Polygon's 180mm-travel Square One EX9 doesn't resemble anything else out there, and it features the novel looking R3ACT suspension layout that is claimed to allow the bike to defy expectations of how a long-travel machine should perform, especially in terms of pedaling efficiency. ''The Square One EX Series is a departure from the old way of classifying bikes and creates a new paradigm where travel no longer determines discipline,'' Polygon says on their website, which is a pretty bold claim, even in our little cycling world where every brand says that their creation is the latest and greatest.
So, can an all-mountain sled with 180mm of travel really feel like an efficient trail bike? And even if it can, does that make it the "one bike" that other testers have said it could be? Let's find out.
EX9 Details• Intended use: all-mountain / enduro
• Rear wheel travel: 180mm
• Wheel size: 27.5''
• R3ACT suspension design
• Carbon frame
• Fox Factory 36 Float fork, 180mm
• Fox Factory Float X2 shock
• Weight: 32lb 5oz
• MSRP: $8,499 USD
• Frame/shock MSRP: $3,499 USD
•
www.polygonbikes.com With a carbon fiber front triangle and swingarm, carbon wheels from e*thirteen, an XX1 Eagle 12-speed drivetrain, and Fox's high-end suspension, the 27.5'' wheeled EX9 model tested below sits at the top of the two-bike range and goes for $8,499 USD. A bare Square One EX9 frame and Fox Factory Float X2 shock sells for $3,499 USD, should you want to assemble your own to have it come in under our test bike's 32lb 5oz (with the 2.5'' Magic Mary tires that it showed up with) weight.
Frame DetailsWhere to start? There's a lot to talk about with the EX9, that's for sure, but it also has a marmite thing going for it - people seem to either love or hate the bike's polarizing appearance. I think it looks like an e-bike without a motor (aka the best kind of e-bike), but there are some angles, especially the three-quarter view from behind, that make it look simply awesome. Then I take a gander from a different angle and it seems as if it may as well belong in a Ridley Scott sci-fi movie, and I don't mean that as a compliment. One thing's for sure: it's unique, which is a good thing in my books.
All lines run inside the frame, with internal guides making maintenance easy.
The frame is carbon fiber front to back, and I suspect that it's probably easier to build the EX9's complicated shapes, especially down by the bottom bracket, out of carbon rather than aluminum. The frame tubes sport a boxy shape, while the dropped top tube provides more than enough clearance for even the stubbiest of riders. The elevated swingarm (who remembers the Trek VRX?) is utterly massive in places to supply ample rigidity, bulging inward towards the wheel where clearance allows and also being home to internally routed shift and brake lines.
A dual-action, Boost-sized 12mm thru-axle ties the back of the bike together, and a bolt-on fender gives the EX9 a very moto-esque appearance. Another guard on the underside of the down tube wards off pointy things that are looking to cause damage.
The massive swingarm and bolt-on fender might have some riders looking for the engine.
A set of ISCG tabs around the PressFit bottom bracket shell means that you can run anything from no guide to full-guide, and the KS dropper post's cable is routed internally from the bike's head tube. One thing that I can't get past is the lack of a water bottle mount. Sure, there isn't room inside the front triangle, but what about one on the underside of the down tube? No luck, unfortunately, which is a shame given that the EX9 is such an impressive pedaling beast. So, if you're considering this bike, also consider that you'll need to wear a pack of some sort during the majority of your riding.
Suspension DesignThe EX9 has 180mm of rear wheel travel, a number that's typically the domain of heavy hitting freeride bikes rather than a machine designed to be pedaled around in an efficient manner. But that's exactly what the big Polygon is made for, regardless of its generous and extremely forgiving suspension. The idea is that travel shouldn't define the ride: "I don't believe that suspension travel should necessarily be part of that equation," says Darrell Voss, the brain behind the EX9's unusual looking rear-end. "Let's face it. Most riders are out there to have fun, and they can only afford one bike. If it pedals efficiently, what is the downside to having more travel?"
But that's the trick, isn't it; to make a bike with 180mm of gushy, ground-hugging travel pedal without making the rider feel as if he's skipped leg day for his entire life. And that's exactly what Voss believes that he's come up with.
The nearly hidden stanchion is completely empty, but there is an air bleed button in case any pressure gets built up inside of it.
The EX9's massive carbon fiber swingarm is attached to the front triangle by way of three elements: the aluminum clevis that drives the bike's custom tuned Float X2 shock, a short link at the head of the swingarm and, most interestingly, a sliding element that's nearly entirely hidden from view. This sliding element acts as a short link but is also more dynamic than a link could ever be, extending in length as the bike goes through its travel.
The swingarm slides in and out on this hard anodized stanchion, and while it may look like a pint-sized shock, it's actually completely empty. Its job is to counter unwanted suspension movement, and also to provide an anti-squat vector that, unlike the present dual-link suspension designs, stays relatively consistent through the bike's gearing and travel. In order to do this, Voss has positioned and angled it precisely to balance suspension action and pedaling forces, but the system should still feel active under even the smallest of impacts at the rear wheel.
All of the above requires a proprietary Fox Float X2 shock with extremely low amounts of damping - no, you can't go and put any other shock on the EX9 and expect the bike to work as intended. Voss also found that the design is so efficient that there's no need for a low-speed compression pedal assist switch as many all-mountain and enduro sleds make use of, despite the Polygon's 180mm of travel. Setup is also said to relatively simple: "Sure, R3ACT's kinematics are complicated to describe," says Voss. "But, the rider should never have to think of that. Set the Square One's sag at 25-percent, get the low-speed rebound close and go ride. There is nothing else to do."
So that's exactly what I did, and below you can read the results.
Specifications
Specifications
|
Release Date
|
2018 |
|
Price
|
$8499 |
|
Travel |
180 |
|
Rear Shock |
Fox Factory Float X2 |
|
Fork |
Fox Factory 36 Float, 180mm |
|
Headset |
FSA Orbit |
|
Cassette |
SRAM XX1 Eagle 12-speed |
|
Crankarms |
SRAM XX1 |
|
Bottom Bracket |
SRAM |
|
Rear Derailleur |
SRAM XX1 Eagle 12-speed |
|
Chain |
SRAM |
|
Shifter Pods |
SRAM XX1 Eagle 12-speed |
|
Handlebar |
Race Face NEXT |
|
Stem |
Race Face Turbine |
|
Brakes |
SRAM Guide Ultimate |
|
Wheelset |
e13 TRS Race Carbon |
|
Tires |
Schwalbe Magic Mary, 2.5'' |
|
Seat |
Entity Assault |
|
Seatpost |
KS |
|
Setting up the PolygonThe EX9's unusual suspension system requires an equally unusual approach to setup, but it's one that I suspect a lot of riders will be happy about. First, set the Float X2's spring rate to twenty-five percent sag, a number that's a touch lower than a lot of modern all-mountain rigs. Next, fiddle with the rebound but let it return quicker than you think is correct. Oh, and pretend those two compression dials on the X2 don't exist - you pretty much don't need them. So while the design may look complicated, setup is anything but. My settings were as follows: 165 PSI, high-speed rebound 23 clicks out, low-speed rebound 19 clicks out, high-speed compression 23 clicks out, and low-speed compression 19 clicks out. In other words, nearly wide open all around.
I generally prefer slower, more controlled low- and high-speed rebound settings, especially on a bike with a boatload of travel like the Polygon. But what I like and what Voss says to do are two different things. I trusted Voss on this one - you know, because he designed the damn thing - and, after balancing the 180mm-travel 36 to match the rear-end, headed out for what was an eye-opening first ride. And second ride. And also third ride. Actually, all of my time on the EX9 was eye-opening.
As it turns out, the interesting looking bike delivers equally interesting performance that's unlike anything else out there.
ClimbingI'd heard from other testers that the EX9 does pedal as well as Voss and Polygon claim, but having a bike actually live up to the hype attached to it isn't possible, right?
Well, it almost never is, except for this one time. The Square One's pedaling efficiency shouldn't be possible for a 150mm-travel bike, let alone one that sports 180mm of extremely active, supple suspension. Yet that's exactly what's happening with the big Polygon. Despite all its travel, the green machine actually does move forward very much like a short-stroke trail bike, albeit a chunky trail bike. You need to try it to believe it.
The Float X2 shock is remarkably and unbelievably still under pedaling loads - remember that there's no pedal-assist crutch, either - with it barely moving into its stroke under even the hardest burst or my efforts to turn the cranks over in squares rather than circles. Sure, the rear-end will feel open when you start throwing your body weight around, but the Polygon will blow your mind if you pedal like a sane person. I feel like I might be over-selling the efficiency but, in nearly twenty-five years or riding, I can't recall a bike that's surprised me as much as this thing; it's that impressive.
All of the above is all well and good, but no amount of pedaling competence is going to change the fact that the Polygon is an all-mountain bike that weighs close to some feather-weight downhill sleds. Get trucking up a gravel access road and the bike will move forward with astounding brilliance, but the trail bike efficiency isn't matched by trail bike acceleration or handling manners when it comes to a set of tight switchbacks or a tangled mess of a climb. It isn't a handful, mind you, and maybe it's just because the green machine is
such a good pedaling bike that my expectations were a bit high when it came to tricky singletrack climbs, but it's not a breeze to get the Polygon up chunky, slow-speed pitches, even compared to longer and more relaxed bikes like the Rocky Mountain Slayer or Ibis HD4. The EX9 isn't too slack or too long (it's actually steeper and shorter than many other all-mountain bikes) but I often had the feeling that the bike had a massive presence on the trail, much like you're trying to thread a loaded dump truck through tiny side streets.
The rear-end is also somehow extremely active despite the said efficiency, and it'll take in the smallest of impacts without hanging up, so there is a massive amount of traction on hand should you need it, but the bike still feels a bit unwieldy when handling skill counts for more than horsepower. I also felt like my weight was always biased too far rearward, which was amplified as the grades got steeper. If the Square One were in my garage, I'd ditch the stock KS dropper with its set-back for a post with a zero offset head, regardless of the effective seat tube angle being 73.5-degrees.
| I feel like I might be over-selling the efficiency but, in nearly twenty-five years of riding, I can't recall a bike that's surprised me as much as the Polygon; it's that impressive. |
Okay, of course it's not going to be a technical climbing savant - that's not what the Square One was made to do - but I suspect that some riders considering the Polygon aren't going to give a rat's ass about this fact. For them, it's about just getting to the top, and there's no denying that the EX9 is more efficient than most trail bikes could ever hope to be. But it's not a trail bike, it's an 180mm-travel all-mountain sled that's made to go through anything and everything, and it also happens to be inconceivably efficient.
DescendingIt took a handful of rides for me not to be constantly surprised by the Polygon's pedaling abilities, but it took even longer for me to wrap my head around what the bike does at speed. And, depending on what you want from your all-mountain bike, the EX9 could be either the best option on the market or far from it. Let me explain...
Traction is a funny thing; most of us don't really notice it until it disappears, and when it does it happens in a near instant. But what if it doesn't disappear? Well, that's what it's like to ride the EX9, and it's a surreal feeling at first. My test bike came shod with Schwalbe's beefy Magic Mary tires, rubber that I'm both intimately familiar with and have a healthy dislike for (there are too many wet roots and woodwork here for me to be a fan) but, on the heavy hitting Polygon, they felt like some of the grippiest tires I've ever used. And cornering, my God can this thing get around a bend. It actually doesn't feel particularly low or anything, but with traction that only seems to get better as the ground gets rougher, the Polygon feels riveted to the deck. It just never seems to get flustered, and where any other mid-travel bike is getting knocked around, the Polygon stays stuck and can hold a line through a corner regardless of roots, rocks, or off-camber anything.
Speed comes so easy on the EX9 that its 66-degree head angle often feels a bit nervous for my liking; I'd wager that this bike is well suited to a more relaxed front end, even if it did come at the cost of killing what little low-speed perkiness the Polygon possesses. The suspension and geometry feel a bit contrasting, with the former constantly yelling in your ear to let go of the brakes while the latter is asking you to pay attention. Weirdly, and completely contradictory, it's not a lively, perky bike, despite the front end sometimes feeling a touch pointy.
Interestingly, it actually rides a lot like the Fox shock's rebound settings are much slower than they actually are, and I can see why Voss recommends minimal damping all around. This isn't a playful thing, and running more rebound damping will basically kill what little friskiness the EX9 has to begin with.
The bike's stability is mindblowing, sure, but I fear that it has come at the expense of a ride that feels anything but dynamic. The EX9 nearly refused to be dislodged from whatever line I placed it on, for better or worse, but certainly for the better if you're all about going as fast as possible down a war zone of a trail. I dare say that the Polygon has more composure and poise than some downhill bikes, with it simply taking in and brushing off whatever happens to be going on under its wheels. This is particularly true when on the binders. In fact, braking traction is one of the most obvious differences between the Polygon and other bikes; the suspension stays active and the bike slows down as if you've dropped a literal anchor into the dirt when squeezing the Guide brake levers.
Jumping is... interesting. With the recommended rebound settings being relatively quick, and the front end set to match the rear, I was surprised by the Polygon's comparative unwillingness to leave the ground. Yes, the bike can jump, and it feels as stable in the air as it does on the ground, but I never found it as easy, or eager, to make the most out of natural take-offs as other more conventional machines. I've also never pointed a Honda Goldwing off a jump before, but I suspect that it feels similar to doing the same with the EX9.
| I suspect that going for a joyride in the Killdozer would be fun for awhile, but smashing through buildings must surely get old after you've gone through a dozen or so; the same applies to the Polygon. |
The flipside of what can feel like near limitless traction and the ability to plow through silly things like boulders, small cars, and also brick walls, is that the Polygon doesn't articulate to the rider what's happening between the ground and its tires. Yes, the bike's composure in hectic terrain is out of this world, but I couldn't help but always think of it as a blunt smashing tool, a sledgehammer on wheels, rather than a laser guided missile like some of today's best all-mountain bikes are. For comparison's sake, I had been swapping between the Polygon and Ibis' new Mojo HD4, a 153mm-travel bike with a slightly slacker static head angle (remember, it has nearly 30mm less travel) and an 18mm longer wheelbase than the green monster. The difference between these two bikes, as well as something like the new Slayer or Slash, and the Polygon is so pronounced that they hardly feel like they've been made to do the same thing, yet that's exactly the case.
While the Slayer and HD4, or many other bikes of the same ilk, can be ridden like a monster truck if one wishes or be made to dance and play, the Polygon is far less inclined to do the latter. This is a bike that causes rocks to jump out of the way and roots to shrivel back into the ground like frightened worms, but don't mistake that for lack of character like I did during my first few times on the Square One. It's the opposite, actually, as this bike has the most personality of anything I've ever ridden. It's just that its personality isn't one that gelled with me. To get right to the point, I can honestly say that I had less fun on the Polygon than I have on other machines. I suspect that going for a joyride in the Killdozer would be fun for awhile, but smashing through buildings must surely get old after you've gone through a dozen or so; the same applies to the Polygon.
If you're familiar with my feedback on bikes, you'll likely already know that I value a lively, playful rig over one that rewards all-out speed, and that doesn't make me a great candidate for the Polygon - I'd need to totally change my riding style in order to get the most out of the bike. Actually, the Polygon and its R3ACT suspension are so different, in both good and less good ways, that I believe most potential EX9 owners would need to do the same. If there were ever a bike that rewarded a balls out, straight line, heels down approach to a trail, it's the big Polygon. And despite the bike's incredible pedaling efficiency, I don't believe that it's the right machine for copious amounts of relatively tame terrain - this isn't the "one bike" that some have said it can be - but then I could also say the same of almost any long-travel all-mountain sled, couldn't I?
Pinkbike's Take | This Polygon has to be one of the most charismatic and contradictory bikes of the last decade, and how it performs matches that description as well. It's a hard bike to pin down given that it pedals with the efficiency of a decent trail bike but possesses downhill rig descending capabilities. In theory, this should make it the mythical 'one bike' that so many cliches are usually attached to, but I don't believe that to be the case with the EX9. Everything has to compromise in one way or another, and the big Polygon's concession is that it's just too much of a blunt smashing tool for me to fall in love with it. But if you're the kind of rider who either has to or wants to pedal to the summit, yet also wants what is essentially a sharp handling downhill bike in disguise, the EX9 might be just the ticket.— Mike Levy |
About the Reviewer Stats: Age: 36 • Height: 5'10” • Inseam: 33" • Weight: 160lb • Industry affiliations / sponsors: None • Instagram:
killed_by_death Mike Levy spent most of the 90s and early 2000s racing downhill bikes and building ill-considered jumps in the woods of British Columbia before realizing that bikes could also be pedaled for hours on end to get to some pretty cool places. These days he spends most of his time doing exactly that, preferring to ride test bikes way out in the local hills rather than any bike park. Over ten years as a professional mechanic before making the move to Pinkbike means that his enthusiasm for two wheels extends beyond simply riding on them, and his appreciation for all things technical is an attribute that meshes nicely with his role of Technical Editor at Pinkbike.
Wait a sec, isnt the Marin Wolfridge Pro essentially identical to the Polygon?
m.pinkbike.com/news/marin-wolf-ridge-first-ride.html
You will walk out leaving everything behind except your bikes, rack and that cool portable barbeque grill she bought me.
Reading Levy's description (it rebounds slowly? ...Huh) just makes me curious what they actually did.
The culprit? The horrid weight (33 pounds with puny looking pedals! are they nuts?) and the 180 mm fork for sure, but I wonder if the overly active suspension might kill the bike on a uphill. Sure there is a solid platform, but if all it takes is to "move your body around" or hit something to activate the suspension ... there goes your efficiency out of the window ...
Nowadays, how well a bike pedals is much, much more the tire & wheel choice + geometry. Most every frame design pedals well, and using the climb switch (I think Cane Creeks is the best) will stop pretty much all unwanted suspension movement.
Finally, that crap about no damping is laughable. Energy is compressed in a spring, and returned. That is physics. The energy needs to go somewhere- either it will heat up oil that is being moved through small orifices, or it will be transferred back into the mass that compressed the spring.
In my mind, adding mechanical complexity to achieve similar or identical design goals is a step backwards. At the end of the day, you have axle path, chain growth, AS, PKB, and AR (anti-rise, for braking) to balance (and I guess leverage rate). There are optimal solutions for most of these problems already (although you likely can't optimize all of those parameters at once).
What is this new design supposed to achieve that we can't already? Does it optimize more things at once than we used to be able to? If so, why don't they just come out and say that?
hamnswiss -> did you read the review? I didn't read it as a glowing review at all.... at least not overall. For me and almost every rider I know it's more travel than they need, which means it's less fun and less fast over the wide range of terrain we have here in northern utah.
If Levy says it climbs well, then that's fine. Of all the 180mm bikes out there, one of them has to climb better than the rest. I think most riders fall into his camp of wanting a better all-rounder with better trail feel, not a bulldozer. Anyway, unfortunately with this bike being so niche and very expensive, it's unlikely that most riders will ever get to throw a leg over one.
You're right on the climb switch thing, but (and this may not have a point) there are many designs that still pedal poorly and rely on the rear shock to firm things up when desired, so "most every frame design pedals well" is not the case. Most designs can be tuned to pedal well, but usually at the expense of something on the opposite end.
Finally, keep in mind that this design is unlike anything else on the market, what with that stanchion slider thingy down by the bb. What the hell does it do? That's what ML tried to answer. Other outlets will likely confirm his findings. No skids greased as to me he clearly stated that this bike is not the holy grail, though it does sound like it has a place amongst the gnar-bros and masochists that climb up to ride full on dh tracks down. Hmm.... maybe it's an enduro-bro bike.
Anyway, I liked the review and thought it was fine. If this bike ever makes it to a demo in Utah then we'll go ride.
LSC does a lot more than fight squat. I run a bike with a very high anti-squat numbers, but still run a fair amount of LSC. Dancing through techy climbs and slow speed out of the saddle navigating is easier with more LSC.
As someone who rode the new Marin, I have to admit that is different from everything I have tried. It pedals Incredibly well and I haven't felt any bobing (even on steepest climbs). I haven't noticed any pedal kick back.
It might look wired, and it is a little bit heavy, but it felt f*cking awesome and it works much better than over bicycles I tried.
Please forgive me, my English still has problems
Mike Levy observes this himself when he states, "Interestingly, it actually rides a lot like the Fox shock's rebound settings are much slower than they actually are, and I can see why Voss recommends minimal damping all around. This isn't a playful thing, and running more rebound damping will basically kill what little friskiness the EX9 has to begin with." Even more interesting is why this happens. It is, after all. extremely odd that on this bike the shock conveys a notably more heavily damped characteristic than would normally be experienced for a shock set up with similar damper settings on another bike. And it is hard not to draw the obvious inference. There is more friction in this suspension linkage than is typical. Stiction in the telescopic link is what is reducing suspension responsiveness and raising the level of breaking force in the linkage which results in the described XC feel.
Stiction can only reduce traction by detracting from suspension responsiveness. There are a few situations in which reducing suspension responsiveness does make sense if ultimate performance (i.e. in lap times or race speed) is required and traction is not jeopardised by stiffening up the suspension. But you want to be able to remove this kind of traction and responsiveness robbing stiction, whatever its value as a form of pedalling platform, whenever it isn't needed. The problem is you can't remove the stiction from the R3ACT linkage as it is currently implemented. Which is why a good shock with a climb switch, which can be flipped off, is better.
The telescopic link, insofar as it plays a part in the kinematic design of the Polygon bike, must be a factor in the determination of planned SAG/ride height but I doubt that the telescopic mechanism, per se, has anything to do with the characteristic ride height of the bike. It may impart a bit more stickiness/rigidity/inertness to the way the bike rides at SAG but that is entirely a matter of ride quality, it has nothing to do with ride height or how ride height is maintained.
I rode the wolf Ridge (almost same suspension linkage) and I think that there is one problem with your statements (if I understood you properly). The Marin has tons of grip, the wheel does't leave the ground and the suspension is super responsive.
Why, because it's not required at the shock?
This doesn't mean that the "system" doesn't provide damping, it means that the system doesn’t lean heavily on the shock to provide that function to work correctly.
It's just a possible explanation for why the rebound seems a bit slow, assuming we trust Levy's word. Nothing more.
I get that some "bold claims" have been made surrounding the R3ACT platform, and I don't blame anyone with a sensitive BS meter for being a little skeptical. A lot of brands/companies have misused the word "disruptive" for designs and products that at best fall short of the mark and represent incremental change. I suspect that to not be the case in this instance and am looking forward to riding either model (Polygon or Marin) to experience it first hand.
Further, if you weed through the normal BS in these comments and get to anecdotal accounts from people that have actually ridden the platform, (from my perspective) it suggests that there "might" be something worth considering here.
The bikes have a polarizing appearance and one can reasonably argue that the "one bike to rule them all" claim is bold, and potentially overreaching. However consider this, its also getting people to notice and to start talking about it...
Also, I would agree with you that the inference I offered to account for the inconsistencies in the evidence was a conjecture in the dictionary meaning of that term viz. a opinion formed on the basis of incomplete information. But please do not suggest I went about this in a half-baked way - I offered a serious conjecture not some flighty pure conjecture. I certainly haven't being trying to force anything on the evidence. It is several of Mike Levy's observations that struck me as so unusual and interesting and prompted my comments, not anything I dreamt up.
Now, maybe what I have said won't stand but I think there are good reasons to suppose that it will hold up and in any case I am far happier with the opinion that stiction explains some part of the unusual behaviour we are seeing from this suspension linkage than I am with my efforts, a bit further down this page, at taking a few steps towards offering a valid kinematic account of the R3ACT suspension linkage. But, despite the inadequacy of my remarks on the kinematics of the EX9 I haven't changed my mind about the need for a sound kinematic analysis of the bike or altered my view about how such an analysis will shed light on rider perceptions of the way the bike rides. At the end of the day, a rider's experience of a mountain bike and a more technical account of it must agree in all essentials, if the discipline of suspension bike design and engineering is to make any progress and offer riders better riding experiences. Lucky for us these two different views of a bike do indeed agree.
I would be interested in your observations about the behaviour of the bike under brakes as well and whether you experienced anything like the comparative slowness of compression and/or rebound that has been reported by Mike Levy. And, if you did notice something similar, what were the riding situations in which this happened?
1. I rode the bicycle several times, but for short periods, it is kind of first ride impressions. (and enthusiasm)
2. It will be interesting to hear what @mikelevy thinks about my thoughts
3. I assume that the Polygon' and Marin's systems are almost identical (although these bikes are way different)
I don't think that there are specific situations when I felt I have "tons of grip", but (for example) it is hard to drift with it, the breaking doesn't interrupts and the rear wheel continues to track the ground (you feel very confident in corners).
The shock goes through its travel very quickly, but I didn't notice that during riding, same thing for the rebound, it is fast, but it isn't really noticeable (maybe thats what Mike Levy meant when he said slowness?)
Another thing- I felt that the bike maintains its speed over rock gardens amazingly
Let a structurally stiff squarish version of the sliding link ride on needle bearings (removing the stiction) and move the damping back into the shock, where it can be regulated based on internal build and adjusters and I can see nothing much that remains controversial about this suspension system.
I feel for this review to be complete this needs to happen.
Also, suspension videos are damn nice to watch.
- @mikelevy , the people's champ.
Well, let's stop handwaving take the time to describe them. Don't underestimate your audience.
I'm not a pro but it's the grippiest tire I've ever ridden.
He was referring to wet roots and hard surfaces (aka rockfaces and woodwork).
I would not run a Magic Mary in the back due to the relatively high rolling resistance and they are not good on loose over hard (dry) conditions, but it was a revelation to me when I first put one on the front of my bike part way through a North Shore winter: I couldn't believe the traction I suddenly had!
There have been a number of tires that have come out in the last year or two (including the one from E13) that I'd like to try which may be even better but I think there is a reason that this seems to be the most popular front tire in any EWS enduro race with somewhat wet conditions.
I sure would like to know what tire Mike Levy prefers for these conditions; maybe I've been missing out =)
Tires are a funny thing, too. You have a few 'off' rides with one tire and then it surely sucks in your mind. And I also think that we all get used to how some tires perform, of course
I think my comment came off wrong.For me, the Magic Mary has been an absolute all star as a front tire. I tried a lot of different tires from everyones favorite Minions to offerings from Michelin and Conti and nothing came close to the confidence I got with the MM. Having said that, I run a Hans Dampf in the back and as you pointed out, a negative experience or two can be very damaging. For me, the DHF just doesn't do it for me, go figure !
Might have something to do with a front end wash that was probably entirely my fault that resulting in a season ending injury a couple years ago..
Plus how on earth do you market a bike as "the one bike" and dont put on bottle mounts, seriously? No dubt the linkage works but the bike has no real place with any serious rider since he wants a fun ride becuase he can already ride and dont need crutches.
"how on earth do you market a bike as "the one bike" and dont put on bottle mounts..."
Backpack or bumpack.
Having said that, i absolutely love the fact that bikes like this one exist. #doesnotlooklikeasession
Rock on my brother from another mother!
One possible solution would be to make mounts to the top of the toptube. If it is in the way, it would only be in the way for those who use a bottle but then again they'd otherwise have a higher toptube anyway. For the Alutech ICB2.0 (which I like because of this very reason) they actually recommend some system to mount a bottle to the toptube. Would that be a solution for you as well?
Can I already start an argument for flat pedals? You clipped in shills!!! Enduro is gay! Heeeeeey it all started with a water bottle but I will start throwing faeggets soon! Here's one! And by the way, get 29ers off trails!
Jesus Christ... hey I don't like water bottles, and don't ride in lycra, applause please, respect me now...
@WAKIdesigns : What are you going on about? I explained that for some there are qualities to a frame not designed to take a bottle. So for people who aren't going to use a bottle anyway, it is nice to be able to take advantage of that.
I personally don't like riding with a bottle, but it doesn't bother me what others use. Yes it does pain me when I see lost bottles on or aside rough descends of which the owner apparently didn't notice the loss in time or simply is too lazy to hike back up to reclaim it. Then for me personally, I sweat a lot so I drink a lot. Losing my bottle on a ride would be pretty horrible and would cut my ride short. And on longer rides, a bottle simply wouldn't hold enough water for me though yes of course on a shorter ride it'd probably be sufficient.
Am I posing simply because I ride with a pack, shorts and a T-shirt, platforms and 26" wheels? No this is simply what suits me. I'm not going to invest in a bottle, lycra, clip pedals and 27.5" wheels just to not hurt any feelings.
Overall I still feel like a bike meant for trail riding is missing something if you cant mount a bottle, you can always not mount it if there is holes for it but if there arent holes you are forced to use a pack. More options is always good and from a companys perspective you choosing something else because they have bottle mounts is not really good for them is it?
But two each their own, ride what works for you!
@mikelevy: It is about priorities indeed and it is different for everyone. For me geometry and room to move around are the main thing. And for some other designers, suspension design simply was more important than the ability to accept a bottle. Not only a complex linkage like this. Also a simple single pivot design like an Orange Five or Four, Santa Cruz Heckler and also my Cannondale Prophet simply don't have room left inside the front triangle. That didn't stop them from becoming quite iconic. Of course iconic doesn't mean they're faultless. But at least there is enough good about them. As for this Polygon, maybe you don't necessarily have to be too upset about the lack of a bottle mount as there are more than a few things that don't make this the ideal bike for you anyway .
www.instagram.com/p/BVkR-sgBqFu/?taken-by=wakidesigns
lifestraw.com/products/lifestraw
I find that climbing on longer travel bikes is usually more limited by geometry than suspension. Doesn't matter how efficient the suspension is if you've got slack angles and a long front-center, so I'd agree that this probably isn't a "one" bike, but it sounds like it could be a monster for enduro/DH racing, and perhaps the design could work for XC with different angles.
Proper enduro bikes aren't really fun either, but more travel and traction than the competitors sounds like a winning combo.
Fun? Not so much.
That said, I'll defer to someone like @andrextr on whether this suspension design is really as novel as they claim, but watching the compression video, I'm not seeing it moving in a way that a linkage couldn't provide. always hard to tell from just a compression vid, though. It honestly looks to me like the slider does more to keep the suspension laterally stiff than it does to separate rider inputs from the suspension action.
gimp-pimp -> interesting that the Specialized boys split the difference in the EWS. Some gravitate towards the Stumpy and some the Enduro.
I agree on the video, which is why I wanted to get on this bike and find out. I expect a fair bit of pedal feedback/suspension firming... but nope. I mean, look at the little video, but on the trail, you simply don't feel it at all. It's like it's wide open and ready to take in everything.
I kind of get the impression that this is going to be the cheater's bike: People with average skill and fitness will be able to ride trails they'd normally consider too scary because they now got what is essentially a downhill rig underneath them with a lazy but forgiving character. Before, any bike that could've given you that was essentially impossible to ride uphill. These people also don't really care much for jumping and playfulness in general. It sounds condescending but I actually kind of get it.
About 4+ years ago proto #1 had 160 mm fork / rear travel and was tested alongside bikes with 140 - 150 mm DW Link and FSR rear suspensions in Kern, CA. Testers were in the same height range so we swapped bikes and would repeat sections. The proto was the heaviest bike in our test by a long shot (probably a good 6-8 lbs more). After a while we were catching each other trying to be sneaky and grab the heavy proto when it came time for long uphill transfers. It went downhill awesome too but the thing that amazed us was how much more efficient it was at getting us through sections that meant pedaling despite the weight.
Fabien Cousinie (aka Cous Cous UR team manager) used his Square One for the dual slalom at Sea Otter this year. There were a number of pro's that are known for being slalom type riders that did not qualify into the final 32 riders. Cous Cous qualified 20th and I'm told ended up with one of the fastest times on the blue course (had a mechanical on the red), final rank 22nd. Here's what stood out to me.... It's a 180 mm bike in slalom and no offense to him but he's not known for being top notch at that discipline these days (managing the team will slow you down a bit). Point being....it was a 180 mm bike in a discipline where you're supposed to be on a hardtail or short travel 100-120 mm slalom ripper. Plus he seemed just fine with it on the jumps & berms too. It's kinda of a real head scratcher.
I got to ride the Square One for a while with some other riders one thing that is noticeable is that while pedaling the shock only moves when you hit something and it can be quite small and still activate it. If you follow another rider around pedaling sections the shock does not move until there is something to move it on the trail. There doesn't seem to be any resistance to movement from the crap your riding over yet it still won't move around from your body's pedaling movements. There's no platform to the shock only the design of the frame doing that. It just seems to balance compression and tension forces like nothing else I've tried.
The freaky good traction comments from Mike are spot on from my experience too but not just from cornering, descending angle. The real eye opener is being able to stay on the gas in technical sections. It just moves out of the way of stuff you're going over but you can just keep pedaling. Best analogy I've heard applied to this design is it's like a hydrofoil boat. The water below it is choppy but the hull of the boat is calm and not bouncing around.
I haven't seen a bad review on this design yet (Marin or Polygon). I've seen a lot of people not understand why it's doing what it's doing but test editors from all over seem to get to the conclusion it's doing what it claims to to.
I get that they are trying to sell this thing like it's a magic elixir, but there simply *is* a technical, measurable, or scientific description for whatever it's doing, and without such an explanation I assume it's no better than existing optimal designs.
Should I demo a new suspension system that makes no particular claims, but sells itself purely on the assertion that it's better? Well, no. I'm a dubious person. Tell me what it does or I'm going to assume you're blowing smoke into various bodily cavities of mine.
This is the same reason that people on the street have trouble selling magic charms and healing elixirs to me.
The point is, that all of your supposition is just that if you can't back it up with anything more than "my experience on other bikes tells me this"... This is not other bikes.
In your original comment, what exactly are you claiming that this bike does that makes it so great? Really, what does even Voss claim that it does?
Now, if you have some scientific or engineering knowledge or you have taken the time to inform yourself about key suspension bike design issues then it makes sense to go to bike geometry and kinematic information, when it is available, and look at what it tells you. Suspension bike designers who typically are also riders, for example, would never demo any bike that they had enough information on to know that it was a poor design. You are following the right approach for someone who is well informed on bike design. Bikers who are less informed may insist that you waste your time by adopting their approach to discovering things but you are right to ignore that and continue to build your technical understanding of suspension bikes.
In that vein I would recommend giving these two sites your perusal:
linkagedesign.blogspot.com.es
mrblackmorescorner.blogspot.com.es
On page translators are provided for anyone unable to read the Spanish original. Both bloggers speak English too and welcome comments in English. Toning down the colloquialisms aids communication.
So, it is good that you are unmoved by accounts that suppose some sort of magic rather than sound engineering is responsible for the way a bike behaves but completely disregarding the odd sliding link on the EX9 it appears that some riders are reporting good experiences with the bike. In a preliminary way, I would suggest that this could indicate that riders are rediscovering the virtues of a bike with plenty of anti-squat and a rearward axle path and who are little concerned about pedal kickback.
I would be grateful if you could indicate the source(s) of information that you are referring to.
"Bikers who are less informed may insist that you waste your time by adopting their approach to discovering things but you are right to ignore that and continue to build your technical understanding of suspension bikes."
Snort - Pretty broad assumption there (not to mention the thinly veiled insult).
Having an open mind towards new ideas is also a possibility regardless of expertise, riding skill or industry background and or involvement.
Bottom line, if you don't ride it first hand, you don't know what you don't know.
But hey, stick to being internet experts - I stick to what I experience on the trail.
It is conceivable that the "mindblowing stability" that the writer speaks of is being mistaken for traction. In the XC world, too, which turns on lockouts and rear suspension compliance limiting mechanisms, traction and stability are often viewed as the same thing. But, they are not. It is not hard to see how this confusion arises. If a bike has enough traction, even when locked out, to get to the top of a hill, say, then locking the suspension out will produce the fastest performance (when enough energy goes into producing it) but that performance will be achieved at a point much closer to the traction limit than making the same ride with a fully open shock. That is, remove the lock out or the heavy damping limiting suspension compliance and the bike gains traction. That is true whether the bikes moves under hard pedalling or not. Traction is gained by the normal operation of the suspension with the suspension complying to the terrain rather than the bike bumping around and being deflected by obstacles. Of course, in certain scenarios, it isn't possible to produce the fastest lap times without sometimes locking out the suspension and allowing the rider to lay down whatever power they have. This is harder to achieve with the suspension cycling at the same time that the rider wants to put in hard pedal strokes. But just because a bike that is very stiff under pedalling gives a sense of amazing responsiveness to hard pedal strokes does not mean that the bike has greater traction. Where traction particularly comes into play is on steep terrain or terrain with slippery or loose surfaces. Locking out the suspension will not produce the best performances in such a situation but rather a wheel slip or slide or a fall. And stiction, too, despite not being anything like a full lockout can only detrimentally affect traction.
This bike has more than enough anti-squat, I believe, to achieve a pretty good pedalling performance without the 'help' of stiction from the telescopic link. In fact the latter can only reduce traction.
I'm well aware of the bullshit in this industry, but hell, when a review is commercially biased ir tends to be subtle, reasonable, believeable. The massive statements made here can only be true. (I can't imagine the price of telling lies that big)
Mike doesn't say it climbs like a XC, he underlines suspension's efficiency when climbing, mentioning as well how the bike handles acording to it's weight and geo.
And about descending, he talks about the massive traction, also noting the lack of playfullness or capabilities other than plow anything also seen on DH bikes, wich might be not everyone's cup of tea.
As usual, I think people would give it a go in case it was a Santa or a Spec. f*ck that.
f*ck the price too.
"I don't believe that suspension travel should necessarily be part of that equation," says Darrell Voss [...] "Let's face it. Most riders [...] can only afford one bike. If it pedals efficiently, what is the downside to having more travel?"
Reviewers consider its fitness as a one-bike solution because that's what the designer says it's supposed to be.
One word: weight.
I'm not exactly sure what that statement means but if you meant to imply that this bike somehow defies conventional kinematic analysis (which is an branch of mechanics i.e. an established science not a bunch of personal "assumptions") you would be wrong. The anti-squat curve will determine acceleration characteristics and the anti-rise curve braking characteristics. The leverage ratio curve in combination with the shock will, broadly speaking, determine other ride characteristics. Poor structural or mechanical design or bike geometry or suspension component quality or excessive weight or too much chain growth will, as they always do, compromise and even cancel everything that may be of merit about the kinematic profile of a particular bike. This bike is no different.
So how would you start to analyse the acceleration, braking and ride characteristics of this bike? Figuring out what the linkage is would be a good start. I note in this connection that one of the anchored pivots (i.e. on the frame) joining the rear triangle of Yeti's recent enduro and trail bikes to the bike frame floats on a rail based link (i.e. the Switch Infinity). That bike despite the originality of implementation is technically a 'four bar' bike. And, so is this bike, I believe. With the Switch infinity we have a pivot that rotates on an axle bonded to a floating rail mechanism moving up and down in an invariant linear path that is close to vertical. The unusual stanchion link of the Polygon R3ACT suspension exploits a different mechanism from the very common pivot axle on a rotating bar or the Yeti pivot axle on a floating link on rails. The Polygon linkage uses a sliding/telescoping link that rotates on the (lower) anchored pivot axle. That much is directly observable from the images and video on this page.
Calculating the instant centre for this linkage, I think, goes as follows. One projection line goes through the centre points of the two pivot axles of the short upper link. The other projection line goes through the centre of the anchored pivot of the lower telescoping link perpendicular to the centreline of the telescoping stanchion tube (along its extensible dimension). The IC will be at the intersection of these two projection lines when looking at the bike in side view. If that is correct, the IC will always be somewhere in the vicinity of and just forward of the anchored pivot of the upper short link. At SAG the IC will be somewhat higher than the mentioned pivot and quite close to it - that indicates that the bike will have plenty of anti-squat around SAG, which is where it is needed for a good pedalling performance. Also, the IC on this bike has a fairly forward positioning compared to most other bikes. That forward positioning of the IC has a significant impact on anti-rise which should be at a modest level around SAG, which is, on balance, a good thing. (A higher level or anti-rise would offer better geometry stability during braking but traction under brakes benefits somewhat from a lower level of anti-rise.) Deeper in travel the IC moves to a position lower than the mentioned pivot and somewhat further forward. That will normally indicate a falling anti-squat rate later in travel. Allowing anti-squat to taper off as travel increases generally makes sense because a falling anti-squat rate is (loosely) correlated with a declining rate of chain growth. Chain growth impairs suspension function and makes the smooth and predictable riding experience that is necessary for producing consistent top performances hard to attain. So, the anti-squat profile of this bike is, probably. pretty good. The bike also apparently has a falling anti-rise rate over the course of travel (with the IC moving forward and downward relative to the frame). That kind of anti-rise profile doesn't confer any benefit that I can see - it just makes suspension response under braking unpredictable - but due to the fairly inactive upper link (the photographs and the video show that the link doesn't rotate all that much through the whole course of travel) it is likely that anti-rise rate doesn't plunge too precipitously. All in all, from a kinematic point of view, the bike should function well. Of course, it would be wrong to get carried away with what Polygon has done here. There may be other kinematically superior suspension linkage layouts that could use this kind of telescoping link mechanism to good effect.
For everything to work well with this sort of link the mechanical design will have to be superlative: robust, precise and very unlike a common stanchion under the skin. Sliding of any sort seems to be a very bad idea in this situation. The design should probably be more the the vein of the Lefty fork internals with high precision flat stanchion surfaces riding on needle bearings. If there isn't anything like that this bike would best be avoided. Also, the upper short link looks to be the wrong kind of design for the job: a one piece link, in the vein of enormously strong (lower) Santa Cruz links, riding on collet axles would probably make much more sense.
The small degree of migration of the IC that occurs over the course of travel on the revised linkage also means that the fall in anti-rise over the course of travel is probably not too pronounced, which is a good thing.
- The bike "pedals efficiently" because it has massive chain growth (see the video)
- The difference between a slack, 180mm bike and a nimble 120mm bike is more than just suspension travel; geometry needs to reflect its use, longer travel bikes require more structural material and components also need to be up to the task. Thus, the 'one bike quivver' is a myth.
- Internal cable routing looks very clean (nice job Polygon)
In other words, ideal for beginners. Most newbs can't yet appreciate nuance like "liveliness, poppy, playful and personality", but I'm sure anyone who's new to lift assisted-riding could benefit greatly from something so remarkably composed and easy to set up.
Also, I'd be very surprised if we don't see a full DH version, and also a lighter trail version that perhaps has a livelier nature?
@mikelevy - I can't square with the weight...how heavy is the frame and shock combination? Because even with 1100grams of rubber at either end everything else about this bike is super (maybe excessively) light. TRS race carbon? Nexxt bars? XX1 eagle? On a 180mm bike seems like it might qualify as under-built.
Great review by the way...still makes me want to give it a spin.
Would this design not be ideal for a 200mm DH bike though, fast, efficient and well planted?
mrblackmorescorner.blogspot.com.es/2017/06/polygon-square-one-ex9-2017.html
On conceptual matters, can this linkage really be considered a single pivot? You will have to do more to convince me. Let me make some orienting comments (that fall short of any sort of thesis about the linkage). I will start with a point of comparison with the rail link on the Yeti Switch Infinity. What we have with that link is a dolly (the black metal part) sliding over two (kashima coated) tubular rails. The rails are bound to the bike frame at both ends and don't move. Only the dolly moves on the rails. Also, a pivot axle on the dolly is one of two floating pivots that act as mount points joining the wheel carrying rear triangle to the bike frame. Now, looking at the novel rail link part of the Switch Infinity linkage, only, it is easy to see that the fact that the dolly runs on two rails has to do with stabilising the dolly and the pivot axle it hosts but in a certain sense that is all just fungible implementation details that are not essential to the design. So, lets get rid of what we don't need. Imagine a spontaneously stable dolly moving on one tubular rail only. No matter how odd it initially seems I want to suggest there is a loose analogy between what I have called the Switch Infinity dolly and the whole swing arm of the EX9. The EX9 swingarm is just a very large dolly sliding on a tubular rail and it is a very novel move to grow what is essentially a simple dolly/link sliding on a rail into the largest component of the rear suspension, which is what has happened with the EX9.
Now, if things stopped there we would have a very simple suspension based on a floating dolly without any conventional pivot at all. But they don't. It is essential to the Yeti rail link that the rail(s) are bound to the frame at both ends but the tubular rail on the R3ACT suspension is only bound at one end and the rail is free to change it angular orientation relative to the frame by rotating on the pivot axle that anchors it to the frame. An arrangement like that would be physically unstable which perhaps explains why, in the R3ACT suspension setup, there is a further 'tethering link' (i.e. the short link we readily see in side view that tethers the swingarm to the frame/front triangle) that captures the sliding dolly like swingarm in a physical arrangement in which the whole linkage assembly moves in the same strictly constrained way without variation (despite the changing position of the swingarm on the rail) with each compression and rebound of the suspension.
The link I have called the tethering link may be pivotal to the kinematics of this linkage or it could be uttering devoid on any kinematic function at all. Maybe, it just holds everything in place and that's it. I am not sure at this stage. But, I will be listening to any views offered.
Even if a more certain picture quickly emerges on the kinematics of this bike there may be much in Mike Levy's report that does not reduce to being a primarily kinematic issue. I would suggest to everyone with an interest in this to try to contextualise their experience a bit. When does this bike feel planted? When does it have a lot of grip? When does it feel lively? When does the compression or rebound feel slower than normal? Without a proper description of the riding situation, i.e. a more extensive description of the riding situation - terrain, surface, slope - it is hard to know what positive and negative statements about the suspension amount to. And we need to know what the rider was doing, too. Is this bike only good while pedalling or is it good all the time? If it is the latter then the positive reception of the bike might have more to do with the virtues of a linear leverage rate (thanks for clarifying that Mr. Blackmore) than the things that have mainly been spoken about so far. Anyway, I certainly will be interested to see how things pan out.
I consider that the main pivot is the joint of the short linkage upper the bb with the frame. It isn´t a monopivot and I must correct that in the blog, but it works like a one of them. If you quit the slider and the short linkage, and the swingarm was attached directly to the frame in the main pivot I commented before, the system barely changes. If the Polygon was sold as a monopivot it would lose all interest, but now you know this...
You are right with the "tethering link" XD. With only the short linkage, the swingarm would fall out (translation and rotation) so the function of the slider must be to "hold" the system (1 degree of freedom, without slider: 2 dof, which is not feasible).
I absolutely agree with your last paragraph, but on any bike. To get a true understand of how the system works, contextualize as you say is mandatory. This is possible if we start with a theory base (the kinematics analysis) and then we must consider how dynamics could affect (sag, type of spring, type of damper, spring and damper values, geometry, rider weight, type of riding...) This can be extended to the whole bike (fork, wheel size, peripherals... and everything mentioned before). I try to explain this in a simple and objective way in my blog, although it doesn't stop being my point of view.
PD: feel free to comment your ideas in the blog. It would be interesting and enriching
mrblackmorescorner.blogspot.com.es/2017/06/polygon-square-one-ex9-2017.html
I get the impression (judging by Mike Levy's personal bike) that his preconceived idea of a bike that rides well is a light one that suits his riding style. I don't think this bike is aimed at Mike. I'm sure he shreds but clearly has a preference towards lighter more agile bikes.
This is basically a sledge so I think he's missing the point. It's designed to go down hills quickly but just been designed to pedal up them as well. I think Polygon have/Voss have missed the mark on how they marketed the bike also. Really should be advertised as a dh bike you can ride uphill.
'One bike for all' is ambiguous. It depends on the end user and what trails they ride. I think a 150mm version of this would be very interesting. If you could build it to 28lb it would keep the internet warriors happy but I think anyone who is riding 'enduro' style riding shouldn't be that bothered. On the other hand if people are honest with themselves they should really be on 130mm 29er trail bikes.
Statements like this really delegitimize these articles...
Probably its one of those bikes that needs to be seen live to understand angles, proportions and maybe starts to look better.
I wonder if that system in the UK tho, where 90% (or more unfortunately) of rides gets the BB area covered with mud, grit and stones, is even adequate, long-lasting or need constant maintenance to keep it that efficient. Water bottle cage? Who cares...unless you only ride for an hour or so!? Magic Mary is the best tyre I've ever tried in muddy wet conditions, so its interested to see such contrasting views!?
Regarding this bike, I think I'm with you too that I cherish my challenges. A bike can actually be too smooth and leave nothing for me to mess with. That said, I'm sure that for EWS riders this could be the ticket.
This thing, with maybe an angle-adjusting headset (ugh) would be an EWS beast.
I think I have several grammar mistakes, please ignore it.
I have to admit that I haven't really tried such a lockout yet.
The Wolf Ridge is something different.
Before the first ride, I focused on the pedal efficiency, so it didn't surprised me a lot. The thing that really surprised me were the descents, it has tons of grip, and the rear wheel tracks the ground incredibly well.
The feeling is different and it might look wired, but you have to try it.
one of the examples of this is his statement about how the EX9 stayed put while descending.
but really, its simple...heavier bikes don't get knocked around and (generally) stay stuck going down.
this bike seems like a practical choice for some riders..who can afford to buy a bike for the same cost
as a good used truck.
It seams to me any design out there could just be tuned with less LSC and high antisquat and achieve the same results....but I havent riddent one yet
Plenty of rearward axle path movement has always levelled bumps well and created lots of chain pull to aid pedalling. The downside as noted in the review also, is that if you look at the design, the shock when it extends will also try to push the slider rearward, which would 'compress' the suspension, the opposite reaction of what the shock extending is supposed to achieve. Only a short link is used to shift the shocks rebound force nearly 90 degrees to compress the slider instead. This huge mechanical inefficiency and angular force transfer is what necessitates the need for a high rebound speed in the shocks damping and also what will cause it, in conjunction with having 180mm travel, to jump badly. Sluggish or over-slow rebound will pedal well but jump horridly - this design creates this through poor mechanical force transfer with the 'linkage'.
I had an old Foes Fly with 9" travel and the wrong shock tune for my weight [combined with the Curnutt shock's intentionally slow rebound anyway] that rebounded far too slowly that effectively rode exactly how this bike reviews. Pedalled well, ploughed well, but jumped horribly. Only my old Foes looked 500% better than this weird looking contraption... and that's where this bike really falls apart, its fuuuuuugly!!!!
People have been fiddling with damping and data aquisition in MTB for about 20 years now. And now this concept here says: Yeah, you went the wrong way. I don't get it.
I don't need damping for effin uphill, I tune damping solely for downhill and guess what: low damping values, especially low speed comp and rebound feel shit. How on earth can this bike handle consecutive hits, compressions and hard landings at all? How? Progression or faster rebound are no substitudes for damping in these cases. I will never have the possibility to demo, so please, anyone, why does the low damping concept seems to work here and nowhere else?
I feel like my own bike is also a one bike for everything but taking a different approach - it's a Banshee Spitfire (160mm fork, 140mm rear) with a DBair-CS and -2 deg headset. It isn't light (just under 32lbs) but it pedals efficiently and pumps equally well, so it feels good on less gnarly trails. The static head angle is 63.7 or 64.2 deg depending on the dropout setting, 25% sag front, 30% rear so that's about 40mm at both ends.
With that geometry, a good fork (Pike with Luftkappe) and shock, a stiff frame, strong wheels, fairly big tyres and 810mm bars it's pretty unstoppable once it gets rough or fast or steep, despite the relative lack of travel.
It might not be as fast on smooth singletrack as a lighter or shorter travel bike or as fast on the big stuff as a longer travel bike but it never feels like too much or too little bike and it's always fun and confidence inspiring. And it goes uphill well too, especially on more technical climbs (notable better in the middle rather than slackest/lowest dropout setting).
Bonus points - it's over three years old and has done thousands of miles but doesn't feel or look dated!
mrblackmorescorner.blogspot.com.es/2017/06/polygon-square-one-ex9-2017.html
I only own one bike, because that's all I can afford/justify owning.
I own a SB6c, it's not the best, it's not the worst, but it HAS to do everything because I can only have one bike. Problem solved
It's like walking through the red light district in Amsterdam. If I'm spending money on one ride I'm going for a looker! Right?
Time
My little Hellement is super efficient, of course... and the Polygon *feels* just as efficient, but in a heavier, more forgiving package. It'll slosh around if you throw your weight around, of course. You can pedal the Polygon with effort and look down at the shock and it is literally not moving a millimeter.
"while the dropped top tube provides more than enough clearance for even the stubbiest of riders"
Is a full on lie, they don't even sell a S or XS size in this bike... My Mrs is 5ft even and we're having a hell of a time finding something for her, the new yeti SB5 has a standover of 668mm, this is 727 at the lowest point... almost 6cm lower...
Easy Bravestar. It's a bike, not access to cancer treatment. Buy her a Giant. They have all kinds of XS MTBs.