Bright Racing Shocks F929 Next-3RC: The Evolution

Feb 21, 2024 at 13:06
by Bright Racing  
F929 Next-3RC

Press Release: Bright Racing Shocks F929 Next-3RC - The Evolution

Handmade in Italy with love.

NEXT is Bright Racing Shocks' (BRS) dedicated enduro MTB fork, and the second generation (with the initial fork being produced from 2021 to now) brings marked improvements over the inceptive model. BRS was born with a commitment to innovation, and with the third generation of the NEXT model, named NEXT-3RC (where RC stands for Regularity Competition), due out this month, Bright has decided to push the envelope even further.

Pablo Fiorilli, owner, and designer for BRS, decided to make a USD fork for the MTB world based on the Sliding Bushings structure found in motocross forks, a solution he has been developing since the 1990s with his first FIMOCO Engineering brand in Downhill. BRS was the first to develop the sliding bushing for MTB forks, solving the typical problems of USD's. Using a combination of sliding bushings and an innovative carbon composite upper tube construction. This combination, when perfectly tuned, allows the dynamic response of carbon fiber to be exploited with the precision and incisiveness of the sliding bushings system, helping create a uniquely stuff yet resilient chassis. .

For the past 12 years, BRS forks have offered athletes and enthusiasts a high level of riding precision, thanks in part to the performance of the ACAD (Anti Cavitation Active Damber) hydraulic cartridge, which was designed to offer increased support and stability compared to traditionally available Enduro forks. The ACAD cartridge has also been redesigned with extensive use, especially in recent years, using telemetry and simulation programs, and is now in its eighth edition. Of note and designed into the ACAD is a dynamic sag where the fork effectively has none. With built-in negative travel, actual measurable sag is cut down over a traditional fork, leaving your axle to crown true when on the bike, therefore not changing the bike's head angle and its ride characteristics. More on that below.

bigquotesWhen I started thinking about the Bright Racing Shocks project in 2009, there was widespread skepticism around my idea to create a USD suspension from scratch. Today we can proudly say that our F929 fork, in both NEXT, XCO, and Skunk versions, was the first USD fork to overcome the typical structural and functional problems of this type of fork in the MTB world, including the first to use sliding bushings in a mtb application. Our ongoing efforts now focus on optimizing the hydraulic systems of our forks, with the continued development of our ACAD cartridge, in its eighteenth version (across each fork model). In addition to the mechanical structure, we believe that what a rider needs is a system that adapts to their riding style continuously.

Here at Bright, this is what we work on relentlessly. We believe that offering every user, whether pro or amateur, a customized and upgradeable setup is the key to success for a high-performance suspension manufacturer. Our motto 'competition prototype, sold to the public' perfectly reflects our philosophy.
Pablo Fiorilli, the mastermind behind it all

What's new on the third-generation NEXT:

F929 Next-3RC

OUTER LEGS:
In the previous version, the outer legs were 49mm in diameter with a shape designed for high stiffness. The outer legs of the NEXT-3RC change with a new mold and design, reducing the diameter to 48mm but introducing reinforcing ribs on the sides to increase stiffness in an oriented manner, following lateral stress flows. Because of this new shape, mechanical performance has been further increased while decreasing the weight and giving it a sleek, tapered finish.

F929 Next-3RC

CROWN:
The fork crown, which retains its complex workmanship as a billet-milled piece of 7075-T751 aircraft aluminum, is reshaped with a new design, fine-tuned using dedicated software to identify active masses. This analysis makes it possible to create a design with greater dynamic stiffness over previous models. The crown also functions as an air chamber bypass system. The crown is hollow on each side with a chamber designed to capture and displace air as the fork cycles. This system is connected through the steer tube allowing for increased air volume which then flows across the legs. The idea of connecting the two outer legs comes from the mind of EVERFLOW of Italy, which implemented this design two years ago by applying external ducts on traditional forks. Bright brought that concept back to USD architecture by integrating the air passages through the crown and steer.

STANCHIONS:
The stanchions now have more overlap with the outer legs to handle greater travel while simultaneously increasing stiffness. The manufacturing process has been refined to achieve a more perfect roundness and straightness, they are finished almost entirely by hand with special abrasive stones to achieve a precision finish. The high-thickness anodization process, with great microporosity, ensures smooth stanchions even under high stresses.

DROPOUTS AND STANCHION GUARDS:
Previous dropouts were designed with reinforcing ribs for increased anti-twist at the axle (Torque Caps are not optional) and this design stays unchanged except for the introduction of fork guard integration. Previous NEXT forks had stanchion guards attached from the upper tubes (still available as an option) but now, the dropouts will have attachment points.

The new stanchion guards are made by SLS (Selective Laser Sintering) 3D printing to achieve an elastic but strong material. The fork will be available with or without stanchion guards, and as mentioned, in two versions: DCMS with the classic BRS top mount and the new MX version with the stanchion guards mounted on the leg.

F929 Next-3RC

CALIPER BRACKET:
The brake caliper bracket undergoes a total modification, yet remains backward compatible with the forks of previous years. Reinforced and equipped with an additional dedicated brake line bracket, it offers more rigid brake support toward the top of the outer leg compared to previous generations. This optional, removable piece weighs just about 30g. The new design also aims for greater stability that helps yield increased braking power.

Sliding bushings
Sliding bushings
BUSHING SYSTEM:
As the first to dedicate their line to using sliding bushing technology, BRS has increased the torsional stiffness of the newest NEXT fork by increasing the length of the sliding bushings. Hardness level has also increased for the raceways of the bushings, to further prevent premature wear and offer smoother travel.

ACAD HYDRAULIC CARTRIDGE:
The brains of the fork is the new ACAD #8 cartridge. In this version, initial sensitivity and elasticity increase with further notable gains in stability over high impacts due to a longer air spring. According to telemetry tests, the ability of version #8 to copy the terrain profile, compared to version #7, has increased by approximately 20%. The rebound end-stop is redesigned, with a hydraulic valve to manage its limits.

TRAVEL E-TUNING:
Maximum travel increases to 195mm, with the last 15mm dedicated as negative travel, pushing the fork into the ground. Two different stock versions of the ACAD cartridge are available (they also offer custom-built). The two stock units are “RACING” and “COMFORT.” The Racing cartridge is classic Bright style with Active Sag Control, offering the 15mm of negative travel, a more controlled, active initial stroke with stronger progression to the bottom, whereas the comfort cartridge will offer the same travel, but a more “traditional” feel with no negative travel, less responsiveness with an initial stroke that is smoother. All can be configured to the rider’s desire at the time of ordering.

F929 Next-3RC

POSITIVE AIR CHAMBER:
BRS has added a compensation blow-off valve at the top of the new crown that works in conjunction with the air chambers in the crown. This valve helps control the mid-stroke feel of the fork. As the crown acts as additional volume for the air spring, the new external valve will let you regulate how much air is in the chambers, therefore allowing you to decrease the volume on the fly as necessary.

Testing

For more information or to order, email Pablo directly at: info@brightracingshocks.com or visit Brightracingshocks.com.





Author Info:
Brightracingshocks avatar

Member since Feb 14, 2024
1 articles

68 Comments
  • 66 0
 MSRP is "If you have to ask, you can't afford it"
  • 7 1
 REMEMBER TRUST...
  • 4 0
 Weight is "If you have to ask, ......
  • 5 0
 Wheel size is "If you have to ask, ..." Same goes for axle standard.
  • 4 0
 Weight supposedly 2150g, price starts at 2000eu
  • 3 2
 Well carbon dorados are £1200, can be set at 180,190,200 n look way cooler Wink
  • 6 0
 Oh yeah, Seb‘s gonna love this air spring, hahaha. At least they took care of the topout issue, still a very questionable approach imo, to put it diplomatically.
USD makes sence, don‘t forget Intend. The front to back stiffness is far superior to conventional forks (that‘s why preferred on motorcycles, hard braking) as is the binding behaviour under braking or in general. Torsion is a different story, but can also be an advantage in certain situations. Contrary to popular believe unsprung mass is tyically not lower on USD.
So before I would buy a heavy ZEB or 38, I would much prefer an Intend bandit or something similar, purely based on technical aspects, ignoring prices. I would love to see a mass market USD enduro fork.
  • 2 2
 Excuse my ignorance but why would you want much more fore-aft stiffness? Of course you need the fork to stay composed and not fold up under braking and compressions, but other than that my feeling is that torsional stiffness is all. If anything I was wondering if some fore-aft movement may help with small trail chatter, but I haven't put much thought into it as I wouldn't consider anything less torsionally stiff than a Zeb for hard riding anyways.
I'm noticing there really are massive differences in preferences, even riding on the same terrain. That may very well include stiffness preferences, where some people appreciate the fork having some "give" and finding its way around, while other people are looking for millimetres of precision with where the wheel will be.
  • 1 0
 @MrDuck: Stiffness under braking is what you want. Slop from traditional forks is terrible, even on dual crown versions. USD forks make it easier to do nose manuals and nose turns. Excessive torsional stiffness causes chatter and can deflect the front wheel and make it hard to keep a line through rough offcamber sections. Plus USD forks get stiffer the further in the travel they go.
  • 1 1
 @tralebuilder: Well, torsional stiffness is what I want. I honestly don't care much about stoppies, unless I'm on a near vertical rock slab where I definitely want my fork to track straight first and foremost because at that moment I only care about precision. I don't do many nose turns racing downhill. What I do, however, is lean into a turn and point my wheels in an ideal line if I'm on my game. I've had forks and bikes with less stiffness, and a back to back comparisons between Zeb, Boxxer and Lyrick on daily basis. I have never noticed the single crown bikes' much lower fore-aft stiffness apart from wearing out CSUs. I do easily notice my front wheel being less predictable under high load turns on the Lyrik. So while I agree that stiffness under braking is what I want, I still am confident in my experience that torsional stiffness is a priority. As in a thing I actually notice when it decreases.
But then if your main point is stoppies and nose turns, I suspect we ride differently and have different demands on our suspension?
  • 1 0
 @MrDuck: I ride mainly natural terrain both fast and slow tech. I need a fork that tracks the terrain well and that doesn't bind. This is why I don't like right side up forks both single and dual crown ones.
  • 8 0
 Uh-oh.... last time the comments got spicy.
  • 8 0
 God inverted forks look so sick, 10/10 would ride one.
  • 5 0
 Any idea if they are going to release a version for tandem mountain bikes?
  • 2 0
 I've got a full suspension Bike-E recumbent i'm keen to put a 16" version on. Wonder how long before they release that?
  • 2 0
 If they do, I hope it's cross-compatible with my tandem mountain e-bike.
  • 1 0
 @james182: the good old random tandem!
  • 6 0
 Ribbed for….
  • 5 0
 Piece of art
  • 4 0
 Sexy
  • 4 0
 It is a looker
  • 2 0
 "incisiveness of the sliding bushings"

The forceful decision making of the bushings?
  • 1 2
 Intend got there first with their moto offering.
  • 3 1
 @EdSawyer: Sorry, no, we have been using sliding bushing systems in our forks for years before Intend.
  • 1 0
 So, they have the most bushing overlap when the lowers have the least leverage against the bushings... Diminishing returns it would seem.
  • 2 0
 Exactly how almost any dropper works. It's got its advantages for sure.
  • 1 0
 @MrDuck: what advantage? If it could be made to fit, any dropper would benefit greatly from having max overlap be at the top instead of the bottom. The sliding bushing setup used in most droppers minimizes drag under load the most at bottom out. So, when loaded with weight on the seat, your post might move marginally easier near bottom out. This helps nothing, since the most friction is in the position where it takes the most load: getting it started downward from near top out.

Literally the same with a fork: highest loads at full extension when the leverage is longest, and in the case of this fork, when the bushing overlap is smallest. Yes it's probably (hopefully) not smaller than other forks, but it's kind of a waste to put effort into enabling sliding bushings to increase overlap as the leverage decreases. Rather see it be less expensive then just to know it has minimal friction at bottom out.
  • 2 0
 @justinfoil: I'm not saying it's ultimately better in any specific application. I see nothing convincing about this fork, but am trying to be objective. Like you acknowledge in the second paragraph, the bushing overlap is (hopefully) not smaller than a conventional design at any point. It's inaccurate to assume friction matters less deeper in travel. There are many situations where the bike is loaded in a compression, turning and trying to keep traction over uneven terrain. So reducing friction there isn't pointless.
That said, I can't see myself riding an USD fork until it's as stiff torsionally as a Zeb, because of the exact same situation where precision is more important to me. I definitely can't see myself riding a fork without a big negative air chamber either. Just trying to appreciate some things I feel they did right. Of course I only say that because I don't care what the fork costs as I'm not interested in buying one. I understand your point of that expense being unnecessary in the fork, but that applies to so many marginal improvements on our bikes..
  • 1 0
 @MrDuck: "It's inaccurate to assume friction matters less deeper in travel."

But it does, in a way, Not simply friction, but friction from bushing overlap, or lack there-of, does matter less. Between the shorter leverage arm and increasing influence of spring rate in the factors resisting compression, reducing bushing friction _only_ at deep compression is redundant.

Yes, Friction always matters, but reducing it only for this situation puts it in the tiniest of margins at best, pointless in reality, and a waste of resources (R&D, engineering, materials) at worst. Give me better bushings all around with maximum extended overlap, not grams of force reduction from increasing bushing overlap while the spring is increasing force by tens of kilograms.
  • 2 0
 I miss the Maverick USD fork.
  • 2 0
 That really reads like it was AI generated.
  • 2 1
 Just wait until PUSH enters the chat..
  • 3 0
 9/1 is coming…
  • 5 1
 @wmelton14: Gohna wait for the push 9/11 dual tower design.
  • 2 0
 Or Intend
  • 2 0
 Ummm... X-Fusion Revel?
  • 1 0
  Just AWESOME
  • 1 0
 How much $$$?
  • 3 0
 2K Euro
  • 6 6
 20 bucks I’ll break it on the first ride somehow
  • 1 0
 18+
  • 2 2
 WTF is negative travel?
  • 11 0
 From what I’ve been told, it’s more travel that drops away from the bike to keep the wheels planted to the ground longer. Basically extra sag that doesn’t affect your suspension setup but it sounds cooler to use trophy truck terminology.

*correct me if I’m wrong though*
  • 8 0
 The droop travel from sag.
  • 3 0
 160mm of travel, but sits at 140mm when sagged, you'd have 20mm of "negative" travel. It's a really important figure for terrain fallowing, you'll see a lot of desert racing vehicles (like Dakar rigs) have large amounts of negative travel, they sit static at a large % of total travel / sag to help deal with big features at speed, maintain contact with the ground and control.
  • 3 0
 This seems like a surprising comment from you., maybe you just missed your coffee this morning.... As noted, the amount of travel from the sagged position, that can drop into a hole. Youre familiar with this idea, maybe just hadnt heard the term before.
  • 3 1
 It's how you measure travel after you snap your frame or fork.
  • 2 0
 Less than positive travel. Duh.
  • 1 0
 I know what sag is, just thought they mean something different, so they just have a version with no sag? Still wtf
  • 1 0
 @lkubica: Thats part of their whole way of thinking, no sag, full send.
  • 1 1
 Sag
  • 1 1
 yeah, nah....
Below threshold threads are hidden







Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.042645
Mobile Version of Website