Sorry this doesn't really answer your question. But it might come close in some way.

I look down on suspension of any kind on a bicycle. (Though I'm willing to admit that it might be somewhat useful, but not necessary for rough off-road use.)

The human body is the best shock absorber for a bike. I'm sure many people reading this know what I mean; on rough stuff you only need to allow the bike to pivot on the crank and let your arms and legs absorb the shocks. Perhaps an analogy to skiing works. Consider a skier going down a fairly rough hill. Unless he's a complete tenderfoot his center of gravity will follow a pretty straight line down the hill. (If not, then he's a 'splattered' tenderfoot.) His skis, on the other hand, will go up and down, sometimes rapidly, over the bumps. His legs will be shortening and lengthening. His body is the shock absorber. It would be absurd to try to mount a mechanical absorber between ski and skier, so no one tries. The same mechanical absorber between bike and rider is less obviously absurd. But, really, it's almost as bad.

They're selling something we don't need.

Also, it seems to me that doing our own absorbing is actually better for our bodies. I doubt if I'll ever be able to prove it, but it feels to me as though it helps keep us limber and pliable.

You show me someone who 'needs' shock absorbers and I'll show you someone who doesn't really, really know how to ride a bike.

I hope I don't sound to contemptuous. But I guess shock absorbers fall into the 'pet peeve' category for me.

And now that I've finished ranting, I'll say 'good night!'