[Closed] Are Orange the only two-bearing frames?

Santa cruz heckler & superlight used to be

They used to be very common. Santa Cruz especially, but also Trek, Gary Fisher, Giant.

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

They used to be pretty popular when manufacturers didn’t know any better. Now they’ve had a bit of time to refine/improve their design, not so much

Orange haven’t quite caught up yet

People like Tom above have a perception that the simple single pivot like orange is not as good as more 'modern' linkage designs but this is plain wrong. Every design is a compromise of sorts, anti rise, anti squat etc and oranges are no different. Orange have experimented with linkages but have always felt the benefits aren't worth it. They've had donkeys years to refine their pivot and shock placement also remember.

They supposedly suffer from brake jack but this has a benefit of preserving geo under braking and stopping the front end diving and getting steep in head angle. Starling cycles are the same design and have had rave reviews - dirt reckoned it was the fastest bike they'd tested. I think a big reason companies use a linkage design is partly technical and being able to better manipulate the suspension characteristics than a single pivot but partly down to (wrong) attitudes like Tom's that they're outdated and therefore won't sell. Not an Orange fan boy btw. These days suspension design is low on my list of priorities in a bike.

I've seen enough people winning races on oranges to know that a single pivot is never going to hold me back.

Everyone else has moved on. Even orange have tried. I'm sure you can make it work, just like Porsche make the 911 work, but there are better* solutions.

*I appreciate 'better' is a relative term and different things are better for different situations, just talking in general

How many bikes do Orange export?

Not defending Orange here but I think the term 'moved on' is wrong. As you say yourself they have tried other designs but have decided that for them it wasn't worth it. Everything is a compromise, even the most modern linkage design. Fine if you don't like orange or starling's design but don't try and say it's worse than other designs. It's just a different set of compromises.

Even if the design principles have some disadvantages, I'm sure they're so slight to the average rider, the benefits of simplicity do it for me. I'm sure they tune the shock to compensate enough.

I've seen enough people winning races on oranges to know that a single pivot is never going to hold me back.

How many recently?

I’ve seen plenty of DH races won on 75mm travel (and less, even rigid) hardtails with Cantis/v brakes. They were the best that were available at the time, but we moved on....

I long coveted a 5. Bought a cheap 2007.
Even compared to my fatty it feels slow to pedal.
How it was voted bike of the year I don't know.
It is however a bike I can ride through the very worst of mud and just leave to fester in the shed while my super speedy Anthem hibernates in the loft.

Depends what you want from your suspension doesn't it?

I don't like pedal kick back on technical climbs, and I don't like suspension stiffening under power on technical climbs, because one steals composure and the other steals traction.

Some people like these characteristics because it makes the bike feel taught under acceleration and more responsive like a hardtail. Reduced compliance and traction isn't always going to be an issue if the ground conditions aren't as marginal. Some will say you can run bigger, softer tyres to compensate for reduced traction, but IME this only goes so far.

In a market where a lot of bikes all look the same I think it's great that orange do it their own way. To the average rider I doubt suspension makes a lot of difference. Bike maintenance on the other hand (or lack of it) probably does.

Never had an orange, always wanted one. A lot of friends ride them and they have been bomb proof and reliable and just as fast as their other bikes or friends.

I don't understand the orange marmite thing, especially not on the new range. In fact the only thing that I hate is the price.

As I plod through the mud on my Hope equipped Orange I just feel so Englsh.

Rowan Sorrell is Errrrrrr fairly quick on orange single pivot, from what I can see.

Santa cruz heckler & superlight used to be

[img] [/img]

Looks like the Heckler still is..

Science Officer - if the suspension is so bad on them, how come Starling have come out with glowing reviews everywhere they've been tested - a man in a shed with no marketing budget so he can't be paying all the media outlets for good reviews. He can't keep up with demand so arguably doesn't need more orders as he currently stands). Don't forget that a lot of other 'modern' bikes are single pivot as well, all the linkages do is change the leverage ratio, the basic principle is the same.

As I alluded to in my eaerlier post. The really bad suspension designs (urt anyone?) have been weedled out by now so it's about compromise and priorities for the individual now.

I've not said it's bad. Please read my comments again.

It's strange that the majority of motorbikes are single pivot.

The simplicity of a single pivot bike does appeal.

I think the main problem with true single pivot designs is that it’s much harder to market them. The industry has done a very good job of convincing MTBers that suspension can’t work well without multi-pivot kinematics.

In reality there are still plenty of single pivot bikes out there but almost all of them use a linkage to drive the shock, so they look like multi-pivots - marketing win! 😉

Starling have come out with glowing reviews everywhere they've been tested

I could tell you lots of stories about people in this fishbowl ...you don't have to have a good product you just have to know the right people and be popular with the right crowd .

if you did that tomorrow with the right reacharound single pivot would be the next big thing.

In reality there are still plenty of single pivot bikes out there but almost all of them use a linkage to drive the shock, so they look like multi-pivots - marketing win!

The OP's question wasn't about single pivot, it was about "two-bearing" designs, i.e. single pivot without extra linkages to drive the shock. Using linkages to drive the shock gives packaging advantages and allows more control over spring rates, but requires extra bearings.

Not strictly true, some manufacturers just use bushings for the linkage movement (this appears to be sub-optimal).

Specialized have had the odd single pivot bike in the past too, and it used to be cannondales main design. Plus moorwood

Regarding the Starlings, I think it’s a case of the design being fundamentally right (great geometry, sensible single pivot kinematics) allied to a bit of a happy accident in that if you build a steel single pivot that long from lightweight tubing then it will have a fair bit of torsional flex.

And that flex works well for finding more grip in the corners and it’s something that Dirt in particular have been going on about with modern carbon frames which feel too stiff. Add in the long geometry and 29er wheels and you’ve ticked all of Jones’s boxes! 😉

The OP's question wasn't about single pivot, it was about "two-bearing" designs, i.e. single pivot without extra linkages to drive the shock. Using linkages to drive the shock gives packaging advantages and allows more control over spring rates, but requires extra bearings.

My point was that single pivot designs still work well but are hard to sell unless you add linkages. So if you want just two bearings there are very few choices other than Orange.

Something to bear in mind with true single pivots is that the bearings will wear out quicker than a similarly built multi pivot because of the extra loads and reduced stiffness. But not four times as fast!

Specialized have had the odd single pivot bike [b]in the past[/b] too, and it [b]used to be[/b] cannondales main design. Plus [s]moorwood[/s] Morewood

Are Morewood still going?

some manufacturers just use bushings for the linkage movement

Bushings are a type of bearing. A frame with a remotely driven shock must have more than two bearings, whether they are bushings, roller bearings, or whatever.

fundamentally you’ve ticked all of Jones’s boxes!

phew glad someone else figured out too

Science officer, you said that single pivots steal composure and traction which surely are bad traits (which I don't agree with you on btw). As Chief said, companies have convinced the buying public that multi pivots are needed, when all I am saying is that multi linkage designs aren't inherently better or more "advanced", just give different options and characteristscs.

I'm also as cynical as the next person regarding reviews, but I don't buy that Joe from Starling is 'mates' with every mtb media outlet there. He does seem pally with Steve Jones but given he's had glowing reviews in loads of places I'm less inclined to believe it's all down to mates being pally and marketing guff.

I think that modern shocks with pro pedal settings combined with single front chainrings mean that single pivot bikes can be made to ride really well .

Something to bear in mind with true single pivots is that the bearings will wear out quicker than a similarly built multi pivot because of the extra loads and reduced stiffness. But not four times as fast!

What really comes across in this thread is how many people have accepted the possibility that there is a ‘universal best’ or that a well reviewed bike will automatically work well for them.

Different people like different things for different reasons. It’s fine to ride a ‘bike of the year’ and decide that in your opinion it sucks.

He does seem pally with Steve Jones

someone once told me if PR clowns guffing from their loin about it ...your made ...

Different people like different things for different reasons.

comedy thing this people making own decisions and choices...bravenewworld eh

That’s why I said “similarly built” Ramsey!

Air shocks are much more linear than they used to be, so it should be possible for a simple single pivot to be sensitive yet not plunge through the midstroke (and you can add volume spacers to adjust the end stroke progression). Air shocks used to have a very U-shaped spring curve, which needed fixing with a linkage.

Well designed true four bar (dual short link or Horst link style) systems can give a better balance of compromises than a single pivot. So if a short dual link (VPP, DW, Banshee, Giant, Mondraker etc, four bar (common rotating not like the Bird designs) and single pivot are designed for the same level of pedalling efficiency (yes you can do that with single pivots), the single pivots will stiffen most under braking, the dual links a bit less, the four bars a lot less. The single pivots will kick back most through the pedals, the four bars a bit less, the dual links a lot less.

But move the top link’s pivot above (like a VPP or Bird Aeris) and then four bar loses the reduced brake squat advantage and the dual link does some fairly weird stuff.

Anyway, some riders won’t be bothered by this - like I’m used to climbing on a hardtail so a bit of pedal kickback doesn’t bother me. Having the bike sit lower even if the back end doesn’t grip as much can be a good thing or a bad thing depending on how you ride. If never use the rear brake when turning it’s irrelevant.

I ride a dual link bike, Banshee Spitfire. Will probably try an Orange when it dies because I like the look of them, like the made in UK, like the simplicity and geometry. Would try a Starling too if there isn’t a massive queue!

I'm also as cynical as the next person regarding reviews

Really? You're coming across as a fully paid up card carrying single pivot fan boy on this thread. That's fair enough if you are too, but you're failing at this juncture to convince me you don't have more than a little bias. I'm also wondering about your comprehension of written English tbh. That's the joy of teh internetz I guess.

Littleman - Member
Science officer, you said that single pivots steal composure and traction which surely are bad traits

Yes, I did, and you conveniently stripped out the context, since I specifically said 'I don't like...' at the beginning of that sentence, and specifically qualified in the following sentence that other people think its beneficial for other reasons. I'm not stating fact, I'm stating my opinion and you'll have to learn to deal with that. It's my [i]opinion[/i] that single pivots steal traction and composure on steep, technical climbs, but I happen to agree with you about brake jack(squat) being a good thing to preserve descending geometry composure. Go figure.

Pretty much, my views are the same as Chiefgrooveguru. All suspension designs have compromises and specific behaviours unique to them. Which one you find the most acceptable will depend entirely on your own preference. It's important to remember that most of the time all current mtb suspension designs are pretty decent, and in the main, you'll find their most different behaviours deviate the most from each other towards limits of their performance envelope.

where does this fit in to the grand scheme of things then?
single main pivot (with gert bearings), no fancy linkage to drive the shock, but the lower shock yoke joins the swingarm with bearings, argh my head hurts!

[img] [/img]

bearings will wear out quicker than a similarly built multi pivot because of the extra loads and reduced stiffness.

The main loads are along the chainstays, and SPs usually have much bigger bearings.

The main loads are along the chainstays, and SPs usually have much bigger bearings.

I meant more in terms of the ability of the upper pivots to brace the lower pivots against torsional and lateral loads, which is particularly significant in dual link designs with a solid rear triangle. My Spitfire’s lower bearings are the same 28mm OD and slightly wider than those in an Orange Five - upper bearings are 22mm OD.

The Shann No.5 is a bit of an odd one. In terms of everything bar the leverage curve it’s a simple single pivot, including the stiffness and loading issue. I don’t think the yoke modifies the leverage curve much, just flattens it a bit (keeps it more tangential to a circle drawn around the main pivot) but it makes a lot of sense for manufacturing in 4130 and keeping a full length seat tube for long droppers.

where does this fit in to the grand scheme of things then?
single main pivot (with gert bearings), no fancy linkage to drive the shock, but the lower shock yoke joins the swingarm with bearings, argh my head hurts!

The yoke just makes the shock (effectively) longer to keep the leverage rate constant-ish, maybe even decreasing it towards full travel. If the swingarm was made so that it connected directly to the shock in front of the seat tube the leverage rate would increase through the travel and the shock would 'feel' softer as it moved through its travel (and it might even flop over centre).

Meh. Buy a hardtail and be done with it!

kenneththecurtain - Member

I've seen enough people winning races on oranges to know that a single pivot is never going to hold me back.

I'm a knobber, but my 224 Evo definitely held me back, I was measurably slower on it than on my Herb DH. The geometry etc was great but the suspension even with a CCDB was second rate.

But it was a blast to ride and way more fun, and way easier to adapt to, than the Herb so I preferred it.

Thing is, unless the bearing life's awful- which usually implies a problem- then the cost of maintaining more pivots is trivial in the grand scheme of things. It shouldn't affect your purchasing decisions in the slightest imo, you'd be absolutely mental to buy a bike you liked less purely because you'll save a few quid a year on bearings and services. It's, what, 1% of the purchase price? The price of a good tyre or an uplift day?

(that's assuming you replace all the bearings at the same time, as lots of people do... Seems weird, my Remedy wears out the small bearings way faster, why would I replace perfectly good ones?)

I was idly wondering what 160mm bike I'd buy if I were rich, and I decided to go for an Alpine. Cos when I look at them, they just look bloody great. I can't be bothered to sit here mithering over brake jack or kickback.

I don't get why people keep mountain bikes inside over winter, why not just ride the same bike all year round? It's not like bearings are overly expensive, much less than a second bike.

I've owned examples of all the different basic suspension designs in the past, but have long had the opinion that the slight differences in leverage curves or axle path make next to no difference in reality. The fact is that your fitness and skill, make up 99% of how fast you are on a bike, and there are a lot of good riders out there who value low maintenance over ultimate efficiency. Single pivot designs with good geometry and modern shocks clearly work very well, hence the popularity of Orange. There's a lot of other riders who are convinced the latest technology will make them faster and perhaps enjoy the ride more, but I think it's owning a shiny object that they derive their enjoyment from really. I was a little sad when Santa Cruz stopped making single pivot bikes, my last generation Superlight 29er with an angleset is doing the job for now, but next bike will probably be an Orange. Why have 8 bearings when 2 will do?

It's not like bearings are overly expensive

I don't get why people keep mountain bikes inside over winter, why not just ride the same bike all year round? It's not like bearings are overly expensive, much less than a second bike.

I have to call BS on the whole axle path thing (within reason, I didn't like how my Nomad climbed but it still got me up climbs) My Heckler rode fine and didn't slow me down - sure another design might have been slightly faster downhill but it's the smile/£ ratio that I am concerned about.

I wonder if there's another market on the planet in which folk get so duped into buying the latest thing which makes **** all difference.

Something to bear in mind with true single pivots is that the bearings will wear out quicker than a similarly built multi pivot because of the extra loads and reduced stiffness. But not four times as fast!

Don't be daft!

Having had both I've replaced more bearings more often in my multi pivot bikes.

More pivots usually means more lateral flex and torsional movement as you rely on the bearing itself to resist the twisting. This kills bearings. Then if one bearing wears this accelerates the death of the rest.

It's not an exact science though as there are so many factors at play.

I like a single pivot. I grew up on em.

IMO axle path isn't [i]that[/i] big a deal but other things are. The amount of anti-squat in my Trailfox, frinstance, ****ed it. I'd still have it if the suspension worked properly when I was pedalling. And my Herb had a single pivot-with-linkage that gave it absolutely ludicrous traction, if you jumped on it after riding other bikes you'd always check the rear tyre for a flat, it was just so reactive. Which was awesome but made it weird to ride when you came off your other bikes.

Meanwhile my Orange's issue wasn't axle path, it wasn't even really brake input, it was the falling rate suspension. And [i]that[/i] was a limitation of single pivot. "Oh I see you're almost bottoming out the suspension? I'll make it softer. You're welcome."

Junkyard - lazarus

You dont own a turner 5 spot then
$150 + postage + import taxes

Sure but that's not a criticism of multi-pivot bikes, it's a criticism of Turner. It's not too hard to avoid companies that treat you like a milk cow.

True my santa cruz only cost about £120 to replace them all - granted the linkages were worn and it was 8 years old and the first change [ but i am keeping that secret as it supports your point]

Junkyard
Agree that does take the piss a bit, but can't be that often. I'd pay that price to be able to run the bike I wanted to.
Zippykona
Fair point on changing the bearings in the freezing cold. Sounds more of an excuse to just ride your fatty anyway, which is totally your perogative. I wouldn't have more than one bike, but that's just me.

Something to bear in mind with true single pivots is that the bearings will wear out quicker than a similarly built multi pivot because of the extra loads and reduced stiffness.

Not necessarily. The main pivot bearings are huge on Oranges compared to all the little piddly ones all over the back of a four bar frame.

+1 on the Turner bushing cost / availability.

My Flux has tore through another set of bushes and after a conversation with Dave Turner, there is a 3 week lead time before stock arrives and probably 10 days delivery after that.

Needless to say that my last Turner is now retired and I'm now rocking a Transition Scout, running on readily available bearings.

Gee Atherton didn't do too badly on his GT Fury which is a single pivot. Ok it has the I drive but that doesn't affect suspension performance.

Not necessarily. The main pivot bearings are huge on Oranges compared to all the little piddly ones all over the back of a four bar frame.

I posted earlier to say that the lower bearings on my short link four bar bike are the same OD as on an Orange 5 (also 140mm travel) and slightly wider whilst the upper ones are about 25% smaller. No piddly little bearings!

More pivots usually means more lateral flex and torsional movement as you rely on the bearing itself to resist the twisting. This kills bearings.

Does not compute?!? If you twist the rear axle then you put the same twisting load through a single pivot. If you do that to a short link design the reaction fork at all the pivots is not just twisting, there’s also lateral and vertical components. The vertical displacement of the pivot points effectively crossbrace each other.

I ride single pivot because I like it. I’ve tried plenty of fancy pivot bikes and didn’t like them as much. I’d buy the Hope bike because it looks nice and I like Hope stuff.

Meh.

Dilwyn - Member

Gee Atherton didn't do too badly on his GT Fury which is a single pivot. Ok it has the I drive but that doesn't affect suspension performance.

Um, yes it does.

@Northwind,
ok it does improve pedalling performance according to GT.
There certainly are no issues with the suspension performance in terms of impact absorption or problems with brake Jack, axle path etc. The latest Furies that the team raced on didn't have the I-drive at all.

Science officer, don’t be so aggressive and insult me. There’s no need. I’m not biased, and if you listened to your own advice and read my posts properly you’d see I said that suspension design would be low down my list nowadays. My next bike is unlikely o be an orange or starling, but not because of the suspension design. Anyway if you can’t engage in a debate politely without insulting I’ve got better things to do with my time. Again if you read my posts properly you’d see that my view echoes Chief’s (as you say yours does) about all designs being a set of compromises for the consumer to choose from. It’s just that the buying public have been convinced that single pivot are crap and outdated.

Northwind, yes I think the falling rate was a bit crap, but have they not resolved that now with a new shock placement?

Northwind, yes I think the falling rate was a bit crap, but have they not resolved that now with a new shock placement?

Yes, that’s why the downtube is now pierced for the mount. Makes a big difference:

[img] [/img]

I posted earlier to say that the lower bearings on my short link four bar bike are the same OD as on an Orange 5

Yes, the main ones maybe, but I have seen some piddly little ones in the other links.

My Trek Superfly looks to have well species bearings, let's hope they last!

If its good enough for KTM to win multiple world supercross events on, it's good enough for Orange.

only a tiny bit of difference between a Tom and an orange too

The next big thing?
https://www.tantrumcycles.com/technology

maybe , maybe not.

I posted earlier to say that the lower bearings on my short link four bar bike are the same OD as on an Orange 5

Yes, the main ones maybe, but I have seen some piddly little ones in the other links.

I have some little piddly bearings in my bike, however it is the biggest ones that have needed to be replaced. The 26mm chainstay main pivot bearings which are almost as big as the 28mm ones in oranges. Bearings in this location seems to take the most abuse, physically and environmentally.

All other bearings on the bike checked at the same time and all fine, so just a regrease to freshen them up. Anecdotally amongst the owners group the middle size linkage bearings wear out next. The smallest bearings in the horst chainstay link very rarely wearout. It's almost as if the bearings have been sized by the frame designer to take the loads experienced in each of the different locations.

Northing specifically against single pivot bikes, even though I wasn't that impressed with my old Patriot. Think modern shock technology has made single pivots more viable. In general I'm happy with 10 quid to replace the main pivot bearings every year or so, and another 40 quid to replace the lot every few years (estimated on current usage/wear), so don't see bearing costs as a major factor, spend more than that on tyres.

I absolutely love my Patriot in its slacker setting, despite it being 10 years old. Some of it has ended up reasonably modern, and with modern bars and stem it seems to really work. I can honestly say that the suspension action has never been an issue descending. There is a lot of pedal feedback on climbs in certain situations, but it doesn't bother me, I just work with it. Same as we all do with fork dive.

I absolutely love my Patriot in its slacker setting, despite it being 10 years old.

Mine can legally vote next year 🙂

Mine can legally vote next year

Did the LT have 6" of travel, pretty sure mine is a 5" 2001 frame. Used it as a trail bike, not ideal for that really. Still have the frame, not built up as it was stripped to provide parts for Dialled PA build.

Different supsension systems have different compromises.

With a true single pivot, design practicalities mean there's some compromise between leverage ratio or pivot postition for anti-squat/chain forces. My Starlings have gone for a linear leverage ratio with optimal pivot position. With modern air shocks the linear leverage ratio is no longer the issue it was in the past. The benefits of single pivot are less parts to go wrong and less opportunity for weird behaviour.

Personally with modern shocks I believe the single pivot is more than capable. If done properly, other factors such as geometry, frame stiffness, wheel size are much more important than suspension system.

What complicated suspension systems do is give manufacturers the ability to differentiate their designs. Brand Ys BLX suspension system is 13% better at small bump compliance than Brand Zs. This would be very difficult if all companies made single pivots. People buy into manufacturers bullshit!

Finally, very interesting to hear comments that the Starling's good reviews are only because I'm matey with Steve Jones. I must be a very nice chap then, as I've got good reviews from lots of different places.
The reviewers pride themselves on being unbiased.

It's just more proof that people cannot believe something is good without a load of marketing bullshit. No FXG suspension system, no 184mm wheels spacing, no OD headset size, must be shit then. Or maybe it's just plain good, wihtout the need for bullshit technology acronyms.

I respect Orange for standing strong and making great bikes that pepople continue to buy. I respect riders who shun technolog bullshit!

Littleman - Member
Science officer, don’t be so aggressive and insult me.

I did wonder if my plain speaking would get a rise from you. It's not my intent to insult, but if you want to be a wall flower about it, be my guest. Your response has done nothing except validate my opinions. Sorry about that, but, you know, other people think different stuff and that.

That aside, analogies to motorcross SP design and the best riders in the MTB world are pretty pointless. One has orders of magnitude more power and suspension design characteristics can be easily over come, and let's face it, people like Rowan Sorrel and his ilk can ride shopping trolleys better than most of us.

No rise, just didn't take to your tone. I'm not fussed either way but more imprtantly it's a bike forum thread about suspension design ffs, about as pointless / nerdy a discussion topic as you can get so not worth getting in a lather about. I will iterate one last time that I'm not biased but if you don't believe me then whatever. Happy to continue the discussion in a positive tone with you.

on the plus side and because we are on page 3 and no one has mentioned brexit yet

orange will be the only company whose prices can't possibly in a month of Sunday's be affected

I respect riders who shun technolog bullshit

honestly some of us don't actually give a shit been there worn the t-shirt heard the bollocks.

Littleman - Member

Northwind, yes I think the falling rate was a bit crap, but have they not resolved that now with a new shock placement?

Aye, they managed to build around it after about 15 years. Though it's still pretty restricted and added a ton of complexity to the design

I thought the 225 was an interesting move tbh but nobody bought it because it was ugly and not a "proper" orange.

As usual with any suspension system based discussion a huge amount of incorrect information and poorly formed opinion is put out as fact.

There are a number of factors that will determine the performance of a suspension system and despite how much many will argue otherwise a single pivot can offer very similar performance in almost every area if engineered correctly (read similar) People say 'I prefer XXX suspension to XXX, it feels 'plusher' etc? - I imagine a lot of these comments come from people who cannot genuinely set a rear shock correctly or are drawing comparison from very old to new designs, different shock standards / spring rates etc.

In reality, there are a number of factors that used to determine suspension performance (aside from reliability, shock side loading, frame stiffness etc which is a different issue entirely)

- Anti Squat; when we all used 3x9 single pivot or IC location for multi pivots was a compromise to optimise anti squat between the varying potential chain locations. Now we all use 1x systems this has been optimised and a single pivot can attain high levels of anti squat which does not drop too much throughout travel.
The multi-pivot approach here allows tuning of the bikes IC position to give a desired level of anti squat at different points in the bikes travel. e.g. DW does this to great effect his bikes obtain around / a little over 100% anti squat until late into the travel when it drops dramatically thus reducing pedal feedback later into the bikes travel, something single pivots cannot do and therefore may feel a little 'harsh' later into the travel.The 'harsh' feeling is caused by 'pedal kickback' which is only really removed by bb concentric designs or high pivots and concentric idlers, the former having terrible anti-squat so only good for a slopestyle bike and the latter having packaging / marketing issues for many. Don't be fooled though as many multi link bikes have very average anti-squat values / curves - almost identical to single pivots, so no benefit there

- Anti Rise; The whole 'brake jack' myth - Modern bikes do not 'jack' or extend under braking, they compress, again multi pivot bikes offer a greater ability to tune this effect but many many multi link bikes are hardly better than modern single pivots (starling etc) Now of course this can make the bike feel harsh under braking / cause a loss of traction but you can use it to your advantage by setting the bike into its travel before steep corners and it helps to counter some of the forward pitch in mass under braking that will naturally remove weight from the rear suspension - Nobody liked floating brakes whey they were experimented with years ago, Fabian actually used one to increase brake squat.

Leverage ratio - Suspension leverage ratio can be tuned much more effectively by using linkages than a simple single pivot. But yet again, what do you want to see here? Personally I like a linear progressive system, early VPP digressive - linear - progressive systems were pretty horrible imho and I wont buy any bike with a strange 'shape' to its suspension curve, I want a predictable, progressive bike that can provide easy adjustment via the shock - Funnily enough Santa Cruz and others agree, look at the new lower link driven Nomad, its leverage curve is linear progressive now, nothing like the previous 'n' shaped curve which caused fast riders to dislike the bike.

Before people jump on a bikes design to praise or criticise remember that there are a huge number of variables available to the designer. Ruling out single pivot A because you tried one years ago / a different brand is foolish, so is buying a multi link bike because you liked your last one - there are many many multi link bikes that have horrendous characteristics by design (Norco with 150% anti squat throughout travel, older oranges with pivots that are too high leading to huge anti squat and pedal feedback, older SC / Intense with bizarre leverage curves and suspension so progressive they are almost impossible to see full travel)

Nowdays most bikes are pretty damn good, designers are in the ballpark and there are not many completely terrible bikes - Choose what you like but at least do it with your eyes open rather than believing the marketing hype.

After that rant, my choice for a suspension system would be a 160mm version of the antidote darkmatter with a slightly lower pivot position, it has brilliant anti-squat throughout its travel and due to the idler you get zero pedal kickback, it has better than most braking performance and a very nice leverage curve, it isn't a single pivot.

Rant over, I needed something to do while I mope around with man-flu.

crankrider - Member

- Anti Rise; The whole 'brake jack' myth

I think we might have spoken about this before, but this is the wrong way to think about it. People feel something happen and they've heard the term "brake jack" so that's what they call it. Most people don't think "jack = up" The terminology being wrong doesn't mean they're not feeling a genuine input.

I just say brake feedback because it explains it without having to get more technical than people want to.

Oh and

crankrider - Member

- Anti Squat; when we all used 3x9 single pivot or IC location for multi pivots was a compromise to optimise anti squat between the varying potential chain locations. Now we all use 1x systems this has been optimised

Again with perspectives and definitions, "optimised" here I assume you just mean "does exactly what the designer wants" but that doesn't mean a thing if the rider doesn't like it. From our perspective there's no such thing as optimum anti squat and never can be

Northwind -

People often think a single pivots suspension 'locks up' while multi link bikes do not and many do believe they 'jack' I have spoken to enough that do. Anti rise is not as simple as single v multi link bikes, many have very similar braking performance.

Onto anti-squat, I think your incorrect, there is indeed an optimum amount of anti squat and it can be mathematically described. Perfection would be a level of anti squat that precisely counteracts mass transfer and therefore the suspension system is entirely bob-free. (that is a mathematical model though, the system is not this simple) This would however cause pedal kickback issues which is where the compromise is introduced but in terms of its actual value, I am sorry but you are incorrect there, its one of the reasons I love the antidote design, just over 100% anti squat throughout travel and almost zero pedal kickback due to the idler.

crankrider - Member

Onto anti-squat, I think your incorrect, there is indeed an optimum amount of anti squat and it can be mathematically described

I think this is just wrongheaded to be blunt. Mountain biking isn't a mathematical problem, rider taste is far more important- almost the only thing that matters in fact. There's no right geometry, no right antisquat, no right brake feedback, no right bar width or brake mechanical advantage, no best tyre, the only bit that can ever be right is the rider and we never are anyway. Flyup 417 sell the best burger though.

I don't mind bob that much, I don't worry about pedal kickback but I [i]hate[/i] suspension that doesn't do what I expect and that's antisquat in a nutshell. I liked strong antisquat, til the first time I pedalled through a rough bit, then I quickly grew to hate it. Give me bob and a lockout so I can control it myself.

You could put me on your mathematically perfect bike and I almost certainly would put it on the classifieds 2 months later with a description saying how optimum it all is, then I'd go and buy an Alpine or something. And you'd tell me I'm wrong because maths.

You could put me on your mathematically perfect bike and I almost certainly would put it on the classifieds 2 months later with a description saying how optimum it all is, then I'd go and buy an Alpine or something. And you'd tell me I'm wrong because maths.

What he said! ^^^

So many experts on here telling other people why their bikes are wrong, should start a bike design business!

My 2011 Fiveling Cabinet is still awesome.

I don't mind bob that much, I don't worry about pedal kickback but I hate suspension that doesn't do what I expect and that's antisquat in a nutshell. I liked strong antisquat, til the first time I pedalled through a rough bit, then I quickly grew to hate it.

I’m pretty certain that any design which manages 100% antisquat with zero pedal kickback will feel the same when pedalling through the rough as no antisquat, bar the reduced bobbing of the former. Anti-squat doesn’t lock suspension up, it balances out forces to remove unwanted motion. The way you perceive the negative effect of antisquat is through kickback, and if your legs resist that kickback then they’ll stiffen the suspension more.

And with a normal chain path anti-squat and kickback are proportional but that Antidote’s idler system manages to achieve anti-squat without kickback which is damned near magic!

So many experts on here telling other people why their bikes are wrong, should start a bike design business!

I don’t think any of us have really been saying that - just exposing some myths and confusion about how suspension actually works.

And in another sector I did start a business after various discussions* on forums and this is our tenth year making innovative and very well reputed gear. I’m a bit too busy with that to start a bike company - though I did almost get a run of hardtails made a few years back... 😉

*aka arguments