First Look: The Shout - Trust Performance's New Long Travel Linkage Fork
Trust Performance's 'Message' linkage fork made waves when it debuted last year thanks to its unique look, sky-high price, and long list of claimed performance benefits. The fact that Trust was founded by industry veterans Dave Weagle, Jason Schiers, and Hap Selig didn't hurt things either. Now, that fork is being joined by a new longer travel sibling, the Shout.
The Shout has 178mm of travel, but because its axle path isn't entirely linear (Trust call it 'contour travel') it should be able to replace 29" forks with between 160-180mm of travel, or between 160-170mm of travel on a 27.5” wheeled bike.
It's constructed with a single piece carbon chassis and steerer tube, and uses a twin-tube, thru-shaft damper that's housed in the right leg, along with two air springs, one in each leg. How much does it cost? The Shout will leave your wallet $1,975 USD lighter.
The Shout has 178mm of travel, but because its axle path isn't entirely linear (Trust call it 'contour travel') it should be able to replace 29" forks with between 160-180mm of travel, or between 160-170mm of travel on a 27.5” wheeled bike.
It's constructed with a single piece carbon chassis and steerer tube, and uses a twin-tube, thru-shaft damper that's housed in the right leg, along with two air springs, one in each leg. How much does it cost? The Shout will leave your wallet $1,975 USD lighter.
Shout Fork Details
• 178mm contour travel
• Air sprung
• Carbon chassis, aluminum pivots
• Externally adjustable rebound, low-speed compression
• Axle-to-crown: 580mm
• 250-hour service interval
• 15 x 110mm Boost spacing
• Lifetime bearing warranty
• Weight: 2170 grams (claimed)
• MSRP: $1975 USD
• www.trustperformance.com
• 178mm contour travel
• Air sprung
• Carbon chassis, aluminum pivots
• Externally adjustable rebound, low-speed compression
• Axle-to-crown: 580mm
• 250-hour service interval
• 15 x 110mm Boost spacing
• Lifetime bearing warranty
• Weight: 2170 grams (claimed)
• MSRP: $1975 USD
• www.trustperformance.com
 | Shout is long-travel suspension, designed to match the performance capabilities of today’s long-travel enduro bikes. |
Just like the shorter travel Message, the Shout uses a trailing, multi-link design, which is said to provide very consistent handling at the beginning, middle, and end of the stroke. Remember, the Shout doesn't have a 1:1 leverage ratio like a telescoping fork - it has an axle path and leverage ratio that's closer to what you'd find on a rear suspension design.
An aluminum lever allows riders to choose between three compression modes: firm, medium, and open. Both the medium and open modes are independently adjustable, which makes it possible to fine tune the feel of those settings to suit the terrain and a rider's preferences. The firm mode operates a little differently than a typical lockout – it only engages after the fork goes through 20% of its travel. That means that the initial portion of the stroke is available to take the edge off the chattery sections of trail that can feel uncomfortably harsh with a traditional lockout.
The Shout comes with three "Huck Puck" volume spacers installed in each air spring, and up to two more can be installed on each side to create additional bottom out resistance, a procedure that only requires two Allen keys. There's clearance for up to a 29 x 2.6” tire or 27.5 x 2.8”, and claimed weight for the fork is 2170 grams.
An air spring is housed in each leg; setup begins by inflating each side to match the rider's body weight.
There are three compression settings, with additional fine tuning options available for the mid- and open positions.
Mike Levy went over the details and backstory of the Message fork in extensive detail, and you can read about Trust Performance's origins here. The Message's final performance report was a bit mixed, pun intended. There were scenarios where its handling, especially in the corners, put it above its traditional telescoping peers, but it didn't deliver the most comfortable ride. For a 130mm fork that's not the end of the world, but the expectations for how the Shout should feel are going to be even higher considering the amount of travel and the terrain it's designed to handle.
Ride Impressions
I only have one single lap on the Shout so far, although it was a good long one, beginning from the top of the Garbanzo Zone in the Whistler Bike Park and heading back down to the base area nearly 4,000 vertical feet below.
The fork, which was mounted to a Yeti SB150, wasn't the absolute final production version, but its handling certainly piqued my interest, especially during high-speed bermed turns. Most of us unconsciously prepare for the front end of a full-suspension bike to dive a bit in that situation, a response developed from years of riding traditional telescoping forks. That wasn't the case with the Shout; it felt as if the handlebar was staying in the same position, but the front wheel was sucking up all of the braking bumps the wheel was rolling over. On the rougher terrain the Shout felt calm and composed, and I didn't experience any undue harshness in my hands or forearms. It was uncannily smooth, a sensation I hadn't been expecting after hearing various reports about the shorter travel Message.
A production version is set to arrive any day now – I'll be mounting that up and putting it to the test this fall in order to see how it stacks up against the other top competitors in this category.
Author Info:
Member since Feb 1, 2009
Must Read This Week
How to Watch the 2024 Mountain Bike World Cup [Update: Staylive Offering Access in New Zealand, South Africa & More]
60327 views
60327 views
[UPDATED] Final Elite XC Results & Overall Standings from the Mairiporã XC World Cup 2024
41243 views
41243 views
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup
Let's go to the our reporter live on the scene:
media.giphy.com/media/fSONfbG5ieaEo/giphy.gif
1. Message (Trail)
2. Shout (Enduro/AM)
3. Scream (DH)
4. Whisper (linkage rigid fork so people that ride cross/rigid bikes can find a way to spend more money on the fork)
But then that would say "Trust the PB comments", and that's rarely a good idea.
Kick my heels up and (Shout!)
Throw my hands up and (Shout!)
Throw my head back and (Shout!)
Come on now (Shout!)
And what about that poor girl that's now fuking dead??
If only trust would like to send me one for troll-review... I’d promise to take it all over local group rides for people to see and squish it
The Shout, may shout "I am different, I am expensive, you are poor and conformist and you better fix those fillings, I may give you a good price" but trying different things is indeed necessary, one cannot bounce between Lyrik with shitty bushing fit and a creaking crown of a 36. I want the shout like I want to make love to a dwarf person. Unlike haters not liking it for the looks, the only thing I am worried is that I will like it. So much that I may want to get even more adventurous with my choices, only to find myself wishing to dip a cactus in chilli sauce and put it on Reverb dropper instead of saddle, hoping it will SAG.
The fork:
Unboxing has been a walk in the park, fork comes at 2200g which roughly translates to...
(Clong!) Aaaaaaaah! Aaaaaaaaaah! Tsssss! Aaaaaaaaah! Tsssssss! Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa Ghaaaaaaaaaawd! It burns! Aaaah God it butns!
You can use that as a base.
My question is why other racing disciplines haven't developed a similar design or if they have, why haven't they been widely adopted? Motocross or MotoGP racing for example where suspension is key?
To the untrained eye it resembles the suspension on a Speedway bike, not known for their versatility.
vintagecannondale.com/cannondale/headshok/1997/1997_01.jpg
The main reason linkage forks aren't used in MotoGP is that the packaging constraints mean they can't get the weight of the bike far enough forwards - some of those things have the front wheels buzzing the radiator. Linkage forks have been used in MX with success (Roger DeCoster in the 1980s) but were abandoned for weight and cost at the time. Also hard to get a lot of travel out of them because the links need to get longer and longer, which in turn takes up more space.
And yet the Britten won a lot of races...
The big issue with linkage forks is not one of engineering, but one of familiarity. If you start racing bikes pre teens on teles and are then asked to adapt to a fork in your 20s where mass transfer and HA changes are fundamentally different you're not going win races. And pro teams rely on results to attract and keep sponsors. Typically, you get half to one full season to prove yourself... If you don't, you get dropped... So no one is going to take the risk given the lack of time available to adapt.
Besides different anti-dive behaviour of these forks, they greatly differ in axle path as well. Structure must be totally different.
A motorcycle winning a few races isn't proof that linkage front suspension works. Technology is out there, and teams innovate all the time. If it was a viable alternative, it would be on bikes today. Take the rotary engine for example - Norton built a 700cc rotary bike that pumps out 200 hp, more than some 1000cc I4 bikes, with way less ew While seems good on paper, it turns out that the more frequent power pulses from the rotary are actually worse for traction than wider spaced pulses of the inline. Or more recently, I4 seemingly has the advantages over V4 in weight and compactness, but V4s are winning more races.
Also disagree about familiarity. Riders use prototype components during races all the time.
The physics don't quite add up with your explanation. If you have anti-dive, your effective suspension is firmer, since you have both the spring and the anti-dive effect forcing the wheel down. Even if your anti dive is preventing your suspension from diving into the higher spring rate, there is still a force that is resisting the suspension from compressing, and when the wheel encounters a bump, it will transfer more to the handlebars than if you didn't have anti-dive. So the advantage of anti dive is not really a spring rate consideration as much as a geometry consideration in keeping the head angle steeper, which works well for trail bikes that have short travel.
However, for enduro bikes, the modern longer travel air forks are quite linear due to larger negative chambers, especially without volume spacers, and some people run coil forks, the advantages of which you guys state on your website. So even if the front end dives, you still have plenty of compliance at a softer spring rate, and the bikes are long and slack enough to not have to worry about the geometric trail. So you don't want anti-dive ruining this, especially in the latter part of the travel where the air suspension starts to ramp up.
As for motorcycles, especially sportbikes, the situation is a little bit different. You want the front end dive not because of feel, but because you want to reduce the trail and make the bike easier to tip into the corner. With the exception of small cc bikes that are set up for more lean and maximum corner speed, most sport bikes prioritize exit on the power out of a corner, where they make up the lap time, which requires very good front end stability since you are on the throttle as you are leaned over. As a result, trail braking is required for good turning so that you reduce the trail/wheelbase by diving the forks which makes the bike turn in better.
Keep in mind that back in the Britten 1000 days, the tire situation was much different. Corner speeds were way lower because the tires did not grip as well laterally, so riders like Mickey Doohan used to ride all crossed up in corners. A bike like the 1000 could have worked against the compeition given how bikes were ridden. Now, in motoGP, guys are dragging shoulders because the corner speeds are significantly higher, and require much more lateral offset of center of mass for balance. And at high lean angles, any small disturbance to the front can result in you going down.
Anti-dive also reduces motion of the CoM relative to the wheels, which has several benefits, including less low-frequency oscillation requiring damping and less lag in the load transfer (and thus grip available) to the front wheel - this is only really critical on roadgoing vehicles, not so much MTB. However, the benefits there are pretty small compared to weight distribution (packaging) and outright weight considerations for MotoGP etc. There are some Moto2 teams using linkage front ends however.
However, the biggest advantage of anti-dive, particularly for off-road applications, is that you considerably increase traction during rebound events (for systems utilising any counter-rotational aspect of the axle-carrying link to generate the anti-dive) which critically is the only time that tyre contact with the ground can ever be lost or substantially reduced, because the rotation of the wheel itself causes the extension of the suspension whenever there is reduced vertical load on the axle. That is why they generate quantifiably improved grip on rougher terrain - there is better contact with the ground and reduced variation in contact patch load. For roadgoing applications, linkage forks need to be very laterally stiff to maintain good grip under brakes however, because any flexural chatter can lead to variations in CPL that can't be overcome by the spring force since (if there's 100% anti-dive) there may not be any substantially increased spring preload on the wheel. If they can do that - and the Britten fork did, as does Duolever - then they can offer considerable improvements in braking distance and maintaining slip.
Yet here we are with 4 bar, DwLink, single pivot, Linkage Driven shock, NaildR3ACT, McPherson struts and all sorts of black magic heckty that delivers very intersting flavors to the ride.
This is the first linkage fork thing that the linkage thing is not in the headset area. This alone makes this thing way sexier than other comparable front suspensions.
Thumbs up for Trust people. Would have one if it didn't cost close to 9 thousand money in brazil.
My point is, we have som much diversity when it comes to frame, why not take advantage from engeneering and have some diversity for the front end too?
Color me reluctantly interested!
I feel like reviews of a fork this expensive need to be done by people who have paid actual money for it to be taken seriously. It’s kinda like reviewing a $20k bike, that you didn’t pay for...
And the question I have for anyone that paid real money for it: Would you buy another one when the new version of it comes out?
Head angle needs to be slack for certain reasons besides geometric trail. Wheelbase is arguably more important than geometric trail, and also, slacker head angles align the fork more with the vector of impact to the wheel, so you get better suspension action and less bending of the fork.
The message works well for shorter travel bikes, because it lets you keep the geometric trail that would decrease with the head angle collapse, but it does so with a price - it moves the wheel back, putting more of your weight on it in the process. For trail riding this is not really that bad, since you arent sending huge rock gardens at speed. But for enduro, where the longer wheelbase gives you that sweet stability where you don't feel like you are going to go OTB, you don't want the wheel moving back.
As for pedaling, thats not a HA issue as much as a design issue. Just have a long front center to make up for slack head angle. Hill climb guys with custom long swingarms on their mx guys have known this for ages. Pole and Nicolai got it right the first time, others are starting to catch on with the steep seat tube angles.
Again, it depends on the ride. If you take a regular trail bike and put a trust message on, its gonna improve the handling on your local trails due to all its advantages.
With enduro, the requirements are a little bit different. Enduro bikes with their 180mm forks are meant to tackle rock gardens like you see on world cup dh circuits, albeit not at the same speed. For this, you want to minimize the weight over the front, so it doesn't get caught in ruts and under braking you are more balanced. The whole mullet bike thing is also partially about that - having shorter chainstays with 27.5 wheel allows riders to get more over the rear wheel.
The big complaint with the Message was that it wasn't good over chundery terrain that has repetitive hits. This is pretty much on par with what enduro is.
So where can we demo this thing? Outerbike Moab?
The market for this is, by definition, people like me who want to put it on their existing bike. It’s already a bit of a leap of faith here to invest in one, just wondering how the company justifies a single A2C for such a wide range of bikes (160mm 27.5 to 180mm 29er). Maybe the ride is just so different to make that number not super relevant for ride feel. If that’s true I want to know why.
Might make me....https://youtu.be/VLnWf1sQkjY
There is no way I am putting such a complex thing on any of my bikes. And, besides being complex, it's so UGLY!
-These forks
-Telescoping Drivetrain
-What else?
My take.
Dude 2 : "Yeah, but she can cook and sew her own clothes and keeps the house clean"