My point exactly - your analysis is a bit useless.
I'm not analysing anything, just stating the facts. I see where you are coming from - if a maestro is so different in its characteristics from an FSR for example, why not call one a dual link and one a 4 bar rather than both a 4 bar? Well if you ask someone to define a dual link, I think they would struggle to do so. A suspension design with 2 links perhaps? But then an FSR, Ellsworth "ICT", Maestro, DW, VPP, Lapierre, Lawwill etc. etc. can all be grouped into this category and not just a Maestro, DW or VPP (these are widely referred to as short link 4 bar designs).
The point of all this is not just a pointless argument over what to call a particular design, but it’s the fact that all these linkage designs are all an evolution of, and follow the basic principles of a 4 bar system i.e. a main frame, a wheel carrier (swingarm if you like) and two connecting links. What makes all these designs that come under the 4 bar umbrella different from a single pivot is that the pivot point (or instant force centre, positioned where the force lines through the 2 pivot points of each of the 2 links intersects) moves as the suspension compresses and is hence often referred to as a “virtual pivot”. Warrenpfo, just to clarify, the VPP design or “Virtual Pivot Point” is just the name Santa Cruz and Intense use. ALL 4 bar designs have a “virtual pivot”, don’t be fooled into thinking Santa Cruz or Intense bikes are the only bikes to have a virtual pivot…marketing guff.
So that brings me nicely on to how a Maestro is very different from a single pivot. Axle paths may be similar (I think Maestro is a bit more vertical at the beginning before moving forward at the end whereas a single pivot will obviously always be an arch of a circle…difference in riding terms could be negligible) but the point through which the linkage forces act on a Maestro moves as the suspension compresses, with a single pivot, it does not! The forces act through the main pivot, which is obviously fixed. What does this mean in the real world? It means that the behaviour of the suspension under braking and powered acceleration can be finely tuned by changing links and pivots to adjust how the virtual pivot moves.
Now Warrenpfo, hopefully this explains a little bit about why the characteristics can change so much between designs. As I said before, one of the main defining features of the VPP system is the “s” shaped axle path which some find hard to get used to as its very different from a predictable circular curve of a single pivot or a Maestro. The virtual pivot position of a Maestro goes down and the back at the last bit of travel, the VPP moves forward I think, both giving different squat (acceleration) and rise (braking) characteristics. Without analysing it more closely I can’t be more specific about that.
Something else to note and what bike companies don’t tell you is that all suspensions analysis is based on some fundamental assumptions, because you have to start somewhere. One being COG height is often assumed (DW assumes this) to be equal to the wheel base and chain line is often assumed to be in the middle. COG obviously changes constantly with body movement and non of us riding suspension bikes only use one gear! Be wary of a manufacturer (rocky mountain) saying their design is good because the line through the pivots is parallel to the chain and so you don’t get any feedback. This might be true if you only used this gear.
phew