Bright Racing Shocks' 1630g Inverted Fork Claims 'Better Precision Than a Traditional Fork' - Pond Beaver 2021

Apr 16, 2021
by Seb Stott  


Recently, The European Bike Project directed our attention to the hand-made inverted forks from Italian micro-brand, Bright Racing Shocks. In particular, their 100-120mm travel XC/Marathon fork, the F929 xCO. It looks like a work of art and has a claimed weight of just 1,630 grams. For context, the RockShox RS-1 weighs 1,666 grams.

On the other hand, the (right-way-up) RockShox SID weighs 1,537 grams, or 1,326-grams for the 100mm-travel SID SL. That is, you know, less. However, Bright's founder and designer, Pablo Fiorilli, claims their fork offers "better precision and rigidity than a top traditional fork." Big words.

Bright Racing Shocks F929 xCO Details

• Intended use: Cross-country / trail
• Travel: 100-120mm
• Wheel size: 29" only
• Stanchions: 35mm
• Upper legs: 46mm diameter carbon-fiber
• Crown: CNC Aluminium
• Weight: 1,630-grams (claimed)
• MSRP: 1,780 Euros
Bright Racing Shocks

Upside-down (USD) forks have a patchy history within mountain biking. The Marzocchi Shiver, Manitou Dorado and RockShox RS-1 all had die-hard fans but didn't exactly see mainstream adoption. The appeal of USD forks is that the wiper seal and bushings sit at the bottom of the fork, meaning they stay well-lubricated in bath oil, and the stanchions and wiper seal aren't in the direct firing-line of debris from the tire. The larger-diameter upper tubes generally result in superior fore-aft stiffness too, although the lack of an arch tying the legs together above the tire makes them typically flexier when it comes to lateral or torsional (twisting) forces. This usually results in either unpredictable steering or a significant weight penalty to try and engineer-out the flex.



Pablo says they achieved this competitive lightness and stiffness thanks to 46mm-diameter carbon-fiber upper tubes and broad (for cross country) 35mm stanchions, plus a crown machined from high-strength 7075-T651 aluminium. The thru-axle is the familiar 15x110mm standard (no over-sized thru-axle intended to add stiffness), but there is the option to use SRAM's Torque Cap hub interface for extra steering precision.

The CNC machining marks are visible on the crown.

The crown is said to weigh just 310g and is machined down from a 2.7Kg billet. Presumably, the other 88.5% of the material is recycled. Other details include a replaceable 160mm brake mount, 35mm lower legs (stanchions), a highly-progressive air spring and what Bright calls their Sensitive Lockout damping, which apparently does away with the need for a remote lockout as it minimizes bob thanks to a three-way compression valve.


But the boutique rarity of the brand is perhaps its biggest appeal. "Think about a hand-made frame builder but for suspension," Pablo explains. "Our business is to make something where you can find real hand made care together with high performance. We deliver a fork tuned expressly for the customer, assembled for him in 2 months."

You'll have to really want to stand out to pay the 1,780-Euro asking price, however. And as always, I'd view the stiffness and performance claims with a grain of salt. After all, the inverted mountain bike fork is a graveyard for promising claims that never quite worked out. Nevertheless it's great to see small manufacturers finding new and innovative ways to get around the same problems. The exclusivity which comes with such a niche brand is appealing and we'd love to get our hands on one in future.






Pond Beaver 2021





173 Comments

  • 112 8
 It’s gonna turn the cycling world upside down
  • 36 5
 The perception of inverted forks is really going to rebound
  • 32 5
 The price is turning my stomach upside down.
  • 4 30
flag fraserw (Apr 16, 2021 at 10:22) (Below Threshold)
 Here's your up doot. Now get out.
  • 5 3
 Really gonna flip it on its head
  • 17 34
flag justwaki (Apr 16, 2021 at 10:35) (Below Threshold)
 I can see the Bright future ahead of my bike
  • 21 0
 @fartymarty: username checks out
  • 49 1
 ǝʞᴉq ʎɯ uo ǝsǝɥʇ ʎɹʇ oʇ ʇᴉɐʍ ʇ’uɐɔ I
................couldn’t stand them !
  • 5 3
 @Matt115lamb: 1000 points for you sir
  • 13 1
 Looks like a normal fork... for an aussie.
  • 2 1
 RS-2?
  • 3 1
 @Matt115lamb: That is Semenuk-level commenting, bro!
  • 4 0
 these guys are mavericks for bringing this to market
  • 1 0
 We should start calling them Australia forks
  • 1 1
 @fartymarty:
I can assure you that all the hours of technology and development within this brand have real value and you feel them when you drive.
  • 1 0
 @PabloBrightRacingShocks: Sounds quite progressive.
  • 2 0
 I think you all have to suspend your disbelief.
  • 1 1
 @megatryn: yes, open mind is always better.
  • 3 0
 @PabloBrightRacingShocks: You mean; open your mind by two clicks at a time.
  • 7 0
 @PabloBrightRacingShocks: What about long term ownership issues like scheduled maintneance? Will parts and service manuals be made available to the public, or will this just be an exotic nightmare that you have to send back to the manufacturer every time you need service? New technology is nice, but if it isn't backed up by service manuals and parts it's just an expensive disposable toy that's gonna piss people off after the newness wears off. Nobody likes to show up at their LBS and get told, "Dude, I have no idea where you get stuff to work on that or how long its gonna take to get it, or how much it's gonna cost."
  • 1 3
 @RunsWithScissors: bulls eye! Thqt iw my issue with everything that is not Öhlins, Fox or RS. Will I be able to service it.
  • 1 0
 @megatryn: Never adjust your mind more than 1 click at a time
  • 6 0
 @RunsWithScissors:
this topic is real and sacred to me.
and you asked a correct question.
but I am used to approaching arguments in a pragmatic way.
then I answer ....:

in Europe we have an organized service with people personally trained by me and continuously active on competitions and tests.
These service centers, as well as the parent company, guarantee service via express courier in one or two weeks (depending on various factors).
We are in the US
looking for a service center that is also a distributor.
the nature of Bright and of our work is that of a racing department.
WE DO INNOVATION ... yes but we don't do it to go for a walk. we are pragmatic and
aimed at racing use.

The F929 was designed (by me,
so i know what i say) like a real race suspension. Contrary to low-cost forks (sold at high figures but
low cost production .....) Bright does not need gurus or sorcerers to return to perfect condition.

high-level projects are like that.
Completely disassembling the F929 frame requires a small flat screwdriver, a 1.5mm Allen wrench, an 18mm hex wrench and 5 minutes of work.
Your good explanations and our support from the parent company are always available.

This is our nature.
I personally design and develop racing suspensions and avionics systems from
30 years. My job is to carry out sustainable and innovative projects. You don't plan to count the customer.

Just think that every single gasket is available as a standard all over the world.
cartridge orings are standard fit.
the dust scrapers
exteriors are standard Rock Shox 35 mm.

not only....
Bright Racing Shocks forks have the gasket pack mounted in a special
floating capsule that also allows you to change the standard of external seals ...

Forks sold out
europa can be supplied with two service kits (two years) at a special price.

the cartridge can arrive from Italy with custom tuning in two weeks.

Yet???? We can talk for days. I hope I have answered at least partially
  • 1 0
 @rip8569: what is with the puns?
  • 1 0
 @silask: Just bobbing for laughs
  • 64 0
 not an xc nerd by any stretch (though there was a time many years ago), but that mondraker looks sick (click to embiggen).
  • 21 1
 me either, but that was a perfectly cromulent observation.
  • 5 2
 @xy9ine yeah that's a weapon. Remove all the logo stickers on everything and it's a dream machine.
  • 7 1
 Xc bikes are super sick and you don't have to wear spandex to ride one
  • 2 0
 The mondraker with the upside down fork looks sooo clean.
  • 8 12
flag justwaki (Apr 16, 2021 at 11:46) (Below Threshold)
 Pictures like this make me think that the poliferation of 32" wheels for XL and XXL sizes is long overdue...
  • 2 1
 @justwaki: rookie numbers gotta go penny farthing.
  • 9 9
 @makripper: there's nothing wrong with 32" wheels. When Emily Batty rode for Trek she could have gone for XS HT with 27.5" wheels just before super caliber came a long. She made the switch earlier so it made sense to hr to ride 29" wheels. Now she doesn't have this choice on Canyon. Yet... MVDP rides same wheelsize as her. She is 161cm tall, MVDP is 184. Kate Courtney isn't exactly a giant either - 29" wheels. Full one cm taller than Batty. No geo number would be strange in current geometry climate. You can fit 32" wheel into 450 stays. Stack will go up by 3cm. That's like XCer mounting a 130 fork. Can be mitigate with bars with drop or by making some fancy fork crown/stem interface inder the head tube. It's much easier to do than what majority of people could think. When I see those mega long posts, saddle being so high up, it doesn't look any smarter than 32" wheels. Off course there will be tons of hate and then dorks who will try to mullet this. Why Gravel isn't pushing for this yet is strange, whereas why touring isn't doing this is plain ridiculous.
  • 2 0
 @justwaki: that's not a good reason. Rollover and efficiency vs weight increase probably holds it back more than anything. An xc tire would be 1kg alone lol
  • 7 7
 @makripper: I swear I said same words in 2010 about 29ers hahah Big Grin By this logic all XC hill climbing constest would be run on 24" wheels. Also 29" XC tire like Ikon (not something made of toilet paper like Thunder Burt) is 650-750g. That is no more than 50g increase over 27.5" version. 32" version would be no more than 100g more than 29". Add no more than 50g to 100g lightweight insert for the rear that some top XCers are rumored ot use. You end up with 150g more for rear wheel and 100g more for front. 250g more total. You gain roll over and grip, and even smoother riding off big obstacles. More comfort. Maybe small gain for XCO, bigger for XCM. Gravel? no brainer... we just need roadies to smarten up. They still ride 650B gravel wheels to fatter 2.0" tires to keep the outer diameter in tune with UCI regulations...
  • 3 1
 @justwaki: 5 years ago, 26 was a perfect DH size, 27.5 was goldilocks size of AM bikes (as trail went by back then and nobody could put a finger on what enduro even means) and 29 was an XC racing size.
32" makes perfect sense for XXL bikes as this pic proves: www.instagram.com/p/CNZQTPtnSgp
  • 3 3
 @jollyXroger: great pic! I honestly think that if Kate Courtney or Emily Batty at 160cm tall can ride a 29er, then me at 180cm could ride 32er no problem. I think 32” will work from Large up. XXL starts to be 36” territory. I don’t remember but I think 46” required 480 stays and that gets way too long for an average person. 450 for an average person is still manageable.
Cheers!
  • 13 2
 "You'll have to really want to stand out to pay the 1,780-Euro asking price"

You do realize this is an industry where there are showroom stock builds for $10-12,000? Where the $3-4,000 difference to the next lower model is literally just for a few hundred grams, often with zero functional improvements?
  • 6 1
 Yep. You could buy a high spec commencal any model and two of these forks to use as wind chimes at home for less than a 12k specialized. Why are they complaining about the price?
  • 6 0
 @mdinger: I didn't see any complaints about price.

You and @justinfoil are aggressively agreeing with Seb, as the people who spend 12k on a specialized are... Wait for it... people who want to stand out.
  • 1 0
 I guess you still ride a 9 or 10 speed 26er then by your logic. Would have saved you a fortune I bet over the last 10 years in shiny, new, near zero gains or zero gains parts moving wheel size!
  • 2 1
 @Mngnt: You really dont stand out with a Specialized, no matter how expensive it is.

Try an Unno, Zerode or other small boutique brand for that matter
  • 2 0
 @betsie: actually my band new totally pimped out commencal is running a 9 spd, as both shimano and sram cannot make their 12spd divetrains as reliable as the old 10 spd XO type 2 derailleurs (its just what happens when you have so many gears, so close together on such rough terrain, those tight tolerances just dont work on brutal terrain)

It is a clutched, wide range 9spd by box.
  • 1 0
 @NotNamed: or antidote... have had one of those... you stand out, everyone asks what it is.
  • 3 2
 I do realize that, yes. But this fork is heavier than its competition, as well as more expensive. It may have benefits but it's tough to justify rationally based on what we know so far.
  • 2 0
 @seb-stott: And there are lots of people with disposable income who are willing to try new and different things. It's like buying stupidly expensive cars or boats or whatever: if you're asking the question of "is it worth it?" then the answer for you is "no", but there are others for whom the answer is "yes it is worth it, because it looks cool/is different/is fun to support folks trying new stuff. even if it is a hundred grams heavier than a Sid with a cut steerer, it's 30 grams lighter than an RS-1 (cut status unknown), it's still bad ass and will fit in great on my carbon everything with full XTR".

Spending "too much" isn't always about "standing out". Sometimes it's about trying new things, supporting ideas you think could be good, and supporting the folks trying to realize those ideas.

You're right that a professional racer who might literally put food on their table based on results probably isn't going to spend hard earned race winnings and sponsor salary on something that is unproven and has no immediate outward performance benefits. But most of us aren't professional racers: we just want to ride rad places and do fun shit on our sick bikes and maybe help some motivated people make cool parts, and some of us are more than willing do spend quite a bit on that.

And this is coming from someone who is definitely not the target audience for this fork (even my hardtail's fork has more travel and is heavier); I just think it's bad form to pre-judge anyone paying that price as just wanting to "stand out".
  • 1 0
 @Mngnt: They might just have more disposable income than you or I are used to, and just go for the top-line product because they can and it's an easy decision. Shit, a lot of those $10K+ builds even only come in black or black with some mild highlights. You could do a lot more standing out with a base model Santa Cruz from a few years ago when contrasting flouro colors were all they offered.
  • 13 4
 No the flex does not cause unpredictable steering. Quite the opposite. The flex aids the steering. UD forks are superior. Mountain bikers are slow to pick up on a better idea. Flex is needed . Stiffness is an over used and often misunderstood part of the Dynamics of how mountain bike parts function.
  • 7 3
 100% agree with this point. I have extensively ridden a dorado, emerald, bos obsys, and have also been extensively on a boxxer, 40, and idylle on my dh bike. All of the inverted forks ride way better in terms of comfort than the right side up forks. The big benefit of the inverted fork is the huge for aft ridgidity, it helps reduce the flex of the fork right below the crown a lot which is a source of vibration and feeling of harshness. If there is enough torsional force to flex and twist the wheel and the fork, your going to feel that in your bars and they will be pulled in your hands, this really isn't the case at all, you are really never fighting to keep your bars from being turned by obstacles on the trail. People remember inverted forks as having little twigs for tubes. There hasn't been stellar inverted fork chassis come out yet, the obsys is close but needs some changes to really shine.
  • 2 0
 Agreed. My dual crown Shiver was so good compared to all other right side up options of the day. People would twist the bars holding the front wheel between their legs and claim it was flexy. On the trail that wasn’t noticeable and I felt was an advantage in aiding the front wheel in deflecting vs locking up on edges along the trail.
  • 3 0
 @mikedk: I find it funny the leg twist test on forks. The force never comes from the front of the wheel like that unless you run into a brick wall at an angle but then there are much more issues besides fork flex at that point in your life.
  • 1 0
 @mikedk: ditto man. Loved my shivers for years and still have an avalanche DHF 8 it on one of my DH bikes, wouldn’t change it for anything currently available.
  • 1 0
 Agreed. My dorado is amazing. It needed a once over when I bought it to sort the dampening to my tastes, I reamed the bushings at the same time. I replace the oil twice a year if I’m bored or once a year otherwise. They are beautifully smooth and work like a dream.
  • 4 0
 @naturaltalent: wise words....yours ! I agree 100% USD DC are way superior than any conventional DC
  • 8 2
 Funny every inverted fork claims to be better than traditional and yet they are never more than a foot note at best in the bicycle world. No need to tell me they rule moto on machines weighing hundreds of pounds more, with more power, more speed and more bump force energy.
  • 1 9
flag rarrity (Apr 16, 2021 at 10:09) (Below Threshold)
 Comes down to center of gravity. Seems to me like the weight distribution on a bicycle is going to have more effect on C.O.G.
Road racers (moto) swap out inverted forks to improve COG and hence corner speed
  • 6 0
 Yeah, they're better on motocross and enduro motorcycles because the weight gain to performance increase makes it worth it. Mountain bikes have more in common with trials motorcycles, in terms of minimizing weight being critical. And trials motorcycles have forks are not inverted. They are pretty similar to dh forks in construction. Fun fact, my trials motorcycle (2005 gas gas) has marzocchi forks and they feel so similar to the 2004 888's I had. At least, they feel very similar to how I remember my 888's feeling, so smooth, and so linear!
  • 2 0
 @kcy4130: i dare say eliminating stiction is the only thing fork manufacturers have to do, the rest takes care of itself.

haven't tried much new stuff but the 27,5 dorado i have is a dissapointment in this regard
  • 9 1
 The main reason why moto went inverted was so the bottom of the legs didn't have to extend below the axle- think 2005 Manitou Travis. Cornering in Moto and Super is all about railing ruts, and you can't ride in ruts if your forks are scraping the ground because they hang too low.
  • 8 17
flag justwaki (Apr 16, 2021 at 11:54) (Below Threshold)
 I'd argue that with slackening of head angles becoming a norm, USD forks make more and more sense, especially on 29ers. their Bushings are exposed to less force leverage and if you can make them into glide bushings where offset increases with compression it gets even better. Not sure about the XC though. USD forks are heavier by nature and there is no running away from the fact that adiditonal 200g can be a deal breaker for Marathon crowd rather quickly. These people are the biggest customer group in MTB as a whole and very few of them can appreciate "better" tracking or lower unsprung mass if that's even relevant considering how light standard lowers are and damping is unsprung in STD forks. In fact the only people Iheard whining about RS-1 lack of stiffness were MTB Marathon/ Triathlete dudes. Says a thing or two... Dorado like fork for long travel Enduro rig? Sign me up.
  • 6 1
 @baca262: This is the biggest problem with current forks that exist, they are sticky and full of friction. The mtb world is so fixated on just a few grams that it is destroying the performance of the suspension by doing that. Those aluminum backed ptfe bushes that forks use are never round from the factory, and need to be sized/burnished after installation, which doesn't happen from the factory, only aftermarket will offer the service and it makes a world of difference. If the suspension mfg's used steel backed bushes instead they wouldn't have as many issues with out of round bushings, look at moto bushes, they are very round before installing into the fork. The other thing is if you build an inverted fork why not do a guide/slide bush setup like moto fork, it makes no sense to have statically spaced bushes like a conventional fork these days, the benefit from having a slide bush is huge. looking at you manitou and dvo (emerald). Bos got the obsys right with a slide bush setup, but the execution and use of not round aluminum backed bushes of it leaves a bit to be desired.
  • 1 8
flag hamncheez (Apr 16, 2021 at 13:07) (Below Threshold)
 @justwaki: USD actually put more load on bushings.

The bushings are higher in the fork, since the stanchions slide up, creating more toque upon impact.
  • 6 1
 @hamncheez: the bushes get closer to the axle on a usd fork, that reduces the leverage and the load on them
  • 1 0
 For 29’er the additional fore-aft stiffness and a csu with larger uppers rather than stanchions could be nice. Or we could just ditch 29’ers
  • 3 1
 @davemud I've personally got an Xfusion Revel USD, and i completely agree with your comment. I am happy to tell anyone who asks about the fork that it has it's downsides. I tell them I am quite a light rider so i don't really notice the lateral flex, but someone heavier probably would. And i probably could have found something lighter for a similar price point.

If the usd world didn't keep making these grandiose claims, maybe they'd have a better shot at the market haha!
  • 2 6
flag justwaki (Apr 16, 2021 at 15:07) (Below Threshold)
 @naturaltalent: Now that I think of it... it can't be that much of a difference. What would make the biggest difference is glide bush though and it seems easier to do with USD fork since you work with two straight tubes inside of which can be done with good tolerances, whereas with lowers of a standard fork it would require some amazing machining. Sooner tubes o be inserted into the lower = more unsprung mass = more cost.
  • 3 0
 @kcy4130: You’re not mis-remembering... I’ve a set of 2004 888’s on a vintage DH bike; utterly buttery smooth, oil-filled yummy goodness.
  • 2 0
 @kcy4130: nice! What model gasser are you on ? I'm on 03 sherco 2.9
  • 2 0
 @justwaki: It makes a lot of sense to use a slide bush in an inverted fork, especially a dual crown as the bushing overlap can be massive. It is possible to do in a right side up fork, marzocchi did it with the monster, and those were known for having amazing chassis action, even though they were sporting crude dampers. Lowers are bored out for the bushes to be pressed in, there are lots of specialized tools for finishing bores to size with good surface finish that can be used on standard machining centers, and they could be applied in the case of cast magnesium lowers to bore the whole length. You can't anodize magnesium to get the hard wear resistant finish that aluminum can have but you can do micro arc oxidation / plasma electrolytic oxidation on magnesium and that produces a surface even harder than hardcoat anodize can manage which means you could have cast magnesium lower leg fork with a slide bush setup. The flip side is that it also adds a lot of extra cost to the fork because that bore needs to be straight, round, and on size, something that the big oem's like rs and fox aren't interested in. Also mao/pea is very expensive as it uses an order of magnitude more electricity than anodizing but at the same time it is more friendly to the environment because you don't need sulfuric acid, or other strong acids, you only need a mild alkaline solution mixture. A number of years ago rockshox came out with the boxxer "keronite" that saved 28 grams on the lowers instead of painting them. Keronite is a company that provides mao/pea and that is what rs was using on those boxxer lowers to save the weight.
  • 1 0
 @Corinthian: Part of the reason that those older marz forks felt so good was they didn't use these aluminum backed bushings that aren't round. They were using industrial bushings, steel backed, with porous bronze, and then a thin ptfe sliding layer. These bushes are much more round when uninstalled and also installed in the fork than the aluminum backed ones, so they were sized right and round when they went in, i think we have gone a bit backwards in terms of fork slide bushes. The larger amount of oil also helps alot but having round bushes with the right clearance is also very important
  • 1 0
 @Corinthian: Just to add to my other post, the Marzocchi 380 did use steel backed bushes with the thicker ptfe tape like the aluminum backed ones, but they had a lot of issues with bores being out of round and bushes being tight and needing sizing. Eventually the bushing will take the shape of the bore, and if that isn't round, neither is the bushing.
  • 4 6
 @naturaltalent: monster lowers were also made of two tubes not a one piece cast. It’s much easier to machine to tight tolerances. If I ever see a “contemporary” Dorado on classifieds I will buy it. But single crown USD fork like this - I’m skeptical. Somebody would need to play with RS-1 architecture where you have a one piece carbon steerer/ crown and outers. Just beef it up a lot then preferably oversize the crown race, take it from 1.5” to 2” or 2.2”. I don’t see future for long travel single crown forks with 1.125-1.5” tapered. It makes zero sense. One look at Zeb or 38 out of the bike - it just looks totally disproportional with that tiny steerer. Ebikes already go to 1.8”, which I find as another dumb “one step a time thing”. Take it all the way damn it. Passionate about USD aye? Big Grin cheers!
  • 1 0
 @justwaki: I totally agree with the steer tube, big area of flex on single crown forks and desperately needs to increase in size. 1.8 is definitely a move in the right direction, but there is still the problem with the small 1 1/8 thin wall tube up top and also why not start using metric to dimension it if its going to change. You are right, it needs to go all the way, not just miniscule steps. Why not go straight to 60mm and taper to 50 or 45mm up top? That would drastically reduce the flex of the steer tube. People would complain about another new standard but unlike most others that have been introduced it would be a meaningful improvement and have many tangible benefits, including larger headset bearings which will be stronger and last longer. but i guess the bike industry wants everything to wear out in a year so they can sell you another and make more profits. Just passionate about suspension in general, of course with a particular liking to USD. Cheers!
  • 3 2
 Yall can downvote me all you want, its still true inverted forks put more pressure on the bushings than right side up forks. The bushings are in the uppers on a USD; in the lowers in a RSU. The further away from the hub, the more the torque.
  • 4 0
 @naturaltalent:
Good boy! these are two and three fundamental points.
Remember that Bright is first of all a developer and we have been designing suspension especially for mtb for 32 years.
our guides have always been mobile (see Fimoco Engineering in the 90s) as in mx.
we are the only manufacturers to obtain the shafts from solid billett and grind with cylindricity and ovalization below 5 microns.
the guides are rolled to tight tolerances.
These technological features come from my experience (16 years) in the aerospace sector; not only in racing suspension job, and they are unthinkable in mtb suspension brands today.

then there are other factors that determine the performance of the F929 and all since
mechanical design.
Testing on the bike is the final word.
  • 4 2
 @hamncheez: You don't understand what you are talking about at all. Lets have an example. On a conventional fork the bushings are pressed into their seats and stay there, they don't move from where they are pressed in, on the lower leg. Lets use a 6" travel fork for comparison sake. In the conventional fork the lower bushing will be approximately 6" of distance away from the axle in the lower leg. It doesn't matter where in the stroke the fork is, that lower bushing is always the same distance from axle in the lower leg. So the more force that is placed on the fork, ie the deeper into the travel you go the more force is applied to that bushing at that 6" distance of leverage. When at bottom out on conventional fork that lower bushing is still 6" away from the axle. On an inverted fork where does the lower bushing sit? - right behind the seal. Where does the seal end up at bottom out? right above the axle. Where is the lower bushing on the inverted fork at bottom out? right above the axle, maybe one or two inches away from the axle at most. It doesn't matter if the bushings are in the uppers or in the lower legs, what matters is the location of the bushings relative to the axle and on an inverted fork they get closer to the axle the deeper into the travel you go where as on a conventional fork they stay the same distance from the axle regardless of where you are in the stroke. So at bottom out on the inverted fork the lower bushing is 1-2 inches from the axle, vs 6 inches on the conventional fork, therefore less load on bushings on the inverted fork and more on the conventional fork.
  • 2 0
 @PabloBrightRacingShocks: This is exactly the things that separate great suspension from mediocre is the attention to small tolerances and details like this, they arguably make the biggest difference. The fact that you make these in house for not that much more retail price than the large oem's is pretty awesome. Simply beautiful forks.
  • 1 0
 @naturaltalent:
thanks a lot.
The differences are a direct and deep control of all aspects.
And increase every weeks in something
  • 1 1
 @naturaltalent: When you compress a fork, it puts very little load on the bushings. Its side loading the fork, like when you hit a bump, that puts loads on the bushings. At bottom out there is potential for a USD fork to have their bushings closer to the axle, and therefore less side loading on them, but 95% of the time this is not true. It is also the most important to minimize bushing load during the first part of your travel, where grip and vibration transmission is most critical.
  • 1 0
 @hamncheez: I am not sure anymore.If it even were so it would be so on a HT where everything rotates around the rear wheel axle. i don't know. But I am not so zealous about it as naturaltalent. I guess the slacker the head angle gets the more loads there are on bushes at the bottom coming from the bike and the rider, but at the same time there is less force acting on them from the wheel. Nonetheless glide bushing seems better solution than the current standard solution and it is not achieveable on standard forks without making a Monster style crown which makes us run into other issues, at least for single crown forks. If anybody in this business worried on side loads from bushes, the sliders would be centric above the axle. In this way there would be no offset of the force. Like itis on many moto forks. Aaandit's a bit crappy solution for adjusters at the bottom...
  • 1 1
 @justwaki: No, we need leftys with better QC and better damping youtu.be/_WlRqcAQr2w?t=121
  • 2 1
 @hamncheez: you just contadicted yourself in the first two sentences. When you hit a bump, you are compressing the fork, and loading the bushings, this happens every single time in every single fork that exists ever. There isnt the "potential" for an inverted fork to have bushings closer to axle at bottom out, this is a fact that is true 100% of the time and is one of the fundamental design outcomes of a usd fork, there isn't any refuting that point, it is a fact, not a maybe. You have just further shown you have no idea what you are talking about.
  • 1 1
 @naturaltalent: If I hit a small bump, and it causes my USD fork to compress 1 inch when its an 8" travel fork, do my bushings get closer to the axle than a regular RSU fork? Yes or no?
  • 1 1
 @hamncheez: if your usd fork compresses 1" the bushings get exactly 1" closer to the axle in every single usd fork that ever exists. If you hit a bump that axle travels up towards the bushings 1" making it closer to the bushings by 1". Any other answer than that is completely wrong. Take it to the pm's if you want to argue about your wierd made up realities that make no sense.
  • 1 1
 @naturaltalent: is it now closer than a RSU would be?
  • 1 1
 @naturaltalent: Jesus, this attitude is not getting anybody anywhere, no matter how right they are.
@hamncheez The way I see it, I think if we treat the whole bike as a frame, two supports will be axles. While supporting force applies on contact patches and rider at the BB and a bit at the bars, we can assume for the sake of this exercise (at least in fore aft aspect) that we treat axles as supports. The further from support you get the more bending momentum is applied to the part we are looking at. This gets even worse for STD fork if we take into account tire contact patches and side loads, as well as twisting loads, the USD fork wins. There will be more deflection higher up the fork than lower in the fork in both cases though, especially thinking about the axle as rotating, not fixed support. If we look closer and the crown race is the upper support while axle is the lower support of the "rod" the most of deflection will happen in the middle. Some actual engineer can correct me...

The way I see it - glide bushing is superior in either case since bushing spacing matters most here. With glide bushing the outer part of the telescopic solution stiffens up the whole system where STD fork always relies on default bushing spacing and force is always applied to lower via bushings, so lowers don't play much of a role in stiffening the whole thing. Only length decrease due to fork compression, decreases deflection.
  • 1 0
 @justwaki: ya, lets do glide bushings, and have forks that cost $3k
  • 1 0
 @hamncheez: glide bushing in USD fork won’t cost this much USD because outers are made of tubes which unlike casted magnesium outers with arcs, can be manufactured to very tight tolerances with ease.
  • 2 0
 @Trls63: Nice. 280 TTX pro, I think. I bought it pretty cheap, a bit of a fixer, but pretty decent now. I have a dirtbike, but I'd never owned or even ridden a trials bike. It's super fun, totally different. I wish I had more big rocks nearby to use it on.
  • 1 0
 @kcy4130: that's awesome ! Same here , always had motos and always wanted a trials bike but never got to ride one. So when I found one for sale 5 minutes from my house (also a fixer upper) I snagged it. Then it promptly got stolen. So I found the same bike a year older in boxes so I bought that and built it. Of course about a month after that I found my first bike for sale so I went and took it back lol. Now I have two...
  • 12 3
 Seems like a Bright idea.
  • 8 3
 I'm shocked that nobody thought of this before.
  • 3 27
flag callumreynolds (Apr 16, 2021 at 9:45) (Below Threshold)
 I said it first Smile
  • 4 0
 Non-boutique companies that have tried and abandoned USD forks for non-DH riding:
-DVO, Halson, Magura, Manitou, Maverick, Rock Shox, X-Fusion, others
Non-boutique companies that currently sell USD forks:
Cannondale, RST
And Cannondale succeeded because they went nuclear on stiffness with three tricks no one else has tried- integrated leg-axle assembly, square legs, two crowns.
  • 1 0
 Many thanks Design is something hard
  • 7 0
 On a side note: That F-Podium is such a sleek and sexy looking bike
  • 7 0
 Give that Fork to Dangerholm he can Sandpaper ist to sub 1600gram
  • 4 1
 I don't know how an article about upside down forks, citing rigidity and giving examples of past forks could be published without talking about Cannondale's Lefty forks. They've been on the market for over 20 years, save for a recent gap. The rigidity gained by going USD led them to literally remove half of the fork and it's still stiffer than most forks even to this day. The 2013 Lefty Hybrid Carbon XLR came in at 1.3kg, with remote lockout and 90-140mm travel. Steerers are separate, but sub-100g carbon offerings exist from the likes of Darimo. Or CNC AL7075 from Leonardi or project321.
  • 1 0
 Also worth noting that in the photos of the Bright assembled to a bike it is using a front cable guide from a current Lefty Ocho...a detail they leave out in every other photo of the disassembled fork. Kinda makes you wonder what other details they missed?
  • 1 0
 Totally agree! The Lefty is in a class of its own among telescoping forks in terms of rigidity, bump sensitivity and weight. But as I understand it, dual crown Lefties are now discontinued, is that right? They did start to spoil their design around 2013 with the Lefty 2.0, now we have only crappy single crown Lefties. Sad.
  • 3 0
 Pinkbike should test one of these forks. These look very interesting to me, and Fiorilli brothers are not improvising or selling smoke here. Many complain about the price but are willing to pay more than 1000USD for top brands forks with plastic internals that seem porpously made to work poorly so you need to buy a new fork every year
  • 2 0
 Thanks a lot...
  • 2 0
 I gotta admit, I don't like the "machining marks" too much. I prefer it when the product looks a bit more finished. The swirls and paths are lovely and all, and I see the appeal, but I'd be more pleased with something that looks smoother.
  • 1 0
 I’m with you. I really don’t understand why mtb stuff intentionally has sloppier cnc work.
  • 4 0
 This has been attempted by every suspension company aside from fox at this point, and they have all abandoned ship.
  • 2 0
 It would be less work to design an internal system that squirts oil on the foam rings
  • 1 0
 I read this with great interest but I didn't see anything that would set it apart from the RS-1 except for not needing a hydraulic push button lever on the handlebar. The RS-1 is stiff in fore-aft as well. It's the twisting force where it's weak, and this fork doesn't do anything to address that. I'll stick with my 120mm RS-1. I'm quite pleased with it.
  • 1 1
 I disagree, the Rockshox fork has a bigger axle (just another 'standard') and this one has a 15x110 axle.
  • 1 0
 This guy claims the 46mm uppers address that....
  • 1 0
 @hamncheez: The stiffness of the uppers isn't much of a factor in this case.
  • 1 0
 @vhdh666: no, an RS1 uses a 15x110mm axle as well
  • 1 0
 @forsinapu: is it the 1st version that didn't? or am I totally wrong?
  • 1 0
 @vhdh666: yes.
the transverse forces do not necessarily pass through the wheel axis.
the guides and then the analysis of the loads are the way.
  • 1 0
 @vhdh666:
RS1 is one thing, BRIGHT F929 is a totally different thing.
In design, solutions and technologies...
Totally different.
In my opinion (from an engineering point of view) the sram hub is a real
Masterpiece. But our guide and legs solutions are far-from a low cost mtb commercial fork
  • 1 0
 So it's heavier AND costs more than a Fox 32 SC or Rockshox SID? Very small market being catered to. Can't say I have any complaints about my Fox SC. Does it look amazing? Yes, beautiful. But I feel like weight weenies such as myself outnumber the.... AestheticWeenies? Someone more creative please come up with a clever name for that....
  • 7 0
 Aestholes?
  • 2 0
 @Genewich: Nailed it.
  • 1 0
 $2,550.00 Canadian for a fork no one knows how to service and no one ever heard of. Good luck in the DEntist's chair selling this anchor of a release.
...enter downvotes from stupid dentist offsprings
  • 3 0
 The decal is easily removable I hope.
  • 2 0
 If that crown started out as 2.7kg block then I’m going on a trip to Barnard castle....
  • 6 5
 I dont know why any company would have a crown that isnt forged. Fuck CNCed 7075.
  • 3 1
 ok, superengineer.
  • 2 2
 @JohanG: I aint wrong though. But I am a career engineer so Ill take that.
  • 2 0
 @JohanG: as opposed to you...not an engineer?
  • 1 0
 For the volume they're going to make, it's cheaper to prep a CNC program and mill it vs. forging tooling.
  • 1 1
 @rip8569: It might be that I am an engineer, but on the anonymous internet, arguments have to stand on their own merit.
  • 2 0
 @Mazador: Agreed, they might not be able to afford a set of forgings (though I suspect they could, but decided that the CNC would look cooler and require less expensive R&D, besides everyone on the internet has a hardon for the word "billet"). I'm just not going to put my money down on some CNCed aluminum crown noodle forks when less money will get me stronger forks made with a crown that will hold them in place due to correct grain flow directions and strength from the cold working. Forged crown will likely also have a higher fatigue limit, which is a feature I like in a crown.
  • 1 0
 I could imagine a 30 or even up to 40mm thru axle would solve the problem of lacking torsional stiffness in usd designs.
  • 1 0
 I ran a Foes Wet One USD, it had 30mm axle with pinch bolt drop-outs and the crowns would come out of alignment much more often than my 20mm axle shiver. That being said I really like the dorado axle/dropout, why not
  • 2 0
 "Small company" in the title has dentists paying attention.
  • 1 0
 This is normal. it is comprensible But try to land from a jump with a Bright F929 and then try to do it with any of the forks of the big brands and then ....... let's talk cheers
  • 1 0
 Intend finally found a friend in the endless discussion about the non existing stanchion protectors
  • 2 0
 protections are available, just choose them in the order. These are also a Bright unique design and are called DCMS. They just eliminate the problems brought about by classic USD protections... thx
  • 1 0
 @PabloBrightRacingShocks: Thanks for the reply! you got my attention
  • 1 1
 What happens when you wreck? It seems like all the dings happen on the fork lower. Those stanchions are going to take a beating!
  • 1 0
 It would be better if the stanchions had a force field around them to prevent scratches.
  • 1 0
 These guys should spell check their website. The description of the "enduro" fork is a interesting read.
  • 1 0
 Remember when marzocchi did this? Then rock shox? And no one bought those? Pepperidge Farms remembers
  • 2 1
 That's some nutty dropper seatpost height...
  • 2 0
 My post height looks like that, but it's his stack height in comparison that looks super odd in comparison. My back hurts from merely a glance.
  • 2 0
 @mammal: When you're climbing, the bars are higher than the seat, and when you're descending, the seat is dropped out of the way and you get the lower center of gravity and better front wheel traction from it. Where it sucks is on long flats, but most cross country courses nowadays seem to have a lot more pure climbing and descending with very few flat parts besides the start finish area. I usually go for bars 2" below saddle for better climbing and descending, knowing I'm giving up comfort on the flat sections. I hate the flat sections.
  • 1 0
 I think it would be comfy if the seatpost angle was inverted from 71 deg to 109 deg. Wheelbase will lengthen significantly, but your back will not hurt so bad. Get on it Mondraker!
  • 1 2
 Of yeah, and boutique hand built obscure builder... so you can expect to get parts and service for it every where and long term right?
  • 11 0
 Just fly to Italy and stay in your lakeside vineyard chalet while Bright rebuilds it for you.

You do have an Italian lakeside vineyard, don't you?
  • 2 0
 Here we go again...
  • 1 0
 That Mondraker is a beauty.
  • 2 0
 It is freaking gorgeous.
  • 1 0
 So, new bike category: Upside-Down-Country?
  • 3 3
 Stop making inverted single crown forks! The stiffness isn't there. it never will be.
  • 2 1
 If only the logo were 15% uglier, I’d be in!
  • 1 0
 What do you mean, shiver not mainstream?
  • 1 0
 very different..... and different skill design
  • 1 0
 I'll take the sid and cash.
  • 4 3
 That’s a lite bright!
  • 1 1
 Wtf look at the rear tire clearance in the rear triangle.
  • 1 0
 Or the absolute lack thereof
  • 1 1
 Almost as precise as a rigid carbon fork!
  • 1 0
 Looks like a shiver?
  • 1 3
 The stanchion is way too vulnerable for cheap ass
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2021. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.019174
Mobile Version of Website