A recent patent application from SRAM indicates that the Quarq ShockWiz could be about to see a major overhaul. The drawings in US Patent 20230348007 A1 depict a suspension component analysis tool (SCA) integrated in various ways into both forks and shocks. Its role is to assess behavior of the suspension component and, working with an app, to make setup recommendations to the rider based on a combination of the captured data, and the rider's preferences.
The SCA assesses performance by deriving the fork or shock position over time by measuring changes in air pressure or damper displacement, or through other means like optical measurements, magneto-resistive measurements, eddy current displacement measurements, strain measurements, and so on. The Quarq ShockWiz device we're familiar with simply measures changes in the air pressure inside a fork or shock's positive air chamber. Even though a heap of other methods are listed, we'd expect any next generation ShockWiz to use the same kind of pressure sensor - it's fairly common for companies to patent a multitude of different methods to achieve the same goal, if only to ward off competitors.
The interesting aspect of this patent is in the integration. At the moment, ShockWiz is a separate tool that works with air-sprung suspension components via a hose that simply threads onto the air can valve. It's been around since 2016, but never really became mainstream. That's not hugely surprising. A unit costs $399, which is a significant sum of money for something that
might help you find a better suspension setup. Also, most people just want to go ride their bike.
All that said, integration of ShockWiz could mean the technology is about to get a lot more commonplace and, a lot smarter, too. The patent in question shows the SCA integrated into the top cap assembly of a fork (220 in Fig. 2, 3 & 5), with a cylindrically shaped housing that allows it to slot in without any major changes to the fork's architecture.
It is also shown in other forms where it is only partially disposed inside the fork spring, with the housing for the circuitry and other hardware placed on the fork leg (Fig. 9 & 11). We like the top cap idea best.
Then, on the shock, the SCA is shown in a multitude of locations. In none of the 'embodiments' is it housed entirely within the shock architecture, however. In Fig. 13 we see it on the air can (1300), with a hose connecting it to the air spring via a secondary valve.
Then in Fig. 17, we see it on the damper piggyback. On the latter, it can measure damper fluid displacement to derive position (or travel usage), but it could also get that information through magnet sensing, for example. Indeed,
Mondraker's MIND Telemetry System uses magnets to monitor travel usage.
Throughout the document, it is suggested that the SCA could be paired with other analysis tools on the bike: a seat post position sensor, tire pressure sensor (read, TyreWiz), and so on. That could make the technology more insightful altogether, producing tire pressure recommendations, and setup recommendations for both seated and standing pedaling, as well as descending. It stands to reason that the more the system knows about the rider and the terrain, the better a recommendation it can make.
A hypothetical future exists where all RockShox suspension components have this built-in telemetry. Realistically speaking, if the brand is to take this design forward, it's more likely they'll contain it to the higher-end offerings, like the Ultimate level forks and shocks.
It seems to us the system could easily be configured to tie in with
Flight Attendant, too. This is briefly alluded to in the patent, "
The device can learn that when the rider is riding up hill, to tune towards efficiency; or when the rider is descending, the device can look for more suspension travel and tune for preserving speed of the bike instead of pedaling efficiency".
That said, a second aspect of the patent has piqued our attention. It reads, "
When used in conjunction with a GPS device, an SCA can have the ability to track and store tuning settings or events directly for sections of trail or geographic terrain types. The locations of the SCAs can be used to build a predictive tuning logic via which a rider can input where they are planning to ride and, if the riding location is a new location, and the rider may be provided a recommendation on how to change their suspension based on a database of other user's information and trends for tuning to that geographic area associated with the new location".
So, say you're off to Madeira next week. Theoretically, you could go into your AXS app and ask it to give you a ball-park suspension setting that suits both you as the rider, and the new terrain you're about to go ride.
SRAM could be killing two birds with one stone here. By making future RockShox suspension products data harvesting devices, they'd be able to funnel that valuable data into the development of future suspension products.
For now, it's no comment from SRAM.
"I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid you can't do that."
That is sad.
With instruction, not only do the instructors vary in skill and quality, but different teaching styles work for different people. Just because your buddy really liked a clinic, doesn’t mean you’ll get anything out of it. It’s a lot more of a risk.
(And yes, I agree most people should opt for the clinic!)
Is it worth it? Were the recommended changes useful?
Would you buy/rent it again?
There was an artical on here and I think with was Levy who spent the day with Fox and their fancy telemetry setup and at the end of the day, they just said "You're not fit enough nor good enough" because his riding varied too much from lap to lap. Line choice and fatigue, trail conditions, all make it super hard to get anything reliable and consistent. Plus are you even fast enough?
TL R We had them early, used them a lot, found them arguably entirely useless.
Try to keep prices reasonable so as many people as possible can try it out.
Also, my girlfriend just started riding. It really helped get good settings for her since she had no idea what good felt like. And now on her third bike tuning with this thing, it has saved a lot of guess work on both of us.
I feel like the price I paid for it was a huge stretch for value. I don't regret it, but I didn't need it, especially for me (I prefer coil bikes anyway).
I would have been better served renting one for myself, but worth it for helping my GF enjoy the experience sooner, so that was worth it.
First, the calibration process is really finicky and can throw the whole thing off. It's sensitive and I found I often had to repeat it several times to make sure I was getting the right values, I'd do it 4 or 5 and take the most common one I got, but it wasn't uncommon to see a margin of error either way with the ratios it gave you. If this is incorrect then all of your results will be meaningless.
It's also limited. It's not a true telemetry system, the closest we got to that with a device like this was the SussMyBike Flow, but the app was terrible and it didn't catch on. The ShockWiz uses air pressure differences to determine where the fork is in the stroke and calculate velocity data. That's accurate to an extent, but again, only if the calibration is right. The downside is that this means it can't present actual data to you like MotionIQ or BYB can, it just gives you recommendations and guidance.
The recommendations are abstract (add LSR, add a token, add air, etc), there are also "detections" that tell if you if pogo is excessive, you bottomed out too harshly, etc. I found the detections to be pretty insightful, accurate, and useful, but the recommendations it gives you can be really misleading. For instance, I tried setting up a Fox 34 and it kept yelling at me to add tokens. If I did what it wanted, I would've needed to add 5 tokens, which obviously wasn't right. What it really meant was I needed to add air and reduce rebound damping, which made it happy. You'll find these sorta weird things you have to correlate to make it happy, but not always, sometimes it gives you really dead on advice. It's not consistent. It's also worth remembering the results are what they (they being SRAM/devs/engineers) think your fork should operate as, which may or may not be right or correct. You still need to default to feel, but it will prevent egregiously wrong setups most of the time. There is some adjustment/settings that let you define broadly how you want the bike to feel (poppy, planted, etc), but getting the whole thing in the green isn't always correct.
It is also really easy to throw it off. Most telemetry systems I've used, like MotionIQ, give you data in a way that you can read to exclude outlying events. If you slam down on something hard, then the ShockWiz will read that and consider it part of the results it presents to you, meaning you just skewed the results. Finally, it doesn't capture balance, which IMO is really important. You can set the whole bike up wrong and be balanced out properly (it's not necessarily 50/50) without the bike feeling too off, if you have the fork setup right and the shock wrong then it's gonna mess with the feel of the bike.
What I generally suggest (I've used one a lot) is that recommendations in the yellow/green are a matter of feel, that's an appropriate range based on bike and terrain. If you have a recommendation in the red, something is off. If it determines you are riding too low in the stroke, then add air up until around the 18% range, then add a token, regardless of what it says. It REALLY wants you to add tokens. The damper suggestions tend to be more accurate, but keep in mind that these depend on your spring, so if you go making a ton of changes at once, you are gonna end up chasing your tail. Make one change to fix one thing, then use it again, then fix another and do it on the same trail.
I wouldn't pay whatever MSRP is for one. IMO at $150-200 it MIGHT be a good value if you have friends that want to use it and can throw you $10 or whatever, but there is a learning curve and the results aren't going to be accurate 100% of the time. Sometimes they are simple and dead on, sometimes they are dumb and you have to translate what it really wants based on feel/understanding.
If they were $99 each (and ideally integrated into the top cap or a volume spacer) then I think they would be a really sensible buy and just run them for a month so you get loads of data. There isn't much to them (or the app) so this seems like it should be achievable and still profitable; and they would start getting a lot of data which would arguably be super valuable in itself.
If they started linking this data to location data and the suspension parts being used then that could be really good too.
There is a PITA set up to ensure that the base setting for each shock and fork are properly recorded.
The interface between sessions and runs is not exactly intuitive and fool proof.......
but they work really well, especially if one has put in the time but doesn't quite know/ can't work out what is not quite working on a certain section of track. The shockwiz detections and suggested changes usually take care of it.
It is also easier to run two ShockWiz on the same bike and shops should really offer two for rental for each session. Mainly because the base line set up is a PITA and best done in a clean shop/ work shop.
The app will only record one Wiz at a time but it then makes it easy to switch from shock to fork once the shock is mostly sorted and then back to the shock once the fork is mostly sorted.
I have used them as a guide/ coach as part of a lesson as we could run repeated laps in order to work on skills (and analysing skills) as well as fine tune the suspension.
The bottom line is that most riders lack the discipline to spend 3-6 hours (once per bike or suspension set up for a bike) to get everything really well set up but spend more time than that over the life of that bike chasing the correct settings or bitching about them.
Hire can get expensive quickly if you want to play around, or have a few bikes. If you have a bunch of friends, split the cost between you and just buy one. We only use them every other service just to check setting now, get a new bike or bit of suspension, or if we want to change to 'Soft and Poppy' or something playing around. We've had the thing about 5 years, and it is still running strong.
I look at it this way, if you've got $2-3k of suspension on your bike, and you're not pro enough to know what all the dials do, spending $100 or so (assuming split costs between 4x people) isn't a bad move. But if you've got bottom rung gear, buying it alone at full wack, you'd do better spending money elsewhere.
though it helped me much in understanding how every single knob effect the suspension
It took a while to learn to read the results, but once I've learned that, it helps me set up a new bike quite quickly. Also a very useful tool for validating some changes.
It also really depends on how you're riding. If your riding is off, it'll tell you to adjust your settings to that riding, which sometimes might be the opposite of what you want to do - if you set up the bike to work well when you're riding well, it'll help you ride well. If you set it up more forgiving, it'll help you stay comfortable but won't always work as well when you want to open it up.
Unfortunately mine started throwing me really odd results after a few years, seems when testing it the pressure readings are off when trying at low pressure, so I assume the sensor has gone funny but haven't had a chance to investigate further.
I appreciate having a shock wizzinator, and my friends who I've lent it to do too. That said, integration makes these less "sharable."
Things like the A1 zeb or anything with a Debonair C1 are pointless for aggressive riding. No matter how many tokens I'd stuff in and go 50% over recommended pressure, it'd bottom out harsh. At recommended pressure it'd be a very plush spring until a big impact comes. Trying to adjust the pressure to take the big hits, it'd be punishing in roots and rocks yet still couldn't take a hit even with both compressions fully closed. No there wasn't anything wrong with the fork. I did ride a bit too far forward, but nothing outrageous.
I don't understand the need of people to use all their travel. It's really popular, especially with e-bikes to just want all the travel, regardless of the fact that if you ride single black trails on a 190, it's probably a sluggish behemoth unless you go really really fast.
I'm glad the new zeb improved that, as well as things like luftkappe from vorsprung.
Some riders get on fine with the newer air springs in the Zebs. Others find they get the setup good then hit a wall of progression.
I have 200, 180 and 160 bikes that I ride back to back quite frequently. I race downhill, not too well, not too bad, and unless I'm ready to go hard, the 180 is just too much bike.
Even a 5ft drop could reasonably bottom out 190mm though so you saying a black diamond is “not enough” for 190 is incorrect
And if you don't hit 20ft drops, how does a bike that bottoms out 170mm on 1.3m support you in a high speed rugged corner? Not saying it doesn't work, but I don't believe it's ideal for most and can limit how fast you can go.
I bottom out my long travel bikes regularly. But not on small features, simply because if I used that much travel on small features, it not only wouldn't allow me to go much bigger, it wouldn't allow me to go fast either. Comfort comes at cost of control, and regardless of travel, there's an amount of support you should get from the bike. If the travel is long, it'll only dive deeper without proper setup, and no amount of damping will keep you up over a long rough turn if the spring is too soft.
Trails at rocky peak looks great! Might come down check it out, but nothing looks like a 190mm bike territory. Here in the sea to sky, there's only a few trails/features where 190 really makes sense. Most of them built by Honza. Most people don't ride those.
I'm not trying to tell anyone what to ride and how to set it up, if you're happy with your setup and it works for you, don't change anything! I've run my suspension too soft for years and loved it. But I stand by the point that it may not be ideal for most to focus on using full travel. Big travel is meant for big hits. It almost seems like the DebonAir C1 came out with more of "make sure the travel is easy to get through" idea and that fork didn't work too well for big hits without modifications.
Then again I suppose I'm weird for asking my suspension to work reasonably well when cruising and then be able to take a large hit. So I modify most of my air springs to increase negative volume (which I find much better than reducing positive through tokens).
I think if I had 190mm I wouldn't complain though LOL
It was about the time the Debonair C1 was out and I just didn't understand why did RS do that, making it much, much worse than the B1 and way too linear. The answer basically was that most people don't ride the same terrain, which really makes sense. Not that it's gnarlier here than elsewhere, but the nature of our terrain requires a lot of grip in the wet roots and massive impact resistance, which may turn out more progressive than what you'd use on a more consistent grade.
IANAL, but there are a number of claims in this application that aren't even close to being novel: it has an antenna, it has a printed circuit board, it has a power supply.
Looks like Im going to need a new question. Damn.
The logical extension of this is to link to anonymised GPS data for other riders, so the shock knows what the terrain will be like, and then make recommendations accordingly on your set up based on location.
Manitou forks don't use dimple to balance positive and negative air pressure. Instead, positive and negative air are connected when air pump is attached. Then disconnected when air pump is removed. Doing so means there's no flat spot in spring curve usually found at balancing point on fork that use positive and negative air balancing dimple. And it also allow easy change of fork travel without changing entire air spring unit (which isn't possible on normal fork because you can't move the balancing dimple to the appropriate place on regular fork when trying to change travel).
When you keep Shockwiz connected on Manitou forks. Then positive and negative air chamber are connected 100% of the time allowing free air movement between them. Obviously, the fork can't perform in this condition. It only perform when nothing is connected to the air valve.
I only require 97psi for Manitou Mara Inline shock for my 150-160lbs body on my previous bike.
The other older bike before that require 170psi for its rear shock.
Both sag to the same amount and rider weight is the same.
What kind of logic give you the idea that set shock at body weight will work for most bike???
/Also, My Manitou shock rebound is clickless. There is no such thing as "3 clicks".