well the long wheelbase, front centre, long chainstay thing gets everyone all excited, theres talk of graphs, curves, balance etc
but his most surprising comment for me was….
I use a Shimano XTR transmission because it’s still possible to buy it without a clutch much. All suspension systems have a certain amount of chain growth. The clutch mech resists this as the suspension moves through its travel, making the suspension feel —-. Why would I want that? How can a thick/thin chainring and a clutch be anything other than the emperor’s new clothes? I use a chain guide to hold the chain on and look at the wear on every second tooth on my chainring and know I’m suffering from half the drag that I would be on a thick/thin. It’s a race down the hill, not a competition to see who can make the chain quietest – say no to clutches!
So, if we ‘clutch’ that rear mech, we are adding a friction damper to the rear suspension system. Again we make the suspension a bit worse, but this time to keep the chain on? Which it doesn’t fully achieve anyway. That’s hardly a win/win situation, is it? Try a rough downhill run with the chain removed to feel how good the rear suspension can be, and how much faster the bike goes without motive power! Since writing this Neko Mulally did exactly that at the World’s when a mechanical issue turned into his best result ever.
so we all gonna be ditching the clutch mech in pursuit of the perfect rate curve, anti-squat optimal, front-rear centred, enduro gnarpoon ?