RE:aktiv Suspension - F1 and MTB Collide

Jun 11, 2014 at 20:00
Jun 11, 2014
by Trek Bikes  
 
You must login to Pinkbike.
Don't have an account? Sign up

Join Pinkbike  Login

Source: Trek

Waterloo, WI – Five years after forming a research and development relationship with Penske Racing Shocks, Trek is unveiling the ground-breaking RE:aktiv suspension on an all-new Fuel EX 27.5. Trek’s pursuit of a breakthrough suspension innovation led them the industry leader in custom suspension solutions for top tier automotive race teams: Penske Racing Shocks.


RE:aktiv Suspension

Views: 13,189    Faves: 19    Comments: 1


RE:aktiv was born of a partnership between Trek, Penske, and FOX. Penske Racing Shocks supplies custom suspension solutions for the world’s top automotive race teams, including top Formula One programs. No mass-manufacturing for the consumer market; Only high-end custom solutions for the most demanding conditions and customers. After a serendipitous meeting between Penske Racing Shocks' Technical Director Jim Arentz and Trek’s Director of MTB Frame Technology Dylan Howes at a NASCAR race, the two companies began talking about the potential for Penske Racing Shock’s custom innovations in the world of mountain bikes.

After thorough collaborative effort the teams landed on the remarkable potential of regressive damping to achieve what inertia valves have been unsuccessfully attempting in the mountain bike world for years. Regressive damping had been utilized in Formula One racing and then moved over to Indy Car and NASCAR with much success. It provides a much firmer hold in straights and corners for incredible support, but when it hits a sudden obstacle, like the square angles encountered on technical trails, the shock’s hold instantly gives way to a plush, controlled progression. In short, the shock was smart enough to get out of its own way… fast. The result of the mountain bike application of this concept is RE:aktiv, which delivers on the unrealized potential of an inertia valve. And to date, regressive damping had never been used in mountain biking.

FOX Racing Shocks was brought into the process at a pivotal moment of the development process. FOX applied their suspension expertise and manufacturing prowess to the new shock to help bring RE:aktiv to market. RE:aktiv is a joint partnership among Trek, Penske Racing Shocks, and FOX. "The thing about Penske is they're completely focused
on being a racing company. So what we're doing is leveraging their R&D resources and turning that into almost an extension of our own capabilities," said Trek Director of Suspension Development Jose Gonzalez. "The combined effort with Fox providing the production expertise has produced just an outstanding shock."
bigquotesThe unique thing about Penske and Trek is that we've really only scratched the surface. Regressive technology helped with one compromise that was there in mountain biking but there's a whole other world of technologies that may apply. Not only from Formula One but all the markets we work with. - Bill Gartner, Penske Racing Shocks Director of Research and Development

Given the prestige and demand for Penske's suspension designs in auto racing, the mountain bike world should be very excited about their future involvement.

Trek Remedy 29 9.9 Photo by Sterling Lorence

Trek's Fuel EX 27.5 with RE:aktiv shock.


RE:aktiv is a patent-pending exclusive technology available only on Trek mountain bikes. RE:aktiv makes its' debut on an all-new Fuel EX 27.5 with select models available immediately exclusively through Trek's worldwide retailer network. The entire lineup is expected to be available later this summer.



Want to know more about Penske Racing Shocks' involvement in the suspension on Trek's new Remedy 29 Carbon and Fuel EX 27.5 models? Stay tuned for an in-depth piece on the technology where we explain exactly how it functions.
Must Read This Week






174 Comments

  • + 56
 if you ride a Foes F1 fork ... you would realize that it is the same thing as the NEW reaktiv!!!! Brent Foes did that 10 year ago!!! The fork remain stiff in corner or under braking but as fast that you it a square edge it be super plush and after it remain stiff.... sorry Trek and fox..... i realy like tou RP23 and all the thing you make but it s only marketing for selling more bike!!!!
  • - 54
flag djcrossmax (Jun 11, 2014 at 20:45) (Below Threshold)
 Your obviously smarter than the Engineers working at Trek. Maybe you should go work for Spesh. Lol.
  • + 19
 Hell yea baby !!!!! Foes FTW !!
  • + 26
 Yes- this has been attempted many times. But we (Trek) licensed a very special valve from Penske that does the job well. It is different than the Foes fork.
  • + 10
 @djcrossmax, @deemax1 is actually onto something. Foes used a patented position sensitive technology from Curnutt to achieve a similar goal. Not to say that the Penske designed system isn't a completely different way of solving the same problem, but the F1 fork does have technology to reach the same goal. Google is your friend, you should learn to use it.

www.foesjapan.com/cnt.html

The foes history page goes quite a bit into their partnership with Curnutt, and the technology they crafted into their suspension.

foesracing.com/bikes/index.php/history

Regardless, its great to see technology being benchmarked from other purposes and trickling down to mass production in bikes!
  • + 11
 Yes there are similar technologies that have been done before but this has the backing to really be great. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying that this is going to be better but with engineers from Fox, Trek, and Penske this defiantly has great potential to be a good shock. I really look forward to riding one of these bikes and see how it feels. However I do have to say that I am not happy about the new axle standard 148x12 they are doing on some of the 2015 bikes. All we need is yet another axle standard!!!!!
  • + 9
 Penske hasn't raced in Formula 1 for about 40 YEARS, and only did so for about two years! This technology that they are referring to, that carried from Formula 1 over to IndyCar, is equally as old. Definitely marketing B.S. to sell the new Fuel EX. I'm sorry, but c'mon guys....
  • + 16
 I retract my previous statement, I was confusing Penske Racing Team with Penske Racing Shocks, completely different branches of the Penske Group. My bad
  • - 38
flag beeone72 Plus (Jun 11, 2014 at 21:54) (Below Threshold)
 @ deemax1
Go ride the 10 year old fork your talking about then. Don't buy one.
I guess you know more than the research and development departments of Trek and Penske.
Dam u smart Deemax.
What you do for work ?
Sounds like you should start your own bike company and show em how it's done.
Or just shut your hole - that would be just as good.
  • + 23
 did you say Ridgelineservice that trek are using a custom size rear axle on there 2015 bikes? so maybe they could make there own custom size head tube and bb to go along with the DRCV shock and 148mm axle, then that would be the complete package of reason's why not to go near there bikes.
  • + 8
 Right now I don't see it as anything special its all marketing. You can achieve that curve with a rebuild and oil weights and as said there are other similar systems already around. What I find funny is this steep progressiveness initially still has a trade off of initially for traction and supper small bumps it does not eliminate that trade off. The only other worry with this curve is you have a stiff enough initial than not enough support as it regresses. That said I will reserve my judgement on this shock until it is ridden and we have some good ride tests out I think its unwise to judge a shock based on this small article. It is great to see fox branching out to one of the renowned tech in the racing world though, any collaboration and new technology is only going to be good for the sport and technology in the long run.
  • + 18
 This really dampens my spirit
  • + 9
 Well it obviously did Foes the world of good......they're selling ship containers full of bikes right?
  • + 6
 All I say is "Brain"
  • + 3
 So where's the foes fork now? Why hasn't it continued to develop and be successful now?
  • + 3
 i ride one of these Foes F1 forks and it is the best fork i have ever ridden....
  • + 17
 The Foes fork, and all SPV/CVT damping do not actually provide regressive damping, they provide heavily digressive damping (aka "platform" damping). It is not the same thing as what Penske are doing here.

@slidways you cannot achieve this curve with "a rebuild and oil weights" or even major reshimming of any valve geometry currently on the market. Call it what you want, but Trek's claim that this is actually different from anything currently in the bike world is objectively correct. Whether it's actually better than Terralogic/Brain technology in the real world though is anyone's guess at this point, but it wouldn't be hard to improve on the Brain, to put it nicely.

Question for Mr Camp and also Penske - given Penske's push over the years to minimise hysteresis through pressure balancing, how did you get around the issues you'd expect from the massive hysteresis inevitably found in regressive mechanical valves?
  • + 1
 @Vorsprung - I'm no engineer but can't you get the same result by setting up a 'regular' shock with lots of low speed and little high speed compression? That's how I run my CCDB, with exactly the same reasoning behind it: feedback from terrain when pumping or cornering while being able to soak up rocks and roots.
  • + 7
 @ Vorsprung: I'm glad someone here actually knows what they're talking about. I don't, I am sad to admit, but I know enough to know that this is different from platform damping, and different from speed sensitive shims, and all the "this is just marketting bs" comments are a little bit presumptive, especially given Penskes involvement with the project.

I'd love to know exactly how it differs from a more normal shock, but I guess I'll have to wait. And I wait with baited breath. I ride a Session myself, and it is absolutely f*cking awesome. I couldn't be happier, but I do find myself maxing out the LSC at both ends on smoother flow/jump (boring) tracks to get the maximum pop off of lips etc and make it more fun, but then have to wind it all back off again when I ride a proper manly track. This system sounds like it might offer exactly the performance I am looking for without all the fiddling. Can't wait to see more Smile Smile Smile
  • + 1
 Isn't that (rock and root I assume) handled by the high speed compression?
  • + 3
 Yeah, but LSC takes a little force to blow off and open the HSC shims. Too much LSC and you feel more of a "punch" through the bars/pedals at the point of impact with root/rock/whatever. Suspension will still compress, but it feels a little more skittish through repeated hits. I don't imagine this system will eradicate the problem entirely, but it looks to me like a step in the right direction.
  • + 8
 You can't get the same curve by running lots of LSC with little HSC. The curve will still increase all the way through the stroke. Regressive uses very clever valve geometry that can REDUCE force as shaft velocities increase. No shim valve or CCDB valving can do that.

Please wait and ride one before passing judgement.


@Vorsprung Suspension- We never really chased down the hysteresis... It has some, but less than you might think- as the valve slows down at the end of a bump event, the valve still flows oil pretty easily since it has already cracked open. The huge pressure buildups/differential are only on opening the valve.
  • + 0
 Where are people seeing this 148 x 12 axle? looks like all the new fuels have 142 x 12
  • + 3
 What's wrong with making a better bike and selling more of them, whether it's new or not
  • + 1
 This video told me absolutely nothing about how this shock is better.
  • + 2
 I've been waiting for a 27.5 Fuel. I currently have a 2011 26" Fuel (X7 spec). After demo'ing a 27.5 Giant Trance (float x & talas & carbon frame with 6" travel) I know I don't need 6" travel. Can't wait to buy this new fuel. I'm a big F1 & Indy & Penske fan too , just icing on the cake. Only remaining question I have is whether I should wait for a remedy 27.5 w/ this new shock. Thanks Trek, for being so cool.
  • + 1
 thanks guys noe i know a lot more on these technologie!!!
  • + 2
 Their and their. They make great bikes. If you don't like them just ride something else and chiiiiiiiill.
  • + 2
 @Dave, fair call, maybe it's not too big a deal. The hysteresis in regressive valves tends to be partially the inverse of normal hysteresis (where the HS closing characteristic is stiffer than the HS opening characteristic), but during the low speed part can be really very large due to the high valve displacements required for such a mechanism to work - as the valve closes, it not only shuts off the oil flow through the HS circuit but due to its own displacement, forces oil to accelerate substantially through the LS circuit. As a result, damping curves like this occur (note the hysteresis and dynamic instability of the rebound curve) shop.penskeshocks.com/images/D/adj%20reg-a%20curve.jpg
  • + 2
 Yeah, the hysteresis never showed up anything like those graphs you've posted... Besides, we are pretty much out of space in the standard Fox package, so any other valves/flow paths would require a major redesign of the entire shock package. $$$$

An interesting thing to think about is that even though those graphs you posted have terrible hysteresis in rebound, the cars are still going faster using them. I think Bill says it in one of the videos, but Penske would rather just bolt a shock on a car and see what the lap times do rather than analyse graphs for months. I tend to agree with him on that front Smile
  • + 1
 Smile There's nothing as good as real world results. I swear the number of cracked frames rose briefly at about the same time FEA started to be heavily used in the bike industry.

"Look, the computer says we can remove over 2 lbs of material without any negative side effects!! Oh shit, best warn the warranty dept...."
  • + 1
 I regress my previous statement. I was thinking today hey wouldn't the ideal curve be one that increases to sag point than regresses after that point ie giving supple traction before the sag that ramps up to sag for pedaling efficiency than providing softer suspension after the sag point for bumps. As soon as I had this thought I realized this is what this shock does and suddenly this makes brilliant sense to me. Evidently there is marketing involved but I think I unacknowledged this shock too early and is much less marketing than I thought originally., this is a brilliant design and I really hope we see it developed further.
  • + 1
 scratch that I was thinking leverage curve not dampening curve.
  • + 1
 Also those who said you cannot get this digressive curve with oil and shim stacks here
www.shimrestackor.com/Code/Sample_Applications/Damping_Profile/damping-profile.htm

You can, maybe it wont be as effective as this as it uses certain ports but you can get a shock to follow this same curve.
  • + 1
 slidways, what you're looking at is a DIGRESSIVE curve (and the graph on the left actually shows curves that are so close to linear that it's irrelevant anyway). The graph on the right doesn't plot force vs velocity, but rather damping coefficient vs velocity. It is not the same as what Trek are doing. Also, dampening means making things a little bit wet, damping is what a damper does Smile

@dave - I agree, if there is a net benefit then it's still an improvement overall even if some aspects are theoretically (or even practically) worse. I'm interested to try one of these things.
  • + 1
 yeah i have been writing dampening all day instead of damping, but you know what I mean. What I understand with this curve is that it wont actually improve traction initially because the curve is very heavily damped it is mostly going to effect the ending of the LSC and the transitional forces from low speed into mid and high speed. I think people are assuming this will maintain very initial traction while giving a stiff platform which from what I can tell it wont, it will give a very stiff platform that than softens up later. Essentially all they are doing it removing that draw back when your run very high LSC that adjustment usually crosses over into the mid and high speed compression velocities, so this will drastically improve the performance of high LSC after the point where the shock can no longer only use LSC circuts but while you are still using the LSC and very low velocity compressions it will be very stiff. This is going to benefit more your transitional compression into mid and high than the low speed ones. So the draw back of lower traction still stands initially with higher LSC. But this will come down to how it is tuned and at what point the valve opens to regress. I can see it working but it will need to be very specifically tuned to regress at the right point for each rider.
  • + 38
 I'm really only interested if the blow off valve makes a big whooshing sound. Like a turbo. Or if I was cropdusting the trail.
  • + 1
 They fool usevery time, don't believe them: the boost valve never made any dump valve noise. Sad.
  • + 1
 I stopped reading when they didn't call it Formula UUUUUNNN.
  • + 23
 Anyone else learn about this in Trek University? Lol
  • + 15
 just did the module about an hour ago
  • + 2
 #trekemployeethings
  • + 21
 Hey guys- I was the lead Trek engineer on this project- I'll try to answer any questions you might have...
  • + 6
 Can you give us a physical description of how the valve works?
  • + 2
 How does it work, dcamp2?
  • + 2
 What keeps Fox from using this technology on their future shocks? Would it be possible to transfer the shock to another bike, or is the tune setup specifically for a remedy?
  • + 3
 @MaxBerkowitz The technology is licensed to Trek, meaning it probably hasn't also been licensed to Fox.
  • + 10
 Those answers though
  • + 3
 The first version of this shock made very similar claims, but once it made it to the end users and on to the trail it turned to have some major flaws. Why weren't those flaws recognized before release?
www.pinkbike.com/news/Push-Industries-Air-Volume-Tuning-Kit-for-FoxTrek-DRCV-Forks-and.html

What makes this situation any different? re: - the prehype marketing campaign and then the potential for a major let down on once this hits the trail.

Why should you be trusted?
  • + 1
 Why the hell do we need a new axle standard?

Also will the bb again be very high? Why won't we get a trailbike that feels in corners at least like a dh bike from 5 years ago. Spesh did it with the Pitch quite some time ago
  • + 8
 Valve explanation:
The valve uses different pressure area's when open and closed to create this buildup of pressure and then blowoff effect. When the valve is closed, oil pressure is pushing through a few small holes which are blocked by a plate held down by a spring. When oil pressure over-comes the spring pressure, the plate moves back and oil can start to flow through the holes and through the plate (which also has holes in it). When this happens, oil pressure is now exposed to the full face area of the plate- instead of the small holes- so the plate is blown back, creating a much easier/larger flow area for oil, and you get the decrease in force.

TL/DR: The valve uses clever geometry and layout to give lots of LSC damping, then blowoff on highspeed hits.

@terrafire- he got it about the licensing
  • + 1
 Hey man thanks for the explanation sounds great, but complicated; therefore hard to service. do you think is something your average mechanic can handle without blowing it up and having to be sent to fox to be fixed?
  • + 4
 @dcamp2

The article talks about this not being a speed sensitive valve, but your description implies it's very similar to a LSC, but with a blow off. What prevents this (fairly high level) of LSC from causing high speed chatter to transmit straight to the rider? it seems that it would be hard to get the "stand up" effect without reducing shock travel during small hits. Corollary question: does this valve affect the entire stroke of the shock, or does it engage at a certain point in the travel, like a mid valve?
  • + 3
 uhhh it's only speed sensitive... The valve generates lots of low speed compression damping, then blows off so you don't get a huge spike when you hit something. When you are hitting chatter bumps- the shock shaft velocity is fairly high, even though the shock isn't using that much travel. The high shaft velocity makes the shock generate LESS damping, so it isn't harsh. Obviously descending rough trails in Climb mode will give you lots of chatter- that is why there is a descend option.
  • + 1
 good answers sir, thank you.
  • + 2
 @dcamp2 hey thanks for answering questions on here, as a fluid mechanics guy it's really cool to get more details on it!

In terms of system response and ride feel, how would you say this differs from Spec Brain (for example)? I would think maybe faster/less noticeable blowoff threshold, since it doesn't have to move a mass before flow can start? Also very cool that it accomplishes the similar concept without need for a remote unit all the way at the back wheel. Any thoughts on how this will compare performance- and feel-wise?

Is there a patent (or patents) I could look up to learn more?
  • + 2
 hmmm, as I understand it, in the brain, shock pressure or fluid flow NEVER moves the mass, the inertia of hitting terrain moves the mass, allowing the shock to cycle.
  • + 3
 Yeah I worded that badly. I wasn't saying that the fluid moves the mass, I'm saying that the mass has to get out of the way for fluid flow to start, and by that time the rear wheel is already a fair bit of the way into the first big bump. OTOH pressure increase in an incompressible fluid is instantaneous, so I would think Trek's gate would disengage before any wheel displacement has taken place (as soon as it touches something, basically). I would think a force-based blowoff would activate quicker than a momentum-based one, basically.

I had a spec epic for a while and actually liked the brain a lot, but I was also a worse rider then so I don't necessarily remember the nuances of shock feel and all that. Loved being able to seamlessly transition from rocks to pedaling short smooth sections without hitting switches.
  • + 2
 @bkm303 correct. This reacts pretty much instantly.

The brain shock feels like it is switching the lockout lever off and on. This shock just feels efficient and settled but without the off/on switching feel of a brain shock.

shop.penskeshocks.com/files/downloads/ETM%2012.1%20REG-A.pdf
  • + 2
 After reading the PDF, it seems like you'd want to set your fork up with more LSC, because otherwise you're going to end up with the front diving (to use the terminology in the PDF, upsetting the chassis) while the rear remains stable, which is an uncomfortable bias in MTB. which means you're going to have to live with more chatter through the bars. I'm guessing I'm citing an example of this damping being more pronounced than it is here, since the fork not having regressive damping was a known quantity for the project. Which just means that they had to compromise on how strong the blowoff is, because you can't pair this with a fork using the same damper.
  • + 3
 @dcamp2 thanks! Sounds like exactly what I want out of a shock (or fork, really). Sounds like a productive partnership.
  • + 2
 @groghunter yeah I was just thinking matching this up with a fork would be kinda tough. Unless Trek is looking to bring this into the fork game too... this tech in front and rear would be SICK on climbs and flowy stuff. And no more climb switches!
  • + 1
 Well, I'm guessing the valve doesn't have a pronounced enough effect to cause this sort of chassis upset, because it would have become rapidly obvious in testing that it was causing a poor front/rear bias. That said, if it was tunable(it probably isn't) you might be able to run something like a Avalanche cartridge with a mid-valve, and be able to crank up the blowoff pressure without upsetting the balance between the front & rear.
  • + 2
 I don't see why Trek's valve wouldn't be tuneable, you'd just need a screw to alter the preload on the plate blocking the orifice. Specialized has the "brain fade" adjustment, this would be like that. Good point though, if the imbalance was a huge problem they wouldn't release it.
  • + 1
 I'm not saying it couldn't be tunable (just replacing the spring behind the plate is a possibility, though I'm guessing you'd need a different plate with different diameter/quantity of holes as well) I'm saying that there's likely too little cost/benefit for them to justify the added expense of adding an adjuster for it. same reason why so few products have all four compression/rebound types adjustable.
  • + 3
 @groghunter the CTD lever is the tuning on this damper- you are adjusting spring preload on the valve. I played with a number of different springs, so it is tunable in that regard, but you'd have to pull everything apart, find a compatable spring and then rebuild the shock.

You are very correct about the cost issues. We had to fit into our standard DRCV package and retain all standard adjusters. anything else and the project would have been killed due to the shocks costing way too much.
  • + 2
 @dcamp2

Are you able to discuss any testing or plans to add this damping to the forks?

It seems like a decent idea to have it matched on both ends.

I am very interested to ride this once I saw that it will be available on the Remedy too.
  • + 2
 No comment. It works well on Remedy- especially with some PUSH spacers...
  • + 1
 LOL, thought that might be the case Wink
  • + 0
 "The valve uses different pressure area's when open and closed to create this buildup of pressure and then blowoff effect. When the valve is closed, oil pressure is pushing through a few small holes which are blocked by a plate held down by a spring. When oil pressure over-comes the spring pressure, the plate moves back and oil can start to flow through the holes and through the plate (which also has holes in it). When this happens, oil pressure is now exposed to the full face area of the plate- instead of the small holes- so the plate is blown back, creating a much easier/larger flow area for oil, and you get the decrease in force."

this is EXACTLY how the MoCo IS works..... which is like 7-8 years old.
  • + 2
 That's how the MoCo lockout/blowoff works, but in normal operation it's just regular compression damping (no threshold switch). Or at least that's what I thought.
  • + 1
 Sure, there's a threshold switch- say if your in position 5 or 6 which has the LSC ports holes half-open/half-covered, when the impact is strong enough, it will still lift the plate and fully open the orifices as well as additional orifices to slam fluid by the HSC shims.. The LSC knob dictates that threshold. This penske/trek koolaid is just tweaked LSC, that's it. Just fine by me, I understand they need more acronyms to sell more/new stuff.
  • + 1
 I'll take the neg props as someone drunk on haterade- you'd respond if i was wrong.
  • + 2
 Not sure if you're still reading this dcamp2, but are you saying that the LSC is fixed, and the blue lever only changes the preload on on the blowoff?
  • + 2
 It's not the same as MoCo, although I can see why you'd think that. Regressive valves often (not sure if this is the case in this particular damper) use ports that are perpendicular to the valve's displacement in order to allow fluid flow only once pressure (applied elsewhere) has displaced the valve poppet beyond that port. You can then apply the pressure of that fluid to a different surface area elsewhere in the assembly that it previously wasn't exposed to in order to hold the valve open more easily (or open it further). Motion Control however has substantial lag before any damping kicks in at all (noticeable if you crank the thing to lockout), Penske's method allows for more precisely controlled low speed damping but less precisely controlled high speed damping. However, lower precision should NOT be confused with lower performance - while these types of valves tend to be dynamically unstable from a mathematical point of view, if the improvements outweigh the negatives then you still end up with a net improvement.

(It should also be noted that in terms of control precision, Motion Control ranks as the all time lowest of any damper I've ever seen, but that doesn't mean it's not better than a simple ported damper - more precision does not necessarily mean superior performance, but it can help).
  • + 1
 precisely why I stepped down in spring rate and run my fork anywhere from 5 to 2 clicks (of 11 positions) open from fully closed. I'm not picky about the LSC performance end of things, a loose and fast style can compensate, but I do appreciate the last half of travel being accessible and well-controlled
  • + 1
 So, did you guys just license and adapt Penske's VB Piston to work with MTB demands?(www.customaxisshocks.com/techsheets/TSVariableBleedPiston.pdf)

I've used Penske shocks on my motorcycles, they are expensive but they work well with minimal fuss as far as tuning. I wonder how they will do with Fox and Trek knowledge added on top of their damping knowledge. Bring on the demo dates!
  • + 2
 @groghunter- LSC is controlled by the CTD lever the amount of LSC and the blowoff point are very much connected. Look at the graphs in the vital feature- might help clear some things up.

@okayh that is a different piston and valve assembly. We used the 'Regressive' valve from Penske.
  • + 1
 Thanks dcamp2. Those graphs do help make sense of things quite a bit.
  • + 1
 dcamp2,

Late entry into the conversation but do you feel this regressive damper has a larger tune window for us fatty riders?
  • + 10
 It's not formula one!
  • + 1
 Haha, atleast someone knows! It's stupid indie car, not even close to F1
  • + 1
 Glad to see another American knows the difference! I'm a die-hard F1 fan. I don't like Indy Car...
  • + 6
 Apparently they do actually have shocks on proper F1 cars, Nico Rosberg's for instance. So yes it is formula 1
  • - 4
flag ArmanNikfar (Jun 12, 2014 at 0:25) (Below Threshold)
 All formula 1 cars have shocks, but they are made by the factory team, for example ferrari makes it's own shocks, (Push rod actuated) But they arent made by penske, penske makes stuff for nascar and all the other bullcrap american racing.
  • + 11
 Dont be condescending
www.formula1news.net/the-2014-f1-turbo-cars-pictures-and-specifications
Look at the Mercedes W05
Dampers: Penske
see also Force India, Torro Rosso and Caterham
  • + 3
 Why would Penske lie about producing shocks for Formula 1? The Director of R&D states they supply 8 of the 13 teams with product. The footage may be of Indy but it is clearly stated they supply F1, Indy and NASCAR. Watch the video and pay attention.
  • + 0
 There are 11 F1 teams... And I know they provide shocks for F1 I was referring to the video. The headline made it seem as if there would be F1 footage
  • + 1
 That was the frustrating part was how they kept mentioning formula 1 and showed indie cars. I wasn't saying they didn't make formula 1 dampers. It would've been nice for some actual explanation what they did to the shock to make it so much better.
  • + 8
 All this time it was Penske, not Fox? I'm shocked!
  • + 1
 Haha nice pun!
  • + 4
 So I'm pretty sure I rented a truck from Penske and drove it on that rock garden in the middle of the F1 track, or maybe I was just so spiritually involved in my Enduro that I was on a mind trip..... can't remember
  • + 5
 I hate innovation. You will have to pry my Penny farthing from my cold dead hands.
  • + 2
 Will there be versions made available for previous trek models. I have a '13 EX9 and have been considering a full Push tune to improve the suspension performance, but if this is backwardly compatible maybe it's worth considering over Pushing the shock...
  • + 2
 there is pure marketeering BS by Trek here. I have no doubts about the shock and am pretty excited by the development of regressive damping in MTB. what i dont like is the distinct possibility of exclusivity with Trek and the rubbish of ANOTHER DAMN axle standard. U want the shock? here, buy this trek with ANOTHER DAMN axle standard. It's not skin off Penske because Fox gets to licence it while Trek corners exclusivity on the final product for x-period of time while pushing a new axle standard.

meh.
  • + 1
 "ANOTHER DAMN axle standard"

^^^^This
  • + 2
 Why do I find all the negative comments unsurprising lol. People pass judgment without trying it and thinking its been done before. Trek has come a long way in the past 6 or 7 years with their suspension and every change they have made has been pretty rock solid. Sure people complain about different standards but I find all the changes to be pretty awesome, especially when I go back and ride some of the old bikes. I can understand that people don't have the money to buy something new every year but at the same time that doesn't mean the new stuff won't be awesome. I for one am excited to try this new tech out. See what it feels like, I will judge it against my own standards and hope that it holds up. Sure there will be marketing hype but riding the bike will be the ultimate test. I am definitely really interested.
  • + 2
 This was the cheesiest video I have ever seen. Reminds me of that Saturday Night Live skit with Martin Short and men's synchronized swimming. C'mon Trek, please play Chariots of Fire in the background...
  • + 1
 double post
  • + 2
 The damping profile reminds me the behaviour of some xc bikes: harsh and unconfortable on smaller bumps and swallow the whole travel on big hits. Hopefully it's better than that! Curious to test ride that.
  • + 0
 Mosley and Leov must have in Scotland, performed pretty well I'd say.
  • + 0
 So what? First Scotland was pretty pedally so a stroung platform helps. Second, I don't ride like those two and may not want their suspension setting (just like WC DH bikes would be way too harsh for us).
But this is all speculation, and I'd be interested to try.
  • + 1
 Had a chance to test ride a new fuel 9.8 with the new rear shock. Was blown away by the difference. I ride it, tested it out over a few curbs near the bike shop, then rode a 2014 slash 7, did the same tests. Night and Day difference. To test it I put both bikes in Climb mode, then rode over curbs, the Slash with the old damper felt sticky while in climb mode and hitting the curb and shock action was jerky. The same test with the new shock/damper resulted in a shock action that would have left me doubting it was actually in climb mode. Felt firm just pedalling around, but once it hit the bump the shock was smooth and flowy as if it was in descend mode. Definitely impressed
  • + 0
 Yay, just what we need, another shock. Sounds like a good one, but I'd rather have an internal transmission. Ditch the derailleurs for f*ck sakes guys. Never mind the perfectly fine suspension that's been perfectly fine for 10+ years!
  • + 4
 ride, then post. otherwise it's all speculation.
  • + 4
 Too much bitching and not enough riding.
  • + 4
 Y u no mention boost 148? Such a pain if you ask me.
  • + 3
 Tell me about it. Happy I got the last Rem 9, don't have to worry about weird sizes..
  • + 2
 What? You no want cheap wheels?
  • + 4
 I just watched the video on 148, I can understand the goals, but wouldn't going to 150mm be even better and mean no mess with new standards? I could be missing something with chain lines etc, just a though...
  • + 1
 I'll embrace the 148 if they get rid of the shitty old Maxle. Concentric pivot nuts + the ridiculously large Maxle quick release stick out so far.
  • + 1
 I would bet Trek is offering dropouts of other sizes to accommodate any hub spacing, just like they do for every other model.
  • + 2
 Hey Dave, who is the rider? It kinda looks like our friend "Elrod" but I thought he was racing tandems these days or something?
  • + 6
 The BC rider is Davis English.
  • + 2
 He has answered to many things in the past but Elroy was never one of them.....
  • + 3
 I'm the rider, had a lot of fun on the bike! It's a pretty capable little shredder for it's category.
  • - 1
 you learn nothing from NASCAR. sorry, lowering air pressure to help the car turn left is not engineering, it's laziness.

I still see a switch on the shock, so that means I have to do something to operate the different modes like climb, trail, decent. What makes this better than my current Fox shock?

Specialized Brain shock is already doing an amazing job at this. I rode an Epic for a whole season and personally could not get used to feeling like I had a hard tail and slowing down much more than I had to for bumps, only to realize that Specialized Brain worked so well, I could have carried my speed. I don't see any advantage to this shock. There was no lever to change settings on the Brain and it would go from locked to full open smoothly and quickly.

The video is more like a eharmony 3-way success story than anything interesting from a mountain biker's perspective...
  • + 2
 dcamp2 looks real promising. The DRCV system works good and this could only be better
  • + 3
 I would love to have a weekend to shoot in that race car test facility!
  • + 0
 Another shit product by trek and fox... Had one of the regular drcv shocks on my slash and it killed that bike converted it to a monarch+ with 170 mm rear travel now... Works so nice
  • + 3
 It doesn't say what difference it is between this and drcv
  • + 1
 That was my question. Not to dwell too much on vapid marketing-speak, but I had to chuckle when the narrator said something like "previous suspension systems could only hope to do what this does blah blah blah" and it's not like Trek hasn't offered rear suspension before. Not *everything* old is crap.
  • + 11
 DRCV is the airspring.

Re:Aktiv is the damper.
  • + 0
 Its basically a fancy word for a stiffer "dampening" with a softer spring.... so more "support" ( doesn't dive easily ) but when the blow off activates ( bump ) the softer spring goes into action with a supple feeling. Pretty much an inertia valve, Its nothing new... Just like Spesh's brain. It might seem like the ticket but that breakaway or blow off point is the drawback, you need to find the compromise between a higher threshold ( better pedaling, more support and staying higher in the travel ) and a blowoff that will activate faster for better bump compliance but less support, pedaling...Etc
  • - 1
 Right, so its probably riding pretty stiff and then sudden sag. Is it better than lockout / fulltravel? Does it actually make crappy damper less crappy? Doubtful.
  • + 5
 @brakesnotincluded 'damping'. we aren't wetting things here.

But yes- you can maybe go down a little in springrate and still have efficient pedaling. It is not an inertia valve like Specialized' brain shocks.

@wakaba it is not like that at all. You should ride one before passing judgement Smile
  • + 0
 @ dcamp2
Im sorry if you can get things wet Wink

But please enlighten me on how a regressive spring curve not work with an "inertia valve" ( in all is possible aspects ) ?? I guess suspension dynamics must evade me, and I never said it was bad.... Just marketing going nuts again over something not so new...
  • - 1
 @dcamp: It's nothing new, it's a bypass in the meteringblock and you delay pressure peak. So its probably a junk of rubber with a tiny hole.
  • + 1
 'a junk of rubber with a tiny hole'. Yep that's how it works Wink
  • + 0
 Decarbon is so done since 1947.
  • + 3
 Too much words. must ride bike.
  • + 1
 I ride by the Trek r&d center on my cx rides occasionally. . Can't wait to see what this Trek and Penske partnership brings to the table in the future.
  • + 1
 Penske has been designing fox's pistons for years.

Stoked to see what's actually different with this "regressive" damping technology.
  • + 1
 I'll be asking my Trek dealer whether I can order just a RE:AKTIV shock for my Remedy 29er.
  • + 1
 Why did they have a Rock Shox shock on there at 00:46 of the video if the DRCV Reaktiv stuff is developed with FOX?
  • + 1
 I think Whyte bikes have already proven that F1 logic and mountain bikes don't mix...
  • + 2
 Specialized start working closely with Ohlins... Trek
  • + 2
 Time for a comparison against Specialized's Brain technology.
  • + 2
 that Fuel Ex 27.5 looks nice on the other hand
  • + 1
 @dcamp2... will we see this shock on the 2015 Fuel ex 29er... If so any news on when?
  • + 1
 The pics posted by another site showed 6 Fuels, 3 27.5 and 3 29. Same story for the Remedy.
  • - 2
 Errr... All shim damping is regressive, so yes it has been done before!!! Also the whole 'met at Nascar' and 'Fox refined our design' parts do a lot to scare me... Bit more excited about the new CCDB inline shock really
  • + 4
 I believe you are mixing up digressive and regressive there. In a digressive damping curve, the damping coefficient (but not damping force) reduces above a certain speed. In a regressive damping curve, the actual damping force drops to a lower value at a higher speed.
  • + 5
 You got it. Digressive has been done a lot, and works very well. Regressive is maybe the next step forward.
  • + 1
 dcamp2- What's really funny is that four years ago I was posting about Penske and regressive damping and how it would apply to mountain bikes and the difference between digressive and regressive. I would just get blank stares from people when I talked to them about it...
  • + 1
 Can someone please explain to me what the f*cking difference is?
  • + 4
 new damper valve. it is an improvement on what was on the bikes last year. ride one.
  • + 1
 Wish I could retro fit this damper into my Slash drcv
  • + 1
 I am shocked by this new technology!
  • + 2
 Looks like a Trek
  • - 2
 Check the Norco Killer Range 2013 650B..... looks like me2
  • + 1
 @Jimmy0 ha ha you are a very punny guy.
  • - 2
 Fack Trek
Why not buy something like a pivot that uses frame and linkage technology to achieve the same thing that Trek and Specialized have to do through proprietary shocks?
  • + 1
 You are free to buy whatever bike you like best Smile
  • - 3
 All Fox did was COPY what Avalanche Racing and Foes Racing did long ago and Craig at Avalanche Downhill Racing still pushes the envelope with his fork and shock mods!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • + 0
 Sounds like specialized brain suspension to me
  • + 2
 You need to read some more of this thread. dcamp2 explained in detail how it works a ways up in this thread.

The main difference the best that I understand and can summarize:

Spec Brain uses the inertia of a brass weight balanced with a spring, activated from wheel impact (all mounted in a remote location) to open/close shock valving.

vs

Trek RE:aktiv uses a special spring and washer configuration (in the main shock body) activated based on shock speed to control valving. Firm for slow shock motion (i.e. pedaling forces), open for fast shock motion (i.e. real bump absorption.)

The Trek system should be less troublesome than the remote Brain, and may actually react with less delay than what occurs when the Brain is set firm. It takes a good hit to open up if set firm which makes a solo bump or the first hit in a series bigger than without the Brain.

I love the concept. I'm going to test ride to see if reality matches the claims.
  • + 2
 Perfect description. Thank you for reading!
  • - 1
 It looks like Norco Killer Range B2 (2013)... copy paste?
  • - 2
 **active
  • - 2
 This is shocking technology. My interest in Trek has been reactivated.
  • + 2
 do you mean "re:aktivated"?
  • + 0
 @finnrambo do you mean "RE:aktivated"?
  • + 2
 ENOUGH WITH THE PUNS FOR GODS SAKE!
  • + 2
 Sorry, I didn't think those puns would rebound off you like that.
  • + 1
 ha. that one was actually pretty good.
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



Copyright © 2000 - 2017. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.090643
Mobile Version of Website