RockShox's New Super Deluxe Shock - First Ride

Apr 7, 2016 at 5:52
by Rachelle Frazer Boobar  


After last week's somewhat cryptic press release about metric shock sizing from RockShox that didn't do much other than stir up a storm of comments, we’re now finally able to talk about what the announcement means and why RockShox has decided to change things up. Tied to this news is the release of two new air-sprung shocks, the Super Deluxe and the Deluxe, that have been made possible by the shift in shock sizing.


The Super Deluxe and Deluxe names might sound familiar to anyone who's been around for more than a decade, but much like how the new Pike has basically nothing in common with its original namesake, both the Super Deluxe and Deluxe are entirely new from the ground up. They are also an evolution of several years worth of work that involved stripping away the current rear shock sizing constraints, a step the RockShox says was required in order to develop an entirely new product.

The major difference between older designs and the Super Deluxe and Deluxe is a new set of metric eye-to-eye lengths, new metric stroke lengths, and reformed metric hardware options. More than that, though, there’s the claim of improved performance, with RockShox saying that both new shocks have ''drastically reduced friction'' thanks to increased bushing overlap, bearing-equipped eyelets, and new seals. We were told that all that adds up to unparalleled traction, increased durability, and that the new metric sizing will make everyone's lives easier, from suspension companies to the frame designer, right down to the end user.

All that sounds promising, but is it true? We spent three days with RockShox in North Vancouver to find out what the new shocks are all about and, more importantly, to see if they are actually any better than what's currently out there.

n
n

Super Deluxe Details

• Intended use: trail / enduro
• Metric sizing
• New bushing design
• New scraper seal
• Three independently tunable compression settings
• Spring: DebonAir or SoloAir
• Mount: trunnion, bearing, Standard DU
• Weight: RC3: 403g / R: 388g
• Will be available on select 2017 bike models
Deluxe Details

• Intended use: XC / trail
• Metric sizing
• New bushing design
• News scraper seal
• Spring: DebonAir or SoloAir
• Mount: trunnion, bearing, Standard DU
• Weight: RT3: 317g / RL: 311g / RT: 311 / R: 294 /
• Will be available on select 2017 bike models

So what's different between the Super Deluxe and the Deluxe shocks? Both feature increased bushing overlap, new scraper seals, metric sizing, and bearing eyelets, but the Super Deluxe also sports a piggyback for more oil volume, and it has new and independently tunable compression settings. The Deluxe, on the other hand, features the damping system from RockShox's Monarch and is an inline style shock. Both will be available in three mounting styles: bearing eyelet, trunnion, and a standard DU setup. Neither will be available as an aftermarket upgrade, at least not anytime soon.


specs


Metric Sizing and How They Ended Up There

RockShox explained that it all started with one question: ''How can we replicate the success of the Pike fork but in a shock?'' During the development of Pike, RockShox said that they chased every single detail and opportunity for improvement, even if it meant looking beyond what they were doing at the time. So, taking that philosophy, they looked at how they could change and enhance their shock technology.

The first couple of things they wanted to do were to increase the bushing overlap to improve rigidity (which reduces loaded friction), and introduce a bearing into the eyelet. To tackle these changes, they knew they were going to need more space - the sizing framework that currently exists isn’t going to support their wishlist. And if they were going to toy with the notion of no boundaries, what else is possible, they wondered. How can they improve things for the rider, the shops, the designers, and the manufacturers?

Design Engineer Tim Lynch spent a full year looking for patterns and trends in RockShox's Tune Tracker database that includes all details of all the different bikes that they’ve ever worked with. He then isolated the five key suspension parameters that frame designers work within; percent rise, curve shape, average leverage ratio, stroke options, and mounting systems before beginning to hash out the opportunities for integration, design, and performance improvements.

Lynch saw that they could utilize the proposed extra space by developing consistent IFP (internal floating piston) volumes across the size range, a change that should provide a consistent feel between each shock size. The next area to address was to create a logical and evenly spaced size progression - hello, metric. Finally, they wanted to limit and focus the hardware options to make things simpler.
Sd

RockShox had enough of a plan at that point that they could approach frame manufacturers to pitch the promise of performance improvements and standardization. It's a bit of a risk on their part, to be fair, as in order to accommodate the new sizing and mounting options, frame designers will have to make some adjustments to their design process. Many of the brands weighed up the options and, seeing the end advantages, agreed that although they will have to make accommodations, it won't impact their designs negatively.

With frame designers open to change, the final piece to this puzzle was going to be inviting the other suspension manufacturers to the party. RockShox says that they went door-knocking with the intention of bringing all of the players into the conversation and present the idea of developing a structured size range along with a hardware overhaul. The majority of the manufacturers saw the potential to make improvements in their own product lines, and together a new framework was built. Change is on its way and it is metric sizing.


x


Tell Me About The New Sizes Already

Long story short, there is more length per stroke. For years, suspension manufacturers have been reactionary to the frame manufacturer's needs and no one had ever stopped to put a system in place. So now we have a set of shocks based on imperial sizing being converted to metric names that genuinely have no logical organizational structure. The whole bike industry is based in metric and now, with proper metric sizing, rear shocks are as well.

Everything the frame designer needs to develop a bike is still there, but now there is more logic to it. Frame designers will be able to choose shock stroke by 2.5mm increments so they can optimize the percent rise, curve and leverage ration of their frame designs.

x

New, Simpler Hardware Sizing

Currently, there are eighty-two different hardware sizes to contend with, but the new metric standard uses only eighteen. Starting at 6 x 15mm and finishing at 10 x 40mm, the hardware changes in 5mm increments. This means that it will be more realistic for your local bike shop to stock the hardware sizes that you need, which means less time waiting on orders to come in, less rummaging through containers, filing down pieces, cutting parts with hack saws or wedging pieces in place.



The Tech Explained

Increased Bushing Overlap: So, imagine you are trying to install your thru-axle. It needs to be perfectly lined up otherwise it's going to require a lot of extra force to push it in because there is more friction. An increase in bushing overlap within the shock stiffens the junction between the damper body and the rest of the shock to keep it more in line with everything else, which prevents it from feeling like that misaligned thru-axle. The overlap on the air can bushings has been increased by 30%, and the piston / seal head bushing overlap has been increased by 90%. The theory being that when you’re riding your bike through a corner, and the bike is laid over while you’re hitting bumps and all the parts on your bike are twisting slightly, the extra rigidity will allow the shock to move freer to absorb the bumps and move through its travel.


Bushing
Monarch Plus bushings overlap.
Bushing
Super Deluxe bushings overlap.


Consistent IFP Across The Range: Current imperial sizing has inconsistent internal floating piston heights, and therefore varying amounts of room for a gas charge at full compression, which is something that affects spring force and makes it more difficult for a frame designer to predict the feel of the system. Certain size shocks dramatically changed force, so moving through sizes, designers have to change their kinematic or suspension design to accommodate this. However, RockShox says that with a consistent IFP height, there is now a baseline for designers to work within which can be further tuned to their needs.

Now, no matter what size shock you have, you will have the exact same force at bottom out. With the damper now creating a consistent feel, the amount of ramp (air volume) can be precisely controlled through a token system. For example, former Kona Product Manager (now RockShox Product Manager) Chris Mandell mentioned that when Kona was designing their line of Process bikes, there was a significant amount of design work to achieve a consistent feel. This new system would have alleviated some of those challenges.


Monarch
  On the left is the Monarch shock and on the right is the new Deluxe. Note the increased bushing overlap, and the additional IFP volume found within the Deluxe.


Spring Systems - DebonAir and Solo Air: Instead of multiple air volume eyelets, air cans and volume spacer types, the Deluxe and Super Deluxe will come with either a built-in DebonAir or Solo Air can and riders can use a token system, just like with RockShox's forks, to tune how their shock's air spring ramps up through its stroke. The air cans feature a lighter and sleeker single walled sleeve as opposed to the double wall sleeve of the Monarch and Monarch Plus DebonAir systems.


SD
  The Super Deluxe from the inside, which now has individual and tunable pistons for open, climb and lockout.


Super Deluxe's Improved Damper: RockShox's goal was to get that Vivid Air performance out of the Super Deluxe and still have all the necessary features. The patterns in the Tune Tracker showed that frame manufacturers wanted to independently tune a lot of this stuff, so they couldn’t have their firm and locked out settings interfere with the performance of the shock. Each setting now has its own piston that is independently tuneable so a company can set each setting exactly as they’d like for their product.

Sealed Bearing Mounts: When you are riding, your shock will rotate by roughly 70 - 120 degrees on one end of its mount while the other end will only rotate by about 5 - 15 degrees, depending on the design of your bike, of course.

By replacing the DU bushing with a bearing in the mount that sees the most rotation, something that a few aftermarket companies offer for current shocks, friction is greatly reduced and the shock is better able to work. Manufacturers can choose for this to be on either the shaft end or the body end, depending on which sees the most rotation.
bearing

The Trunnion Mount: Horizontally mounted shocks can deal with a bit of extra length, but vertically mounted shocks cannot, especially in smaller bikes where designers don’t want to adjust the top tube or standover height. A trunnion attachment has a mounting point on either side of the shock, a tactic that reduces the overall eye-to-eye length and opens up some packaging options that wouldn't be possible otherwise.

Designers will mount the bearings into their linkages - picture some Trek full-suspension bikes - and will then thread the mounting bolts into each side of the shock.
Trunnion

New Scraper Seal: The new scraper seal is physically larger, and RockShox says that it is more durable and performs better in cold weather. And, despite its increased size, they also claim that there is less friction compared to the smaller seals used on previous shocks.

Counter Measure Spring: Initially developed for the Vivid and Vivid Air, the Counter Measure is a negative spring that opposes the back-pressure from the internal floating piston. RockShox says that it is designed to massively reduce the initial breakaway force, something that should make the shock feel more supple at the top of its travel and when the stroke changes direction.

Super Deluxe Damper Shaft: The damper shaft is now larger in diameter and is said to provide added compression control by moving more oil as the shock goes through its travel.
counter measure


Rebound
  The rebound adjustment on the Super Deluxe is now a disc that sits on the top of the shock for easier on the fly adjustments.


A Few Important Questions Answered

Can I buy a Super Deluxe or Deluxe shock on its own? Nope, not yet. To try out the new metric shocks, you'll have to buy a new rig, and 2017 will see a lot of bikes using one of the new shocks.

Can I still use my older shock in a new metric frame? Nope, you can't. Different shock lengths and mounting hardware mean that this isn't possible.

Will RockShox still sell original sized shocks? Yes, they will. RockShox will offer legacy rear shocks until demand decreases, which they forecast to be around four or five years. Basically, they do plan to support the market until the market is no longer there.

Will the rest of the RockShock line be available in metric sizing? At this stage, the answer is no, but you don't need a crystal ball to see where things are going.






I spent three days riding the Super Deluxe shock on the terminally damp and dewy trails of North Vancouver aboard a Transition Patrol. I first rode the bike with a normal, 216 x 63mm Monarch Plus, which was then swapped out for the new, 230 x 65mm Super Deluxe, a change made possible by the use of a custom machined linkage. After all, what's the point in talking about the new stuff if you aren't comparing it to what came before? It's also worth mentioning that RockShox shared next to no information about the new shock prior to me riding it, with the idea being that I'd be able to come to my own conclusion without "looking for" anything that I might expect to be feeling on the trail.

What did I feel? The difference between the standard Monarch Plus and the Super Deluxe was immediately noticeable, both while climbing and descending.

Sitting in for a long ascent with the Super Deluxe under me, the first thing I noted was the increased stability compared to when the bike had the older shock mounted on it. Stability as in the bike was tracking smoothly over the terrain, with its suspension expanding and contracting as it reached for the uneven and rocky ground like a rock crawler would. I'd describe the sensation as the bike feeling more connected to the ground, and myself feeling more connected to both.

And what about the fun stuff? The first descent that I took the bike down consisted of a succession of perfectly sculpted berms that seemed to be made of hero dirt. Yes, I am talking about North Vancouver. Diving into each corner, something felt different compared to before. Rather than my pumping motions being wasted, every push I made into the bike's suspension was transferred into the trail without the back of the bike cramping up as I exited the corner. Instead, I was carving delicious turns into the dirt. Yes, the bike felt great with the Monarch Plus, but very different things were happening when the Super Deluxe was attached to the same machine.



Photo by Adrian Marcoux
Photo by Adrian Marcoux


Next up was some of the more typical trails that you might think of when someone says North Vancouver. Technical, twisting singletrack that seems to be equal parts dirt and roots; the kind of stuff that can cause some clenching anytime of the year, let alone when things are wet and soggy. And things were wet and soggy. The Super Deluxe, however, was anything but soggy as it continued to consent to my commands. The back of the bike tracked the ground immensely well, better than it did when the Monarch Plus was in play, which surely means that traction was improved. Over the next three days, it was all I could do to not shove my clipped-in feet into every bump, hole, and corner on the trail in order to feel the rear wheel track over everything.

Three days of riding does not make a test, and by no means was this a proper test, but it certainly was a thorough introduction on some serious terrain. Real terrain that allows one to know how their suspension is performing. The Transition Patrol felt like the total package once the Super Deluxe was bolted onto it, and this is a bike that is known to be a good performer right out of the box.

In the past, I had been focussed more on what the front of my bikes were doing, and largely letting the rear 'get by' as it was never fully going to respond how I wanted it to. But both ends of the Patrol felt like they were on the same program once the Super Deluxe was installed. The bike felt more complete.
Chris Mandell

As mountain bikers, we tend to be a skeptical bunch that like to question the validity of every change, and rightfully so. Parting with our hard earned cash to keep up-to-date with the so-called latest and greatest can really leave a dent in the pocketbook, not to mention your trust. But, after three days on the Super Deluxe, I can tell you that there is a clear difference between it and its predecessor. Granted, it was only three days, and we have no gauge on long-term performance outcomes. But if this new metric sizing change means that all suspension and frame manufacturers can make a better product, then I am intrigued to see what unfolds.



Photos by Adrian Marcoux

MENTIONS: @SramMedia / @TransitionBikeCompany




407 Comments

  • + 906
 Remember guys, it just doesn't matter. Your current ride still kicks ass and is more bike than you can handle, so don't start saying "now my brand new bike is out of date" it's not. Just ride your bike, because it just doesn't matter..
  • + 102
 indeed... but my bike parts don't have this "fast black" finish
  • + 27
 great comment
  • + 1
 Say that in eighteen months time when you need spares or a new shock for the bike you bought this year. Seems pretty dumb that they won't be selling a version in the ubiquitous 200x57 size, but then maybe that was the point.
  • + 59
 Yup. This is entierly true. An 03 imperial and a '10 enduro can still kick my ass...but thanks to those that Have to have the latest and greatest makes a nice market of used practically new "dated" bikes at a great price. Sooo everyone, your bike sucks. Get a new one for us cheap guys.

That said. Bike doesnt make a rider. A rider makes a bike.
  • + 15
 @PJD1: yep, after getting my butt handed to me by a certain AC riding a clunker, I've just started to focus less on the bike and more on the ride, and man it works.
  • + 8
 @CGalbreath: haha i love watching the klunker videos. Guys ripping faster then most on what most call garbadge.
  • + 8
 It just means that your older bike is going to loose value faster.
  • + 31
 @enrico650: Lol dont sell it get to know it like its family. Ride em til the headtube sheers off!
  • + 37
 @Fix-the-Spade: Did you even read the article? Parts, shocks, and rebuild kit will still be available for 4-5 years.. Plus you'll probably want to upgrade your frame in those years so stop whinning, ride your bike and enjoy the new tech! What if we were still conviced that 100mm travel was for downhill... we would be nowhere!
  • + 4
 huge props man
  • + 19
 I ride with a fox float RP23 on the rear, and i'm SO fckin HAPPY !!!! every ride is the best
  • + 9
 @rigodon777: I read the article, I just don't believe them. Time spent trying to source spares for two year old 'legacy model' shocks will do that to you.
  • + 12
 @RedBurn: i just changed from the fox rp23 to the monarch plus...i honestly think it's the bet upgrade i ever made. that said, i wouldn't have died without the upgrade for sure Smile
  • - 10
flag endurocat (Apr 7, 2016 at 7:43) (Below Threshold)
 @PJD1: I guess when you don't have money to get a new one your rule applies.
  • - 6
flag DARKSTAR63 (Apr 7, 2016 at 7:48) (Below Threshold)
 Popular shock sizes will be supported. RS has proven to be reliable for supporting customer demand. If you are still thrashing a six year old frame - and didn't buy a new shock in that time - you are a small minority of customer base, sorry. Buy a new frame, you need one.
  • + 6
 @RedBurn: That things still works? I love Fox, but damn did I not love that shock.
  • + 1
 @DARKSTAR63: you are correct sir.
  • + 28
 I converted my 8.5x2.5" to 215.9x63.5mm... Need to stay current!
  • + 14
 lucky.. i ride hardtail trail/all mountain . . 170mm in front
  • + 1
 Comment of the year. Nice to see a young guy with a positive attitude.
  • + 5
 @CGalbreath: I'd love to do so, but I'm already having troubles finding 26" tiers of my prefference. If fork or wheels give up I'm better of dumping my kickass ride ;(
  • + 1
 @enrico650: whats the difference between a 67-69 degree headtube from then and one from now? Or on topic, my "old" stock endoro Rp23 doesnt absorb routes and rocks like this one? Sure the deluxe may be more efficient, but is a weekend warior going to notice? Is a guy riding in ontario three times a week going to notice? Probably not. And is this new shock going to be the difference between being able to gap 10 ft to 72ft? Thease guys get stuff handed to them, I work for every part.

Not that I dont have the money, ill have imperial rebuild pics up soon. And ill admit, alot of parts are 2014 and up or new 2010.

A used bike is only as valuable as the owner sees fit. Somewhere theres a buyer who will agree. Ride you bike and love it, make it family and the value goes to an unsellable point. Offer me 20,000$ for my imperial, ill still say no. Say i shred the headtube off, offer me 30000, ill still say no.
  • + 6
 So all the previous parts that these bike manufactures sold us has been garbage all along. Now they have colluded to bring us more garbage with metric sizing that doesn't work on our current bikes.
  • - 5
flag bikekrieg (Apr 7, 2016 at 8:50) (Below Threshold)
 Thanks Dad!
  • + 6
 @DARKSTAR63: I agree with all that you say until the very last line. Nope, they very possibly don't need a new one at all. Have things changed in six years? Yup. However, if it all stills works, you don't need a new one. New frames and new tech are rad, but it doesn't render last year's fun bike no longer fun to ride. Or a fun bike from 6+ years ago.
  • - 2
 Wow, did you cut and paste that speach from another thread?
  • + 6
 Also, for overseas people who think Americans are not competent with, or welcoming of the metric system, the fact is we've been using it since the late 60's:

28.3 grams in an Ounce
2.2 Pounds in a Kilo.
  • + 1
 @PJD1: I knew I was going to hit a nerve.
  • + 2
 @Fix-the-Spade: They are supporting parts and older sizing for up to 5 years. So can't see how 18 months comes into it.
  • + 0
 @enrico650: haha thanks for lunch break entertainementWink

The funniest thing is we all made the metric upgrade before it even existed, turn the ruler overXD...

Bet you they'll make a new and improved 215.9MM shock size.Or wait 216mm, thats whats going to make a bike obsolete. .1mm
  • + 5
 Seems like maybe an opportunity maybe for aftermarket linkage plates like the specialized enduro guy is doing.
  • + 2
 @VwHarman: In most cases a six year old full suspension bike is thrashed. At least thats been my experience. But with that said - who says you can't rebuild the shock you have? And who says the five year guess - and its a number out of thin air - is accurate? If there is a demand - there will be shocks. maybe not by every manufacturer, but somebody- will have parts for you. Im just not worried about it, and I'm all for progress so I don't care. Ill go as far to say - go for it boys - make this shit better throwing caution to the wind. Thats my opinion. I understand the fear - but i don't harbor it for myself.
  • + 1
 @Bruccio: thanks I know what to put next !!!
  • - 6
flag imac965 (Apr 7, 2016 at 14:01) (Below Threshold)
 @drivereight: Spoken like a true 'merican, fck the metric system! #imperial4lyfe
  • + 5
 I just bought a non-boost metal frame with a pike and a monarch plus and the wheels aren't 40mm wide and Its bloody brilliant.....:-))))))
  • + 0
 @Fix-the-Spade:

"Will RockShox still sell original sized shocks? Yes, they will. RockShox will offer legacy rear shocks until demand decreases, which they forecast to be around four or five years. Basically, they do plan to support the market until the market is no longer there."
  • + 1
 Whatever
  • + 2
 Great attitude! Love for bikes should not be dictated by industry standards and model years. That stuff can be an expensive trap.
  • + 6
 He writes this:

"Long story short, there is more shock stroke per eye-to-eye length."

Then below is a chart that completely contradicts it. #whoslying
  • + 5
 Further to the OP, all this means is that bike designers no longer have to build linkage designs around limited stroke and eye to eye lengths. All this shit in the review about how the shock performs should be ignored because the overall performance is still subject to the quality of the overall linkage design and shock tune, and the design intent. Your current bike is likely very good, and differences in future designs resulting from a bit more flexibility in design constraints are not going to be ground breaking. If you look after your shocks, you won't have to worry too much about failure and limited replacement parts.
  • + 5
 @endlessblockades:
Heck, I've had several complete metric tool sets for 20+ years, as even fricken HD uses metric(mixed with standard mind you), and every car/truck I've owned for the last 15+ years-even American made- has had all metric fasteners.
Lastly, if you were ever in the military(U.S.), you learned not only the metric system-real fast- but also the 24h clock as well.
But I submit this isn't the issue.
EVERY bike I've owned in the past 3-4 years(and I've had a bit of a problem buying 2-3/year) has had fricken METRIC SUSPENSION.
I mentioned this in another post, but I'll do it again: My Enduros-all four of them-1- 26", 1- 27.5", 2- 29", HAVE HAD METRIC SUSPENSION!! Shocks-216x63mm, or 216x57.2mm. Forks-160mm.
Heck, the Fox forks on my '15 951 are 'sized' by their 40mm STANCHIONS, and have been for what, 7 years? How in the heck is that not metric?>!>?>!>!>?>?>!
SO, AGAIN, WTF!>?>!>?
  • + 2
 @DARKSTAR63: I think we must be misunderstanding each other. Your last post is spot on. I'm not opposed to progress at all, in fact, I love the progress. I thought you were saying that people should just upgrade for the sake of.having something newer-pure consumerism is not my cup of tea, hence my response. I think your spot on with the last post.
  • + 1
 You just hit it, in head, got few old but they still are great, but I'm far from great.
  • + 3
 @Fix-the-Spade: Pretty easy to compensate for that. A pair of offset bushings will shorten up or lengthen your eye to eye to compensate for any marginal difference in lengths between metric and imperial.
  • + 2
 @VagkaR: Gotta have that!
  • + 2
 I agree man like monarch plus kicks ass there's not much it can't handle
  • + 1
 @VwHarman: No not at all - I'm just saying that people tend to over-react. Parts will be available for those who need them.
  • + 2
 @YoKev: Measure your shocks. Are they 'exactly' 216 mm ETE? Exactly 63 mm of stroke?

The thing here is that it's metric based and is 'rounded' to 5 or 10 mm, not some argle bargle of 1/8th of a king's thumb or something.

Also, too many people get hung up on the metric part, this is just a part of the whole novelty, which gives us sensible lengths, not some arbitrary king's thumb measurements, that are about 200, about 216 and about 222 mm. And the strokes about 51 mm, about 57 and about 63 mm.

The idea of metric sizes is cool. The idea of better damping due to more space, supposedly better endurance and, mainly, bearings in the eyelets, is the most awesome part of this new system.
  • + 1
 FUN FIRST. THAT'S IT
  • + 1
 It actually is. Not now but virtually soon. They say they Will produce actualités sizing as long as there is a market... Whitch mean if i buy a frame this year and I break my shox il 2020 I'll probably not find any shox to replace it. What I actually had with my 2011 heckler. I hand to buy a second hand lyrics because it's nearly impossible to find a 26" 1/8" 160mm fork nowadays.
  • + 2
 These makeovers should be blindtested -> hide the cans and ask how they feel after each ride. repeat. draw conclusions.

We'd probably be a little less skeptical when these changes come by.
  • + 2
 @guycharlesvalois: a "double blind" review of the parts would be really cool.
  • + 1
 @PJD1: That is the key for sure! Still have old Balfas, Banshees and Brooklyns running around.
  • + 1
 @Quebracho: Sad but true, same here, I stock up on 26 spares when I find stuff I like. Our hand is being forced.
  • + 1
 @endlessblockades: Don't forget the big block chevy, 454 GR. Per LB.
  • + 443
 Vincent: And you know what they call a... a... a quarter inch shock in Paris?

Jules: They don't call it a quarter inch shock?

Vincent: No man, they got the metric system. They wouldn't know what the f*ck a quarter inch shock is.

Jules: Then what do they call it?

Vincent: They call it a Super Deluxe.

Jules: A Super Deluxe. What do they call a DBair?

Vincent: Well, a DBair is a DBair, but they call it le DBair.

Jules: Le DBair. Ha ha ha ha. What do they call a Float?

Vincent: I dunno, I didn't go into Fox.
  • + 18
 well played. excellent.
  • + 7
 classic!!! Big Grin
  • + 3
 Classic
  • + 11
 You win the Pinkbike internets. Hysterical.
  • + 7
 Awesome reference !
  • + 5
 AWESOME, you made my day
  • + 18
 Sometimes I just want to strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who would attempt to poison and destroy the the bike industry with ever new standards.
  • + 10
 [Slow Clap]
  • + 2
 well played,well played
  • + 3
 @emile16: Everyone knows @Powderface has the sickest references.
  • + 3
 This is gold
  • + 65
 You win our Pinkbike Comment of the Day Contest - email marketing@canecreek.com for your free prize @Powderface!
  • + 2
 Genius.
  • + 23
 @CaneCreekCyclingComponents: let me guess a metric shock
  • + 1
 Awesome.
  • + 2
 Comment of the year right here, and it's only April.
  • + 3
 That was the best comment I've read in pinkbike since Oct 4, 2007!
  • + 2
 It's comments like these that make me wish I had more than one prop vote.
  • + 3
 Powerface- I'm buying you a $5 shake! That is the Madman of comments my brotha!
  • + 2
 Funny AF
  • + 1
 Hey Cane Creek,
Can I ALSO contact marketing and claim said prize?
  • + 2
 First you have to make me laugh out loud @Waldon83.
  • + 1
 @CaneCreekCyclingComponents: oh man, now the pressure is on, I was hoping you'd fold like origami.
  • + 1
 @Powderface I just came here today to read your comment once again. I bow to you the great one.. Big Grin
  • + 1
 @pakleni: I just watched Pulp Fiction yet again. Thanks @Powderface.
  • + 1
 @Crossmaxx: Spoken like Thor! Thank you!
  • + 1
 #winnerwinnerchickendinner
  • + 165
 Thought the metric sizing was an april fools?
  • + 30
 It sure fooled me.
  • + 8
 Seriously tl dr can someone give me an executive summary of what it actually is
  • + 33
 @fercho25: New frames, new standards, new mounts, new everything.


Basically, todays bikes are obsolete.
  • + 54
 So basically in 3-4 years there will be no guarantee that I can find a new shock for my frame that has a lifetime warranty. I'm so frustrated with the industry right now that I can't even put it into words. This last bike I bought will likely remain my last. Have fun selling new bikes to dentists.
  • + 58
 @ninjatarian: Yes, yes. Feed them your tears. The great and mighty SRAM requires them. Sweet, sweet, salty tears.
  • + 9
 @dragonaut: I know they don't give a damn about one guy ranting under an article, but at least I spoke what was on my mind.
  • + 40
 @ninjatarian: I don't know why I'm even pissed. I ride a hardtail, but somehow I'm still pissed.
  • + 6
 Wait, what?? This wasn't a Joke? Holyfk, I kina bought a bit of 650b, i questioned boost, but changing sizes of shocks is completely unwarranted. Sheesh.
  • + 9
 This is why I'll never buy anything SRAM. Running out of ideas are we? Really, shock evolution and performance was constrained by the units of measure? Shimano for me. SRAM can take this and boost and shove it up their new metric-sized a*sholes.
  • + 2
 So did I, didn't bother reading the article. Saw the headline here and I thought it was just a reference to the joke.
  • - 2
 @ninjatarian:

"Will RockShox still sell original sized shocks? Yes, they will. RockShox will offer legacy rear shocks until demand decreases, which they forecast to be around four or five years. Basically, they do plan to support the market until the market is no longer there."
  • - 1
 @Mojo348:

"Currently, there are eighty-two different (imperial) hardware sizes to contend with, but the new metric standard uses only eighteen. ... This means that it will be more realistic for your local bike shop to stock the hardware sizes that you need, which means less time waiting on orders to come in, less rummaging through containers, filing down pieces, cutting parts with hack saws or wedging pieces in place."

82 options vs.18. Math it up.
  • + 13
 @CaptainSnappy: Don't you mean 82 options + 18? We now have 100 options.

xkcd.com/927
  • + 5
 @red720: Well it's a nice "metric" number that 100.
  • + 2
 @CaptainSnappy: 4-5 years, when they forecast the demand decreases, or when every f-ing body who bought a bike this year or last needs f-ing replacement parts.
  • + 1
 @red720:

For the next 4-5 years, yes, and then there will be 18 after that. It would be almost suicide for RS to just stop servicing imperial models in 2017.

And since Fox hasn't joined the group, if you have a Fox shock after 2016 you won't be able to switch it out for another brand without an aftermarket custom adapter.
  • + 1
 In engineering school I was taught multiply/divide by 25.4, guess people are just to lazy to convert units...
  • + 117
 3 weeks without a new standard coming to the market. I was starting getting bored!
  • + 5
 Look forward to the all new MetImp shock sizing coming out next month! Metric length to fit your new frame, and an Imperial stroke to keep the travel....eh.....uh...(someone feed me marketing drivel)...(more plush and responsive)....Oh yes! More plush and responsive, now give me your money!
Said SRAM.
  • + 106
 Pinkbike reviews/first looks are usually pretty good but this is an example of what people dislike about a lot of bike journos - talking about how the new stuff makes the old stuff seem terrible in comparison, when that "old" stuff blew their mind not more than 12 months ago. The reality is it's just some small incremental improvement. Go service your old suspension and it'll feel really good again.
  • + 17
 This^
  • + 45
 "Currently, there are eighty-two different hardware sizes to contend with, but the new metric standard uses only eighteen."

Err, well, from RS' production perspective maybe, however to me and my need to service my old legacy DHX4, Vivid Coil, CCDB and their corresponding hardware bits and pieces, it seems more like this;

"Currently, there are eighty-two different hardware sizes to contend with, but with the eighteen new hardware sizes of the metric standard, this will increase to one hundred"
  • + 4
 @orientdave: good point, well made
  • + 15
 this piece was super advertorial feeling
  • + 1
 @flipfantasia: Perhaps, but since the performance review seemed to focus purely on this new system and bearing mounting, and the fact that it says the other shock makers are on board, it seems like a review of a new stamdard rather than any one company's product.
  • + 69
 1 mile or 1.609 km? Only the bike industry will tell you that one is further than the other.
  • + 29
 Yeah, I totally don't get it. They keep saying that using metric will allow them to have incremental steps in size... Why can't they just do 1/16 inch increments instead of 2.5mm?
  • + 2
 @skelldify: They could, but they'd still be working to get rid of shock sizes that negatively affect the entire shock lineup. (as in, for instance, 200x57, which is apparently super hard to support due to the e2e being so short, with a 57mm stroke.)

Since they're already making shocks that won't work with some old sizes, why not convert to using standard metric increments at the same time, since this is one of the last bastions of imperial measurement in bikes?
  • + 1
 @skelldify:

Because only 3 countries in the world use the Imperial measurement system. Come on USA, catch up to the rest of the planet.

www.nerdylorrin.net/jerry/postages/MapOfCountriesNotMetric-800px.jpg
  • + 1
 @skelldify: They wanted to simplify their offerings and break out of the current constraints to create a product with more bearing overlap etc. They could have done it with a new set of 18 imperial measurements but since they were starting from scratch they decided to use 18 metric measurements because talking about things in 1/4s and 1/6th of an inch is dumb, and makes the maths harder than they need to be when you can just have another measurement system that is easily divisible by 10.
  • + 42
 am i the only one that thought that this metric stuff was just an april's fools thing?
  • + 13
 no. not at all. I dismissed the whole thing without even reading it.
  • + 41
 A new standard that makes sense. Metric sizing... welcome to the rest of the world America
  • + 44
 200.025x57.25 is also metric
  • + 38
 I totally agree that the metric system makes more sense. But what I don't get is that they keep saying that going to metric allows them to incrementally space the shock sizes. Why couldn't they have just used 1/16 inch increments instead of 2.5mm increments?

Sounds like they wanted to do a complete overhaul of their shock line, so they used "We're going to metric!" as an excuse.
  • + 7
 @skelldify: don't work in bike industry so obviously talking out my ass, but my guess is it has more to do with tooling and manufacturing overseas where nobody uses the english system. seems like there are lots of improvements in the shock that are not because of mettric conversion but because of better design (more bushing overlap, fancy negative spring, fancy seals, revised IFP etc).
  • + 3
 @skelldify: because most people don't understand and will buy it because it's the "latest technology".
  • + 3
 @madmax245: Actually even transition employees have voiced some concern on mtbr that shock size greatly changes suspension at bottom out- cue the Patrol.

The truth is they needed to make the shock longer for every stroke- in other words, nothing will properly fit anyways, regardless of using metric or imperial. The bonus is at least its metric- that will make everyone's lives easier.

Also there is so much new stuff, you may as well ride what you have into the ground. All my parts are practically worthless- 135QR, 26, hardtail. There really isn't anything wrong with the old stuff, and most bikes are aluminum and practically designed to break apart after 5 or 6 yrs of hard use. I would not call this the straw that broke the camel's back- rather, it is on a long list of reasons not to spend money upgrading. Complete or bust.
  • + 2
 @the-one1:

Not without units it isn't.
  • + 1
 @the-one1: which of these is easier to do math with 200.025x57.25 or 210x50?

If SRAM is going to throw away all the old shock lengths and strokes, then it makes perfect sense that the new ones be aligned with easily divisible unites like 10s in the metric system.
  • + 31
 Ahhhh the bike industry, fixing problems that don't exist since forever!
  • + 28
 All this talk of metric but the photo of the shock still shows us the recommended pressure in PSI. If you're going to go metric, go the whole way.
  • + 4
 Naw screw that.
  • + 22
 "Currently, there are eighty-two different hardware sizes to contend with, but the new metric standard uses only eighteen. This means that it will be more realistic for your local bike shop to stock the hardware sizes that you need."

So instead of 82 different sizes there are now 100?
  • + 27
 Last weekend I met Nobble Prize winner, Professor Higgs Bozon from University of Scotland on annual Academic Championships in Log throwing and asked him about quantum physics in cycling. We talked about poossibilities of fatbike tyres warping spacetime as well as dark energy used in S-Works frames. He estimated that according to revised theory of relativity, the increase of number of standards correlates with accelerating expansion of universe. We discussed that as crazy as it sounds, the mathematical equations show the possibility that those new standards defying laws of troll logic may actually be coming to our realm from a paralell universe, where laws of physics may be slightly different. He showed a concern that latest experiments at 650b shiton collider may confirm that if number of mountain bike standards per suspension travel will cross the number of 69.53, the mass of bullsht will be so big that the industry will collapse on itself and form what astrophysicists call a beige dwarf.
  • + 1
 @WAKIdesigns: Perfect! That's exactly what I was hoping for!
  • + 0
 @WAKIdesigns: You never let us down! Salute
  • + 1
 @WAKIdesigns: What about reverse entropy?! You didn't calculate the reverse entropy!
  • + 3
 @friendlyfoe: reverse entropy, let me think... give me a minute... If dE equals circumference of event horizon, Fr equals rebound force, 27.5b equals marketing constant, D equals... OH MY GOOOD! We're dead in the water!
  • + 20
 Why does it seem like it's always Rockshox/SRAM pushing new standards? You guys make stuff that rides good, but I hate that you can't try and do it without making one standard obsolete at a time. I mean seriously, almost nothing you make each year can be retrofitted to my one year old bike unless I buy a new part/frame/etc to make it fit. (I swap steeds every season.)
  • + 46
 Why does it matter if you swap bikes every year? You are the perfect consumer for all the new goods if you get a new bike every year.
  • + 14
 @smjergie: I'm still beating the hell out of an '07 Santa Cruz Heckler. Not getting my money
  • + 2
 They do because they can. They are one of the biggest manufactures in this business and one of the best. With that said, I think this is fantastic. Why be bound by grandfathered standards for new designs that require/can take advantage of new parameters? This is needed. The old system made little sense and had spiraled out of control. I particularly like the idea of simplifying mounting hardware. To the second part of your statement I don't understand? I just purchased a brand new PIKE fork... in 26. The rear of my bike is a Monarch made to fit the proprietary size of my Trek Remedy, purchased as an aftermarket part. So I think they actually go above and beyond to support customer demand. If you swap steeds every year I would love to know what problems you are running into??
  • + 4
 @smjergie: I should probably clarify, I buy I used bike every year that is normally 1-3 years old, depending on what I'm able to find and what I want to ride. I could never afford a new bike and frankly am not willing to pay for one when I can buy a great bike secondhand.
  • + 27
 Metric, Boost, 12spd. cassettes...
Part of me applauds the theory / engineering behind it, the other part of me wants to kick someone in the nuts.
  • + 3
 @DARKSTAR63: I was referring to the boost standards, XD driver when 11 speed can out, and the predictive steering hub for the RS1. All of the technology is nice when it truly phases out another standard, but until then it means I can't use the parts I carry from bike to bike because they don't fit my new bike.
  • - 3
 @Mitch7Yeti: No standard forced you to 11 speed though? You could continue to run 10 speed on your fresh frame no? RS1? That's your example? Do you own one? That fork is very high end, I think it's assumed you can deal with a new hub, and it's certainly has not become a standard?
  • + 4
 @DARKSTAR63: Also, are we really giving RS shit over making a fork that requires a custom hub(that will ACTUALLY WORK JUST FINE WITH A 15mm hub?) There's been probably 10 other examples of that since the 90s.
  • + 8
 @DARKSTAR63: I don't think people are pissed by new standards. If they announced a gearbox debut, everyone would have went crazy, the good kind of crazy. It's making a completely new standard to only add or subtract a millimeter here or there that creates anger.

New stuff is cool, new stuff with marginal and intangible improvements that is incompatible with everything else is not.
  • - 2
 @PLC07: None of this should create anger. If thats the case, I just feel bad for you. These are bicycles, and I am having fun, always, Smile
  • + 9
 @PLC07:

How new bike tech seems to go for like, 90% of the population:

Step 1: Anger

"WTF is this new SHIT that those EVIL f*ckING BIKE COMPANIES are trying to SHOVE DOWN MY THROAT NOW?!"

Step 2: Denial

"I'll NEVER switch to suspension forks/rear suspension/20mm forks/disc brakes/hydraulic brakes/29er/1.5/tapered/dropper posts/15mm axles/650b/boost"

Step 3: Bargaining

"Man, I found a great deal on this new frame... guess I'll give 29ers a chance"

Step 4: Depression

"Wow, my new bike goes through rough trail depressions way faster than my old one!" (I know that one is reaching, gimme a break.)

Step 5: Acceptance

"I can't imagine riding the bike I had 10 years ago! No dropper?! PBBBTTTTTT"
  • + 7
 @DARKSTAR63: I'm not angry, still riding my 2012 dixon and I couldn't care less.

You have to understand that some people bought a brand new bike 2016 bike that they haven't even received and yet have already been pushed aside by RS when it comes to any product upgrade that might be released down the line. These people are understandably angry and I'm sure you can understand how senseless things have become and why people have come to resent any new standard.
  • + 4
 @PLC07: "pushed aside by RS when it comes to any product upgrade that might be released down the line."

Yea, because SRAM only makes press fit BBs now! Actually wait, no, they still make all kinds. In fact, they have a better selection of 24mm cranks than most brands do.

Let's see, can you get brand new SRAM hubs in non-boosted sizes? yep. Heck, you can even get those fancy new Hope Pro 4s, too.

Lets see, can you still get straight steerered forks from SRAM? yep, & let's be serious, it's been more than 5 years since Tapered became the defacto new standard, even more if you count how many bikes had 1.5" headtubes that work fine with tapered.

Yea, I'm just not seeing "SRAM will never make any improvements to shocks in imperial sizes after this." Sounds like baseless speculation.
  • + 4
 New stuff is cool, new stuff with marginal and intangible improvements that is incompatible with everything else is not That does indeed sum it up beautifully
  • - 1
 @Karve: ...provided that the new stuff's improvements actually are ONLY marginal & intangible... which doesn't match the experience of anyone who's actually ridden these shocks. But hey, they must be dirty liars.
  • + 2
 While we're on the topic of standards:
The Space Shuttle and the Horse's Rear End
www.astrodigital.org/space/stshorse.html
"So a major design feature of what is arguably the world's most advanced transportation system was originally determined by the width of a horse's ass."
  • - 1
 Hmmm, I was ready to outraged (well, annoyed perhaps) by this new standard but then...

...hang on, when was the last time I bought something new and @ retail? When is the world going to run out of good used bikes and parts? When was the last time rockshox made a dime out of me? And when will I ever be riding along wishing my shock stroke was still measured in inches rather than mm, or vice versa? (Relaxes somewhat)
  • + 19
 What people don't realize:

The fact these shocks are measured in metric vs imperial measurements really has nothing at all to do with what has changed.

What has changed is the design philosophy. Previously, shocks were built to fit into existing frame designs, with sizes haphazardly created based on existing frame designs. Now, shocks are built in a more standardized way such that the shock is designed as a single system first, and then bike manufacturers will design their frames based on these new shocks, which have consistent differences in sizing. This allows the shocks to be optimized for performance first, instead of being restricted by what can be done within existing frame design constraints. Yes, frame designs will have to be changed, but, to put it bluntly, suck it up. Things change. That's how humans/nature/technology evolves, instead of just stagnating.

TL;DR: Frames will be designed around shocks, instead of shocks being designed around frames. This allows for less restrictions on the shock research/design/build procedure, and thus better overall shock design.
  • + 12
 The reason people don't get it is because RS did a piss poor job of marketing it. You're 100% correct it has nothing to do with metric. Metric was just the logical choice for dimension choice when standardizing.
  • + 2
 Like the guy from DVO said, every shock in a lineup is negatively effected because of the space constraints of 200x57, I'm pretty ok with not paying a penalty in performance for a shock I don't own.
  • + 4
 The first press release really didn't make this clear at all. I will give them credit that this time around they have made the differences much more clear. Also, releasing a press release about using different units of measure equating to a new standard on April Fool's Day likely led many people to disregard it as the nonsense it seemed like at the time. I also appreciate this article explaining more clearly the bearing replacing the bushing for better rotational performance. Nice!
  • + 1
 @VwHarman: They did talk about it a bit before 4/1, but yea, that was not a great choice.
  • + 1
 @groghunter: I missed the earlier discussion of it. Was it mentioned in another article about something else, or was there a specific article about the development? My bad either way, missed it!
  • + 1
 @VwHarman: I'm not having any luck finding it, but I remember thinking that I already knew about it, so that it was odd that everyone was treating the 4/1 announcement as the first time they'd seen it.
  • + 2
 @dclinton Whoa! Whoa! Easy on the logic and facts! That's not overly welcome around these parts!
  • + 3
 awww, i was getting excited to get out the pitchforks, but this makes a lot of sense
  • + 1
 @groghunter: all good, I appreciate the search for it though. Cheers!
  • + 18
 So in short:

- Bearings ? BOS is offering it already, many aftermarket companies too, no need for changing the standards for it.
- Consistent IFP through the range ? Yes you can do it on current sizes too, you just didn't bothered so far.
- Simplifying hardware sizing ? Could have been done ages ago too, no need for new standard here.
- Trunnion mount ? I had a call for GT and they told me to let their STS and LTS bikes in the past, they were nice but leave the there.

So only kind of advantage of "metric" is the possibility to put more bushings in the shock, problem that is not one if your frame is rigid enough where it needs to be ...

Thanks Sram/RS for more shit to come on the market and make our current shocks worthless in few year. From 1 or 2 years from now you will change Forks pivots sizes as the 650b replacement will have been done and you want to kill the 2nd hand market once more ?
  • + 14
 Congratulations Sram, you just insured that nobody will buy any existing 2016 and many 2017 bikes for fear of being left shockless in a few seasons. Here I was, almost letting myself feel like I was being left behind by still riding 26 inch and now Sram went and made sure I have one more reason not to buy a new bike. Thanks for saving me money guys and making me feel better about my "old and outdated" rigs.
  • + 2
 So true!
  • + 15
 0 days since new standard introduction. Here we go again.
  • + 11
 So.. I need to buy a new frame to replace my 'obsolete' shock in a couple of years time? Yay, it's the new 27.5.

Also, if it won't retrofit, how were you able to bolt it on to the Patrol in place of the standard 216 Monarch?

Confused.
  • + 11
 RockShox had custom linkage made so the switch could be made, check it out: www.pinkbike.com/photo/13350452
  • + 1
 linkage looks pretty custom
  • + 36
 If the linkage was different, how can you say the shock performed differently? Surely you need to identify an independent variable and remove any other factors that could change the outcome
  • + 22
 You don't need to buy a new frame, just a Fox shock...
  • + 1
 @rachellefrazer: I don't suppose SRAM was so kind as to tell you which manufacturers will be moving to this standard in 2017?
  • + 2
 @adamwaatson: Exactly what I thought, when you know how much few mm here and there in the pivot placements can change radically the behavior of a suspension, comparing with custom links makes me smile. And also it seems that RS is using a new compression damping as such it might just be the compression piston that is better. Comparing a Monarch+ with "metric" sizing would have make more sens but in terms of Marketing it wouldn't work ...
  • + 10
 no worries guys! this is so easy, like duh! just go home and get a 4 year degree in mechanical engineering for $100k so you can learn the correct physics and material theories, as well as CAD designing. then go model the particular link for your current bikes, maybe rapid prototype them first on your $2500 home 3D printer to make sure your design is sound, source the correct bearings, and then fire up your own personal trusty 4-axis CNC from HAAS that only costs you $150k! 5 years and $300k later... CUSTOM LINKAGES FOR ALL!!!
  • + 1
 @rachellefrazer: Mandell didn't do Kona any favors ! ! ! Be careful. . . . . .
  • + 2
 @adamwaatson: IT. PERFORMED. BETTER. PERIOD.
  • + 2
 @Sweatypants: You know somebody is going to offer this for either their own bikes, or some small company like Wolftooth is going to make linkages to convert popular models.
  • + 5
 @adamwaatson: I think it would be safe to assume that they are capable of making a new rocker link that will accommodate the new size shock whilst maintaining the same suspension characteristics of the 'old' one.
  • + 2
 @groghunter: haha i know. if you're already in the business of doing so, its no big deal. i just like how casually it was thrown out there, like: "oh that's nothing, just whipped up a CNC'd piece of kit from some aluminum stock we had lying around, no biggie..."

i also wonder what this change did to any leverage ratios or travel path/forces on the bike... shock stanchion travel with a few extra mm's there and so on...
  • + 2
 @Sweatypants: I would respect the guys at Transition enough to assume they preserved the bike's original characteristics, though they may have altered some ratios slightly to account for the reduced stiction of bearings instead of bushings(if they did indeed use bearings in this case, I'm not sure from the photos.)
  • + 3
 @dingus: I agree, I think they would have done a pretty good job at trying to replicate the rocker but for the new shock, but I still don't think you can say that one shock out performs another when there are so many variables that may or may not be different. I understand I'm erring on the side of caution, but I think that's the safe side when RS seem to want to make me fork out more money for a slightly different shock.
I also want to say that I think moving to metric sizing is a good idea, especially if it changes the design philosophy like others have mentioned down below. I have more of a problem with the new shocks than with the change to metric.
  • + 1
 @adamwaatson: I trust rockshox products enough that I'd think it's safe to say the new shock will out perform the old one, it's pretty rare for any new component to be worse than its predecessor these days. Whether it's as super deluxe as the reviewer makes it out to be is the question. As for shelling out more money for a slightly different shock, seeing as they're an non standard size you're only really going to be getting one of these shocks if you buy a complete bike or a frame anyway, so it's a bit of a non issue IMO.
  • + 2
 Easiy retrofitted with a set of offset bushings to account for different eye to eye
  • + 1
 @kathwill: yes, but not stroke. Simple exemple : Kona process 134 with 190x51 and 1 cm max of possible space between yoke and seat tube.
Metric offerings are 190x45 and 210x50.
In the first case (swaping for 190x45 shock) you lost something like 15.7 mm travel at rear wheel assuming constant ratio so basically your bike gets 118 mm rear wheel travel instead of 134 and as the eye to eye length is the same your bike will become steeper since less sag at rear wheel for the same sag at shock.
In the second case, well, there is not second case since the shock just won't fit even is the yoke is redisigned.
I would like to hear from rock shox that the monarch lineup will still benefit from update and developpement for users stuck with their 2016 "legacy" frame.
  • + 11
 Let's just not buy SRAM or RS stuff. It's great but theyre greedy. They certainly aren't our friends. And they shame us for our incomes and don't cater to people who don't make silicone valley incomes. F 'em.
  • + 9
 "What did I feel? The difference between the standard Monarch Plus and the Super Deluxe was immediately noticeable, both while climbing and descending. "

These tests crack me up! This one is majestic: it is telling us that you would be able to tell the difference between a 2.0 inches eye to eye shock and a 508 millimeters one!!!!!

Blind tests, please, you will never be able to find any difference due to "increased bushing overlap" or triviality such that if you tried.
  • + 3
 Remember rock shox "99% of riders won't be pro enough to feel the difference" a while back......

Yeah right
  • + 1
 "the new shock is tuned slightly different"
  • + 3
 For all we know it could be due to a different type of grease on the hardware haha.
  • + 12
 Shocking. It will take a while to absorb this and determine what bearing it might have on my ride.
  • + 8
 Dont worry there is a world cup coming that will dampen the blow
  • + 9
 all these new standards are making me want to switch to road cycling full time. the mountain bike industry is tiring and so confusing, just let people ride their bikes instead of having to worry if they'll be able to buy parts a few years down the line.
  • + 3
 Why? Road bike standards are changing as well. Disc brakes, through axles, DI2, Motor assisted cheating. All changes that are exactly like changing standards in the MTB industry, so you'd either be just as upset or realize that (some) of those things have advantages for road bikes.
  • + 2
 Or you could just ride whatever bike you have not worry if you have 40mm or 25mm rims or what shock/wheels size you have etc. The great secret is none of that stuff really has any bearing on you going out for a ride or you're enjoyment of that ride unless you tell yourself out does
  • + 9
 Sweet now Fox can replicate this in a year or two and receive "Innovation of the Year" award. I'd rather spend money sending my suspension products to Craig at Avalanche or companies like Push who take into account your weight, riding style and suspension.
  • + 8
 Am wondering how much of the 'improved feel' of the shock is actually from the bearings at the mount. I put an aftermarket needle bearing kit on my prior bike's shock mount and it was impressive how much of a difference it made.
  • + 4
 Yup. I'm sure the other changes make a difference(& they even point out that standard IFP sizes really benefits designers, not customers) but bearings in the high rotation pivot makes a huge difference, it's the main reason behind the shock yoke Specialized has been using for years(& before that, other options: my old 2005 Demo 8 had a custom DHX 5.0 without a normal eyelet at one end, so that it moved on bearings in the frame, rather than a bushing. that's how it came stock, to be clear.)
  • + 9
 "I Don't Care"

I don't care
I don't care
I don't care
About this news
I don't care
About that shock
I don't care
I don't care
I don't care
About these standards
I don't care

-Ramones
  • + 8
 Dear Rock Shox,

thanks for a new product even when your "older" did not last one summer. Still waiting for my reverb to return (yes, it did not work anymore) and also for my boxxer (where I as a medium aggressive rider blew the charger).

My Pike did not last one summer and I had it in use for two years now. I also think my Monarch Debon Air is losing air and so overall I am not impressed at all.

Future plan - avoid any SRAM or ROCK SHOX products ;-)
  • + 8
 So because my bike is 2016 I don't get to enjoy better suspension technology?

Am I getting this right? SRAM if you claim to have wanted to build a rear shock that was the equivalent to the pike in what it did for the industry you may have wanted to f*cking acknowledge how many people "upgraded" to the Pike. If you are unsure what what means; it means people bought one for their sometimes later model and current model bikes to increas their performance. Who builds an OEM part that's better than the current after market one they offer? Why don't you just start eliminating charger dampers from your top of the line forks and install it just in your XC 32s and call it a day. Don't forget to make sure that XC 32 has a new steer tube standard to better f*ck us with.

What a bunch of shit.
  • + 5
 It's not like their current offerings suck and they are discontinuing them. This makes sense. When you have companies like Giant putting a 63mm stroke on a 160mm rear travel bike, that shock is going to feel like a pogo stick for heavier, medium-fast riders without custom tuning. It's kind of going to suck. Sadly, bikes weren't designed around people like that. Bikes were designed for slow people. Longer stroke shocks can help alleviate these issues in bikes out of the box.
  • + 1
 @j-t-g: But, according to the chart, the stoke lengths are not actually longer with these super fabulous shocks. I guess looking at the "Trunnion Mount" the eye to eye vs stroke length seems longer but they only moved the location of an eye rather than increasing the stroke length.
  • + 4
 @socnick83: You're right. However, they are increasing the available space in bikes that will come with these shocks. We'll have potential to solve this issue where as before there wasn't room. We can hope one of the other manufacturers who's on board with this sizing can solve it.


Also, I'd like to correct myself from before. The reign is a 57mm shock not a 63mm. The reign SHOULD have a 63mm+ shock.
  • + 2
 @j-t-g: no you are right their offerings now don't suck. But these new shocks are better and to be honest would greatly benefit those with short travel rear ends that could use the extra help in managing terrain.

I'm on a process 111 and though my monarch which I upgraded with a debonair bandaid kit is doing a pretty good job i was pretty pumped when I heard the new stuff was going to be a whole lot better. Flash forward to today and now I'm seeing that it doesn't even matter anymore.... I'm aloud to be not happy. Down right grumpy! Lol
  • + 1
 @brockfisher05: then put a new metric 190x45 shock on your bike, run a little more sag, & go nuts.
  • + 1
 @groghunter: How am I supposed to do so if these are not available as an upgrade and will only be found on new bikes as an OEM product.?
  • + 1
 @j-t-g: Forgive me if im wrong dude but surely the issue is still going to remain as currently each existing size has 3 different rebound/comp tunes in order to deal with different leverage ratios/ amounts of travel.

In your example of the reign surely the issue is that the rebound tune is to low for the heavier riders and a change to H tune rather than mid is all thats required? (im not sure what tune giant went for btw this is just an example). youd get the reverse for the lighter rider. but no manufacturer is going to spec their bikes with shock tunes based on rider weight theyd go for the middle ground any one outside of that will always need some form of custom tuning.

I get what theyre trying do ie make manufacturers build a frame around a specific shock size which has specific characteristics/tuning but they could achieve the same with the existing sizes and just phase out the sizes that dont work. changing to metric is just a money making exercise surely.
  • + 12
 Well, Rockshox just made me a Fox fan.
  • + 7
 I'm sorry but you didn't test a new shock, you tested a new shock and a new rocker arm. The new rocker arm changes the Leverage Ratio of the bike and it makes it better, so you noticed an improvement, but you don't know how much comes from the shock and how much comes from the new rocker arm. This test should have been done in another bike, something that works exactly the same with both shocks....
  • + 1
 Transition compensated for all of that when they designed the custom link so that the kinematics and geometry were unaffected during the switch.
  • + 1
 @rachellefrazer: Thanks. I was wondering whether it was an "improved" bell crank link or if it was just made to fit the new shock. Thank you for clarifying that.
  • + 3
 @rachellefrazer: If you can post a good picture of the frame I can do the math and see if the Kinematics are the same or not. Keeping the geometry the same it's very easy, but the LR on the other hand it's not, unless they build the entire frame from scratch...
  • + 6
 "it was all I could do to not shove my clipped-in feet into every bump, hole, and corner on the trail in order to feel the rear wheel track over everything" Is this a bike review or a romance novel? Change a few words in there and I wouldn't be able to tell the difference.
  • + 3
 What can I say, I'm a romantic.
  • + 1
 @devin-bodony now that you mentioned it...excuse me for a minute, ahem

@rachellefrazer: Thanks for the fun read! Hey, it would be fun to do an article written in different styles. There was one for internet trolls, so why not?
  • + 8
 I know this damages my chances of getting spares for my current bikes down the line, but damn, seeing those round millimeter numbers gives me a warm feeling inside.
  • + 1
 Yeah, going forward this will be an improvement, might as well rip off the bandaid.
  • + 1
 Finally being able to get 200mm shocks is awesome.
  • + 6
 "Long story short, there is more shock stroke per eye-to-eye length" Sorry but I call BS. Legacy 200 x 57 Metric 210 x 50

I'm not saying there's not plenty of improvement here and consistency standardization but metric has nothing to do with it. An inch is 2.54 cm no matter how it's specified. That said, I understand the desire to move toward metric sizing as all other specs and dimensions will typically be called out in SI units.
  • + 6
 I want Rachelle to do a blind test, I don't trust her strong statements towards the improvements.

"the first thing I noted was the increased stability compared to when the bike had the older shock mounted on it"

Statements like that make me immediately call BULL and become a skeptic.

Put her on the Transition 5 times and switch the shock back and forth without her knowing and then tell me her average guessing which is which.
  • + 1
 I thought the same at first, but like it's mentioned in there, this isn't a proper test, it's more like "first impression".

The true test would be on demo day at the local trail/park...when we ride them ourselves.
  • + 5
 All these new 'standards' are nothing more than a way to devalue your current investment in the hopes you'll buy another 'doughnut' because of a lacking self esteem success chance, in the words of Titus. In Short. Ride a Fat Bike.
  • + 5
 So are the new metric shocks heavier? I assume the bearings and increased overlap will add weight but it is hard to make a comparison. 20% heavier with 29% less travel on the Super Delux RC3 seems like a step in the wrong direction.

Super Delux RC3 190x45 403g---Monarch Plus RC3 216x63 335g
Super Deluxe R 190x45 388g-----Monarch Plus R 216x63 335g
Deluxe RT3 190x45 317g-----------Monarch RT3 165x38 215
Deluxe RL 190x45 311g-------------Monarch RL 165x38 215
  • + 7
 Finally someone took their head out of their behind and used bearings in the shock eyelets. 10 years too late tho.

I guess BUST148 was morer importanter ;/
  • + 6
 BOS has been doing it since they launched their Shock range, a few years ago now. Proof that you don't need metric so achieve this.
  • + 5
 Facepalm.... So with a wave of misdirection (metric sizing?) ...RockSucks Has made it impossible for anyone who owns a 2016-17 or older frame to upgrade rear sus.. As they will NOT be able to run ANY shocks Post 2018 (bandwagons will be jumped by all, re. - boost, 650b, extra) Another Scam buy the MTB cash-grab "industry" (industry standards that aren't standard, as they change at least twice a decade.) At this rate I will NEVER waste my time or $$ buying anything that isn't from PB and Used. And this is how I will choose to vote my $$$.
  • + 2
 Yeah I have bought used for years now after feeling ripped off by upgraded new technology
  • + 5
 I agree that bearings improve traction dramatically , but missing 200 mm length in new metric shocks is huge PITA and very calculated bullshit from SRAM just as I expected. Luckily my Trek bike already has bearings in rocker link , so no need for this new shock at all..
  • + 4
 CANNOT BELIEVE I'M THE FIRST TO MENTION THIS. You are all too young to remember the most unique feature of the orignal Super Deluxe.

It had this feature known as "SPRITZ MODE".

My god man. Are they insane????

It's like rebadging the Goodyear Blimp "The Hindenburg". Why in hell are they proud to bring back that name for the love of all that is right in this world. :0
  • + 8
 Is this a game changer, like boost but for shocks?
  • + 4
 Always so shocked with this industry and its ability to capture so many consumers with ease. It's so incredibly transparent yet people are so easily influenced with what the market wants you to think. I can't say SRAM are a bunch of idiots, they have one of the most impressive marketing techniques in just about any industry.
  • + 8
 New rear shock mounting standard? Thank God I love hard tails!
  • + 2
 Yeea! HT 4LIFE
  • + 4
 Was the reviewer's bike retrofitted with a super fabulous? The article says "you can't use an old shock in a new metric frame" but it seems from this article that it is possible to match a new super fabulous to some non-super fabulous frames?
  • + 9
 Transition provided custom links in order to allow the bike to accommodate the different shock size.
  • + 11
 Well, isn't that handy! I'm sure we'll all have access to custom links!
  • + 17
 Custom linkage manufacturers should be licking their chops to utilize this super fabulous hype for the next few years.
  • + 3
 @hetfield1: Some small manufacturer could potentially make a business out of making conversion kits.

Or in some cases, bike companies may supply the parts if the model remains unchanged in 2017.
I could see Santa Cruz making a running change to the V2 Bronson / 5010 to accommodate the new shocks.
  • + 5
 It appears no one read the article
  • + 2
 @ReformedRoadie: BETD used to do just that back in the 90s. They made Kona and Specialized linkages that increased travel as well.
  • + 7
 @mikekazimer: The same Transition that stayed away from pressfit and didn't spread its legs for boost is all of the sudden first in line to wrap its lips around this metric shaft? That's the weirdest part of all this. They should be making fun of it with witty acronyms, not building new links.
  • + 1
 @SintraFreeride: I know...there seemed to be a lot more of that "back in the day" of 3D Violet and CNC'd everything...now it's only limited to expander cogs and N/W chain rings.
  • + 1
 @ReformedRoadie: It's a real shame. It opened up a lot of possibilities. I'm surprised offset dual crowns or even single crowns haven't come out. Stock offset isn't always best especially if you add an angleset to you bike.
  • + 1
 @kleinblake: Yup, everyone seems awfully worried about fitting a shock to their current frames...that isn't going to be offered as an aftermarket upgrade for a while.
  • + 3
 @GeorgeHayduke: Maybe they see more potential gain with the metric shaft rather than with pressfit and boost
  • + 4
 New is better! Even though you are still riding the same trails you were 10 years ago, and those same trails are still ridden on hardtails and rigid single speeds by people who are faster than you, Metric sizing is so much better!
  • + 3
 I see that the Patrol in the test has a black non-OEM bell crank linkage, and that the blue Patrol ridden by Rosara in the Rock Shox promo video also has a non-OEM linkage. I wonder if anyone from Transition or RS can comment on whether the new link was simply to accommodate the dimensions of the new shock, or if there were other things going on (leverage ratio, etc) that might have contributed to performance differences?
  • + 1
 Hi Kat, The custom link was designed by Transition to keep kinematics and geo on par with the original.
  • + 3
 This is INSANE!
SRAM says this new way of 'sizing' their shocks was needed in order to create these better shocks?
WTF? EvERyBODY's existing shocks were ALREADY listed in metric sizes.
My 2013 26 Enduro came with a 216x63mm shock, my '15 29" Enduro came with a 216x57.2mm.
In case anybody isn't aware, the first number is the 'eye to eye measurement, and the second is the stroke, which in the above issued press release, we're told that these metric numbers allowed SRAM to create new shocks.
PB had a golden opportunity here to clear the fricken air, but as usual they dropped the ball.
  • + 3
 Hell yeah. So my brand spanking new 16' trance 2 with 2x10 drive train (non eagle gold bling) and now outdated imperial sized shock is going to be laughed at next year on the trails. At least my new Fox fit 4 works well. Let's see how long it takes sram to innovate another new standard......Suck it sram!
  • + 3
 So now shock companies are coming out with new 'standards' to make bikes even less compatible to what you're riding right this second? Freaking BS.

I do like RS suspension a lot and a new damper design is fine and all, but why hype up that it's metric? Who the hell cares what ruler you use to build the thing, the only things i care about are: 1) does it fit my bike and 2) is it actually better than what i'm using now.
  • + 6
 so now we need metric wheel sizes, bar diameters, steerer tube diameters etc.
  • + 4
 Wtf does measuring the size and stroke in mm instead of inches have to do with damping or scraper seals or ride quality??? 25.4mm is one inch. It doest turn lead into gold if you use metric.
  • + 3
 Well damn, I just ordered a YT Capra that has a Monarch Plus on the rear......I haven't even received my bike yet, but apparently my shock is crap LOL! But good article, the move to metric sizes makes sense.
  • + 2
 A change that doesn't need to happen.
It's stated in the article that the trunion mounting allows for a longer shock body for a given e-2-e length.
Only the mounting style needed to change for these advantages in design!!

Rockshox could have just partnered with the bike companies to offer linkages that fit trunion style shocks, they just wanted this to be another giant/OD2 story. Now instead of just avoiding one brand you will have to avoid all mainstream brands to use any existing parts you might have.

Just another way to sell new bikes seeing your 26 wheels and forks, now shock won't fit
  • + 2
 What are you doing RS? 2 new standarts... amazing, this is a revolutionary redisgn, Bravo! why you don´t work in a new hydraulic damper to the pike and lyrik with HSC and LSC? or better, upgrade the vivid air shock. This isn´t a new, this sucks

I´m going to fox, obiously
  • + 3
 I call BS On the need to have new sizing to make more bushing overlap. I see the need to eventually move over to precise metric measurements, but I just hoped it wouldn't happen in my life so I wouldn't have to deal with it.
  • + 4
 Now I can tell my friend his 2016 SB6c is obsolete just like my 2013 SC Butcher still on 26's! Serves him right for talking shit on my bike.
  • + 2
 From the chart provided, it seems like the new metric size standard mounts actually provide less stroke length per eye to eye when compared to the retro sizing. Am I missing something in that this new standard provides "more shock stroke per eye to eye"?
  • + 4
 I guess they can say there is more stroke length per eye to eye for the "Trunnion mount" but that would be some bs because it simply moves the location of an eye inward.
  • + 2
 Ha..! I love that comparison between the Deluxe and the Monarch.
Of course when they reviewed the Monarch(RT3 Debonair yada yada) it was THE greatest thing since sliced bread, but magically now it packs in and sucks up dirt glods leaving berms, isn't 'stable', and we all need to now go out and buy not only new shocks, but NEW BIKES that house said new shocks, 'cuz SRAM colluded with bike manufacturers to make it so the only choice we'll have in a couple years is to toss the old and bend over for the un-lubed, high-hard-one for the new one.
  • + 5
 I'd like to apply for the position of brand manager because whoever named these shocks needs to be fired.
  • + 2
 Luckely my 12 years old Fox Vanilla RC is still working perfectly even though not being serviced the last 7 years (not sure if it has been before, don't know who owned it back then).

Just have to make sure you have a reliable shock that will outlast your frame, when the switch will be made completely.
  • + 3
 The new YT bike which is being advertised big at the top of this page seems to be whack as it doesn't have this new fancy shocks. Or is it still good until they devlop something better? I am confused?! Who wants my money?
  • + 6
 Nah, I don't get it. Isn't 25mm an inch wherever you live?
  • + 2
 25.4mm is an inch, but if we're rounding...
  • + 1
 @PullMyBrakeLever: Oops forgot about the 0.4mm.
  • + 2
 @rachelfrazier.. You can't make chicken salad out of chicken shit.. Well you can but it will taste like shit. And no it doesn't matter how much you polish a turd its still a turd. This is the biggest shiniest turd since Scam's announcement of the golden eagle turd last week
  • + 3
 Looks like my bike and it's crappy imperial shock length are going in the wood chipper when I get home. I can't imagine what that extra 14mm of shock length feels like on the trail. Must be bliss.
  • + 4
 So if I buy a 2016 bike I'll have to buy a new frame in 2020 or 21 if I just want to upgrade my shock?
  • + 1
 That would meant that the Empire would have struck back...mostly your wallet though.
  • + 1
 Well I often see the comment how the bikes are getting better and better, how we will not have these bikes without the industry inovations. And I see some comparisons between old bikes from before year 2000 and the current bikes. Well there is a big change there. But there is not a big change between a bike from 2008 for example and 2016. These are 8 years without big change, but plenty of new standards - new wheel sizes, new axle sizes, new shock sizes, new bottom bracket sizes, new seat tube sizes, new handlebar sizes, and so on.... These 8 years its all about the money, the tech is already complete.
  • + 4
 So I cant put a 2017 shock on my 2016 bike because its now uses "old" standards? I guess thats one way of making me update
  • - 2
 From my understanding is that you cannot put an "old standard" shock on a new 2017 frame that has the metric system, but (I'm assuming from what I've read) that you should be able to put the new shocks on your current bike with some type of conversion kit for how it is attached, etc.
  • + 2
 @Mike-Gambino: No, you cannot. They have different strokes ! Which means that the bike will work differently.
  • + 0
 @Mike-Gambino: wow, way to read between the lines and come to a conclusion that is completely incorrect.

Quote:
Can I still use my older shock in a new metric frame? Nope, you can't. Different shock lengths and mounting hardware mean that this isn't possible.

But they will still offer the older measurement shocks for a good few years yet, so youll be able to put a 2017 monarch plus debonair rct3 on your 2016 frame.
  • + 1
 duplicate
  • + 2
 Did they not just replace a "legacy" sized shock with a new metric shock on a 2016 frame?
  • - 1
 troll post recipe nr233 - come up with a hypothetical situation and then blame the standards of greedy industry for low likelihood of it ever happening. Who on earth wants to change his 2016 shock for 2017?
  • + 2
 Except you can, just not a Deluxe. as in, they will make 2017 Monarchs & monarch pluses. Heck, a lot of bikes are going to be coming standard with monarchs, because if somebody spent the money on a carbon mold within the last year, they aren't going to redesign & lose that investment.
  • + 1
 @inked-up-metalhead: maybe for 2017 and starting on 2018 they will stop production making most frames obsolete. As the shock aftermarket is kind of small they won't be able to sustain such a broad offer. If they do prices will be even more stupid than they are.
  • + 2
 Where is the Coupe Deluxe to go with this 'new' Super Deluxe - I remember my RS SD back in the day.....pogo stick after about 1/2 a ride. www.cambriabike.com/Images/product/large/rockshocx_coupe_deluxe_rear_shock.jpg
  • + 1
 My Transition Smuggler came with a low-level Monarch RT. It felt like poop. Very notchy, hard to get full travel. I decided to remove the shock bushings and install some Syntace needle bearings in their place. Holy Cow! It transformed my "cheap" shock into a smooth and compliant shock.
When I read this article, that was the first thing that popped into my mind when the author was talking about the new shock and how it felt on the trail. I'm sure the new design is great and all, but those bearings replacing bushings are a huge part of making the shock work better, in my opinion. Cheers!
  • + 1
 I might be wrong, I'd have to measure how much the back wheel can move without hitting anything. BUT I have a 200x57 shock right now and I'm pretty sure I could use a 205x60 for it because it will only raise the rear wheel 15mm and add about 10mm of travel.
  • + 3
 Finally seems like a justified change that makes an improvement for bikes, not just another pointless standard in pursuit of profits
  • + 1
 HEY GUISE LOOK AT OUR METRIC SIZING!!! WE PROMISE THAT 12.7MM SHAFT BODY IS REALLY METRIC THIS TIME, AND NOT HALF A GODDAM INCH! ALSO, WE'RE GOING TO CLAIM A LONGER STROKE LENGTH DESPITE THE TABLE WE'RE PUBLISHING SHOWING WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING SHORTER...

BUT TRUNION MOUNTS! METRIC! IT'S HIP AND EURO!

can we have a "worst innovation of the year" award please? Because this started as a bad joke, and now it's turned into a nightmare.
  • + 5
 I thought the first was an april fools. Oh darn
  • + 4
 Supporting current bikes until demand decreases, 5-10 years? Like they did with 26"?

SHAME ON YOU, SRAM
  • + 5
 I Hate Jeffsy............for not having a Metric Shock!!!
  • + 1
 Wah wah wah. Quit bloody moaning. Not every manufacturer is doing metric sizes anyway. Parts are supported/made for 5 years still. Do you think companies won't make new linkages for you to use to fit the new standards anyway? Of course they will.

Stop bleating about anything new as if it is destroying the 'soul' of riding a bike. Remeber the 80's bikes, don't try and say change is bad.
  • + 1
 It looks just like Great news to me. Inevery single aspect of the design. Wow. I think I may become a Rock Shox fan! I bought the new Lyrik, feeling kind of "meh" as I wanted the 36 180, but now I'm getting a bit proud Wink

It's a good month for bike tech.
  • + 0
 Sarcasm on
  • - 2
 @torero: no sarcasm here. This thing makes a lot of sense to me
  • + 4
 @WAKIdesigns: sure it makes sense, but they're marketing it as some radical new concept in terms of features and quality. All they did was go from inches to mm. Like I said earlier- they didn't turn lead into gold
  • + 3
 So it's clear now that the '17 Transitions will be switching to this new standard. Hopefully with this switch, we'll finally get a carbon Smuggler.
  • + 4
 came home from afternoon riding. that was a great day, one of the best rides until 2016. then i opened pinkbike...
  • + 1
 But a pedal experiences 360 degrees of rotation constantly, yet those use bushings. I'm confused. If bearings truly are better, why aren't they being used to help defeat maintenance costs and add to the longevity of the product?
  • + 2
 Bushings work pretty good. Manufacturers love them because they are cheap and work pretty good. Bearing work better but cost more. It's just economics. Otherwise, we would all be rocking bushing hubs and bottom brackets, right?
  • + 1
 Yeah this whole changing standards thing is getting old. I never understood why shocks weren't in metric to begin with, but at this point why bother changing it?

Either way when this metric thing is in full swing, you'll still be able to buy a used non-metric shock and send it for custom tuning (Push, Avalanche). Your custom non-metric shock will be wayyy better than any new shock out there.
  • + 3
 Hey TransitionBike, I'll need that linkage for my Patrol in case I want to upgrade in a few years Smile
  • + 4
 I think that we need new brake mount standard for next week...
  • + 1
 dam I hope the Taniwha is going to be metric when its available, then this plus Gbox will be future proofed and have best bike, so screw the Eagle 12 spd and Di2+3, just make it happen and I will be happy camper!
  • + 2
 So the real question is: do they make a Super Deluxe shock that will fit a Stinky Deluxe? Because that would be a Deluxe Deluxe.
  • + 3
 We should seriously send the bike industry an angry mail a day until they stop deliberately designing for incompatibility.
  • + 1
 Another dick move from RS: weird sizes and killing off other sizes that are much more commonly used. Planned obsolence man, there's no way around it.

*rolls on with his 1995 Trek winter beater with a 2005 RS Duke SL*
  • + 1
 Change fornthebsake of change isn't innovation. You know what, f*ck it. Who needs 26" and 29" wheels when we can go metric and somehow make wheels that are better. Maybe rockshox dont know 1 inch is 2.54cm's...
  • + 2
 Sorry SRAM/rockshox when I like to be bent over and füčked by a company I prefer to how many inches I'm going to be receiving....
  • + 1
 Also, it is kinda messed up they didn't make the two sizes it would take to allow you to update 80% of the trail and enduro bikes currently being ridden.

AND, kinda pisses me off they did it the day before April 1st.
  • + 0
 Am I the only person not bothered by this? I think it makes great sense, and is a smart move. Transitioning completely away from imperial is bound to happen eventually, and it only gets harder the longer you wait. there will be 100 sizes in the interim, but 10 years out it'll be down to far fewer than we have now. That's a good thing.
  • + 2
 That's it. I'm going back to moto. The bikes cost about the same and have had the same wheel and suspension sizes for the past 15 yrs at least.
  • + 5
 none of the wheels or shocks are compatible between brands. stop crying.
  • + 0
 @kmg0: Wehhh
  • + 4
 I'm kinda glad that a full suspension isn't affordable to me.
  • + 3
 What about downhill shocks ? Are we spared or will we have to enter this new standard in 2/3 years ?
  • + 3
 A new week, a new standard! Sweet! Someone really needs to look into standardizing all of these new standards!
  • + 3
 Hey there, see that bike you just spend $5K on? Yea you'll have to buy a new one in 4-5 years.
  • + 4
 Time to go buy a hardtail.
  • + 4
 Ok, so my next rear shock will not rock. No problem.
  • + 2
 Too bad all the major suspension players are switching too. So it doesn't really matter if it rocks or not still gonna have a hard time unless you buy n.o.s or used.
  • + 2
 I'm just about to buy a new shock, was feeling smug that'd I'd waited for RockShox's new shock. That it appears that I won't be buying!
  • + 2
 Like everything except the name..super deluxe..kinda like "Extra Great"..mmm..how bout....Evolution.
  • + 2
 A standard that doesn't include one of the largest players in the business? How's that going to play out?
  • + 2
 After the 650B marketing play, it's time to move on on a new standard to sell more bikes, and shocks Smile
  • + 3
 How could this not have been done to a shock size that we currently have?
  • + 2
 Metric sizing but still PSI (POUNDS per square inch)? Should it not be BAR Wink
  • + 1
 Since all the old shocks will have no use in 2017 and up bikes … better dust off a shelf beside the 26" wheels that also have nowhere to go.
  • + 1
 I'm sorry @mikekazimer I have a question! but do you know how many stock bottomless tokens are in my Super Deluxe RC3 2017? Thanks
  • + 1
 @loiic33, It'll depend on the bike that it came on - companies are able to pick the stock configuration for each model. But it only takes a few minutes to check what's in there. Just let all the air out, unthread the air can by hand or with a strap wrench, and then you'll be able to see how many spacers are inside.
  • + 0
 So now it's up to the bike manufacturers that went along with this to offer fair priced Linkages to swap out and update your current bike to Metric sizing. Clearly Transition is ahead on that task.
  • + 1
 Err... am I going mad.... how is a 230 x 65 shock longer stroke than the currently existing non-metric shocks -222 x 70 Or 222 x 66 for that matter. Total marketing BS!
  • + 2
 Did anybody else catch that the all new metric super delux runs a 1/2" shaft?
  • + 1
 Fox already solved the inside volume issue with the Float CTD suspension with Trek's DRCV technology.. So I better understand why they don't follow.
  • + 3
 Scam and rocksucks suspension at it again.what the fuck
  • + 1
 this is just another "new standard", but they don't want to call it that, because they know it will piss everyone off.
EVERYTHING is metric - it's just a measurement.
  • + 4
 I have mixed emotions
  • + 2
 @jonokonko "Button your lip baby..button your coat..
  • - 1
 This isn't a done deal anyway, Fox are not adopting the metric sizing (not yet anyway)
I don't understand how PB says the shocks are not compatible with current shock sizing, yet they used the different standards on the same Transition Patrol?
Could you clarify please guys?
  • + 4
 from the article

"I first rode the bike with a normal, 216 x 63mm Monarch Plus, which was then swapped out for the new, 230 x 65mm Super Deluxe, a change made possible by the use of a custom machined linkage. "

as someone else mentions, they either had a linkage from the 2017 patrol, or rockshox / transition custom made a linkage for this demonstration.
  • + 1
 @hardingsan:
Ah. So it is indeed possible, but Rockshox won't be making the adaptors. Loud and clear!
  • + 1
 They did, they said they used "custom machined linkage" for this Patrol to test the new shock.

Makes me wonder how easily some manufactures could make specific geo chips to accommodate the size difference.
  • + 1
 @Dobbs59: Only 'possible' if you happen to have a custom machined linkage for every bike lying around. So on any bike as they come stock, no it isn't possible.
  • - 1
 @mgolder: eh? a shock fit is standard, a 216 to a 220 would be the same for any bike
  • - 1
 Does the change in shock lengths affect the geo? I would think the increase to 230mm on a patrol would steepen the HA and raise the BB. I wonder how many companies will immediately change their manufacturing to accompany the new standards
  • + 3
 I'm confused. Is this a joke or is this real?
  • + 2
 Why no 200mm i2i?

Surely this is easy to do and fits a huge number of bikes. Even if they shortened the stroke a little.
  • + 2
 That was a dumb comment by me
  • + 3
 2 words: So stupid!
  • + 2
 loving the Transition Patrol was used for this article!! Transition FTW!
  • + 1
 I was curious when RS would release a competitor to the float...a comparison would be welcomed.
  • + 1
 How much better does the yellow patrol look with a black link? so much better
  • + 2
 I hope these new shocks measure up.
  • + 0
 so you rode a bike with a 216mm i2i shock then fitted a 230mm i2i shock and the difference is down to the performance of the shock not the increased i2i causing geo changes?
  • + 8
 There was is no geo change. As you can see in the pictures they are using a new linkage for the super deluxe. This is probably the linkage that transition will use for MY17 bikes. The linkage allows them to fit the larger shock (i2i) as well use the 2mm of extra stroke in whatever way they want (more travel or a slightly different leverage ratio).
  • + 0
 so I have to assume they changed the linkage as well when they changed over from ther shorter shock
  • + 2
 So the trunnion mount is like my old 2004 cannondale jekyll
  • + 2
 So my Karpiel Apocalypse is out of luck?
  • + 1
 And here I am just trying to find time to go out and ride my 26in 120mm bike with an 11-36...
  • + 1
 hopefully bike manufacturers can provide new linkages to adapt an older frame to the new standard....
  • + 1
 Deluxe setting icons; locked, unlocked, honey combs cereal. Because you never want to pedal when locked or unlocked....
  • + 2
 super deluxe??
"rockshox is a mess"
"rockshox is a big mistake"
  • + 2
 WOW! A new standard is announced and Pinkbike didn't crash. Amazing.
  • + 1
 "Carved some delicious turns in the dirt"he said.ive done that with me head
  • + 1
 "Neither will be available as an aftermarket upgrade, at least not anytime soon."

Why the f*ck not??
  • + 1
 The only deluxe I'm gonna have is a deluxe pizza. Still shit compared to the all meat...
  • + 2
 I'd better wait for premium super delux le to come out
  • + 2
 I thought the metric stuff was an April fools joke
  • + 2
 More bearings to wear out????
  • + 1
 finally a 230mm eye to eye air shock that will lighten the load on my sx trail :-)
  • + 1
 Yay! Now I'll finally be able to afford 2nd-hand or NOS shock upgrades for my 2005 Kingfisher.
  • + 1
 All these new 'standards' are just the bike industry finally doing some critical thinking about how stuff should work.
  • + 1
 Older, outdated, no its called Legacy!
  • + 0
 The return of the Super Delux.............back in the day, the Super Delux was a coil shock.
  • + 1
 ...and I thought the metric sizing press release was an April fools jokeSmile
  • + 1
 How the F@ck is MBAction going to deal with this???
  • - 3
 "Can I still use my older shock in a new metric frame? Nope, you can't. Different shock lengths and mounting hardware mean that this isn't possible. "

Ok, but on the other side, can I put a metric shock on an "old" frame ? It seems to be ok since Rachelle did it.
"aboard a Transition Patrol, but I first rode the bike with a normal, 216 x 63mm Monarch Plus before switching to the new, 230 x 65mm Super Deluxe. "
  • + 3
 as per the rest of that sentence...

"...a change made possible by the use of a custom machined linkage"
  • + 2
 Dude....read the arcticle! She had a custom made linkage....
  • + 2
 The article was updated after all the questions....
  • + 1
 My cane creek dbair is just fine
  • + 1
 Weren't shocks already metric sized? I mean 222.25x66 is metric no?
  • + 1
 12.7 hardware on the super deluxe??? Some one dropped the metric ball!
  • + 1
 Now you need a Diploma to Service this
  • - 3
 Most changes in bikes lately seem stupid... but this one makes total sense. Yes, it is a new standard... however, it will simply in the long run, rather tan complicate. Although, I honestly think the consistent IFP across all sizes is a much bigger deal as far as actual frame/suspension tuning than the metric sizing.
  • + 2
 Simplify how? The PR lists 9 "old" length/stroke combos that can be used by manufacturers to achieve just about anything they want without having to go for a weird custom shock size... and then lists 12 "additional" options. Hmm...
  • + 1
 I want a see through one!
  • + 1
 Whats the point of having a climb switch? it does nothing
  • + 1
 Ho hoooo... So funny. But wasn't April fool last week?
  • + 1
 is it better than the monarch pus debonair?
  • + 1
 I have that exact frame / color. but I only have a "normal" debonair. Frown
  • + 2
 planned obsolescence
  • + 1
 Hey guys, always exist offset bushes
  • + 0
 Know what they call a quarter pounder with cheese in france?
  • + 1
 wait and see
  • - 1
 And to everyone hating on me calling it an April fools joke guess what jokes on you suckaz lol
  • - 1
 love that black painted shock linkage on the patrol...
  • - 3
 FUCK OFF.
Below threshold threads are hidden

Post a Comment



You must login to Pinkbike.
Don't have an account? Sign up

Join Pinkbike  Login
Copyright © 2000 - 2019. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.107694
Mobile Version of Website