Adjustable Travel Rear Shocks - not popular?

PB Forum :: Bikes, Parts, and Gear
Adjustable Travel Rear Shocks - not popular?
Author Message
flag cowieuk
Posted: Nov 16, 2008 at 15:50 Quote
There isn't really a need as if you shorten the travel you'd drop the BB height and change all the angles which will make uphill harder. Best bet is shocks using technology like Rockshox Motion Control.
flag DJ28
Posted: Nov 16, 2008 at 15:50 Quote
what if you were lowering the fork and the shock enough so the geometry was kept the same just less travel...would that work?
flag Hombre3000
O+
Posted: Nov 16, 2008 at 15:51 Quote
Fair enough, I guess no one wants it. I thought it would be cool to be able to have a bike that would be able to switch between something like a Double and a BottleRocket (I know), so that the suspension wouldn't gobble up the jumps.
flag cowieuk
Posted: Nov 16, 2008 at 15:54 Quote
Hombre3000 wrote:
Fair enough, I guess no one wants it. I thought it would be cool to be able to have a bike that would be able to switch between something like a Double and a BottleRocket (I know), so that the suspension wouldn't gobble up the jumps.

That'd be cool but I'd rather have a different set of shock mounts for doing that. That would probably change the leverage ratio as well maybe you could get shorter travel and have less squish.
flag odin333
Posted: Nov 16, 2008 at 15:57 Quote
the main thing is that full suspension bikes are made around a certain length shock. for example, if you take a bike with an 8.5 inch shock and drop it down to a 7 inch shock, the head tube angle is going to decrease which could lead to snapping, the bottom bracket will get closer to the ground, and pretty much all the geometry on the bike will be different making your bike feel weird.

the closest your going to get to making your bike easier to ride uphill and downhill is adjustable geometry. like for example the Devinci Wilsons have adjustable chain stays and shock mounts. but the only problem is that its not on-the-fly adjustment.
flag pbuser102331
Posted: Nov 16, 2008 at 15:58 Quote
Hombre3000 wrote:
Fair enough, I guess no one wants it. I thought it would be cool to be able to have a bike that would be able to switch between something like a Double and a BottleRocket (I know), so that the suspension wouldn't gobble up the jumps.

a progressive spring would help in that area,aswell as others lovley and soft for dh but with heavier rate at the end for drops.
flag Hombre3000
O+
Posted: Nov 16, 2008 at 15:59 Quote
OK everyone, this is the part where I realize how dumb I am and crawl back into my cave.
You all are free to go.
flag pbuser102331
Posted: Nov 16, 2008 at 16:02 Quote
Hombre3000 wrote:
OK everyone, this is the part where I realize how dumb I am and crawl back into my cave.
You all are free to go.

not really that stupid to be honest just not a market for it,well there is but people dont see it yet.
flag me2menow
Posted: Nov 16, 2008 at 16:04 Quote
doesnt a lower end give you a slacker head angle? thats better for dh, where you woulld want more travel...
defeats the purpose i guess
flag pbuser102331
Posted: Nov 16, 2008 at 16:05 Quote
me2menow wrote:
doesnt a lower end give you a slacker head angle? thats better for dh, where you woulld want more travel...
defeats the purpose i guess

nope your just missing the point.

shorter travel for the climb readjust the shock and have longer travel for the down.
flag Borgschulze
Posted: Nov 16, 2008 at 16:37 Quote
marquis wrote:
nope your just missing the point.

shorter travel for the climb readjust the shock and have longer travel for the down.
Talking about adjusting the shock... which will slacken the head angle and make climbing harder...
flag iggz
Posted: Nov 16, 2008 at 16:41 Quote
marquis wrote:
shorter travel for the climb readjust the shock and have longer travel for the down.

Shorter rear travel would make the bike ride really high up hill Blank Stare That's why there are so many adjustable forks on the market... when you drop down your fork it balances out your bike. But when you lower the rear, it makes it more uncomfortable. So, adjustable forks have a greater market/use than adjustable rear shocks.
flag pbuser102331
Posted: Nov 16, 2008 at 16:44 Quote
igz- wrote:
marquis wrote:
shorter travel for the climb readjust the shock and have longer travel for the down.

Shorter rear travel would make the bike ride really high up hill Blank Stare That's why there are so many adjustable forks on the market... when you drop down your fork it balances out your bike. But when you lower the rear, it makes it more uncomfortable. So, adjustable forks have a greater market/use than adjustable rear shocks.

well you know what i meant kind of,i was also refering to using an adjustable fork up front to keep the angles the same.

i usually push up hills so have never worried about it.
flag iggz
Posted: Nov 16, 2008 at 16:45 Quote
I don't climb either but when you think about what kind of riders an adjustable rear shock would be targeted at... xc.
flag pbuser102331
Posted: Nov 16, 2008 at 16:47 Quote
igz- wrote:
I don't climb either but when you think about what kind of riders an adjustable rear shock would be targeted at... xc.

yep it dont make any sense,they have hammerschmidt and stuff for freeride rigs so you can climb but the same old suspension.

i cant see the point in compromising a design,you can near enough have a do it all bike but never a true do it all.

 


Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.010994
Mobile Version of Website