Mountain Biking - Bias information?

There are interesting animations in Specialized website that compare different types of suspension design. Obviously, they say that their system is better. Any thought?

http://www.specialized.com/sbc4Bar.jsp?a=b

I'n my experience the Horst link design used by Specialized (and several licencesee's) is the best system out there It's an active system with great compliance with no pedal input.

but then again, you bought a specialized FSR. :D

I probably should not get into this since I've never owned a full suspension. I rode a single pivot FS at ohiopyle state park (rented) and it felt really inefficiant (sp?) with lots of bobbing.

Doesn't sant cruz use a single pivot? whats the difference between the santa cruz single pivit and say, a wall mart single pivot? they look very similar

Yes but after LOTS of research and test rides. I spent a couple YEARS researching suspension designs before I actually bought one.

the santa cruz blur isn't single pivot. Take a closer look and you will see that it's 4-bar. It has what they call a "virtual pivot point" or vpp where the axel travels in a slight S shape path which reduces pedal bob.
The FSR axel path is pretty much straight vertical which is why specialized developed the brain shock to counter bob.
I know that Intense is also marketing the vpp suspension on their Spider which is looking to be a sweet xc rig.

Hey, i don't know if the Specialized f/s design is the best or not, but I do love the animations!!

I also love how they do not identify the bikes being compared to their suspension. However, it's VERY obvious as to which brands/models they are referring. :D

The take on the NRS suspension was interesting. I'd really kind of considered it the best out there, right up there with the 4-bar. However, I didn't really look into an NRS when I was buying because the SID on the NRS-1 scared me away. Still, it would be interesting to see another companie's take on the animations.

There are plenty of people to debate which is the best, but I don't see companies lining up to borrow the NRS design.

To a previous question: Yes, many of the Santa Cruz bikes are single-pivot designs. Santa Cruz, however, has put plenty of man-hours of R and D into figuring out where to locate the pivot point and what angles to attach the stays at, etc. That has allowed the Superlight to be a very well respected XC rig, even though it is single pivot. Plus, you'll never see a Fox taking the stress on a Walmart bike :D

Originally posted by montlake_mtbkr

The FSR axel path is pretty much straight vertical which is why specialized developed the brain shock to counter bob.
FSR's don't bob. I should know I ride one.
With the FSR system, you can see that it's independent in two ways...pedal force does not cause the rear suspension to compress or rebound, and the motion of the suspension does not cause your pedal stroke to be inhibited. This gives you maximum efficiency because your pedal force is going into moving you forward without moving your suspension, and it gives you efficiency because your pedal stroke is not disrupted, enabling you to have a smooth pedal stroke on the bike, and perhaps the biggest benefit on a rear suspension bike...being a truly active design. That means your suspension under all conditions is free to compress, and rebound, in an uninhibited way.
The FSR is the most efficient design but it wasn't perfect the Brain was brought in as an evolution of the design to further blur the line between hardtail efficency and suspension control.
Brain Technology is hardtail-firm when terrain is smooth for improved power transfer, yet fully active when terrain is rough, providing maximum benefits of FSR suspension.
I however will wait untill the design evolves a bit first before jumping on the Epic bandwagon

I don't understand why all the other suspension designs cause the pedal to kick-back while FSR is kick-back free... so they claim. The "monolink" system seems to have the worst kick-back.

Again borrowing from Specialized but it's true:
Fully Independent. The suspension works all by itself in bumpy conditions. This means two things. First, chain loads have virtually no effect on suspension. Even under heavy pedal load, the suspension is virtually unaffected by chain force. Second, rear suspension motion has virtually no effect on pedal stroke. This means that there is no suspension-induced pedal “kick back” or “drop away” as the suspension absorbs bumps. The linkage works with you, not against you. By dialing-in the pivot placement within the FSR system, the FSR design is almost completely neutral.

Sorry if I ask stupid question. I have never ridden full-suspension.

You say: "rear suspension motion has virtually no effect on pedal stroke"

Now, how can that be? When the rear suspension moves, the cog moves, right? Wouldn't that movement alone causes the chain to react (since the chainring stays put) and eventually cause the pedal to kickback?

Originally posted by firebolt
Sorry if I ask stupid question. I have never ridden full-suspension.

You say: "rear suspension motion has virtually no effect on pedal stroke"

Now, how can that be? When the rear suspension moves, the cog moves, right? Wouldn't that movement alone causes the chain to react (since the chainring stays put) and eventually cause the pedal to kickback?

...well the way the rear linkage and rear triangle move, they do not lengthen or shorten the chain enough to have the peddles kick back.
Honest, it works, and Im not saying that because I own one!!

Scoob

Originally posted by Phatman
Doesn't sant cruz use a single pivot? whats the difference between the santa cruz single pivit and say, a wall mart single pivot? they look very similar

They are only similar in theory not in application. Where the pivot is, the length of stroke and the basic design of the bike all effect how it 'rides'. SC's system isn't perfect as it is still a single pivot but it is just about as perfect as you can get when compared to other single pivots...

In case anyone out there wants to read a full design path analysis as to why designs work so differently.

http://www.mtbcomprador.com/pa/english/

Titus also has a site with decent info on suspension theory
http://www.titusti.com/techtalk.html

Cheers.

Originally posted by firebolt
Sorry if I ask stupid question. I have never ridden full-suspension.

You say: "rear suspension motion has virtually no effect on pedal stroke"

Now, how can that be? When the rear suspension moves, the cog moves, right? Wouldn't that movement alone causes the chain to react (since the chainring stays put) and eventually cause the pedal to kickback? It's a quote from specialized.com in reference to the FSR suspension style.

FSR is great. Even before the brain, it was a great system. Bob was not an issue and ghost shifting and other problems associated with non-vertical rear wheel travel were absent. The NRS, for one, is essentially designed to lock out the suspension as a means of countering the problem of pedaling input inducing bob. However, this means you no longer have a fully active suspension. Specialized got it right the first time on this one.

Talking about the FSR and NRS, there were a dispute over the 4-bar linkage between Giant and Specialized, right? Does anybody know exactly what was going on?

I found this article when searching for more info on the matter.

specialized v.s. giant part 1 (http://www.mountainbike.com/gear/gear_news/archive/gn_19990811-16353.shtml)

specialized v.s. giant part 2 (http://www.mountainbike.com/gear/gear_news/archive/gn_20000119-23077.shtml)


Seems like Giant based their NRS on the FSR design and modified it to eliminate bobbing (I think Giant eventually paid Specialized to sell the bike in the US). Then someone could argue that NRS is better because it has all the FSR characteristic without the bobbing (albeit less plush)

Have you ridden an FSR? There's no bob unless you're pedal stroke is purely up-and-down. I don't see how the NRS is an improvement-it is designed so that pedal input locks out the rear shock so it's not going to be active at all if you're pedaling. I don't know about how the rest of you guys ride, but I'm usually pedaling over the bumpy stuff so the NRS is dead to me. :D

Nope, but I am going to test ride one this week. I am buying a new bike, either a full suspension to replace my hardtail,... or a road bike, still can't decide :) If it's a FS, my choices are: Giant VT, NRS, Stumpjumper, and Sugar. Right now I am leaning more toward the NRS because of the "hardtail" feel... as told by the brochure and numerous magazine reviews.

And ask anyone who has ridden one. The NRS is known for its ht feel...

That makes for a pretty expensive HT feel :D

Originally posted by firebolt
Nope, but I am going to test ride one this week. I am buying a new bike, either a full suspension to replace my hardtail,... or a road bike, still can't decide :) If it's a FS, my choices are: Giant VT, NRS, Stumpjumper, and Sugar. Right now I am leaning more toward the NRS because of the "hardtail" feel... as told by the brochure and numerous magazine reviews.

If you really want a hardtail feel, why not get a hardtail? :p

The main thing that keeps me away from the NRS is the fact that it is strictly a XC bike. Its a gram counter's bike in my eyes. I want something that is going to be nuke proof, or as close to it as I can get without weighing 40 pounds.

I've heard good things about the VT. The rear shock is effectively manipoo's attempt at the Specialized (Fox) BRAIN. Its in it's first year of production still, and that kind of worries me. Has anyone heard anything about the life of the Swinger? The initial reports I heard on it were promising.

I'd like to hear what the NRS camp has to say about their bikes.

Now, in the NRS, does the pedalling action really lock the shock to the point where the shock is useless? I would imagine that if you hammer it up-and-down, it would significantly lock the shock (which I think is good most of the time). If you pedal smoothly, I would think that the locking action is negligible and the suspension would still be able to freely absorb bumps as good as any other FS bikes.

Originally posted by DiL
That makes for a pretty expensive HT feel :D

For sure i'd be pissed if I get the NRS and it turns out to be as harsh as hardtail

A few various points:

Anyone who thinks that their FSR doesn't bob is eithe rkidding themselves or is running so much preload that they aren't getting full travel. I've ridden and AMP b4 and B5, both predecessors to the FSR, as well as an FSR. They bob, that's why Specialized put a lockout on the back end.

The NRS is a great bike. Sure, it is pretty stiff, but definitely not like a hardtail. I rode and raced a 2001 and a 2002 NRS air, and I count it among the best bikes I have ridden. Quite raceable, but also quite a decent bike for all day epic singletrack rides. The suspension, when set up proberly, reacted well to trail input, but climbed like a hardtail. The SID never gave me any problems. IMO, anyone who is shopping for a full suspension and rejects the NRS without trying it is selling themselves short. I do wonder how the new generation of SPV shocks will affect this design.

I currenty ride a Santa Cruz Blur. It is not a 4 bar design. VPP is something different from the rocker arm 4 bar that (rightly so) has become (thanks to Horst Leitner of AMP) one of the accepted currencies of dual suspension design.

Originally posted by firebolt
I'd like to hear what the NRS camp has to say about their bikes.

Now, in the NRS, does the pedalling action really lock the shock to the point where the shock is useless? I would imagine that if you hammer it up-and-down, it would significantly lock the shock (which I think is good most of the time). If you pedal smoothly, I would think that the locking action is negligible and the suspension would still be able to freely absorb bumps as good as any other FS bikes.

Not at all. I could power up a climb, and there would be no bob, but the suspension would react to bumps in the trail while I had the hammer down.

I didn't even have to work at pedalling particularly smoothly.

I have heard some NRS owners complaining of poor suspension performance, and everyone of them admitted that they either din't read the manual, or ignored its advice. 50 psi in the negative chamber (no more, no less) Rider weight plus 10-20 pounds in the positive chamber.

Originally posted by Singlespeedster
A few various points:

Anyone who thinks that their FSR doesn't bob is either kidding themselves or is running so much preload that they aren't getting full travel. I've ridden and AMP b4 and B5, both predecessors to the FSR, as well as an FSR. They bob, that's why Specialized put a lockout on the back end.

....snip...... The lockout is for out-of-seat climbing. As for FSR's bobbing you obviously need to work on your spin because they don't bob during seated pedaling when set up correctly. Borrowing your buddies bike that's set for him doesn't a true experience make.

Originally posted by Raiyn
The lockout is for out-of-seat climbing. As for FSR's bobbing you obviously need to work on your spin because they don't bob during seated pedaling when set up correctly. Borrowing your buddies bike that's set for him doesn't a true experience make.

I agree.

I rode MY FSR.

They bob.

Hence, EPIC.

Now I will agree that the bob is certainly not detrimental, and that the FSR is one of the better designs out there.

But to claim that it doesn't bob is a bit beyond the pale.

A

Without this degrading into a FSR v. NRS. The issue I have with the Giant is (as mentioned by Dil) that the NRS is essentially a lightweight XC bike, although a good choice for all day epic rides. My personal issue is that in order to achieve the designed performance, you "Must" use an air shock. Being a clydesdale, I tend to stay away from "air" shocks.

If you're under 200 lbs, try both types. If over 200 lbs(heck, I'll, stretch that to 225), I recommend avoiding the NRS.

L8R

Originally posted by a2psyklnut
Without this degrading into a FSR v. NRS. The issue I have with the Giant is (as mentioned by Dil) that the NRS is essentially a lightweight XC bike, although a good choice for all day epic rides. My personal issue is that in order to achieve the designed performance, you "Must" use an air shock. Being a clydesdale, I tend to stay away from "air" shocks.

If you're under 200 lbs, try both types. If over 200 lbs(heck, I'll, stretch that to 225), I recommend avoiding the NRS.

L8R Yepper. We'd destroy a NRS on a BLUE trail. :D