duncan^kona
Likes Dirt
the only thing im questioniung about the demo 9 is that rear swing arm, whats with the multiple bars?????
Kram said:Special Ed
yeh its pretty much the sameSocket said:The wheel does (or might as well) follow the same path as a singlepivot (albeit with the pivot in a location that isn't necessarily the same as the main pivot on the current linkage). Until you start incorporating pretty drastic backwards (eg Canfield's Fatty Fat Fat) or forwards elements (none that I can think of, maybe a Giant NRS), most bikes may as well be singlepivots for their axle path.RaID said:no its not as the bottom bracket isnt on the chainstayCHEWY said:very nice, is it just me or does that look like it has URT ?
plus the wheel doesnt follow the same path as a single pivot
the dj has steel stanchionspeachy said:OMFG OMFG OMFG OMFG THOSE ARE THE HOTTEST BIKES!!!! u reckon those bikes would be cheaper or more expensive?
they are hot!! although i don't know marzocchi are doing by makin the stantions silver, looks gaybo - althoug if its some material that improves the performance than go for it
those dj's look like they have more travel
The difference between a VPP and a Horst-link is nothing to do with which link actuates the shock. The Santa Cruz Blur and the Intense Spyder (or XVP, whatever it is) both actuate the shock via the top bar. The real difference between a Horst-link (and most linkage bikes) to a VPP is that with a VPP, the two links that are attached to the front triangle swing in opposite directions (one swings clockwise, the other counterclockwise), whereas with a Horst-link, all the links swing in the same direction.Kram said:I disagree. A regular 4 bar linkage pushes the shock from the top linkage plate. An intense and a norco and a big hit are all alike enough to require patent rights from Special Ed, because the forces are all applied in the same manner. You can position the pivots wherever you like within this paralellogram, but you will still be infringing on their patent. My first generation chromo FSR had the pivots in vastly different places to the current big hit, but it was still a 4 bar.Socket said:If you look at any full-linkage bike... they all work like that. It's just the difference in pivot placement that makes all the diff.
The action between a 4 bar and a VPP are very different. It's the "inner link" for want of a better name, that applies the force to the shock. And this one here is significantly more like a VPP than a 4 bar-horst linkage.
Then again, maybe I've smoked too many drugs :lol:
Ok, you've got me on that oneSocket said:The difference between a VPP and a Horst-link is nothing to do with which link actuates the shock. The Santa Cruz Blur and the Intense Spyder (or XVP, whatever it is) both actuate the shock via the top bar.
I don't think so, iirc the patent applies to "counter-rotating links", ie links that rotate in opposite directions. You can make some pretty funky wheel paths without violating the VPP patent (the NRS's have really really tightly radiused axle arcs) so I don't think it's possible to patent the axle path. The patent may include it though, I'm not really sure.RaID said:isnt the VPP patented on the actual wheel path?