|   continuation of the 4 bar discussion | ccm
Mar 7, 2003 6:44 PM | | great info a few posts down
So given that the ETSX is a true 4 bar, and that the Blur is likely also a 4 bar. How do these bikes really differ in ride compared to a Horst Link equipped bike like Specialized FSR?
FSR and ETSX are claimed to let the rear hub track in a near vertical line. |
| More important than basic profile, not really an answer | GrahamKracker
Mar 8, 2003 2:28 AM | | ...Is actual configuration of pivots. (yes, the SC and Rocky are true parallelogram-type 4-bars) A tale of two bikes:
Turner 02 versus Giant NRS
These designs are both short travel versions of the familiar Turner Burner walking beam design. Other examples of this profile include the Ellsworth Truth, most Kona bikes (w/out horst link), some newer Azonic offerings, etc.
The Turner is more "active", meaning the suspension was configured to be neutral under power and braking. This offers continual bump absorbtion while pedaling, braking, whatever, at the expense of slight bob when the rider's weight moves up and down. The Giant is design to stiffen to a topped out position under power, thus eliminating the tendency to bob as the rider's weight shifts up and down with pedal strokes. This results in hardtail like efficiency, at the expense of some bump absorbtion, and a nasty tendency to stink-bug, or markedly stiffen up, under braking.
While this is not an answer to your question at all, my point is that with a given suspension design, the pivots can be moved a few centimeters here or there and completely change the ride quality. |
| |
