Interview: Laurie Greenland's Coach, Olly Morris, on Faster Rebound Damping & Riding Technique

Mar 17, 2021
by Seb Stott  

Olly Morris is the ride coach for MS Mondraker team, working mostly with Laurie Greenland to help him dial-in his skills and setup. He's also the owner of Pro Ride MTB Coaching, offering advice to those of us with slightly more room for improvement in the skills department. That's exactly how I got to know Olly when I went for a skills session last year. I was happy to learn that Olly is a fellow bike nerd, and we got chatting about suspension setup in downhill racing, as well as how bike setup can be affected by riding technique and visa-versa.

In particular, we talked about the shift towards faster rebound damping, both at World Cup level and in the mainstream, where Ibis's Traction Tune is perhaps the most notable example.

I called Olly to pick up where we left off and get his coach's eye view on this trend and the relationship between bike setup and riding technique. Olly's track-side perspective from World Cups, test sessions with the MS Mondraker team, and coaching weekend warriors like me gives him unique insights into this topic. I learned a lot from our half-hour conversation, which I've edited down for you to read below. I hope you learn something too.

400 [Failed to load instagram embed]https://instagr.am/p/CKg9bgVh3vk&maxwidth=1000
PC Chapter Studios
Olly Morris
Credentials: Ride coach for MS Mondraker team, Owner of Pro Ride MTB Coaching, Elite DH racer
Location: UK
Instagram: ollym1

400 [Failed to load instagram embed]https://instagr.am/p/CMAeRdFHe7W&maxwidth=1000&hidecaption=1

So Olly, am I right that World Cup Downhill riders have been moving towards lighter damping, especially on rebound?


Yeah. Well, from the riders I know, ride with or work with, that is the case. Just like you said, especially on the rebound side, it's definitely getting a bit lighter. I don't know if that's just because it's the improvement of the quality of the damping - I'm sure that has something to do with it - but definitely it's something that's quite a big topic at the moment as everyone is now starting to use data and telemetry to help understand it all a little bit more.

And you've used the Motion Instruments telemetry system, haven't you?


Yeah, with Laurie mainly, and with Mondraker. It seems really good, very insightful. I guess that's the whole idea, isn't it? It makes me wonder what we used to guess a few years ago!

I talked to the guys at Motion instruments and they think that a lot of people, possibly most people, are running the rebound too slow. So have you any ideas on why it used to be quite fashionable to run rebound really slow and that seems to have really turned around, at least at the top level? Was it just that we were guessing in the old days?


Yeah, it could have been. I think though, like any setup thing, everything is about finding the best compromise. And I know in, for example, F1 car racing they do speak more about “if you're going to give with one thing you're going to take away with the other”. Whereas, I think probably the way we are in the maturity of our sport, we're probably not quite there yet. So in other words, we hear on the grape vine or in the industry that faster rebound equals I will be a faster rider. Laurie Greenland runs a faster rebound, so therefore I will. And so, I think there's a little bit of that going on, if I'm perfectly honest as well. Yeah, definitely a little bit of that going on.


A bit of just following the trend?


Yeah, totally. And that’s not to say the trend isn't correct, and we can obviously speak more about that, but I think there's an element of trend following.

I think a good example, and hopefully this doesn't go off track, is when folk used to run really flat handlebars. I think it was Blenky who used to run really flat handlebars, so everybody copied. Well, flat handlebars can still be really useful today, depending on how tall you are, how long a head tube you have or whatever. So, taking into consideration the speed of your rebound, it definitely seems to be something where it's useful at the moment, because of the type of tracks we have and the type of bikes that we now have. And it seems to be that riders are preferring it as well.

Yeah. Bar height is a topic I like to bang on about - I think a lot of short riders have the bar way too high, and a lot of tall riders have theirs way too low. But I agree that's an example where there was a phase where everyone wanted a flat handlebar, irrespective of whether they were five foot tall or six foot six. Getting back on topic - so there's always an element of fashion, but when you tested with Motion Instruments did that offer any real insights on where you should be with rebound or with suspension settings generally?


Yes. Definitely. So speed of rebound, for sure, was something that we have to improve. On certain sections of track, I reckon you can just run your rebound off and it'll probably make the bike faster. But I wouldn't necessarily advise it!

You can nearly get to that point, but there are certain sections of track where we didn't find it was beneficial. It’s not just the speed of the rebound, probably above all of that, one of the most important things that we took from Motion Instruments was about the balance of the rebound speed. When I say balance, I mean from the front to the rear of the bike, balancing the fork and shock. Almost even if you run too slow or fast, if you balance them, I think that was a bigger win than just running faster.

bigquotesOn certain sections of track, I reckon you can just run your rebound off and it'll probably make the bike faster. But I wouldn't necessarily advise it!

Okay, that's interesting. So what is the thing that you're feeling when it's not balanced?


The main thing that the rider feels - and this is something I can see even if we don't have Motion Instruments plugged in, I can see it from the side if I'm filming a rider of any level - is the bike will do a sort of ”rocking horse” motion. The front chassis will rock backward and forward. And this makes the rider on top of the bike make additional movements. So, they'll move back or forward to react to this movement in the bike. When the rebound speeds are correct and balanced, the front triangle balances out and the rider on top of the frame feels a lot more comfortable. They just feel like there isn't actually a rough track anymore. That's maybe going a bit too far, but it's definitely heads that way.

Laurie Greenland on his way to fourth place.

Yeah, I mean Fort William top section is never going to feel smooth no matter what you do!

So obviously there's a downside to having the rebound too fast, which is that you'll get more bucking, the bike will potentially be less stable on big hits, big landings, takeoffs, or even kind of slow, technical boulder sections. But then if you're going fast over high-frequency, “chattery” terrain, then that faster rebound will, in theory, be more beneficial there. So, I guess it depends on the track.

I wanted to ask you how this relates to riding technique, because with the faster rebound the rider has to do more work to control that oscillation energy from the suspension, especially when you're landing or taking off a jump. I wonder if you think nowadays there’s more emphasis on the rider dealing with that kind of low-frequency impact, like a jump, and then making the bike more optimized for the high-frequency stuff that no rider can respond to. Does that makes any sense to you as a coach?


Yeah, I think there's load in there that's right. I mean, it depends what do we mean by fast, but I do hear a lot from riders who may be newer to jumping who think the reason they get bucked is because of their fast rebound. And from watching, the reason they're getting bucked isn't because of the fast rebound, it's because of how they're jumping and their technique within the jump. Maybe a fast rebound doesn't help, but they've already provided the problem themselves through the way they've ridden the jump. But yeah, I think it’s worth being a little bit careful on this “slow it down if you're getting bucked” kind of thing. Unless it's stupid fast, I don't think there's much in it.

bigquotesThe reason they're getting bucked isn't because of the fast rebound, it's because of how they're jumping.

But if you take that to a more advanced rider then, yeah, definitely. I think one of the things we sometimes find is that, if there's a transition from, say a right to a left, a very fast transition, sometimes the faster rebound would unsettle the bike more than the rider would want in-between the turns. So whereas they'd be getting, as far as I'm concerned, the maximum amount of grip through the corner with fast rebound, it would be the transition where they're changing their weight position going into the next turn that can sometimes cause the issue.

Laurie Greenland sailing off the finish line drop in Les Gets.
For Laurie, fast rebound is not a problem when getting airborne.

I see, so is that one of the main things guys like Laurie are finding when the rebound is too fast?


Yeah, I would say so. It seems to be what I'm hearing. And again, it does depend on the track and maybe how tight those turns really are and things like that. But yeah, that seems to be the main thing more than the jumping bit. But again, it depends which rider we talk of, because it's all dependent on the rider level.

Okay, but even at the top level, it seems there's a relationship between technique and how “lively” you can set up the bike without it becoming an issue. There was a race in Fort William a few years ago where quite a few people were getting bucked on the last jump before the elevator section at the end of the motorway. And you can kind of explain that away with bike setup like, "Oh, maybe the rebound's too fast because the shock’s heated up." But then, if they were fresh I'm sure those riders could cope with that jump with that rebound speed, so perhaps the fatigue and everything is all coming together to cause this problem.

Do you think that’s something that a top rider who's not too fatigued would just be able to deal with, whereas maybe a less-good rider, or a good rider who's fatigued, would struggle to handle that jump with those suspension settings?


Yeah, definitely. As you started talking now I was thinking, yeah, it's probably more down to fatigue than the bike setup. But again, I think the bucking of a bike is more from the balance, the difference between the speed of the fork and the shock, than necessarily how fast it is. If it pushes back together, then it's okay. It's only if somebody sped up their rear and not their front, then it could happen. So for example at Fort William, definitely fatigue could be one thing, but if we just speak about the suspension, it could be that the shock has heated up more than the fork, which is often the case. And if it has, then it may potentially be having that impact. But, if it helps, I run my air shock on my trail bike near enough fully off for rebound. Maybe a couple of clicks on, but near enough fully open. And that's on an air shock, which is quite poppy as it is.

PC Chapter Studios
Olly's happy with his trail bike shock almost fully open, though he's not done much testing other than on his DH bike.

And with your fork, are you similarly close to fully open?


Not quite, no, but pretty fast. I probably should go a bit faster. Obviously I haven't tested properly with the trail bikes. But yeah, pretty fast.

So you’ve done more testing on your downhill bike with the telemetry. Are you looking for those to be really balanced in terms of rebound speed? Because Motion was saying to me that often people like the fork to be a little faster than the shock, and that seems to be what I prefer.


Yeah, I have heard a bit of this and maybe that is the case, it depends how close we're talking your tolerances are. But yeah, we found that the closer you can get the [rebound] speeds, the better. I remember the first day I tried faster rebound was in Sanremo, which is probably the perfect place to test any suspension. And I remembered going considerable amounts faster on my shock and getting pretty scared on the track by the sort of bucking I was getting down it. And the old me would have done two things: he would slow down the [shock] rebound or potentially even make the fork firmer by coming up on compression to try and stop the front diving.

At the time I didn't have the telemetry on, so all I ended up doing was making the rebound faster on my fork, and getting it closer to, it probably wasn't exact, but closer to my shock. And then with the shock still as per the run before (“too fast”) it then gave me a very balanced ride. And if I'm honest, it was the first eye-opening moment for me to go, “oh wow, I've got grip!” It was next level grip, as far as I was concerned. I'm more used to it now, but at the time it did feel like quite a step change in how the bike was handling.

bigquotesIf I'm honest, it was the first eye-opening moment for me to go, “oh wow, I've got grip!” It was next level grip.

This was the moment that Laurie Greenland nearly threw it all away. How he held this one up on the steepest section of track is incredible.

That's very interesting. So did you find, when the fork and shock were both set faster than you used to have, that it's quite manageable?


Definitely, yeah. If they're both too fast, it seems to be okay. But if one's too fast and one isn't then it’s a problem... And again, speaking as a coach, you see it from the side of the track; you see the bike just getting thrown around and the rider struggling to hold onto it.

Take an EWS or downhill - let’s take the difference between a privateer and a pro on a factory setup and factory team with all the support. The data acquisition technology isn't cheap, so the privateer probably isn't going to use it, or maybe they have used it but they've used it back in their hometown on a little track with somebody who they could rent it off or whatever. And then they get to an EWS or World Cup track and the bike’s thrown around and you're going to have to get support from the sponsors to help bring it right again. So, I think you can see it.

So you think you can see it even just watching on live feed?


Yeah. Well, as we know, looking at last season, some of these privateers are absolutely incredible riders, aren't they? They've almost got more fight in them, because they've got more motivation to try and get in onto a team... But yeah, you can definitely see. And a privateer will try and listen in to what's going on with factory teams, and they may hear things like, “speeding up the rebound is good.” But they don't have all the information without the data there. And that's why a privateer, as we saw last year, can podium and do really well but they're probably less likely to do it at every race. Because one week all the stars align, their suspensions works, everything fits and they fit for the track, and off it goes. And then the next week, maybe they're not quite there. Whereas, Bruni is a prime example of somebody where they're not guessing each week, are they? The setup is as right as it can be. And obviously if they get the setup a little bit wrong, that's probably them back a few places. Maybe down in fifth instead of first. But, they're always in that sort of ballpark figure, aren't they?

That makes sense. Going back to that test in Sanremo, what do you feel is the advantage? Did you go a lot faster with faster rebound?


So, the test was more for Laurie than me. So my time just wouldn't have been relevant. But in terms of Laurie's times, the simple answer is, yes. And that's consistent not just in Sanremo but other tests we've done. Generally, when we get that suspension right there is a noticeable improvement in speed. The tough thing around timing is, as you know, that it’s hard to bring the consistency to it.

Yeah, with timing there's always a huge problem with motivation or placebo or just randomly going faster because the stars aligned with the way you rode. It's so hard to have enough consistency to say, "I changed the setting and that's what caused me to go faster."


Exactly. So, sometimes we'll see Laurie do a jump in three or four seconds from one run to the next, from a small setup change. And I definitely would admit that he hasn't done that because the clickers have changed by a couple of clicks or whatever. But it's a sign to say, come race day, if you had that setting it may be there's a higher chance that he'll be able to go faster. And isn't that what performance is all about? It's about raising your chances of winning.

Laurie's bike from Crankworx Innsbruck, 2019, with suspension dialed in from lots of testing.

I guess it's a continually evolving process, isn't it? Was there a point where you did one thing to the setup and it just felt better, in such a way that you could be confident that it was a genuine improvement?


Yeah. And the way the work is we use all pieces of feedback, so the time we keep that ticking over, because it has to be done, and we use the rider feedback: we use coach feedback (myself, and the filming that I've done); mechanic feedback is mega important to see how the bike has performed, and then obviously looking at the data as well. So, there's many things that we look at to confirm that it's right rather than just one. And remembering though that, I think you mentioned placebo a second ago, isn't that the best thing you can go on out of all of it? If a rider is happy then the rider's going to probably perform better anyway. So that's half the battle, is it not?

I suppose so, yeah. I always want to know if it's the psychology or the suspension that's made the difference, but I suppose in terms of winning races, it doesn't really matter which it is.


A hundred percent. Both are connected, I think.

So, going back to where we started, I think it's safe to say that in general, riders are running faster rebound now than they used to. So have you any idea why what seems to work now maybe didn't work before? For example, I suspect the increase in wheelbase gives modern bikes more inherent stability, which allows you to run lighter damping without too much chassis movement. Or could it be something to do with changes in riding style?


Good point. And pretty hard to answer I suppose. I think it's definitely going to be to do with something around the sizing and geometry. Although, coming back to balance, if a bike's imbalanced then a shorter bike is going to be more imbalanced, isn't it? It's going to be even more important than with a longer bike. So yeah, definitely the bikes can have a huge impact on it.

For me I'd say maybe it's just the evolution of the sport. There's so much that's changing all the time that we have to not forget the balance of all of the things. If you change one thing, it affects everything else. So yeah, as we moved to suspension or as we're moving to slightly faster on rebound, and that's probably not all riders, then we’ve got to remember that's then impacting all of the other things that happen.

bigquotesIf you change one thing, it affects everything else.

Laurie Greenland came down like the blazes and put 7.5 seconds into the field. Greenland took second place in his first season as an elite.

So, it's all about looking at everything together, I guess. And as the bikes change, as the riding changes, the speeds pick up, then what's going to work best in one particular area is going to change.


Completely. And I sit here with a slight smile on my face because I really enjoy the process of testing - isn't testing just like figuring it out, basically? And we've probably overused the word testing, because I find it quite funny that, basically what we're doing is we're out there trying loads of different things to see what fits. And as long as you enjoy trying different things, which obviously you do too, then you can find an answer.

Yeah, agreed. If you work out how many combinations of different things you could do just with a stock bike: different spring rates, volume spacers, compression, rebound etc., the number of combinations is just mind-boggling. For example, we've been talking about rebound, but the optimum rebound setting with one spring rate or one amount of compression damping will be very different if you change either of those variables. So it's a real puzzle when you consider all the different variables that are impacting on each other all at the same time.


But some of the changes over the years, we almost haven't been told about. As riders and coaches, we just get handed a new part and then off you go. And it is different. And that's why you have to start trying again and testing to see how that new part has impacted everything else from steering, suspension and the frame size, and then obviously the rider on top of it.

Flying down the track for 3rd was Laurie Greenland

Just one last question: do you think there have been significant changes in riding style over the last few years that could explain or go with differences in suspension and bike setup?


I would say riders have changed massively, and I think it's a really interesting one because it's a bit like: has the rider changed how they ride so the bike has then changed for the rider? Or has the bike changed and the rider then has to adapt for the bike? And if you took any top rider, the one thing they have which is sometimes the hardest thing for me to coach into riders who maybe aren't their level, is how they can have amazing feel for the bike and the floor: the contact points, the tires on the ground. And so if you give a very advanced rider a long bike, that rider will just adapt to it, they will just change. It may take them a couple of runs or a weekend or whatever, but they'll just change; because they're not really, necessarily thinking of the bike. They're just thinking, how can I give this bike the most amount of grip? So they will move forward or back or whatever it requires to fit. I think the rider will just deal with it to an extent because they're just after feel.

For a newer rider into the sport, who doesn't have that feel, they're just after something that's going to give them maximum confidence, aren't they? That just makes it not feel too dangerous to ride down this steep chute or off this drop or over these roots for the first time. So they're going to want the thing that’s most comfortable, probably isn't too fast on rebound relating to our conversation, probably isn't too short relating to bike sizing and stability.

But with the elite athletes, I would say the main thing that's changed is that they're now allowed to ride in-between the two wheels, as in, in the middle of the bike. We've all seen pictures and videos of Peaty and Minnaar from 10, 15 years ago. They had to swing off the back of the bike because if they go in the middle when the middle was so short, it became dangerous. So yeah, I'd say the main change is that riders have become more central, to summarize. But it's just whether it's been driven by the bikes or by the riders.

That is interesting. I remember Greg Minnaar saying that in about 2002 they made him a "super-long" frame - and it was maybe a 1250mm wheelbase, so it was small by modern standards. But apparently, at the time he thought it was too big and he went back to his stock bike. It seems there's an odd relationship between the bike and how you ride it. It's not as simple as, "Oh, this bike is faster." And it's not even a one-way thing. It's a two-way relationship.


I couldn't agree more, the two way relationship is very important.

So I guess we could conclude by saying don't expect that if you just whack your rebound all the way open it will make you instantly faster. It's not as simple as that. But it does seem like for some riders on some tracks, there's time to be had by opening up the damping so it can deal with the high-frequency stuff a bit better, as long as you keep it balanced. I guess the main takeaway for me after talking to you is that the balance is critical. And maybe you can get away with a faster rebound as long as it's balanced front to rear.


Yeah, I'd say that's a really good summary to be fair mate.


122 Comments

  • 147 1
 Those kinds of articles make me wanna visit pinkbike (and other media sites) over and over again in hope of finding such good reads!
  • 61 0
 Thanks, glad you liked it.
  • 16 0
 @seb-stott: you should do an weekly article
  • 3 0
 Yeah, thoroughly enjoyed that. Thanks Seb Frame design and shock tunes have come a long long way in the last ten years. Still want to get an old Ironhorse Sunday or Dentist 303 and build it up with today's parts and somehow magically make them a 29er. Then it would just be all about the geometry.
  • 4 1
 Congrats @seb-stott, I’d say you’ve almost emulated the old conversational style of DirtMag when they conducted interviews.

A frank and honest conversation that wouldn’t go amiss on the podcast.
You and @Ollym1 should do Weekly/monthly for sure. 100% agree.
  • 2 0
 @Waldon83: Have shock tunes actually changed that much? How different is a coil shock inside from twenty years ago? Air shocks have probably improved, but I'm not sure if coils have evolved that much, they haven't needed to, aside from tighter spring weight spacing and lighter weight.
  • 1 0
 @ChazzMichaelMichaels: That's a good feature idea actually. With diagrams and motion graphics ideally.
  • 1 0
 @Waldon83: 26 29 the super mullet! It would be sick
  • 2 0
 @ChazzMichaelMichaels: They’ve changed for sure, they’ve had to with frame kinematics.
A Fox RC4 piston and shim stack compared to a EXT Storia, and the storia would blow it out the water.
  • 69 0
 Turn red knob go fast. Got it. Thanx
  • 18 0
 Turn both red knobs go fast*
  • 5 0
 Thumbs up for that!
Or as Ty said in one of his comics: more rabbit - more turtle
  • 5 0
 Go that way, really really fast. If something gets in your way...turn.
  • 2 0
 Turn it which direction?!
  • 1 0
 @Chuckolicious: Great better off dead reference!
  • 44 1
 friday fails bout to be LITTTTT!!!
  • 37 0
 Interesting article! Thank you for diving into the finer points of tech. It would be ideal to take it a step further and discuss whether this trend toward faster rebound applies more to the high-speed rebound circuit, the low-speed rebound circuit, or to what extent of both.
  • 23 0
 That's a good point and could be a future tech article. I saw an interview with Tim Flukes, SRAM technician, who was saying most of the pro EWS and DH racers are on linear rebound tunes now (as opposed to the digressive valving on many stock shocks). I've back to back tested linear and digressive valving on two bikes, one with Fox, one with RS, and preferred the linear tune both times. I think the linear tunes could have something to do with the trend discussed above as the firmer HSR relative to LSR makes it less dangerous on big hits while still allowing the wheel to flutter over the chatter.
  • 4 0
 @seb-stott: I actually went so far as to put a progressive 2 stage stack with a gap shim in my fork, because i wanted even more hsr than what the linear tune had!
The rockshox "rapid recovery" garbage on another bike really gets on my nerves, gonna probably pull it and install a linear stack in the next couple days
  • 6 0
 @Civicowner: I personally think digressive tunes have their place - they're definitely better for seated climbing because the bike doesn't oscillate so much, but for chunky descents with rapid braking bumps and big impacts, not so much. It is interesting that Specialized went with a progressive rebound tune in their new Stumpy, but not heard of it in a fork. You happy with the change?
  • 6 0
 @seb-stott: I like it, but it needs some fine tuning. It definitely "sticks" to the back of landings much better (especially going big to flat) where it bounced before, but with overall faster feeling rebound. Second stage only seems to kick in after reaching like 60 or 70% travel
I find myself turning the LSR knob quite far toward open now. I think i will crack it back open and go smaller on the gap shim and possibly a slightly less stiff second stage too, i think slightly less progressive would be good, but i really like how it feels on big landings now. Just want slightly faster recovery from big square edges.

If interested this is my stack

Stock

17.35x0.15
17.35x0.15
17.35x0.15
Piston


current
13x0.1
17.35x0.15
17.35x0.15
11x0.1
17.35x0.15
Piston

next revalve
12x0.1
17.35x0.15
17.35x0.15
10x0.1
17.35x0.15
Piston

Fork is fox grip, all shims 6mm id
  • 1 0
 good point, there was already a similar discussion on the green'ish mtb side (for the rear shock). there were claims that HSR is mainly relevant for a rebound scenario where the wheel is not loaded (floats over fast bumps) which is likely in the first, let's say, 50% of the travel. Big hits like g-out’s are a mainly within the LSR speeds due to the loaded wheel by the riders weight. Meaning putting a stiff HSR shim in a shock will not change the feeling during G-Out/ big landings. I assume only telemetry can answer that correctly. @Olly Morris: any thoughts on that?
  • 1 0
 @seb-stott: made the same experiment putting a slightly stiffer linear stack instead of the stock digressive stack in my DPX2 - overall it feels better, but pedaling effects the suspension more (oscillating). I am not sure, but I think this come more from the now faster set LSR rather then from the changed HSR stack. The HSR should stay closed at seated pedaling anyway
  • 5 0
 That is the key question and I am quite surprised that this topic was left untouched. So before you open your clickers even more, try to find out good rebound damping curves and where a clicker should be.
I think there is a huge offset in the mtb industry in contrast to more matured industries like mx. In mtb I have the feeling everybody wants to run their clickers wide open, which is exactly the wrong way imo. And contrary to seb I think a digressive tune in form of preload in the stack (nuts!) does not lead to higher daming in low speed reb, cuz everybody opens the clicker to compensate for a stack, that opens way too late for an avg spring rate. And thereby killing all chassis stability and go far away from D=0,7. And RS do not seem to get it.
In MX a lot of reb stacks are crossovers. But, then you can run your clickers more closed to achieve chassis stability. Such a crossover configuration could turn out slower in low speed, than a wide open clicker on a digressive RS reb tune.
So you have to be very careful and look at all parameters and the damping curve as a whole.
Furthermore, it is correct that chassis stability and traction do not peak at the same reb damping values, but a good tune should bring them closer together so that you do not habe to sacrifice traction a lot and still maintain very good chassis control. Which is hugely important.
The owner of shimrestackor is very active in some mx forums and provides insanely deep knowledge and he also says: you wanna have your damping on the valve, not on the clicker. That is why crossovers are so popular in mx reb stacks. So I think there is a lot more to learn for us mtbers and especially for the manufacturers. RS have decent valves sometimes, but their reb tunes from factory almost always suck arse imo. Maybe because they have to be safe for the biggest nobs and that is why we can’t have performance straight from the factory.
  • 2 4
 @seb-stott: also, what part the kinemetics of the bike play into the speed of rebound. This article is clearly written from a Mondraker persepective, and as a Mondraker rider myself, I can attest to them really feeling good the light you go on the damping. Mondrakers are supremely linear bikes, even the "progressive" super foxy is pretty linear by conventional metrics. I wonder if this philosphy applied to a hyper progressive bike might not play as nicely!?
  • 2 0
 So to add a conclusion: I personally would run the needle fairly closed (one slight overswing on curb test, a lil below critical damping) and tune the rest (traction, packing, pop) via the stack or hsr adjuster based on that clicker/needle setup. Ultimately a fairly linear reb damping curve seems to be a consensus, that is desired. You achieve that via a crossover stack with right size crossover shim and the right ratio of stiffness between 1. and 2. stage of the stack, because a normal tapered stack on an avg valve produces a slightly digressive curve.
  • 2 0
 @conoat: Super open rebounds can start to be really detrimental on highly progressive bikes. The really low leverage towards the end of the curve spikes the shafts speeds and needs to be managed. There is always a balance though because highly progressive bikes also tend to sit into themselves more and require opening the rebound enough to prevent them feeling super stuck to the ground and locking your weight in rearwards.
  • 3 0
 @conoat: "what part the kinemetics of the bike play into the speed of rebound"

Kinematics of the bike and the spring curve of the shock. It's the wheel rate that's felt - i.e. the combination of the spring curve, damper curve, and the motion ratio curve - not any single properly in isolation.
  • 1 6
flag conoat (Mar 17, 2021 at 8:18) (Below Threshold)
 @R-M-R: well, I would assume that a bike with a progressive linkage would have a wildly different tune on the shock than a linear one, but my question was more focused on the end stroke at bottom out. I have ridden a number of very "rampy" bikes and they feel like hot garbage coming out of full compression when you have the rebound open. I was wondering what is the main factor there, bike itself or shock tune?
  • 6 1
 @conoat: For a given damper tune and spring curve, which dictate the shaft speed of the shock, the rebound of the wheel as it extends from a full-bump event will be initially slower and will end faster with a highly progressive linkage. This will feel similar to a more progressive / less digressive rebound tune.

A more progressive motion ratio curve needs a more digressive rebound damper velocity curve to feel the same as a more linear motion ratio curve with a more linear damper velocity curve.
  • 2 8
flag conoat (Mar 17, 2021 at 8:55) (Below Threshold)
 @R-M-R: right. now what happens when some kid on a Megatower(progressive) reads this article, opens their rebound up, and hucks a drop? nothing good, thats what.
  • 3 1
 @conoat: Maybe this kid will now be smart enough, after reading our exchange, to run an X2 and open up the HSR, rather than the LSR!
  • 3 0
 My question is how to learn this stuff. Are there any resources, online or not. What kind of school teaches you the basics of this? I am genuinely interested. I mean the theory and practice of suspension construction.

BTW, anyone tried to tune Super Deluxe or knows some useful links?
  • 2 0
 @lkubica: My educational background is mechanical engineering, I worked in engineering roles in non-bike industries for many years prior to the cycling industry, and there are several books (and countless websites) on suspension design, vehicle design, and chassis dynamics.
  • 2 0
 @seb-stott: Stumpy's flex-stays may be the reason. IDK how much spring the stays add, but seems like it would be significant.
  • 1 0
 @ArturoBandini: well written! What I cannot grasp how can someone technically minded like Seb struggle to grasp that linear "race tune" or whatever marketing term RS is using for this "novelty" is doing exactly opposite of what is mentioned in the article, the stack is actually OPENING and OIL IS FLOWING THROUGH THE PISTON, it produces less high speed rebound damping not more, this is allowing the user to close the LSR adjuster needle few clicks in to get more chassis stability while still having usable rebound from bigger hits without packing. Older rebound tunes from RS were exact opposite of what rapid recovery name suggests, on medium/heavy tunes the shimstack never opened and was therefore exactly same in behavior as primitive fixed orifice damper that you have to chose between chassis stability and traction. Well, just with expensive piston and shimstack sitting there doing nothing, waiting for tuner to actually use it for what it was meant to do. The reason for this is obvious need to cater for way too big range of rider weights and spring rates, and that range is only achievable by running very compromised HSR setting, that gives LSR needle all the range they felt was needed...
  • 2 0
 @lkubica: New site for learning in a totally new way coming up
  • 2 0
 @lkubica: Vorsprung Suspension‘s videos on YouTube are a good starting point. I am a complete jerry on the mechanical side of suspension but those are easy to understand and very informative.
  • 2 0
 @Upduro: I know and understand Vorsprung vids. What I would like to understand is valves, shims tacks and how this changes curves. I know people who experiment using try and error approach but I have much less time.
  • 1 0
 @ArturoBandini: Good point - soften the rebound shim to allow the HSR be more active, is what I will try next. But I am not sure going with a crossover stack, because as far as i understand the first part of the crossover mainly effect lower speeds till it gets in contact with the stiffer second part...I don't know moto sus. but a reason why they do it could be that they try to manipulate LSR and HSR only by the shim (just guessing...)
  • 1 0
 @seb-stott: sorry for my boring question (but I ask anyway): wouldn't regressive be correct to use in this context (as it is the opposite of progressive) instead of digressive?
  • 4 1
 The way I think about it is conservation of energy. Every time you add more damping you lose energy from the system. You should always run your stuff as soft from a damping perspective as possible. The stored energy in the spring should push down the hill faster. Also you guys are awesome one of the best comments threads ever.
  • 1 0
 @ArturoBandini: Hi
I definitely agree, this is what i am trying to achieve in my fork. Currently running (checks fork) 6 clicks from closed, i am trying to bring it so i run it 2clicks from closed (so i have some extra tuning available)

However in the Super deluxe on a Nukeproof Reactor, i think it does achieve a digressive rebound curve. I am runnng the clicker fully closed because anything else just throws the rear end back up after hitting a bump. This preloaded stack and closed clicker has way too slow lsr however, and the shock feels really bad on fastish chunk because it just can't extend into holes from sag properly. Even if i open it a few clicks, when it feels better, then i land drops to flat ect and the rear end returns a lot faster than the fork

What do you think? I am going to take out the preload ring shim, and add some 19x0.15s, maybe 2 or 3

@lkubica I recommend giving Racetech's Motorcycle Suspension Bible a read. Shoot me a DM
  • 20 0
 So I believe the important quote from all of this is "whack your rebound all the way open it will make you instantly faster"
  • 2 0
 Or at least make you feel like you should be going faster, even if the clock tells an other story?
  • 19 0
 I see we have a true journalist in the house. *tips hat*
  • 2 0
 “The reason they're getting bucked isn't because of the fast rebound, it's because of how they're jumping.” A good ff intro
  • 18 0
 More amazing content, thank you Seb!
  • 14 0
 Interesting read. When I was working with Greg Minnaar years ago, probably 2011 he was big on having the rebound even between front and rear. This made perfect sense to me to keep the bike balanced with front and rear reacting the same to the terrain. Was upset that I hadn't thought of that!

As for as frame length and bar width Greg was slow to change. His Honda was tiny and when he went to Santa Cruz he was riding a large (which probably had the reach of current medium). I said Greg, that bike is way too small for you and he replied, "who's the World Champion here?" When I got ahold of some 32" (820mm) bars from Chris Van Dine and was raving about them to the athletes in my course Greg laughed and said, no one needs bars wider than 30"!

I think this comes down to the fact that change feels weird. Most struggle with change for that reason. I suspect it would be tougher for a World Champ, "don't fix what ain't broke".

Now has we all know Greg loves his much longer bike and wider bars. Don't be afraid to experiment and give your experiments time. When I went from 28" bars to 32" it took 7 days of practice before I got used to them. The first day was hysterical, they felt so weird!
  • 5 0
 Interesting stuff. In my line of work it's a challenge to differentiate between a setup that's performing worse and one that just feels weird because it's new. The best way in my experience is to get used to the new setup for a while then go back to the old one. If going back feels instantly better, it probably is; if it feels just as odd as the first change the new setup is probably better.
  • 11 0
 Appreciate the interview and the fact that it wasn’t turned in to a lengthy video.

I learned something.

Thank you.
  • 9 0
 This is some great content! More of this!
I've moved to faster rebound myself (and also firmer springs) over the past year with great results.
  • 8 1
 "The reason they're getting bucked isn't because of the fast rebound, it's because of how they're jumping."

Boom! Fast rebound shouldn't be affecting jumps because on take off the wheels should be loaded all the way until the end of the take-off. And in landing wheels are going to get loaded and should then stay in contact with the ground as much as possible after that for maximum control. Not enough compression damping or lack of spring rate such that you bottom out upon pushing into the jump or upon landing is way worse than "too fast on rebound".

Same kinda goes for going fast through rough stuff: more likely to get bucked from slow rebound and/or lack of compression damping causing the suspension to pack down and then smacking into something at bottom out or a very stiff part of the leverage curve (wall of progression).
  • 4 0
 "The reason they're getting bucked isn't because of the fast rebound, it's because of how they're jumping"

Yes! @justinfoil Wheels loaded evenly.

I've made the mistake of leaning back on steep lips, loading the rear suspension more than the front thus setting the front and rear of the bike on different trajectories.

Preload forward with your knees bent over the pedal axles to load up the front suspension and rear suspension evenly is what I've heard from better riders than me. It's been far and away the most impactful coaching tip I've ever had.

It's been brilliant, my rebound is now basically wide open with no trouble with bucking.
  • 3 0
 I agree, although I think we could consider rebound that's not too fast as a safety-net against poor jumping technique. I think if we're being honest that's not to be sniffed at for many of us, myself included.
  • 1 0
 @seb-stott: But the better safety net is more spring and more compression damping. Taking off early and letting the suspension push back too hard due to lack of rebound damping can certainly upset a jump. But slamming all the way through the travel right at the lip will upset it more, and bottoming out on a knuckle or flat landing is an almost guaranteed buck, while "too fast" rebound on a cased landing just helps keep wheels down to maybe make a save.
  • 5 0
 No foreplay. Straight in with a question about rebound damping. I like your style @seb-stott
On the subject of bar height, as a short-ish rider with stumpy legs and a long torso, I found it a revelation to move to a 38mm high rise bar.
I think I tried that after listening to one of your BR podcasts actually.
  • 4 0
 What's the impact of changes to world cup trail design on faster rebound becoming more accepted? Would have thought slower rebound is better for lower speed tech that requires riders to move the bike and body around. There's less and less of this in WC races these days - and, I guess, maybe that's why riders are optimising for faster rebound?
  • 4 0
 I would agree with this (having loved testing for so many years), as tracks become more high speed its the speed of recovery that is important than the actual damping (damping compression and rebound).

It also depends on the rider, some riders like to be wild, some smooth, some have long legs, short body/arms, some short legs longer body and arms. All makes a difference in what setup works for what rider.

As they say, you can see out of the gate who has a dialled setup. Bruni loves to hang off the back of that shorter bike and goes against much of this article, but AP is over the front and probably the biggest driver of the latest fashion. I always think... we are all different, our physiology, training, brains are different, ride what is fastest for you and not some other guy. Know its your fastest by testing it. (not just the bike, training, diet, sleep, prep etc.)
  • 1 0
 That's a good point, although personally I'm not sure if the tracks are universally becoming less technical (see world champs 2020), or if the riders are just making them look easier these days.
  • 5 1
 I found the downside to really fast rebound on the front end is grip in high speed corners. I played around last season and found when the rebound was too fast the front end would slide or wash out in corners. Everywhere else going a click or two faster felt better tho.
  • 5 0
 it's possible your fork was riding higher because it could recover faster and required a readjustment in riding position with more weight on the front wheel. dunno, just a thought
  • 1 0
 Same here. Trails with steep and off camber corners are where I notice wanting more LSR than usual.
  • 3 0
 You are on the money with your statement. Ride it faster until it starts to push wide or stand you up in the corners, then slow it down 1 to 2 clicks. As confidence brings speed, you will need to adjust settings slightly too. Cane creek have a setup guide that is pretty bang on for setting up a control loop. As you allude to, every track is different so set and forget is really a compromise, understanding what to change for different tracks is key.
  • 2 0
 @betsie: confidence, strength, etc. would you believe that pro hockey players often go down a flex number in their sticks part way through the season because they are not as strong in the upper body as at the beginning because they've been lifting so hard in the gym. weird eh. there is no perfect set up and that's why the pro DH'ers are on the psychiatrist couch with Jordie after every run trying to figure it out.
  • 2 0
 @jamesbrant: There is no perfect setup, some riders understand suspension better than others too.
You would see Gwin change setup mid practice run and other riders have to try and explain what they felt, didn't like to Jordie after every run.
I always wanted to be one of those riders that could jump on any bike with any setup and rag it down a hill like I stole it, accepting I am super calculated and fussy about setup and will never be that ragged edge rider sucks.
  • 3 0
 @seb-stott I wonder if being able to run faster rebound is also down to better high-speed compression circuits. If you can dissipate more energy of a big hit during compression then you don't need excessively slow rebound damping to try to dissipate that energy on the return stroke.
  • 2 0
 It's possible, although my perception is that many riders are going lighter on compression and rebound. The move to air springs may be having a similar effect though because some of the energy is dissipated as heat as the air is compressed rapidly (adiabatically).
  • 4 0
 @seb-stott just to be annoying, any thoughts on rebound damping on hardtails? The big forked variety where there's a lot of energy up front to control but no suspension out back to balance it...
  • 2 0
 Good question - I think balance is out the window but you might want to run it fast to keep the fork propped up to help preserve the head angle...
  • 3 0
 MTB suspension is still an OCD sufferer's nightmare. Legit consumer level telemetry is desperately needed. Shockwiz is just "ok" and can't run both front and read at same time, the importance of which is now being realized. Not to mention it's no good on a coil.
  • 1 0
 that's funny, because Mondraker just came out with exactly that! the MIND system comes on their higher end models for 2022. adds about $300.
  • 3 0
 Faster rebound works good with hydraulic bottom out, and not so great with all the popular air token options I reckon. I run fast rebound when messing about and general trails and slow it down a few clicks when hitting drops and jumps. I think this trend says more perhaps about modern DH track design than it does about how most people should be setting their bikes up.
  • 2 0
 I've always run rebound really fast as I find it improves the grip on the soft rooty conditions of my local trails. I'm not very heavy and, if I'm honest, not very fast so that is a factor but I also think that the increased length and stability of bike design in the past few years now keeps the bike calm enough that you can use a fast set up without it becoming unsettled.
  • 4 0
 I grew up riding 90s rockshox forks with judy cartridges in, having any functional damping still feels alien to me. Everything comes around...
  • 2 0
 good article Seb. Having had almost this conversation with Olly too it was fun to read and cement in what we discussed last year on my coaching session.

I am definitely curious about HSR vs LSR at different stages of travel....i find i like my HSC and rebound as open as possible until it comes to large hits (like a huck to flat) where controlling that huge amount of potential energy stored in the near bottomed out fork/shock wants to unload fast at first.
  • 2 0
 Olly is an awesome guy. Ive done a couple of his courses and he is hands down the best coach Ive come across. For me its his blend of mtb experience and his knowledge of adult education. He just knows how to break things down and teach properly. His work on linking bits of trail and finding flow and speed is so helpful and its made me a better rider and got me focusing on more simple stuff for greater benefit. He is also a super nice guy and very helpful. He helped me sort out the balance on my bike in getting the right pressures front and rear etc. Id recommend his courses many times over and Ill be going back for more.
  • 2 0
 @seb-stott: Great article! Big fan of your tech content, and you were probably the only reviewer at BikeRadar that I liked reading..

On the compression stroke, what are your thoughts on spring vs damping support? I've been playing with the settings on a Fox 38 Performance GRIP but always go back to running the compression dial wide open for the best combination of comfort and support. I've tried slightly lower pressures with a few clicks of compression but it feels like small-bump is compromised without substantial benefits in support under braking or bigger impacts. Am I missing something?
  • 3 0
 I agree. It depends on the terrain and the damper, but i often find firmer compression isn't always that useful in propping up the fork relative to the downsides of sensitivity. Certainly under sustained braking the compression isn't going to do much to hold it up. The 38 has good mid-travel support which allows me to run the compression pretty near off for the most part.
  • 1 0
 @seb-stott: Down a smooth descent with heavy breaking, yeah, the LSC's free-bleed is going to let the fork compress all the way down to wherever the spring can counter the weight shift. But we don't ride down perfectly smooth trails. We ride down trails where the wheel moves up and down. With fast rebound and proper LSC, the fork remains high because the LSC gets to do its work over and over again as the wheel moves up and down and the rebound resets the circuit. Then you can run a proper spring rate (sounds like the 38 has that good spring rate for you) and get that sensitivity.

(For further evidence that spring rate is the really key to "sensitivity", not just super-open LSC, just look at all the reviews of coil springs that gush over the "small bump sensitivity". Even on a shock with the _same damper_, the coil is also touted as more sensitive. This is probably because the coil's spring rate is so consistent and linear. Modern air shocks are amazingly close to linear and very consistent, but there are still little spikes of spring rate due to stiction, especially off the top and in direction changes.)
  • 2 0
 I took a picture of Laurie at Snowshoe where he g'd out HARD. Never seen a DH bike compress that much but it looked like a child's bike with the bottom bracket dragging on the ground. Watching him in real time I would have never known that occurred; just looked like he floated down the rock section and took off on the flat.

What suspension setup is best for Laurie probably isn't best for me Big Grin
  • 4 3
 Kicking rear shock was a common trait 10-15yrs ago, but I think there is no rear shock on the markt anymore that can be dialed so that it kicks. Ending stroke rebound or HSR is always set to a safe minimum of damping. I can turn the rebound on my Superdeluxe full open, and it still is slow on ending stroke. Same goes for the Lyrik.
  • 4 0
 my experiences with rapid-recovery on superdeluxe differ...
  • 1 0
 Thanks a lot! I want to go to my first race soon and lately i've been trying to dial my suspension at my local trails. Every little bit of info on how to make it perform better helps. The thing about balance front and rear is reeeally good to hear.
  • 1 0
 good timing on this. I literally just finished installing an upgrade damper and spring on my hardtail fork. So faster rebound goes faster, but it's important to match front and rear. Guess I'll run rebound wide open and lock out the fork. Upgrades gonna be so dope.
  • 1 0
 @seb-stott
Thanks for the great article and interesting points regarding setup.
My main focus when setting up my suspension was optimising balance with air pressure front and rear, interested in trying the same with rebound and compression now.

I have often wondered how dynamic geometry affects the performance of mountain bikes and how suspension tunes work with this.
Are mountain bike geometries optimised for the sag position?
Do you think that faster rebound would result in the bike spending more time at the optimised sag position therefore maximising the bikes performance? (gross oversimplification I know)
  • 1 0
 I feel so vindicated by this article. I've discussed this with countless people who don't want to adjust their rebound settings out of some fear that it's going to destroy their bike, especially if they speed it up, however my observation doing a lot of experimentation myself, using the Motion Instruments system (which was VERY interesting), and riding other peoples bikes is that the rebound setting is super important but often overlooked. There seems to be an excess of focus on the spring, where the damper settings fall to the side and no one wants to tweak them. I've known some very good riders that just leave them at whatever they were set when they got the fork.

I equate this to braking technique, a lot of newer riders are afraid of their front brake because they are afraid it'll pitch them over, yet it's super important to master on steep terrain, otherwise you have no control. You need to learn to use it and it will improve your riding dramatically, yet there is this fear of crashing if you do it wrong. People are afraid of setting their rebound too fast, because they think it'll cause them to crash or get bucked, yet the result is more control, more reponsiveness from the bike, and better tracking. Similar to using your front brake, if your technique is wrong, then yea, you will get bucked, but with proper body position, it affords you a lot more control and movement.

The interesting thing about this fear is that I've had far more close calls due to my rebound being set to slow than the other way around. If your body position is correct, then faster rebound will allow you to absorb impacts and keep you in position, but if it is too slow, then it wants to fling you one way or another on the bike. I've had numerous occasions where I was riding something steep and chunky, only to nearly get pitched over the bars because my fork was packing up and not returning properly. Similarly, I was riding Windrock some time ago on a new shock (big mistake) and kept feeling like my body position was getting thrown all over the place. As soon as I opened up the rebound in the shock and fork, I immediately felt an improvement in balance and control. I was able to maintain a consistent body position, the bike was responsive under me, and it tracked a lot better.
  • 1 0
 Really interesting article @seb-stott and it illustrates just how many different variables there are, that can influence how we ride and how our bikes perform.

Having had a few sessions with Olly and got to know him pretty well, I’d have to agree that he is a really great coach and a nice guy, too.
  • 1 0
 "the reason they're getting bucked isn't because of the fast rebound, it's because of how they're jumping and their technique within the jump"

this is all fine and dandy but you will case it sometimes and that's where slower rebound on the rear is a lifesaver
  • 1 0
 Low speed rebound (aka LSR, aka the only rebound adjustment on most forks and shocks) isn't going to do a whole lot if you case or flat land. More important is good compression damping and a good spring rate helping prevent a hard bottom. It's things running into other things hard, whether the frame into the ground, or the suspension into itself and the tire into the ground, that causes the nastiest crashes, not the suspension extending faster when unweighted (which is all LSR can really control).
  • 1 0
 @justinfoil: i know, too much hsr or too stiff a spring for the tune is gonna ruin your day. you can't prevent the tire rebounding but the rest of the suspension travel needs control, that's what i'm talking about.

ls needle has a lot of effect when full closed, i have to run my shock fully closed in the summer for now but it becomes acceptable that way, it does have effect on the deep stroke
  • 1 0
 @baca262: It does have some effect on the deep stroke, sure, but it's still less important than not bottoming out (from too little compression damping or too little spring rate) on a case. Because bottoming out means the bike and rider will be quickly decelerated, and be immediately bounced off the ground. But if the spring and compression damping do their job and control the impact, the ride is more gently decelerated and now has more time to recover from the case. And if the tires are contacting the ground thanks to a fast rebound, that extra recovery time can be used to really make a good save.

Not sure what "too little hsr ... for the tune" means, since HSR is part of the tune; and more rebound damping, both high- and low-speed, would be desirable with "too stiff a spring".

You can prevent the tire bottoming by increasing the spring rate (the air pressure), same as the suspension.

BTW, really sounds like you need a shock rebuild or maybe a different shock. I don't know anyone who runs shock rebound almost closed, unless they're very heavy and run a huge spring on a stock damper. I run a pretty pretty big spring on my DPX2: 305 psi out of 350 max with the biggest volume reducer (though a low-compression can), and I'm like still 5 clicks (of 11) from closed on LSR, maybe 6 in the middle of winter when it's cold like 25F/-4C.
  • 3 2
 Been doing that for years. And reduced offsets, don't get me started.... I was way in front of Chris Porter when I used a 26 inch Fox 40 on my 27.5 DH bike in 2015. I don't follow the trends, I bloody set them mate!
  • 1 0
 Most of those FF bucks are riders hitting the seat with their butts off the lip.
Then there's the occasional "butt brake" off the drop where their ass locks up the back wheel at exactly the wrong time.
Brutal!
  • 2 0
 Understood -i `ll whack my rebound all the way open and watch worldcups fore the finetuning -i can do that.
  • 1 0
 been wrestling with balancing out my rig and I find it difficult to intuitively set the bike up for different conditions...but at some point, it'll all click!
  • 3 0
 I ride a rigid bike and i still found this fascinating. Thanks!
  • 1 0
 Makes sense: same things apply just in your legs and arms (ultimate damping because feedback loop!), and even in the tires (though the damping characteristics are pretty static for a given tire).
  • 1 0
 So, crank up my rebound and ride a long bike? check, check, now I have that magic "feel" for the ground and contact points! WC here I come!
  • 2 0
 Without question the best and most enjoyable piece i’ve read on PB for some time.

Kudos.
  • 1 0
 I had no idea fast rebound was a trend or topic of discussion lol. Just by feel I run my rebound as fast as possible without it feeling like a pogo stick.
  • 1 0
 For those of us without a really great feel for these things: is there a quick-n-dirty test to check if my front and rear rebound are anywhere near the same speed?
  • 1 0
 Push down hard (like really hard, like jump a little and push hard as you come back down) and evenly on the bars and release quickly; and then same with the the seat. See if they bounce back the same. Can use the tire as a judge, see if it just barely comes off the ground (or barely sticks to the ground, your preference) the same amount for each end.
  • 1 0
 Start with the 'parking lot' test. While riding, smash down hard in attack position. Don't let your butt hit the seat. See if you can tell if the front or the back returns first.
  • 2 0
 @invictarocks: Said they didn't have a great feel, so "see if you can tell" is kinda the whole missing piece.

@AndrewHornor forgot to mention, do the checks i mentioned from _off the bike_.
  • 1 0
 @justinfoil: I'll give that a try, thanks. The extremes are obvious but there's a pretty wide range in the middle where it all feels the same to me. If fork & shock are at opposite ends of the useable spectrum, maybe I can fix that to unlock a little more stability and confidence.
  • 1 0
 @AndrewHornor: Can help to have someone else off to the side of the bike and judge the tire hop (or almost hop). Use their feedback to help learn what it feels like as you push and release.
  • 2 0
 Very insightful article PB. More like this.
  • 2 0
 Very good article. Thanks for it! Beer
  • 2 0
 Best article in ages. Thanks.
  • 2 1
 Walks into garage and sets rebound 4 clicks faster front and rear. Guess I’m doing repeats/brackets on today’s ride.
  • 2 0
 this rules, more articles on technique and setup with pros please!
  • 3 1
 immediately ran downstairs and opened rebound, felt better already
  • 2 0
 Great read! Top interview with a top guy!
  • 1 0
 Super informative. Besides the videos (which are awesome) this type of content is exactly what I want to read.
  • 2 0
 Thanks for the article!
  • 2 1
 Faster rebounds for Noobs = bigger fails for Fridays!!! Big Grin
  • 2 1
 mtb is getting too complex for me...i‘ll switch to chess.
  • 1 1
 Everyone then went and turned up their rebound, launching themselves over the bars lol.
  • 1 0
 Awesome article.
  • 1 2
 That Fox digger is the absolute tits!!
  • 1 2
 This is why I come here.

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2021. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.261551
Mobile Version of Website