Edit: somehow can‘t upload a photo but it‘s the counterscycle product that‘s seen on Loris (and others) bikes that‘s available to purchaseAfter all the hype and...
Edit: somehow can‘t upload a photo but it‘s the counterscycle product that‘s seen on Loris (and others) bikes that‘s available to purchase
After all the hype and talk I couldn‘t ressist…
From shaking it in my hand I can feel there‘s a weight in there moving up and down. Without riding the bike I can‘t tell if there‘s anything going on. Looking to take it out to a trail the next weekend. I‘m still thinking about the placement on the fork/steerer area.
Is there a reason to put it right or left? And how much up or down on the fork?
how much was shipping to germany? paid any customs on top?
Im really interested in trying a light version on the rear axle, but like you I need to figure out a mounting setup. Stoke you felt...
Im really interested in trying a light version on the rear axle, but like you I need to figure out a mounting setup. Stoke you felt a positive change! I’ll keep experimenting, see where else this can be mounted or frequency we can cancel out.
Did you change any settings on the dorado to go with it?
Any chance these improve riding comfort when going under 15mph? I am assuming they are meant for going Mach 2 down a racetrack, so no.
Yes they do. At least the Countershox one, as long as you have some bumps in it, it will work. Although I think the faster you go the more useful the effect is.
Im really interested in trying a light version on the rear axle, but like you I need to figure out a mounting setup. Stoke you felt...
Im really interested in trying a light version on the rear axle, but like you I need to figure out a mounting setup. Stoke you felt a positive change! I’ll keep experimenting, see where else this can be mounted or frequency we can cancel out.
Did you change any settings on the dorado to go with it?
I feel like i was able to stiffen my compression a bit and speed up the rebound. I do think to get the most out of the CounterShox you should adjust your air/coil and clickers if you feel it's needed. Since the Countershox is removing some of the vibrations, it lets me run a stiffer bike but still has comfort to my hands and feet. The positive of this is now that my bike is more stable from pitching on and off brakes. I used to run an incredible soft suspension setup because I was searching for comfort.
Would love to see these devices integrated into frames, forks, steerer tubes etc. in a modular way. Or at least add dedicated mounting points for them in common locations.
I love that we are at this point in the sport, but tuned mass dampers (TMDs) seem more a reflection of hyper optimization than some must-have breakthrough that will change the sport (or your bike) forever. I'd put aftermarket linkages, pedal kickback devices etc in this realm as well. This isn't to say an average joe type rider won't or can't benefit from this type of thing, but it will become harder and harder to decouple placebo from real world effect.
If I'm riding a well serviced bike that is super dialed for me and my technique is solid of course I'll benefit from all these new fangled devices, so long as we can actually setup something like a TMD to do something specific without chasing our tail elsewhere. Also, remember, Dak specifically said it helps him see when he's riding so close to the edge his eyeballs are being shaken like he's in a paint shaker. How many of us mortals can say this is a common complaint? Not saying it doesn't happen, but I am saying this is the type of "on the edge" willingness one needs to have for these things to really start to add up to something of value.
Remember, most riders (not on Vital per se) are on a bike that desperately needs suspension service, isn't properly setup for the rider in the first place, has clapped out tires/wheels/whatever, is the wrong size and/or the rider drags brake everywhere he/she goes. In these situations, adding some new fangled device like a TMD is way more placebo than something real. Or at the very least its one of those "stepping over dollars to pickup pennies" type of thing.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DAsKBzCOFqR/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA== Video of Jordi giving his thoughts on the TMD while testing with Richie. Obviously, with Jordi's relationship to Fox, it sort of has to be taken with a grain (or three) of salt, but I still think he more or less hits the nail on the head. The TMD is going to need to be tuned, likely with data, to a particular rider's demands/setup/bike/etc. A one sized fits approach is unlikely to work when we are aiming at a bike/rider specific frequency to dampen or "tune out" to some extent.
Im really interested in trying a light version on the rear axle, but like you I need to figure out a mounting setup. Stoke you felt...
Im really interested in trying a light version on the rear axle, but like you I need to figure out a mounting setup. Stoke you felt a positive change! I’ll keep experimenting, see where else this can be mounted or frequency we can cancel out.
I feel like i was able to stiffen my compression a bit and speed up the rebound. I do think to get the most out of...
I feel like i was able to stiffen my compression a bit and speed up the rebound. I do think to get the most out of the CounterShox you should adjust your air/coil and clickers if you feel it's needed. Since the Countershox is removing some of the vibrations, it lets me run a stiffer bike but still has comfort to my hands and feet. The positive of this is now that my bike is more stable from pitching on and off brakes. I used to run an incredible soft suspension setup because I was searching for comfort.
I’d be curious to hear about how the bike feels with the spring and damper settings for the CounterShoxs, but with the CounterShox removed. I think it’d be a way to flush out the difference in feel even more
I love that we are at this point in the sport, but tuned mass dampers (TMDs) seem more a reflection of hyper optimization than some must-have...
I love that we are at this point in the sport, but tuned mass dampers (TMDs) seem more a reflection of hyper optimization than some must-have breakthrough that will change the sport (or your bike) forever. I'd put aftermarket linkages, pedal kickback devices etc in this realm as well. This isn't to say an average joe type rider won't or can't benefit from this type of thing, but it will become harder and harder to decouple placebo from real world effect.
If I'm riding a well serviced bike that is super dialed for me and my technique is solid of course I'll benefit from all these new fangled devices, so long as we can actually setup something like a TMD to do something specific without chasing our tail elsewhere. Also, remember, Dak specifically said it helps him see when he's riding so close to the edge his eyeballs are being shaken like he's in a paint shaker. How many of us mortals can say this is a common complaint? Not saying it doesn't happen, but I am saying this is the type of "on the edge" willingness one needs to have for these things to really start to add up to something of value.
Remember, most riders (not on Vital per se) are on a bike that desperately needs suspension service, isn't properly setup for the rider in the first place, has clapped out tires/wheels/whatever, is the wrong size and/or the rider drags brake everywhere he/she goes. In these situations, adding some new fangled device like a TMD is way more placebo than something real. Or at the very least its one of those "stepping over dollars to pickup pennies" type of thing.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DAsKBzCOFqR/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA== Video of Jordi giving his thoughts on the TMD while testing with Richie. Obviously, with Jordi's relationship to Fox, it sort of has to be taken with a grain (or three) of salt, but I still think he more or less hits the nail on the head. The TMD is going to need to be tuned, likely with data, to a particular rider's demands/setup/bike/etc. A one sized fits approach is unlikely to work when we are aiming at a bike/rider specific frequency to dampen or "tune out" to some extent.
In order to find something that might be a breakthrough, new things have to be tried. If no one tries aftermarket linkages, pedal kickback devices, TMD's, air spring modifications in a fork, etc. then things stagnate.
Maybe there are people out there setting these things up solely by feel and it's working great for them, but I have to think that the groups hoping to sell these things to the masses (ha!) are super bummed about the MI System 2 being shelved. I'm not sure I'd add this complexity to my mtb experience regardless, but there is zero chance of me buying one of these things without some ability to use DAQ to aid me in setting it up.
I love that we are at this point in the sport, but tuned mass dampers (TMDs) seem more a reflection of hyper optimization than some must-have...
I love that we are at this point in the sport, but tuned mass dampers (TMDs) seem more a reflection of hyper optimization than some must-have breakthrough that will change the sport (or your bike) forever. I'd put aftermarket linkages, pedal kickback devices etc in this realm as well. This isn't to say an average joe type rider won't or can't benefit from this type of thing, but it will become harder and harder to decouple placebo from real world effect.
If I'm riding a well serviced bike that is super dialed for me and my technique is solid of course I'll benefit from all these new fangled devices, so long as we can actually setup something like a TMD to do something specific without chasing our tail elsewhere. Also, remember, Dak specifically said it helps him see when he's riding so close to the edge his eyeballs are being shaken like he's in a paint shaker. How many of us mortals can say this is a common complaint? Not saying it doesn't happen, but I am saying this is the type of "on the edge" willingness one needs to have for these things to really start to add up to something of value.
Remember, most riders (not on Vital per se) are on a bike that desperately needs suspension service, isn't properly setup for the rider in the first place, has clapped out tires/wheels/whatever, is the wrong size and/or the rider drags brake everywhere he/she goes. In these situations, adding some new fangled device like a TMD is way more placebo than something real. Or at the very least its one of those "stepping over dollars to pickup pennies" type of thing.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DAsKBzCOFqR/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA== Video of Jordi giving his thoughts on the TMD while testing with Richie. Obviously, with Jordi's relationship to Fox, it sort of has to be taken with a grain (or three) of salt, but I still think he more or less hits the nail on the head. The TMD is going to need to be tuned, likely with data, to a particular rider's demands/setup/bike/etc. A one sized fits approach is unlikely to work when we are aiming at a bike/rider specific frequency to dampen or "tune out" to some extent.
In order to find something that might be a breakthrough, new things have to be tried. If no one tries aftermarket linkages, pedal kickback devices, TMD's...
In order to find something that might be a breakthrough, new things have to be tried. If no one tries aftermarket linkages, pedal kickback devices, TMD's, air spring modifications in a fork, etc. then things stagnate.
Of course! Nowhere did I say we shouldn't try new things. What I am however saying is people often step over much easier/obvious performance gains to follow the proverbial herd. I'm also suggesting we're whittling away at smaller gains than maybe we were 5-10 years ago. All of these things can be true at the same time, and if history is a guide this is exactly what we should expect (optimizing for smaller and smaller "real" gains).
I’d be curious to hear about how the bike feels with the spring and damper settings for the CounterShoxs, but with the CounterShox removed. I think...
I’d be curious to hear about how the bike feels with the spring and damper settings for the CounterShoxs, but with the CounterShox removed. I think it’d be a way to flush out the difference in feel even more
Tomorrow I will try with more air the fork and maybe more compression too, because with the tmd only on the fork it feels like the chassis is in general pitched a little bit more forward.
I feel like i was able to stiffen my compression a bit and speed up the rebound. I do think to get the most out of...
I feel like i was able to stiffen my compression a bit and speed up the rebound. I do think to get the most out of the CounterShox you should adjust your air/coil and clickers if you feel it's needed. Since the Countershox is removing some of the vibrations, it lets me run a stiffer bike but still has comfort to my hands and feet. The positive of this is now that my bike is more stable from pitching on and off brakes. I used to run an incredible soft suspension setup because I was searching for comfort.
I’d be curious to hear about how the bike feels with the spring and damper settings for the CounterShoxs, but with the CounterShox removed. I think...
I’d be curious to hear about how the bike feels with the spring and damper settings for the CounterShoxs, but with the CounterShox removed. I think it’d be a way to flush out the difference in feel even more
The bike is not fun to ride in this setting. (setup for countershox but removed). Much more feedback to my hands and less planted bike. It felt like it was deflecting all the way down the trail.
I have no horse in the race, I’m just a rider who’s trying to make his bike feel awesome and enjoys testing. I’ve tried a lot of stuff on my bike that didn’t make a difference, but using TMD makes enough of a change that I’m keeping them on. I think everything will evolve and they will be hidden in the future.
Don't think its been mentioned that Rimpact's steerer mounted TMD is available for pre-order - https://www.rimpactmtb.com/tmdComes with 3 different spring rates
Don't think its been mentioned that Rimpact's steerer mounted TMD is available for pre-order - https://www.rimpactmtb.com/tmd
Comes with 3 different spring rates
Looks like it could have potential! Weight is made of tungsten. I’m a little worrried about how noisy this might be. Decent price and just over 400g in weight.
Don't think its been mentioned that Rimpact's steerer mounted TMD is available for pre-order - https://www.rimpactmtb.com/tmdComes with 3 different spring rates
Don't think its been mentioned that Rimpact's steerer mounted TMD is available for pre-order - https://www.rimpactmtb.com/tmd
Looks like it could have potential! Weight is made of tungsten. I’m a little worrried about how noisy this might be. Decent price and just over...
Looks like it could have potential! Weight is made of tungsten. I’m a little worrried about how noisy this might be. Decent price and just over 400g in weight.
Does anyone know if the the countersycles tmd and the rimpact work the same way? Or is there oil in the Countersycle tmd to dissipate energy?
No there isn‘t anything in the countersycle, they both have the same construction
The countercycle is housed within the shell and have some sort or grease or lubricant inside. I like the fact that it’s dead silent. The rimpact could be noisy also there’s no way to dampen the rebound and in this design
The countercycle is housed within the shell and have some sort or grease or lubricant inside. I like the fact that it’s dead silent. The rimpact...
The countercycle is housed within the shell and have some sort or grease or lubricant inside. I like the fact that it’s dead silent. The rimpact could be noisy also there’s no way to dampen the rebound and in this design
Dead Silent, no rattle. Interestingly, ours is sprung much firmer that the counter cycles version in all three frequency set ups we've targeted. It's really cool to see others doing their own data acquisition and analysis of the Countercycle one, I hope ours is put under similar security. The specific frequencies we targeted were derived from a great deal of data collection, Fast Fourier Transfer analysis and GPS comparison. Looking at which frequencies were actually felt as negative at a given instance and which were actually part of the ride characteristics of the chassis. It's clear all the options being worked on across the industry have different goals, which I find super exciting to explore. Our TMD is friction damped not oil damped due in part to it's design, cost and implementation limitations. An oil damped version is something we will begin looking at when/if TMDs stick around long enough to mature somewhat and the risk/reward is worth the immense effort to design something like that. We like the zero maintenance, easy and approachable user experience that our execution has. Something more complex may optimise further but be less enjoyable and beneficial for users outside of the top 10 WC teams.
The countercycle is housed within the shell and have some sort or grease or lubricant inside. I like the fact that it’s dead silent. The rimpact...
The countercycle is housed within the shell and have some sort or grease or lubricant inside. I like the fact that it’s dead silent. The rimpact could be noisy also there’s no way to dampen the rebound and in this design
Dead Silent, no rattle. Interestingly, ours is sprung much firmer that the counter cycles version in all three frequency set ups we've targeted. It's really cool...
Dead Silent, no rattle. Interestingly, ours is sprung much firmer that the counter cycles version in all three frequency set ups we've targeted. It's really cool to see others doing their own data acquisition and analysis of the Countercycle one, I hope ours is put under similar security. The specific frequencies we targeted were derived from a great deal of data collection, Fast Fourier Transfer analysis and GPS comparison. Looking at which frequencies were actually felt as negative at a given instance and which were actually part of the ride characteristics of the chassis. It's clear all the options being worked on across the industry have different goals, which I find super exciting to explore. Our TMD is friction damped not oil damped due in part to it's design, cost and implementation limitations. An oil damped version is something we will begin looking at when/if TMDs stick around long enough to mature somewhat and the risk/reward is worth the immense effort to design something like that. We like the zero maintenance, easy and approachable user experience that our execution has. Something more complex may optimise further but be less enjoyable and beneficial for users outside of the top 10 WC teams.
Nice thanks for the clarification! Could you give more details on the process of deciding which spring to use? Do you have recommendations for trail type and speed? Did you find different riders preferred different set-ups in the same terrain/trail-speed?
The countercycle is housed within the shell and have some sort or grease or lubricant inside. I like the fact that it’s dead silent. The rimpact...
The countercycle is housed within the shell and have some sort or grease or lubricant inside. I like the fact that it’s dead silent. The rimpact could be noisy also there’s no way to dampen the rebound and in this design
Dead Silent, no rattle. Interestingly, ours is sprung much firmer that the counter cycles version in all three frequency set ups we've targeted. It's really cool...
Dead Silent, no rattle. Interestingly, ours is sprung much firmer that the counter cycles version in all three frequency set ups we've targeted. It's really cool to see others doing their own data acquisition and analysis of the Countercycle one, I hope ours is put under similar security. The specific frequencies we targeted were derived from a great deal of data collection, Fast Fourier Transfer analysis and GPS comparison. Looking at which frequencies were actually felt as negative at a given instance and which were actually part of the ride characteristics of the chassis. It's clear all the options being worked on across the industry have different goals, which I find super exciting to explore. Our TMD is friction damped not oil damped due in part to it's design, cost and implementation limitations. An oil damped version is something we will begin looking at when/if TMDs stick around long enough to mature somewhat and the risk/reward is worth the immense effort to design something like that. We like the zero maintenance, easy and approachable user experience that our execution has. Something more complex may optimise further but be less enjoyable and beneficial for users outside of the top 10 WC teams.
Awesome! I sent you a DM and message on your site. I’d be stoked to help test and provide you data!
The countercycle is housed within the shell and have some sort or grease or lubricant inside. I like the fact that it’s dead silent. The rimpact...
The countercycle is housed within the shell and have some sort or grease or lubricant inside. I like the fact that it’s dead silent. The rimpact could be noisy also there’s no way to dampen the rebound and in this design
Dead Silent, no rattle. Interestingly, ours is sprung much firmer that the counter cycles version in all three frequency set ups we've targeted. It's really cool...
Dead Silent, no rattle. Interestingly, ours is sprung much firmer that the counter cycles version in all three frequency set ups we've targeted. It's really cool to see others doing their own data acquisition and analysis of the Countercycle one, I hope ours is put under similar security. The specific frequencies we targeted were derived from a great deal of data collection, Fast Fourier Transfer analysis and GPS comparison. Looking at which frequencies were actually felt as negative at a given instance and which were actually part of the ride characteristics of the chassis. It's clear all the options being worked on across the industry have different goals, which I find super exciting to explore. Our TMD is friction damped not oil damped due in part to it's design, cost and implementation limitations. An oil damped version is something we will begin looking at when/if TMDs stick around long enough to mature somewhat and the risk/reward is worth the immense effort to design something like that. We like the zero maintenance, easy and approachable user experience that our execution has. Something more complex may optimise further but be less enjoyable and beneficial for users outside of the top 10 WC teams.
Nice thanks for the clarification! Could you give more details on the process of deciding which spring to use? Do you have recommendations for trail type...
Nice thanks for the clarification! Could you give more details on the process of deciding which spring to use? Do you have recommendations for trail type and speed? Did you find different riders preferred different set-ups in the same terrain/trail-speed?
Actually very similar to the approach that Downamics talks about using in their Instagram post above. We recorded data from a range of different rides on varying bikes and trails. Merged the data and cleaned it up a little. We used a fast Fourier transform to order the data in a most to least occurrences fashion. Drew conclusions from this and then selected a specific trail that had a range of different speeds, features and conditions in one lap, the kind that, if you were to set up your suspension on, it would yield a solid ball park set up for all trails thanks to its variety. We recorded data and also logged rider feedback from a few riders on said trail. We cross referenced the instances where rider feedback listed a negative feeling with the trail feature, their location and the data according to the time stamp and GPS. Essentially snipping out the data specific to that moment in time so we could discard the plethora of irrelevant data points. We then looked at what frequencies were recorded during those snapshots and we had a starting point to aim for with a design. Luckily the various instances we analysed were within a close range making it possible to adjust one component of the formula and hit our targets. Hence 3 spring rates, fairly close but distinct enough to notice how they behave on the trail with respect to different features and the negative feelings those features produce in the bike.
We have found with our execution, variables such as rider weight or skill level make much of a difference. The data was surprisingly similar across all riders and locations we tested in. One main thing that made a bigger difference was the trail. Fort William, slower steeper tech and a mellow trail centre all had sections where one of our three set ups had merit. But usually one had more than the other two and that made it quite easy to select a spring rate and go ride. For reference, Trans Madeira felt great with just the middle of the three options. I've stuck with those for almost all rides since, but would swap out if I was racing Fort William or heading to the Alps. Of the test riders that have tried the three options, all have settled with the middle option as their go to, but have concluded there is a use case and reason for the other two being available. Most testing has been conducted in the UK and Morzine.
A few key points to note: It wasn't as straightforward or as easy as the above. We worked on this on and off since at least early 2021 I think. More off than on.... We learned a great deal throughout the project and one thing in particular was that there's multiple ways to skin the cat. Where you place it on the bike, what function you target (high or low frequency, low or high amplitudes), oil damping for dissipation or an alternative design for smoothing things out over time, adjusting the natural frequency or ignoring that entirely and targeting a change in how one frequency interacts with the system. I'm continuously surprised with our TMD each time we conduct back to back blind testing which has always driven the project forward.
Sorry if the answer is missing specifics, there's about 3 other companies working on prototypes as the moment. Until ours is launched officially we will keep specifics secret to preventing others getting a free ride.
Actually very similar to the approach that Downamics talks about using in their Instagram post above. We recorded data from a range of different rides on...
Actually very similar to the approach that Downamics talks about using in their Instagram post above. We recorded data from a range of different rides on varying bikes and trails. Merged the data and cleaned it up a little. We used a fast Fourier transform to order the data in a most to least occurrences fashion. Drew conclusions from this and then selected a specific trail that had a range of different speeds, features and conditions in one lap, the kind that, if you were to set up your suspension on, it would yield a solid ball park set up for all trails thanks to its variety. We recorded data and also logged rider feedback from a few riders on said trail. We cross referenced the instances where rider feedback listed a negative feeling with the trail feature, their location and the data according to the time stamp and GPS. Essentially snipping out the data specific to that moment in time so we could discard the plethora of irrelevant data points. We then looked at what frequencies were recorded during those snapshots and we had a starting point to aim for with a design. Luckily the various instances we analysed were within a close range making it possible to adjust one component of the formula and hit our targets. Hence 3 spring rates, fairly close but distinct enough to notice how they behave on the trail with respect to different features and the negative feelings those features produce in the bike.
We have found with our execution, variables such as rider weight or skill level make much of a difference. The data was surprisingly similar across all riders and locations we tested in. One main thing that made a bigger difference was the trail. Fort William, slower steeper tech and a mellow trail centre all had sections where one of our three set ups had merit. But usually one had more than the other two and that made it quite easy to select a spring rate and go ride. For reference, Trans Madeira felt great with just the middle of the three options. I've stuck with those for almost all rides since, but would swap out if I was racing Fort William or heading to the Alps. Of the test riders that have tried the three options, all have settled with the middle option as their go to, but have concluded there is a use case and reason for the other two being available. Most testing has been conducted in the UK and Morzine.
A few key points to note: It wasn't as straightforward or as easy as the above. We worked on this on and off since at least early 2021 I think. More off than on.... We learned a great deal throughout the project and one thing in particular was that there's multiple ways to skin the cat. Where you place it on the bike, what function you target (high or low frequency, low or high amplitudes), oil damping for dissipation or an alternative design for smoothing things out over time, adjusting the natural frequency or ignoring that entirely and targeting a change in how one frequency interacts with the system. I'm continuously surprised with our TMD each time we conduct back to back blind testing which has always driven the project forward.
Sorry if the answer is missing specifics, there's about 3 other companies working on prototypes as the moment. Until ours is launched officially we will keep specifics secret to preventing others getting a free ride.
Great to hear the background of the development. Super interesting!
Too bad it won't fit on most dh setups with that 190mm+ steerer tube requirements 😔it looks like a winner otherwise and price is very reasonable.
Yes agreed it's long and needs a conventional stem to take up the extra 40mm or so rather than direct mount stems, leaving DH riders with a chimney stack. It'll fit most small enduro bikes with a regular stem and some of the larger headtube DH bikes. A solution to this is being looked at, but the travel of the mass is part of the equation when designing this making it tricky.
how much was shipping to germany? paid any customs on top?
Paid around 25$ extra for shipping and it arrived within a couple days with fedex priority. Customs was just 11€, but you can get unlucky there too.
Did you change any settings on the dorado to go with it?
Any chance these improve riding comfort when going under 15mph? I am assuming they are meant for going Mach 2 down a racetrack, so no.
I would assume they would be tuned different but unless you’re riding so slow as to not generate any forces…
Yes they do. At least the Countershox one, as long as you have some bumps in it, it will work. Although I think the faster you go the more useful the effect is.
I feel like i was able to stiffen my compression a bit and speed up the rebound. I do think to get the most out of the CounterShox you should adjust your air/coil and clickers if you feel it's needed. Since the Countershox is removing some of the vibrations, it lets me run a stiffer bike but still has comfort to my hands and feet. The positive of this is now that my bike is more stable from pitching on and off brakes. I used to run an incredible soft suspension setup because I was searching for comfort.
Would love to see these devices integrated into frames, forks, steerer tubes etc. in a modular way. Or at least add dedicated mounting points for them in common locations.
I love that we are at this point in the sport, but tuned mass dampers (TMDs) seem more a reflection of hyper optimization than some must-have breakthrough that will change the sport (or your bike) forever. I'd put aftermarket linkages, pedal kickback devices etc in this realm as well. This isn't to say an average joe type rider won't or can't benefit from this type of thing, but it will become harder and harder to decouple placebo from real world effect.
If I'm riding a well serviced bike that is super dialed for me and my technique is solid of course I'll benefit from all these new fangled devices, so long as we can actually setup something like a TMD to do something specific without chasing our tail elsewhere. Also, remember, Dak specifically said it helps him see when he's riding so close to the edge his eyeballs are being shaken like he's in a paint shaker. How many of us mortals can say this is a common complaint? Not saying it doesn't happen, but I am saying this is the type of "on the edge" willingness one needs to have for these things to really start to add up to something of value.
Remember, most riders (not on Vital per se) are on a bike that desperately needs suspension service, isn't properly setup for the rider in the first place, has clapped out tires/wheels/whatever, is the wrong size and/or the rider drags brake everywhere he/she goes. In these situations, adding some new fangled device like a TMD is way more placebo than something real. Or at the very least its one of those "stepping over dollars to pickup pennies" type of thing.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DAsKBzCOFqR/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA== Video of Jordi giving his thoughts on the TMD while testing with Richie. Obviously, with Jordi's relationship to Fox, it sort of has to be taken with a grain (or three) of salt, but I still think he more or less hits the nail on the head. The TMD is going to need to be tuned, likely with data, to a particular rider's demands/setup/bike/etc. A one sized fits approach is unlikely to work when we are aiming at a bike/rider specific frequency to dampen or "tune out" to some extent.
I’d be curious to hear about how the bike feels with the spring and damper settings for the CounterShoxs, but with the CounterShox removed. I think it’d be a way to flush out the difference in feel even more
In order to find something that might be a breakthrough, new things have to be tried. If no one tries aftermarket linkages, pedal kickback devices, TMD's, air spring modifications in a fork, etc. then things stagnate.
Maybe there are people out there setting these things up solely by feel and it's working great for them, but I have to think that the groups hoping to sell these things to the masses (ha!) are super bummed about the MI System 2 being shelved. I'm not sure I'd add this complexity to my mtb experience regardless, but there is zero chance of me buying one of these things without some ability to use DAQ to aid me in setting it up.
Of course! Nowhere did I say we shouldn't try new things. What I am however saying is people often step over much easier/obvious performance gains to follow the proverbial herd. I'm also suggesting we're whittling away at smaller gains than maybe we were 5-10 years ago. All of these things can be true at the same time, and if history is a guide this is exactly what we should expect (optimizing for smaller and smaller "real" gains).
Tomorrow I will try with more air the fork and maybe more compression too, because with the tmd only on the fork it feels like the chassis is in general pitched a little bit more forward.
The bike is not fun to ride in this setting. (setup for countershox but removed). Much more feedback to my hands and less planted bike. It felt like it was deflecting all the way down the trail.
I did a test recording axle and bar movements with and without countershox. There is an article on PB that has all the graphs and results. https://www.pinkbike.com/news/first-look-countersycles-tuned-mass-damper-for-mountain-bikes.html
I have no horse in the race, I’m just a rider who’s trying to make his bike feel awesome and enjoys testing. I’ve tried a lot of stuff on my bike that didn’t make a difference, but using TMD makes enough of a change that I’m keeping them on. I think everything will evolve and they will be hidden in the future.
Where's the 0-50Hz chart?
TMD on Amaury Pierron's bike seen in the Fox Pitted video.
Don't think its been mentioned that Rimpact's steerer mounted TMD is available for pre-order - https://www.rimpactmtb.com/tmd
Comes with 3 different spring rates
Looks like it could have potential! Weight is made of tungsten. I’m a little worrried about how noisy this might be. Decent price and just over 400g in weight.
Does anyone know if the the countersycles tmd and the rimpact work the same way? Or is there oil in the Countersycle tmd to dissipate energy?
No there isn‘t anything in the countersycle, they both have the same construction
The countercycle is housed within the shell and have some sort or grease or lubricant inside. I like the fact that it’s dead silent. The rimpact could be noisy also there’s no way to dampen the rebound and in this design
Dead Silent, no rattle. Interestingly, ours is sprung much firmer that the counter cycles version in all three frequency set ups we've targeted. It's really cool to see others doing their own data acquisition and analysis of the Countercycle one, I hope ours is put under similar security. The specific frequencies we targeted were derived from a great deal of data collection, Fast Fourier Transfer analysis and GPS comparison. Looking at which frequencies were actually felt as negative at a given instance and which were actually part of the ride characteristics of the chassis. It's clear all the options being worked on across the industry have different goals, which I find super exciting to explore. Our TMD is friction damped not oil damped due in part to it's design, cost and implementation limitations. An oil damped version is something we will begin looking at when/if TMDs stick around long enough to mature somewhat and the risk/reward is worth the immense effort to design something like that. We like the zero maintenance, easy and approachable user experience that our execution has. Something more complex may optimise further but be less enjoyable and beneficial for users outside of the top 10 WC teams.
Nice thanks for the clarification! Could you give more details on the process of deciding which spring to use? Do you have recommendations for trail type and speed? Did you find different riders preferred different set-ups in the same terrain/trail-speed?
Awesome! I sent you a DM and message on your site. I’d be stoked to help test and provide you data!
Actually very similar to the approach that Downamics talks about using in their Instagram post above. We recorded data from a range of different rides on varying bikes and trails. Merged the data and cleaned it up a little. We used a fast Fourier transform to order the data in a most to least occurrences fashion. Drew conclusions from this and then selected a specific trail that had a range of different speeds, features and conditions in one lap, the kind that, if you were to set up your suspension on, it would yield a solid ball park set up for all trails thanks to its variety. We recorded data and also logged rider feedback from a few riders on said trail. We cross referenced the instances where rider feedback listed a negative feeling with the trail feature, their location and the data according to the time stamp and GPS. Essentially snipping out the data specific to that moment in time so we could discard the plethora of irrelevant data points. We then looked at what frequencies were recorded during those snapshots and we had a starting point to aim for with a design. Luckily the various instances we analysed were within a close range making it possible to adjust one component of the formula and hit our targets. Hence 3 spring rates, fairly close but distinct enough to notice how they behave on the trail with respect to different features and the negative feelings those features produce in the bike.
We have found with our execution, variables such as rider weight or skill level make much of a difference. The data was surprisingly similar across all riders and locations we tested in. One main thing that made a bigger difference was the trail. Fort William, slower steeper tech and a mellow trail centre all had sections where one of our three set ups had merit. But usually one had more than the other two and that made it quite easy to select a spring rate and go ride. For reference, Trans Madeira felt great with just the middle of the three options. I've stuck with those for almost all rides since, but would swap out if I was racing Fort William or heading to the Alps. Of the test riders that have tried the three options, all have settled with the middle option as their go to, but have concluded there is a use case and reason for the other two being available. Most testing has been conducted in the UK and Morzine.
A few key points to note: It wasn't as straightforward or as easy as the above. We worked on this on and off since at least early 2021 I think. More off than on.... We learned a great deal throughout the project and one thing in particular was that there's multiple ways to skin the cat. Where you place it on the bike, what function you target (high or low frequency, low or high amplitudes), oil damping for dissipation or an alternative design for smoothing things out over time, adjusting the natural frequency or ignoring that entirely and targeting a change in how one frequency interacts with the system. I'm continuously surprised with our TMD each time we conduct back to back blind testing which has always driven the project forward.
Sorry if the answer is missing specifics, there's about 3 other companies working on prototypes as the moment. Until ours is launched officially we will keep specifics secret to preventing others getting a free ride.
Great to hear the background of the development. Super interesting!
Too bad it won't fit on most dh setups with that 190mm+ steerer tube requirements 😔it looks like a winner otherwise and price is very reasonable.
Yes agreed it's long and needs a conventional stem to take up the extra 40mm or so rather than direct mount stems, leaving DH riders with a chimney stack. It'll fit most small enduro bikes with a regular stem and some of the larger headtube DH bikes. A solution to this is being looked at, but the travel of the mass is part of the equation when designing this making it tricky.
Post a reply to: Tuned Mass Dampers and Mountain Bikes