Interesting red

[David Kirk]

http://www.velonews.com/article/75037/tech-report-with-lennard-zinn---what-s-the-next-big-thing

Dave

[J.Greene]

No mention of the DKS.

JG

[EDS]

How would the Serotta ST rear stay hold up at Paris-Roubaix? Would it help at all?

[whitecda]

.

[RPS]

IMHO road suspension comes down to basics:

Low weight + ideal stiffness + zero friction = great ride and performance

MTB-type forks miss on all counts while some frames do much better.
Mostly we need a fork designed specifically for road use.

[Bruce K]

Sounds like some variation of the Cannondale Headshock might be the quickest answer to front suspension for road bikes.

Maybe something like along the lines of the MTB softtails for the rear if you actually want a shock vs a compliant rear end.

BK

[benb]

I mostly see it as just waiting for the right combination of low weight and proper spring & damping rates. Maybe something along the "Zertz" track or the ST rear end may be the answer. But I really doubt MTB style forks will never work.

People said the same thing with motorcycles and yet almost no one sane would dare say a motorcycle without suspension on both ends worked well today.

Maybe road bike just don't go fast enough though. Maybe it really only belongs on cross bikes and/or special bikes for stuff like Paris-Roubaix.

I know I could use a little something right now.. the thump-thump-thump of the frost heaves gets old. But getting exactly the right tire pressure, etc.. can certainly help, and the faster I go the less I notice. But on a long enough ride they still beat the snot out of me.

[RPS]

Bruce, there are some road suspension forks already available for 1-1/8-inch head tubes. I plan to test one once I start riding again, but expect that friction will prevent it from doing what I want.

[mcteague]

I often wonder if the quest for the stiffest frame makes sense. My preference is for a slightly flexible frame. Not a noodle mind you, but a little give is a good thing IMO. 700x25 tires go a long way towards improving the ride as well. More comfort = fresher body = greater speed in the long run.

Tim McTeague

[RPS]

I mostly see it as just waiting for the right combination of low weight and proper spring & damping rates.Under what conditions do you feel you need damping on a road bike?
Just curious as to what your expectations are for a road bike -- not MTB or cross.

[goonster]

The bike has a long fork rake and such a shallow head angle that it still has “a ridiculous amount of fork trail,” says Felt, without pinning himself down to the actual numbers. It has clearance for 27mm tires caked with mud and a carbon layup designed to soften it even more.

It’s not so much comfort that Bäckstedt and other top Paris-Roubaix riders are seeking. “These guys are willing to take a beating,” says Felt, “but it’s a control at speed issue; they want it to hold the (cobblestone) road. And it can’t be quick handling, since one swerve on wet cobbles and they’re down.”


Contradictory statements? What's "ridiculous"? Can someone translate all this for me?

[ashwa64]

thought this was going to be a thread about wine...

[Chris]

I often wonder if the quest for the stiffest frame makes sense. My preference is for a slightly flexible frame. Not a noodle mind you, but a little give is a good thing IMO. 700x25 tires go a long way towards improving the ride as well. More comfort = fresher body = greater speed in the long run.

Tim McTeague

I read that this morning and thought it brought up a few questions. I think that the pursuit of stiffness may well have been done without the objective evidence to support the need. I remember in the early days when you had a choice, lots of people, myself included would say that riding a steel bike was better because of the fatigue issue later on in the ride. Now, it seems that Craig brings up an actual objective example (albeit n=1) of where data supports the use of a heavier bike that has more compliance. Maybe e-RICHIE has been right all along. And Maybe that was the reason Sean Kelly was so good after all. Who knew?

[benb]

Under what conditions do you feel you need damping on a road bike?
Just curious as to what your expectations are for a road bike -- not MTB or cross.

Suspension without damping is a pogo stick and you're just going to bounce-bounce-bounce like a cadillac floating down the highway.. that's the only reason I said you need damping. No different then a MTB or a motorcycle or a car.

[Ken Robb]

my Hampsten Strada Bianca ti by Moots has the YBB rear end and I think it's areal bonus for comfort and handling. Our pal PB Wrench rode it for a few days and liked it too so it's not just my imagination.
I also was impressed a couple of years ago when I tried a Klein Reve. Without Reve a Klein is too harsh-riding for me but with Reve it was about as comfy as my regular road bikes with similar tires and geos: Legend CSI. The rambouillet with 44.5cm chainstays was still more comfortable. The Hampsten miles ahead but also way more $$ to get the YBB added to the frame than the Reve added to the Klein.
I think you could also get Reve on a few models of brands also under the Trek banner. I haven't noticed any lately. I wonder why.

[Ahneida Ride]

The DKS was truly ingenious .... ;) It worked.

I believe it was not marketed effectively.

[sg8357]

The new Bicycle Quarterly has a similar article on more comfort = less fatigue.
No talk of suspension, but top tube to down tube ratios and tires.

BQ is addressing rando riders and Zinn is talking stage racing, similar
conclusions for long distance events and rides.

[RPS]

Suspension without damping is a pogo stick and you're just going to bounce-bounce-bounce like a cadillac floating down the highway.. that's the only reason I said you need damping. No different then a MTB or a motorcycle or a car.Exactly what makes a road bike pogo-pogo-pogo?

Not to be difficult, but I think you are missing a huge difference by comparing road bikes directly with MTB, motorcycles, and cars.

[benb]

I didn't say they pogoed currently. I said they *would* pogo if you sprung them without damping. Road bikes *do* react harshly & bounce around at high speed when hitting rough patches in the road though.

To be crystal clear.. what I am looking for.

If I rail a cracked up descent full of frost heaves, cracks, etc.. road at 45mph around a corner on my Serotta... make it feel like a Suzuki GSX-R as opposed to a 1970 Mustang. Let me haul on the brakes full on when I'm going into that hairpin at 40mph and have to slow to 20mph to make the corner and not worry about the back tire hopping around over the frost heaves and cracks.

Don't knock it till you've felt it! I think it's very possible cause a good MTB is 99% of the way there already.. just way too heavy.

I know I'm crapping on tradition but it's the same way I feel about disc brakes for road bikes. They will eventually figure it out and it will be better. The thread is about the "next big thing". These are two things that to me would qualify as the "next big thing" far more then more BS about "Vertically compliant and horizontally stiff" or 10g more weight taken off the fork.

e.x. Sunday I was doing ~40mph down a steep hill that I have not rode yet this year.. there was a 5' long pothole about 3" deep that laid across the entire road.. I braked. I maybe would not have in a race. I would not have on my MTB at that speed, and I wouldn't even have felt it at 60mph on my motorcycle.

Suspension can do amazing things!

[Dave B]

my Hampsten Strada Bianca ti by Moots has the YBB rear end and I think it's areal bonus for comfort and handling. Our pal PB Wrench rode it for a few days and liked it too so it's not just my imagination.
I also was impressed a couple of years ago when I tried a Klein Reve. Without Reve a Klein is too harsh-riding for me but with Reve it was about as comfy as my regular road bikes with similar tires and geos: Legend CSI. The rambouillet with 44.5cm chainstays was still more comfortable. The Hampsten miles ahead but also way more $$ to get the YBB added to the frame than the Reve added to the Klein.
I think you could also get Reve on a few models of brands also under the Trek banner. I haven't noticed any lately. I wonder why.


This is my take as well a Vamoots YBB or even a psychlo-x YBB if it were terribly muddy.

I am surprised that custom builders or smaller ones don't get remembered, but we look to mass produced companies to make it work.

I was watching the vs coverage and a comment was made by Phil or Paul on Boonen's s-works. The commented that back in the day guys just used a "normal' bike and they still did really well that technology has changed for cobble specific bikes.

Not that today's riders are not still as brilliant, but I wonder if the heros of yesterday wish they had that stuff or simply think these riders today are too soft.

Would be fun to listen to Merckx talk about this...even though his company makes pretty techy bikes.

[znfdl]

I got excited about the title "Interesting Red".

I thought that you would be discussing a good red wine, hopefully a zinfandel. Oh Well.

[Ozz]

I got excited about the title "Interesting Red".

I thought that you would be discussing a good red wine, hopefully a zinfandel. Oh Well.
+1

Here is one for you: Gouguenheim Valle Escondido Cabernet Sauvignon (http://www.saltcreekwinestore.com/179316/?utm_source=google;utm_medium=base)

good value...tasty....sorry, not a Zinfandel :beer:

[fiamme red]

I got excited about the title "Interesting Red".

I thought that you would be discussing a good red wine, hopefully a zinfandel. Oh Well.Romanee Conti sounds interesting.

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSL1928862520080419

[znfdl]

OZZ: sounds interesting

Fiamme: I would have to sell my bike collection to maybe purchase one bottle. Do no think that would happen.

[Ozz]

OZZ: sounds interesting....
It runs about $10 at my local grocery store.... :beer:

[beungood]

Are we talking something like this Bianchi?....

[David Kirk]

IMO there will come a time when most competitive folks will be on something we consider suspension. I doubt it will have pivots and shocks and moving parts but it will have wheel travel given by flexible frame members.

The amount of "needed" travel is very small so damping isn't all that important. I believe it will allow for less fatigue and lower rolling resistance and therefore will be faster. If the UCI lowers the weight limit it will delay the progress in this direction.

I don't see much need for change in the fork. The zertz thingies are a good step and lots of the way there. The issue from my perspective is the rear. Since the fork is a cantilevered beam that is allowed to flex all over the place it does a fairly good job of isolating the rider from road shock and keeping the front tire on the surface. The rear of the bike, being a small closed triangle, can't move much if at all and can be an issue. The fact that the majority of the riders weight is on the rear wheel and that it takes more effort to unweight (compared to the front where the rider can soften the elbow and absorb short) the butt from the saddle makes the rear and even bigger deal.

Bikes made for specific events like Paris Roubaix will not become the norm. The needs of events like this differ so much from our everyday needs they will remain one-offs for those special events.

It will happen and it won't look anything like a MTB. Consider the obvious motorcycle comparison..........road race motorcycles and motocross bikes. They are both suspended but that's there the similarity ends. The amount of travel and the type of damping are worlds apart.

I've said much of this before so sorry to bore you. I'll repeat myself one more time........road race bicycles are the ONLY high speed, rolling, racing device left that doesn't have some sort of suspension. It's bound to change at some point.

dave

[csm]

dave, what about gokarts? do those shifter karts have suspension?

[David Kirk]

dave, what about gokarts? do those shifter karts have suspension?


Shifter carts have a frame that has adjustable flex.....both in bending and torsion.

Makes a huge difference I'm told.

dave

[csm]

can't the same be said about road bikes? there is some "give" engineered in?

[brians647]

can't the same be said about road bikes? there is some "give" engineered in?

Yes, but that's Dave's point too. The amount that you can engineer into a shifter kart suspension is pretty significant - think about those bars going all the way across that support no vertical load - just torsional ones. A bike has few such pieces in it - hence Dave's pointing out the rear triangle limits.

At least I think that's what he's saying (never even driven a shifter kart). What the heck do I know?

[David Kirk]

Yes, but that's Dave's point too. The amount that you can engineer into a shifter kart suspension is pretty significant - think about those bars going all the way across that support no vertical load - just torsional ones. A bike has few such pieces in it - hence Dave's pointing out the rear triangle limits.

At least I think that's what he's saying (never even driven a shifter kart). What the heck do I know?

Yes that is pretty much what I'm saying. While you can design some give into a traditional double triangle bike frame I think there more would be a benefit. The tough part is getting more WITHOUT torsional or drivetrain rigidity becoming an issue.

Dave

[rwsaunders]

Sounds like some variation of the Cannondale Headshock might be the quickest answer to front suspension for road bikes.

Maybe something like along the lines of the MTB softtails for the rear if you actually want a shock vs a compliant rear end.

BK

I rode a Silk Road for years and the front suspension was a dream. The problem was that Cannondale forgot to deal with the rear triangle. Rough pavement had that rear end all over the road.

[RPS]

I didn't say they pogoed currently. I said they *would* pogo if you sprung them without damping. Road bikes *do* react harshly & bounce around at high speed when hitting rough patches in the road though. The primary cause of pogoing is due to suspension that is too soft and not because of lack of damping.
For a pogo stick to work, the person has to jump/bounce in rhythm with the pogo stick’s natural frequency.
If the person tries to jump/bounce twice as fast or twice as slow, there will be no pogo-pogo-pogo. ;)
From personal experience I can assure you that a bike will not pogo unless it’s suspension is made too soft. And if you eliminate damping (including friction), it will do a better job reducing annoying road buzz which is at a much higher frequency than pogoing.

[RPS]

Don't knock it till you've felt it! I think it's very possible cause a good MTB is 99% of the way there already.. just way too heavy. To the contrary, I'm not knocking suspension -- I defend the concept when properly applied.
I’ve felt road bikes with more rear suspension travel than a DKS and Terraplane combined, so I think I have a good appreciation of the benefits as well as limitations.

Having said that, I think it is important to keep the 80-20 rule in mind when discussing road suspension. No doubt a full active suspension much like MTB is possible, but for road use it’s not needed, it’s not advantageous over other simpler, lighter, and more efficient options.

[RPS]

e.x. Sunday I was doing ~40mph down a steep hill that I have not rode yet this year.. there was a 5' long pothole about 3" deep that laid across the entire road.. I braked. I maybe would not have in a race. I would not have on my MTB at that speed, and I wouldn't even have felt it at 60mph on my motorcycle.Isn’t that like wanting a sports car to have a Hummer’s off-road capability? Seems extreme to me because it requires too many compromises. It’s possible to build a 4WD Porsche SUV (indeed a very nice SUV) but it can’t compete with true sports cars for that intended use.

[RPS]

IMO there will come a time when most competitive folks will be on something we consider suspension. I doubt it will have pivots and shocks and moving parts but it will have wheel travel given by flexible frame members.
The amount of "needed" travel is very small so damping isn't all that important. I believe it will allow for less fatigue and lower rolling resistance and therefore will be faster. If the UCI lowers the weight limit it will delay the progress in this direction. Can not agree more. IMO when travel is limited to prevent pogoing (so as to allow efficient pedaling) damping isn’t needed.
A major problem is that many people continue to think of damping on a road bike as if it were an MTB being ridden off road where repeated oscillations with very large amplitude have to be controlled; and that’s so rarely the case on a road bike. Adding damping is easy enough, but will mostly just transmit more low-amplitude vibration – more buzz.

[RPS]

I don't see much need for change in the fork. The zertz thingies are a good step and lots of the way there. The issue from my perspective is the rear. Since the fork is a cantilevered beam that is allowed to flex all over the place it does a fairly good job of isolating the rider from road shock and keeping the front tire on the surface. The rear of the bike, being a small closed triangle, can't move much if at all and can be an issue. The fact that the majority of the riders weight is on the rear wheel and that it takes more effort to unweight (compared to the front where the rider can soften the elbow and absorb short) the butt from the saddle makes the rear and even bigger deal.Dave, I agree with you that the rear is more important because something like 60 percent of the weight is there, but as the rear suspension is designed with more travel, the front becomes a comparative bigger issue by default.

When the rear suspension is made softer the front will feel stiffer – mostly by comparison to the rear. IMO a suspension fork (if a light one that worked well was available) would allow the frame to be tuned for optimum ride and performance. At present much has to be left on the table because of the front end which still carries about 40 percent of the load and contributes to a disproportional amount of harshness and buzz.

[RPS]

Yes that is pretty much what I'm saying. While you can design some give into a traditional double triangle bike frame I think there more would be a benefit. The tough part is getting more WITHOUT torsional or drivetrain rigidity becoming an issue.

DaveThat part may be easier than getting any new design past UCI. IMHO unless a new design is first proven in racing, it will be tough to market to the masses. And for the time being, UCI requires the double triangle frame with its inherent vertical stiffness.



suspension rant over :)

[benb]

Isn’t that like wanting a sports car to have a Hummer’s off-road capability? Seems extreme to me because it requires too many compromises. It’s possible to build a 4WD Porsche SUV (indeed a very nice SUV) but it can’t compete with true sports cars for that intended use.

Guess I would have to take pictures of what I'm talking about.. I'm not looking for anything even close to what a XC MTB is designed to soak up.

I can't really go for a ride in most of New England without hitting those kind of potholes, cracks, frost heaves, etc..

The roads out in upstate NY near Serotta are marginally better.

The stuff is just wicked annoying when you're in a pack and can't see it before you hit it. Other then parking lot/industrial zone crits every race I've done has had you riding over this stuff.

It's just an inch or two. No need to be able to hit a curb at 30mph and not even feel it like an X/C FS MTB.

[taylorj]

[QUOTE=benb]
I can't really go for a ride in most of New England without hitting those kind of potholes, cracks, frost heaves, etc..

The roads out in upstate NY near Serotta are marginally better.

The stuff is just wicked annoying when you're in a pack and can't see it before you hit it. Other then parking lot/industrial zone crits every race I've done has had you riding over this stuff.

It's just an inch or two. QUOTE]

Had I not lived there I would not understand. The roads in New England (mostly the Boston area) are like a third world country, until you get out in the Concord to Carlisle area. And even then, I was amazed at how rotten the pavement was for road biking. There was this one patch of pavement on trapelo going back into Belmont that they fixed and made it worse. A little bit of "give" would be nice in a road bike in that area. That said, I ride a steel hard-tail off road...

I can't imagine racing over those roads. The pot-holes are about the size of a small state!