. Nice guys.
Great Geo, but terrible kinematic. I sold it before the CC link came out.
The kinematic is as follows:
https://www.pinkbike.com/news/behind-the-numbers-specialized-stumpjumpe…
@Mwood an others that may be struggling with your Stumpy EVO in mullet mode...
Specialized does not tell customers but using the mullet link drops the progressivity of the suspension A LOT. I believe Cascade and Williams Racing Products has said it drops to ~11% progressivity from ~19%. That is a massive drop. 19% progression is pretty middle of the road for modern bikes these days. 11% however is quite low and will require a lot of volume spacers and suspension compromise if you're a hard rider. It's a shame they don't explain this to customers but sell the link.
Your option if you want to still run it as a mullet but get it back to stock progression of 19%: Buy the Williams Racing Products Stumpy EVO Mullet Yoke for $250USD here: https://www.williamsracingproducts.com/shop
If you want the progression of a Cascade link (27%) on this frame, you can either go back to a 29" wheel out back and put the Cascade link on. OR, if you want the mullet AND the Cascade 27% progression, you will need to buy the mullet yoke from WRP and the Cascade link.
I was trying to dig up that article, but couldn’t remember what it was named, so thank you for that! I remember the progression ratio being low, but not that low. No clue what the big S was thinking back then.
Thanks for that information! Is there any source to that? It would explain my experience well.
I am on the smaller size and would prefer to keep the mullet, also don't want to sink more money into this bike as I haven't jived with it.
@CascadeComponents do you have any figures to back this up? And is what @RiderMikeCheck1 say correct about needing the WRP parts? From reading the CC site, I should be able to just go to the CC link - even with the mullet.
-The Cascade link replaces the link in the suspension system. It's designed for a 29" wheel. If you put it on with a 27.5" wheel the BB will be too low. The "Mullet Link" that Specialized sells is a different shape which makes the rear end taller so you can run the mullet wheel and keep all the geometry the same. The drawback of the Specialized link is that it drops progression a bunch (as discussed).
-The WRP mullet allows you to run a 27.5" wheel, and the stock link (19% progression) or Cascade link (26%) and preserve ride height/geo. I have done extensive research on all this for my SJEVO.
-For sources?:
1. Read the product description on this page: https://www.williamsracingproducts.com/shop/p/specialized-stumpjumper-e…
2. Read the comments from Cascade on their post to the person who asks "Will the mullet link be on the menu as well?" : https://www.instagram.com/p/CMkFCjkh8Yn/?hl=en (Cascade's response: "Hit up @williamsracingproducts. They'll have an option for you soon enough. Long story short is mullet rocker links are bad for kinematics, but mullet yokes are good. ... It decreases the progression to the point where it's essentially the same as the previous generation of Stumpjumper."
3. There are a bunch of comments from WRP on Instagram posts with the link in it. Don't have time to go through them all but here is their response on one talking about their yoke, "they [SJ EVOs] come with the option of a mullet link. By swapping the link, it makes the kinematic less progressive and decreases anti-squat (undesirable). By swapping the yoke [To WRP], the kinematics mentioned are improved - this can all be found on the website"
When you install an MX yoke, you're increasing the combined length of the shock and yoke which is the same as installing a longer eye to eye shock on a non-yoke bike. It's pretty easy to visualize how that will impact the leverage curve from the standard one by extending the curve to the left from 0 shock stroke and trimming the same amount off the fully compressed side of the curve.
Super low progression bikes like this were still common when the Stumpy Evo came out (i.e. Kona Operators and Processes, every Demo 8 until 2021, the original Orbea Rallon, every single pivot Orange, etc). But yeah, it sucks. Glad those days are mostly behind us.
I was having issues getting along with my Stumpy as well with the Mx link. Added the CC and WRP and it has been a much funner ride, and way more comfy. The shock is still set up stock without additional volume spacers.
WRP was a new purchase. The CC link was from a previous user. Helped to keep my costs down.
Ok, this whole thing seems a little messed up... or I am blind/dumb. I have been trying to sort out why I have been having this issue since June of last year and felt like I was going crazy as so many people I spoke with weren't having the same issue(well looks like they were all on the 29/29 set up).
Why doesn't Specialized actually call this variation in kinematics out on ANY of their info- I bought the bike specifically for the mullet aspect and to try out the legendary Stumpy platform. It seems a lot like a bait and switch to me, and it kinda irks me that I now have to drop another $500+ to get the mullet bike to ride like the stumpy is supposed to.
Yep, really a bad move that they didn't talk about the progression issue. But they wanted to call it out as a mullet-able bike and didn't want to scare people off. Also as Teamrobot pointed out... the current EVO frame launched in 2020. Which means it was on the drawing board in 2018. 11% (the EVO MX link is either 11% or 13%) progression wasn't good, but wasn't terrible by standards back then. Fast forward to 2024 and 11-13% range is super low for a modern hard-charger trail bike. They chose to give the option to the buyer to mullet the bike. And for many people it works fine. If you don't ride super aggressive or hit big terrain you may not even notice the low progression. I know of a few women who have the EVO MX link on there and still seldom, if ever, bottom the (OEM setup) shock out at ~30% sag.
. If you want the bike to be mullet and have the higher 26% progression, you need to get the WRP yoke and the Cascade link.
The reason Specialized didn't do a mullet yoke (the proper fix for this issue since it wouldn't reduce progressivity) is because the longer yoke will put more stress on the shock. The Specialized yoke bikes are already notorious for eating shocks up. So the engineers were definitely not going to sell a longer mullet yoke. So they stuck with the safer play--the link.
So yes, if you want to run the bike mullet and you want it to 'feel' like the stock bike with 29" link (19%) you need to get the WRP yoke. It's 'only' $250 now because of the exchange rate when I got mine it was $320
The only saving grace is that you said you got your Stumpy EVO June of 2023... If that's the case you got the bike on super sale since they've been fire sale'ing them for 18+ months.
As an aside, the new Stumpy EVO, that they're holding back until they clear stock, will not rely on the link to make it a mullet. Doing away with this issue.
Appreciate your thorough responses. These are major first-world problems here, but this is starting to make much more sense. Do I like it no, but I got the bike on a deal and will live with it.
Might try to scope out a 29" rear wheel and try that out. See how it feels and go from there. I've always held the stumpy in such high regard and have been really let down; now I know why. Folks at Big S might be getting a text or two as well.
If your texting friends at the big S, let the. Know that those that purchased at the original price may just like getting a wheelset, or maybe a head to toe riding kit to “ease the pain” of the original cost of the bike in comparison to now. I am sure they can get creative with what they offer those that registered in the beginning.
Thank you for this thread! Sorry hadn't been on in a while, and stoked to see this discussion.
Great data @CascadeComponents thank you. Quick question, (and feel free to tell me to mind my own business!) When you design the 4th link of a 4-bar (like the stumpy evo link) do you have more freedom to tune the leverage ratio without affecting other kinematics too much? i.e. is it more difficult to keep everything in balance when you design the second link (like your VPP lower links for example)?
Further on your point of the potential for movement of c.o.g., kinematics are based on fudge-able 'constants' of which centre of gravity is the main culprit. So frame designers and armchair nerds alike can never really compare apples with apples unless they know all constants used to create the published curves.
Am I missing an agreed industry definition of the height of centre of gravity? It seems to me like it should be agreed standard and a function of bb height, reach and stack...
I'd say impact on other aspects of kinematics beyond leverage curve are similarly impacted with horst vs other layouts for the most part. I've found with VPP and other layouts with two short links, towards the end of travel can deviate a lot. It's usually in a way that's, at least for me, positive (low anti squat and low anti rise). To be clear, I don't think low anti rise across all of travel is necessarily the thing we all need, but at the end of travel it certainly keeps it from packing up.
I ran a SJevo for a bit over 2 years and really enjoyed that bike.
Lots of experimenting and if I could only keep one single mod, it would be the Cascade Link.
However the combo that rocked my world was a CC, a WRP mullet link, Mara Pro (with the volume reducer that cuts the can in half, then 2 more reducers), long and slack settings & a 29er rear wheel.
This set up really corrected all of my issues with that bike and made it incredibly capable.
So just to reiterate and have absolute clarification, you can or cannot run a 27.5 wheel with a WRP yoke, and a CC link? Because I had a Evo and thought its a great bike. Up until I mulleted it. The LBS I bought it from thought I was being crazy that it lost its progressiveness especially since the ad text on big S website says it does not change anything but wheel size. Id love to get a another Evo if this combo is good and safe to use.
lots of people have done this with seemingly great results, as mentioned here and on the SJ evo thread on PB. I haven't seen @CascadeComponents comment on the WRP yoke + CC link combo specifically but my takeaway is that while the CC link wasn't designed to be used with the WRP link, there's no reason you can't do so if you want to.
Thats all the confirmation bias I need. Now I wish I didnt trade my frame away
Thank you
Double confirming this. I've ran this combo (WRP Yoke+Cascade Link + 27.5" wheel) for over a year.
Sucks that Specialized didn't make this more clear in their materials---or at least to their shops so the shops aren't in the dark when customers are complaining it doesn't ride the same.
I got the WRP yoke and only 1 ride so far, I can already feel a difference. My plan is to ride the WRP yoke for a while and maybe look into the CC link at a later time.
And yes, it's not cool that this was swept under the rug; my local Specialized shop had no idea. It was really just this thread that finally convinced me that maybe I wasn't crazy and got me to send it on the WRP.
Stoked that you got the yoke and are happy with it!
Post a reply to: Cascade Components on the Stumpjumper Evo