Review: Six Months on Structure's Wild Looking Cycleworks SCW 1

With statements like that, I have a few questions of my own to answer, especially considering that modern mountain bikes and their telescoping forks don't exactly suck these days. They don't suck while also looking pretty good, which leaves me wondering why Structure is effectively trying to swim up a waterfall of good looking bikes that probably aren't holding us back, especially as they're far from the first company to give this a try.

Yes, there's no getting around that the SCW 1 is heavier, more expensive, more complicated and, well, look at it... But what if it works better?

---

It's not inexpensive or light...

In case you hadn't noticed, the SCW's frame and fork have been designed to work together - you can't put a 36 or Lyrik on the front of this thing - so it's a package deal. The frame and fork kit, including both DVO Topaz T3 shocks, sells for $4,750 USD on their website, and it's said to weigh in at a not-light 13.5lb.

Let's compare. A new Santa Cruz Bronson frame and shock goes for $3,299 USD, and Fox's 36 Factory GRIP2 costs $1,065 USD, so you're looking at $4,364 at retail pricing for both. The SCW includes a second high-end shock that'd go for around $600 off the shelf, and it can't be cheap to manufacture at this point.

It's relatively heavy, too, with my test rig weighing in at 34lb 10oz (as pictured, without pedals) thanks to the chunky frame. If you care about such things, you're probably going be hard-pressed to get it down to 30lb, but hey, if it performs as well as Structure is claiming, maybe the cost, weight, and even its appearance could be forgiven?

What's up with that crazy fork?

Linkage forks are far from a new idea, but most haven't been designed as an integral part of the frame. Instead, options like Trust's Message or Motion Ride's fork can be put on any bike because, well, it's a whole lot easier to sell a fork than it is a frame and fork combo that only works together. So, why didn't Structure go that route? Standalone linkage forks certainly have their benefits, Structure's Loni Hull told me, especially when it comes to compatibility, but he's also convinced that integrating the fork and frame together is how to get the most out of the concept.

Because the design requires such long linkage arms, and provides a whopping 7-degrees of head angle change when the fork and shock are both bottomed out, Structure needed the real estate that only their own frame could provide.





Structure calls their linkage design 'Without Telescoping Fork' or WTF for short, which is also what a lot of people say to me when they first see the bike. Hull believes that all we're seeing is tiny, incremental steps forward in performance every now and then, and that a big leap in performance will come from trying something different. He also says that unlike a telescoping fork, their linkage design does more than just absorb impacts.

Using pivot locations to control the kinematics, much like your bike's rear suspension, the WTF front-end has less dive than a telescoping fork, which means it shouldn't go deep into its travel while you're braking or rolling a steep line, meaning there's more travel to absorb bumps.




I'll turn it over to Hull for the fork dive talk: ''A typical telescoping fork is roughly 30 to 35% pro-dive under front braking. Assuming 30% as the starting dive inclination, our base position offers a reduction of 17% (still 13% pro-dive; we call this setting Plush), which offers a meaningful improvement when hammering the front brake but still allows a rider to transfer weight to the front to set up a corner. We also have eccentric positions for dive reduction of 22% (still 8% pro-dive; my personal favorite setting), 33% (3% anti-dive, i.e. inclined to open/jack the front suspension slightly when acted upon by front brake forces), and 41% (11% anti-dive, and pretty aggressive; we call this the Race setting)"

It adds trail as it's compressed, and the WTF lengthens the front-end and relaxes the head angle by a whopping 7-degrees when the bike is bottomed-out front and rear. If only the fork were compressed, the bike's head angle would remain largely unchanged, and none of that would have been realistic if it wasn't integrated with the frame.




The idea behind all that is to add stability and predictability, which makes it easier for you to go faster. It's kinda the opposite way of how a telescoping fork works; they want to compress when you stab the brakes, which makes your bike feel nervous and sketchy at the exact time when you want it to do the opposite. Telescoping forks depend on the spring and compression damping to stay up in their travel, whereas the WTF and other linkage forks use kinematics.



The fork legs and lower arch are all carbon fiber, as are both (!) of the tiny headtubes and the very lengthy trailing linkage. An aluminum crown is clamped down onto the fork legs, and a short aluminum extension serves as a crown of sorts for the upper headtube. Confused yet?

The slim nose linkage, also done in carbon fiber, is only there to transfer steering forces from the upper headtube to the lower headtube; it doesn't see any suspension loads.




I know you're already adding up bearings in your head. There are eight 30mm cartridge bearings in the suspension linkage itself, six smaller ones for the steering linkage, and a spherical bearing that lets it all move freely. Oh, and two complete headsets but nowhere to mount a bottle cage inside the front triangle, although the latter might change on future models. Aluminum axles hold everything together, and you don't need anything beyond basic tools and common sense to take it apart. More on that later, though.

Hidden behind those carbon fiber arms is a Topaz T3 shock from DVO in the exact same size and spec (Metric, Trunion, 205 mm x 62.5 mm) that Structure is using to control the rear suspension. The two shocks are identical, including their custom high-speed compression tune that's lighter than usual for improved action over square-edge impacts. If you prefer coil-sprung suspension, you can go that route for the back of the SCW 1 but not the front; there's currently not enough room in the fork's the linkage to fit a coil.

Frame details

Integrating the linkage fork meant that the rest of the frame was probably going to look, er, let's call it unconventional. The strange-looking fork delivers loads into the front triangle in a completely different way than a normal frame and fork, so it makes sense that it has to look completely different as well.


It might look like Ridley Scott took some DMT and used his third eye to design the SCW 1, but there's a lot of normal to be found on the SCW if you look closely. There's a threaded bottom bracket shell, room for 2.6" wide rear tire, 148mm hub spacing, ISCG-05 tabs for a chain guide, a sneaky Di2 battery box, and sleeved internal routing to make life easier. Aside from there being nowhere to carry a bottle, a deal-breaker for me and some others, the SCW ticks all of the enduro boxes.

Sort of... There are probably two sticking points: It's not a 29er, and the 66-degree head angle doesn't exactly sound too enduro-y these days, does it? As for big wheels, I'd expect to see a 29er in the near future.

Geometry

For a bike that looks so wild, the geometry might seem pretty ho-hum these days, but the 66-degree head angle is a bit misleading. It's a static number, measured with the bike un-sagged, and the SCW gets up to 7-degrees slacker when both ends are at full-travel. In other words, don't judge a book by its head angle. That said, Hull did let slip that they hope to offer different carbon steering heads (the bottom headtube) that could allow for a 64, 65, or 65.5-degree head angle, and the modular design would make it a relatively easy job in a workshop.

Structure is offering three sizes that they're calling G1, G2, and G3, with my test bike being a medium-ish G2 that has a 460mm reach. The G1 gets a 420mm front-end, while the G3 is a roomy 505mm; I would have liked to see something in the 470 to 480mm range that I've been feeling so comfortable with lately.




All three sizes get relatively short seat-tubes that sit at a 76-degrees (effective), and they all share the same 435mm rear-end length. One interesting number is the 1,224mm wheelbase that's only 9mm longer than a large-sized Bronson when both are un-sagged. But at the other end of the travel, when both are bottomed, the SCW's linkage fork pushes the front axle out by roughly 25mm to maintain the bike's wheelbase while the Bronson's (or any normal bike) front-end does the exact opposite. In fact, the Bronson's wheelbase shrinks by roughly 72mm at full-travel.

Longer, slacker geometry is generally more stable and easier to ride at speed or when things are sketchy, so the SCW should, in theory, feel pretty good relative to bikes like the Bronson, SB150, Stumpjumper, and anything else using a normal fork with similar intentions and geometry.

Rear suspension design

If you didn't get your fill of carbon at the front of the SCW, the rear-end is entirely carbon as well, including the massive rocker arm. The bike's 153mm of travel is delivered via a Horst Link system with swoopy carbon seatstays and chainstays, and all the bearings are protected by aluminum caps. There's a DVO Topaz T3 shock in the exact same spec as what's used to control the front suspension.

The rear of the SCW 1 is almost boring compared to WTF is happening at the front of the bike, but how the two ends worked together ended up being a big part of the Structure's personality.

---

Spec-wise, the only change I made was to replace the trimmed-down Race Face cockpit with We Are One's gorgeous (but questionably named) Da Stem and Da Bar combo.

I've had the Structure for a relatively long time, since last year's Crankworx Whistler, and it's seen all sorts of different kinds of terrain during those six months. Squamish's rough and steep trails featured heavily, of course, as did Whistler, but the bike was also ridden on smoother, faster trails outside of my Sea to Sky bubble. There were zero reliability issues during that time, too, despite the linkage fork's complicated appearance.

Climbing

We'll get to the linkage fork, but first, we need to get to the top of the mountain, a job that the husky Structure does surprisingly well. Something about the 34lb weight and claims of front-suspension that feels like it has 180mm of travel had my expectations low, but the extremely efficient rear-end works wonders at hiding most of that.

With a 66-degree static head angle not being that long, the SCW 1 is an easy machine to live with on slow, technical climbs. It also leaps forward with more urgency than most, especially helpful when faced with those all-or-nothing uphill moves that your friends think you clean half the time. It's only a quarter of the time, though. At best. Enjoy poking your way up the roots and rocks at near-trackstand speeds while pretending to still have a granny ring? There's not many of you left, Jedi, but you'll enjoy the Structure, too.

The very sporty pedaling manners also mean that, unlike some enduro sleds out there, it's not as if your soul is being drained every time you need to giv'er beans out of an uphill switchback. The DVO shock (the one in the back, I mean) does have a pedal-assist switch, but it's not necessary - the bike has enough built-in pep to keep your terrible Nino impressions from being wasted.




It's the opposite story on the other end; the fork is very active, especially if you're out of the seat and over the front of the bike while working hard. If that sounds like how you approach your climbing, you'll want to engage the front shock's pedal-mode. I really do hate saying "front shock," to be honest.

No, I wouldn't want to race it up any long uphills, but as far as 150mm-ish bikes with enduro intentions go, the SCW 1 is an impressive climber all around.

Descending

Let's get straight to it: The linkage suspension on the front of the SCW feels impossibly smooth throughout its travel, almost enough to make me think conventional forks are filled with a 50/50 mixture of sand and maple syrup for lube. And it's not just at the top of the stroke where we think it matters, but throughout the entire range of travel. That's leverage at work, with a telescoping fork being one-to-one and this, much like your bike's rear-suspension, definitely not; the friction of the shock's seals seems close to non-existent.

The sealed bearings help, of course, and the result is, as much as it irks me to say that Structure wasn't stretching the truth with their claim, a lot like the damn thing has an extra 20 or 30mm of travel. It's implausibly smooth and frictionless, delivering the sort of ground-tracking action that I doubt any telescoping fork could ever match, regardless of pricey clout-coatings and fancy seals.

You know when you try something for the first time and you end up kinda liking it even though it weirds you out, but you're also more uncertain than before? That's how I feel about deep-fried brussels sprouts, gravel riding, and the Structure during the first week I had it. Here's how that played out...

The first few rides: "Hhhmm, either I'm too fat or the fork's shock - ugh, did I just say that? - needs more air in it. If I'm honest, it's probably both, and it's time for me to be honest with myself... I really hope no one sees me riding this thing." Much like when I first rode the Trust Message, I had to remind myself that this isn't a conventional fork and won't feel like one, either. We're not used to front suspension like this, and my first thought was that it needed more air. It didn't. When the front wheel hits something and moves up and out of the way, the way the fork lets that happen effortlessly makes it feel like it's way under-sprung. The fork doesn't use more travel than it needs to, though, and there's enough bottom-out resistance in stock form to keep me happy.

I'm still not sold on those deep-fried 'sprouts, and I certainly wasn't sold on the Structure right out of the gate. It was doing some neat things, no doubt, but it also felt unfamiliar.


The next few rides: "You know what really gets my goose? The people coming way out here to smooth out the singletrack. It's supposed to be bumpy and rough, so stick to Zwift if you don't want to deal with that. Keep the mountain in mountain biking, bruh! Then again, I am going faster than usual... " Wowza, whatever it's doing, it's doing it well. Smaller impacts and the chattery stuff that you might feel but don't think much about are dealt with quietly; it doesn't seem like the front tire left the ground, almost like it went through the root rather than up and over it.

Was it a ghost root? Probably not, but the way it absorbs those small, high-speed impacts is otherworldy. Cool trick, but there's more to a suspension fork than just being slick and forgiving.




Riding a fast, rough section of trail back-to-back on a dialed-in conventional fork and on the SCW 1 highlights the differences between the two. In comparison, the normal fork acts as you've nearly closed the high-speed compression, while the Structure's linkage front-end does a far better job of dulling impacts. It does it so well, in fact, that the entire bike seems far less concerned about what's going on, although I suspect that's where some of Structure's geometry voodoo is coming into play. Anti-dive isn't no-dive, though, and the fork will dip into its travel in the same situations that a telescoping fork would, just far less.

The SCW 1 isn't a long bike by today's standards, and there's nothing about the geometry, and especially that 66-degree head angle and the chainstays, that screams stability and "Let go of the brakes" to me, but that's exactly what ends up happening. It stays remarkably composed during those I'm-just-hanging-on moments, a lot like it's a few feet longer than it actually is. When the fork goes into its travel, the head angle gets many degrees slacker, the trail increases, and the front-center length grows substantially, but it never comes across like there's that much going on while it's happening.

Instead, it's like both your handlebar and the bike's handling are simply calmer than you might expect.




Many rides later: "The trail hasn't been smoothed out and I don't know what I believe anymore. If this fork is real, maybe Lazar is telling the truth..." I hope he is, and the fork's performance is very real.

All that calmness that I talked about above applies in the berms and switchbacks, too, and especially when they're choppy, worn-out corners that the over-maintainers haven't "fixed" yet; the rougher the ground and higher the speed, the more the fork and geometry changes felt like an advantage. And it'll only get better if Structure lengthens the SCW 1's rear-end. Then again, the fact that it's not an overly long or slack bike, and has very efficient rear-suspension, means that it's pretty quick when the corner is so tight you're more worried about tipping over than losing traction. I love a bit of slow-speed, mega-awkward jank, the kind where you're thinking so much that 30-minutes goes by in only 5-minutes. The big black linkage bike feels the exact same way, despite the small-diameter wheels not helping matters.

On the handling front, it's almost like Structure has been able to double-dip by creating a bike that doesn't feel too long and unwieldy at slow speeds by using conservative head angle, reach, and wheelbase numbers. Then, when it's time to drop your heels and hang on, the head angle relaxes and the wheelbase doesn't shrink, which is the opposite of a conventional mountain bike that gets steeper and shorter in length. Even so, I'd like to see them add 10mm-ish to the reach across the board, which would take my G2/medium from 460mm to 470mm, as well as 10mm to the chainstay length - the front-end feels so planted and easy to live with, but it was a party behind me sometimes, regardless of if that's what I wanted. More length and more active rear-suspension should help. Speaking of that...

What's not to like?

If you hadn't noticed yet, the Structure went from being in the 'weird but okay' category with deep-fried brussels sprouts to the 'weird but I like it' category with deep-fried chocolate bars. But unlike the latter, the Structure isn't perfect.


I'd like to think of myself as being fairly good with the stoppers, if only because it comes in handy to goon it up on your front wheel for 20 or 30-feet down a rock slab. So I was confused when I repeatedly locked up the front brake while specifically trying not to, even crashing once because of it.

Turns out, front-suspension with anti-dive characteristics tend to be slightly touchier about front-wheel traction under heavy braking, which is the opposite of what I would have expected. This was confirmed by both Structure and another company who designed and built their own linkage fork but never pursued it. That tidbit of info, as well as my local trails having a lot in common with the waterslides that scared the piss out of me as a child, had me nervous.

The bike's four-piston Magura brakes are powerful, no doubt about that, but I'm also familiar with them and their impressive modulation. At no other point did I come across the same issue with locking the front wheel in any other situation, even under the heaviest of braking from hyperspace to a dead stop, or on steep-but-not-that-steep rock slabs, and low-speed maneuvers using the front brake were the same as on any other bike. Don't plan on pointing yourself down any killer waterslides? Then it's not an issue.




Alright, what does all that mean and does the Structure cut it as an enduro bike? It looks strange, and there is certainly some strangeness to how it rides, but yeah, this thing is fast as hell and only going to get better as it's developed further. I don't put a whole lot of stock in Strava times, but for what it's worth the computers do tell me that I had some of my quickest section times while on the SCW 1. I'm also not surprised that they were usually rough, fast sections of trail.

The effort required to ride Structure's enduro bike at my own 10/10ths, or a bit beyond that, felt lower than when I've been on almost any other bike of similar intentions. They'll need to sort out the suspension balance before it feels like a cohesive package, but this thing is the real deal.

---

How does it compare?

We can't get out of here without talking about Trust's Message and Shout linkage forks, neither of which feel anything like what's on the front of the Structure. I once said that any bike I installed the Message on was instantly transformed into one of the best handling bikes I'd ridden, and that's still true. Trouble is, Trust makes no apologies that the Shout and Message aren't smooth, forgiving forks by prioritizing handling while riding hard rather than my soft hands and weak upper body. I get that, and it works, but I also like my suspension to do suspension things like, you know, absorb bumps and stuff.

Structure's WTF fork performs a different kind of magic when it comes to handling, but the outcome is similar: Consistency that allows you to ride faster. Structure's fork is also far more forgiving than Trust's over all types of terrain, and especially those high-speed compression bottom-outs from you over-shooting every single landing even though you know better.

What about that crazy looking Motion Ride linkage fork from France? I'm currently putting time on one, so stay tuned for that review. And yes, we obviously need a linkage fork cage match where all three Erector Sets fight it out in a battle to see who has the most pivots and which weirdo fork folds up and down the best.

Is this the bike for you?

If you're not okay with people pointing at you and asking what the hell is going on, you probably shouldn't have the SCW 1 on your shortlist. That's fine, because this bike is obviously going to require a certain type of owner; he or she will need thick skin and a thick wallet, and they'll also need to be open-minded... Us mountain bikers are open-minded, right? Most of us would rather pull our jacket hood over ourselves while walking in the pouring rain than carry an umbrella (be honest, we're dumb like that), and the Structure SCW 1 is that umbrella.

For the most part, the bike works well and the fork's action is as impressive as it is strange, but when's the last time you reached for an umbrella? There's your answer.

Pinkbike's Take

---

---

Posted In:
Reviews and Tech Reviews Linkage Forks Structure Structure Cycleworks Scw 1