just6979

Enduro and Sender are NOT six-bars. And quite different than DW-link 6, which isn't really a 6-bar either. Don't lump them together, and don't make up new categories. Downcountry was bad enough, don't make "6-bar" happen.

If the short-link four-bars get link rotation differentiation, then why don't the long-link four-bars get that distinction? Why not the linkage-driven single-pivots?

@huckschwinn: Sure you're sure? ISCG mounts (which aren't really for bashguard... hence the ChainGuide part of the name) are not as common as they used to be, and with DirectMount rings everywhere, getting a real bashguard onto a modern bike often means spending extra money (104BCD cranks, ring, and bashring; or WolfTooth stainless DM ring with custom WT stainless bashring)

@smartyiak: Industry inertia. Everyone expects 175, maybe 170 on a Small, and maybe maybe 165 on an XS. So if company X started putting 170s on XLs people would question it and possibly make it not worth the trouble for company X to do it. But yeah, it's been shown that crank length doesn't have much correlation to power output, especially in mtb type situations (track is a bit different). I'm 5'10 and usually ride a size Large from most companies, and have run 170 cranks forever now. I've had to make swaps on all my bike except the last, Stumpy 27.5 2018+ Large, which came with 170s (SRAM DM though, so I still swapped them to a RaceFace 104BCD because I need a real bashguard, but that's another story. Also gained even more clearance because the SRAMs are the same casting just drilled differently, so the 170's crank arm itself is still as long as a 175, where-as RaceFace is doing different castings as of 2019, and that's yet another story.

@bananowy: "If anything, your suspension will work better and bike weight will matter less." Fucking nailed it! I'm the biggest rider in my group at 100 kg, and my bike is expectedly the heaviest as well (I run strong tires, big dropper, big alloy bars, etc), but when it's considered relative to body weight I actually have the lightest bike! I do have a fairly high leverage frame (Stumpy 27.5 2018+) so I've got a ton of air in the shock, but still 1/7 out from maxing it out, so all good there! Someone heavier might want to switch to coil, but isn't everyone just looking for an excuse to go coil anyway? Haha!

"For the medium-sized frames, the wheelbases are also similar, with the Yeti being a mere 3.6mm longer." But the reach is 16mm longer, at 460.2mm, on the Yeti. With, half a degree slacker head tube and longer fork, something doesn't add up. The Yeti should have much more wheelbase relative to the Revel. One of these measurements is not like the other... (The headtube length is ~10mm short on the Yeti, but the 10mm longer fork means the top of the headtube is pretty much the same height, so that small potential difference in reach can be factored out.)

"the smoothness of the suspension was one of the most noticeable qualities of the Rascal's ride" So you could put that fork and shock on any bike and it would be awesome? Because if they were the "most noticable", then the rest of it just doesn't matter as much... Chain growth? Anti-rise? Who knows?! I only noticed how smooth the shock was!

@bananowy: That's human body weight. OP said "dude", probably means male body weight

"To achieve this, the links are aligned so that they line up with the chain line throughout the entire travel range." Umm, you can see in the video that the bottom link's alignment to the chain changes through the travel...