Dirt Magazine has published some very informative articles about why pivot placement is important and it's made for interesting reading.

I do agree that there are few munters out there these days, but there are quite profound differences in how a bike feels in certain conditions. Both my suspension bikes are broadly speaking Four Bar bikes, however they ride completely differently.

The Horst link bike feels very plush and never seems to have an issue with traction, however it's prone to pedal induced squat.

The Quad Link bike is stiff under pedalling and always feels controlled, but the rear wheel spits traction suddenly and the suspension bobs when using the granny ring.

Interesting thread!! This will be a can of worms!

Really it's all going to depend on what your doing, how and where.

I don't think you get any really bad bikes these days, well maybe 😮
I'm not going to mention names!

The way the suspension is setup is the main factor for the vast majority of people most of the time.

Ooh, I wish I hadn't clicked on that linkage weblink from Brant. May have to buy the software and waste loads of time playing with it…

I'm very much of the opinion that suspension set up is vastly more important than the actual design. I'm sure so many people don't get this right. Further, having just thought about it I own or have owned single pivot, faux-bar, VPP and DW and I like(d) them all although all have various pros and cons. Hard to compare exactly as the DW has 8" travel and the faux-bar 5.5". I do believe that shock technology (specifically RP23) has opened up a load of designs which would have been rubbish to ride a few years ago.

So you don't think that'll compromise "weight" or "maintenance" at all?

Compared to what, a hardtail? Any suspension system is going to have bearings and extra metal. The only system which is definitely going to be lighter/lower maintenance is SP, but then it won't ride as well, which is the point is it not?

treks abp is pretty neat in terms of isolating stuff…wait for shock technology to advance a bit more it'tl come down to geometry and a clever little processor in the shock

awhiles – interesting, though my single piv did used to compress on braking, obviously, it never locked out or got harsh on alpine descents.

I may have to buy some Jr Ts and ressurect the old Coyote!

As composite suggests, wait for decent sensors and micro control to hit the shock realm and you'll see some pretty impressive advances, just like active suspension on track cars – yes you can create a car that works well without it, but with it you can create a beast that can do things that are just not possible without constantly variable parameters.

Will it make the bike more fun to ride? I'm not so sure.

thebikechain – Member
I like bikes. I like them more if they go boing.

How they go boing does not really worry me. Just that they make me smile.

LBS of the year, eh?

😕

😆

I see no point in masking design problems in suspension design with tricky damping , active control or pro pedal ,,

there is no best design it's a compramise ,, whats good for a xc race wont be great on a non pedaly DH course

with the advent of hammerschmitt front thingies it's made the single pivot designers life luch easier as his ideal pivot placment( whereever that maybe) as he has only one ring to design around

the other reason why there is so many designs out there is the need for the designer to get around the huge number of patents out there,,

i think there is a lot of life in the single pivot design,, and with the new crop of linkages now letting the designer control the rate curve rather than being forced into the standard single pivot falling rate ,, single pivots have a lot going for them

bear in mind that suspension program is like wikipedia and can be changed by anyone, companies have a vested interest in making results fit their marketing, and ammetures might not measure stuff correctly.

Single pivot is the most trouble free but when compared to a Horst link it rides like a pig on stilts.
Nicolai do it best 🙂

I have a copy of linkage ,, and some of the files are a bit dodgy but i have found most to be very good,, and for developing your own design it's great wish I had it 10 years ago ,,
i know of a few people in the bike design world who have switched to this for initial design before going for it in the cad world ,,,

but remember GARBAGE in GARBAGE out ,,,,

worm can opened

ade ward:

I see no point in masking design problems in suspension design with tricky damping , active control or pro pedal

I understand that you have a background in this and, given the inevitable compromises forced on bike suspension design, wonder why you see no point?

Is there a reason to have, in simplistic terms, a complex suspension action (Whyte Plus 4, Horst, counter rotating 4-bar/VPP) and "simple" damping vs. single pivot and platform damping, a la Foes?

I think Brant should lay the cards on the table with some details of the Ragley full-sus….

from the bikes I have riden (GF, Scott, Giant), i liked the Giant Maestro system, worked all the time, no feeling of bob etc

the 'best' for all round type riding?

honestly; hardtail.

I think Brant should lay the cards on the table with some details of the Ragley full-sus….

there's no Ragley full sus at the moment, though there might be some Nukeproof stuff coming 🙂

Is there a reason to have, in simplistic terms, a complex suspension action (Whyte Plus 4, Horst, counter rotating 4-bar/VPP) and "simple" damping vs. single pivot and platform damping, a la Foes?

in a word fashion,, all the obove designs have their merits,, and possisbly perform better in certain situations

but i would blame the DH market,, where often pedal feedback is not the main criteria of the design,, then the marketing man then feels all his range should look like the DH design plus they may have paid a lot of money for a patent licience and feel they have to justify it throughout the range

damping in my personal little world i think that high speed damping is for controling the wheel(unsprung) and low speed damping is for controling the body (sprung weight frame rider etc) and trying to control the pedal induced suspension squat with damping will effect it's performace in controling the bike in pitch and until we have the power to run a hydraulic pump and batteries for the black box full active systems are just dreams

If you look at Turner bikes and the various reports that have come back from the 3x Flux rear suspension designs it's:

+1 DW Link

I would say a Horst link, but I have limited experience of newer designs such as the DW link/VPP so will have to reserve judgement.

I do know the worst though: anything 'faux-bar'. Like any Kona, 2nd gen 5-spot. Unless you prefer your rear suspension to stop working properly when you apply the brakes that is.

All I know is VPP, and yet the hills look greener in other camps…

….or is that what they want us to think!

Old MTB saying: If it ain't broke…………………………….flog it on STW and buy something new & shiny

If any one system was significantly better than others then we would all be using it.

Comparisons from one bike to the next are invariably useless as there are too many other factors that are different, yet ignored.

do know the worst though: anything 'faux-bar'. Like any Kona, 2nd gen 5-spot. Unless you prefer your rear suspension to stop working properly when you apply the brakes that is.

This is one of many posts that is typical of someone who reads the magazines without applying their mind.

We are getting closer to active electronic control. Not sure I'd have started with the fork to be honest.

Pro-flex already tried that did they not?

al' – faux bars are about as bad as it gets for brake lock. a lot of people don't seem to notice it, but most people haven't ridden a truly active system.

(the downside of an active system is that they're a bit more nose-divey when you grab the brakes)

thebikechain – Member
I like bikes. I like them more if they go boing.
How they go boing does not really worry me. Just that they make me smile.

GW:
LBS of the year, eh?

No we aren't. Nor have we aimed to be.

The point of the post was that most people don't actually know what suspension design does what.
It's more important that they try a range and find one that they enjoy irrespective of what patent is on it.

Personally that seems like the soundest advice i can give people. If you like it, it's the right one for you. i don't have an engineering or design background but i like riding bikes not analysing how it's riding. much like driving. I don't 'need' to know how my engine works as long as it works.

Make sense?

I wish someone would do some sort of video/CAD comparison, that explained & demonstrated the differences in a clear way. It all does my head in.

My outgoing single pivot bike can not be dialed without some bob, even with pro-pedal on a RP23. The more air squeezed in the more it just ramped up and became more and more like a HT. I think single pivot suits a certain terrain (perhaps more rocky/ledgey slower chunk, steep), but for more XC with climbing, faster descents not so good, as you would get bob on the climbs, and then brake jack/packing up on the fast descents, with more front wheel weight.

The complex multi-link systems I've tried (Giant's Maestro and Niner's CVA) are efficient, firm, with no bob or need for PP. Tracked better, no bottomless feeling, and also a disconnected trail feel

As long as you realise what you're getting into, and it suits your riding, all's well and you wont be disappointed

[pulls up a chair…] Tea anybody? Cream and sugar? [sits comfortably and reads on…]

single pivot