Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 585
  1. #1
    Axa
    Axa is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    32

    New innovative suspension from Tantrum Cycles. Any thoughts...

    I have been following the updates from Tantrum Cycles for a while now, just waiting to get on a demo bike to see how it feels.
    Imoh the Missing Link linkage is claming to do all what I have been looking for in an All Mountain bike.

    -Seamlessly and automatic raising the BB height when climbing to avoud pedalstrikes and improve the geometry for climbing.

    -No bobbing even without any propedal platform, lockout or other "Anti Bob" devices like electronics or inertia controlled valves. And yet stiff as a hard tail when climbing steep, but still active to bumps to give good traction to efficiency ratio.

    -Plush initial travel without wallow.

    It's all well explained in video, diagram and text in the Tech web page
    Technology

    What's your thoughts on this?

    Skickat från min SM-G900F via Tapatalk
    Last edited by Axa; 09-24-2016 at 09:25 AM. Reason: spelling

  2. #2
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,612
    Quote Originally Posted by Axa View Post

    -No bobbing even without any propedal platform, lockout or other "Anti Bob" devices like electronics or inertia controlled valves. And yet stiff as a hard tail when climbing steep, but still active to bumps to give good traction to efficiency ratio.
    Well, for one, on many bikes, it's not "bob" that decreases your efficiency, if you pedal completely smooth and get no bob, there's still squat that compresses the rear shock beyond it's sag point, as a result of the torque you supply to the chainring, which in turn tugs the rear cassette up and keeps the shock compressed. That's where the efficiency is made/lost. That they are marketing "bob" just goes to show they are trying to pander to the uninformed masses.

    I don't want the rear wheel to stiffen during climbing, I want it to absorb bumps and give me traction. That's why I bought an FS bike.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  3. #3
    mbtr member
    Reputation: scottzg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    4,292
    Haven't ridden the bike, obviously, but the design gives me three concerns

    *looks like they're using chain tension to prevent chainstay growth. This makes for a ton of pedal feedback as the chainstays try to extend and pull on the chain.

    *Using chain tension to 'pick up' the rider means the rider is using energy to extend the suspension with each pedal stroke. Reverse pedal bob.

    *Locking out the suspension this way makes the suspension pretty unresponsive to bumps under power.

    Maybe it's the biz, but by now it seems like suspensions are pretty well sorted and designers only have to tweak their parameters to get the ride character they want. Interesting design, but I wouldn't be interested without an extended dirt test ride.
    "Things that are complex are not useful, Things that are useful are simple."
    Mikhail Kalashnikov

  4. #4
    Axa
    Axa is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    32
    Thanx for the clarification Jayem. Bad explanation frommy side. I totally agree in what you say and Missing link is suppose to do exactly what you wrote. No squat but still active, always.

    I'm a "spinner" myself and used the word "Bob" with the uniformed masses in mind.. 😉

    The ting is that this linkage is supposed to be stiff when pedaling on smooth ground, from flat to the steepest climb. But still be active to absorb every bump to give you good traction.

    And at the same time avoid squat by having this anti-sag function that rais the BB when climbing. Improving the ground clerence when you want it. And also steeping the head angle to give quicker steering when you want it (slow speed at step climbs)

    Skickat från min SM-G900F via Tapatalk

  5. #5
    Axa
    Axa is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by scottzg View Post
    Haven't ridden the bike, obviously, but the design gives me three concerns

    *looks like they're using chain tension to prevent chainstay growth. This makes for a ton of pedal feedback as the chainstays try to extend and pull on the chain.

    *Using chain tension to 'pick up' the rider means the rider is using energy to extend the suspension with each pedal stroke. Reverse pedal bob.

    *Locking out the suspension this way makes the suspension pretty unresponsive to bumps under power.

    Maybe it's the biz, but by now it seems like suspensions are pretty well sorted and designers only have to tweak their parameters to get the ride character they want. Interesting design, but I wouldn't be interested without an extended dirt test ride.
    Regarding chain tension and pedal feedback.
    Since the lower part of the "Missing" link is shorter then the equivalent lower links on VPP and DW-LINK suspension, I would guess it's a good chance that it also gives less pedal feedback.
    Personally I think it's a overated problem anyway.

    I doubt the suspension extends with every pedal stroke. Or ever locks out completely.
    If that was the case they could not state that the "Suspension does not wallow in travel due to Missing Link effects"
    And "Instant reaction to bumps, even while climbing or sprinting"

    They is a discussion with som deeper explanations on how this actually works
    http://m.vitalmtb.com/photos/feature.../sspomer,2#_=_

    Skickat från min SM-G900F via Tapatalk

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    Well, for one, on many bikes, it's not "bob" that decreases your efficiency, if you pedal completely smooth and get no bob, there's still squat that compresses the rear shock beyond it's sag point, as a result of the torque you supply to the chainring, which in turn tugs the rear cassette up and keeps the shock compressed. That's where the efficiency is made/lost. That they are marketing "bob" just goes to show they are trying to pander to the uninformed masses.

    I don't want the rear wheel to stiffen during climbing, I want it to absorb bumps and give me traction. That's why I bought an FS bike.
    Some bikes compress, but most modern bikes have a degree of anti-squat to prevent that. In the extreme, anti-squat can seriously extend the rear, only to have it compress at the top/bottom of the stroke. Think an old C'dale super v.

    We're also talking about climbing efficiency, where weight transfer to the rear will cause more than static sag in the rear, resulting in slacker than static HT and ST angles, making it more difficult and less efficient to climb. This is of course made worse by the fork lengthening with less weight on the front.

    Quite the contrary, the uninformed masses will have the most difficulty understanding all of the benefits. The market for this bike is the all mountain trail rider that knows what makes a good climber (steeper geometry, stiffer rear suspension) and what makes a good descender (slacker geometry, ultra plush bump absorption combined with a bottomless feel).

    You say you do not want the suspension to stiffen, but i'm guessing your bike has a lockout and if you do any serious climbing, you've probably used it. You've probably also suffered for the lack of suspension while using it, and accepted this compromise as a better trade-off for efficiency. In fact, I don't think you'll find a bike on the market without a lockout of some sort, so it must be desirable at some point.

    I'm personally not fan of lockouts. Much of my climbing is very short and steep, following quick short descents. I don't want to mess with the extra clutter or complication.

    The Missing Link removes the need to EVER use a lockout. If you are climbing in a situation where you would want one, then you are most likely on a fairly steep, smooth climb. If you can put out that power, the missing link will not only prevent the shock from compressing, but will extend it fully for the duration, steepening the geometry by up to 4 degrees.

    This would be fine on a paved road, but when you hit a bump, the Missing Link rotates in the opposite direction, encouraging the shock to compress at a softer than normal rate, while still providing steeper geometry.

    Pedaling on level ground provides a nominal stiffening, enough to prevent the compression you previously mention, while still providing superior bump absorption due to the missing link assist.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,093
    Nice to see some manufacturer comment, thanks for joining. Your product looks cool, and I'm all for innovation, but have to question this:
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    In fact, I don't think you'll find a bike on the market without a lockout of some sort, so it must be desirable at some point.
    There are lots of bikes without lockouts... My kid's Process 134a (LDSP) for one. Not sure if the CTD switch on my Trance (DW) would be considered a lockout, either.
    2016 SC 5010
    2014 Kona Taro
    2014 Giant Trance (the boy's)
    2014 Kona Process 134a (the other boy's)

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by kyle242gt View Post
    Nice to see some manufacturer comment, thanks for joining. Your product looks cool, and I'm all for innovation, but have to question this:


    There are lots of bikes without lockouts... My kid's Process 134a (LDSP) for one. Not sure if the CTD switch on my Trance (DW) would be considered a lockout, either.
    I know this is a completely new concept. No other bike has this or has this capability. So I want to do my best to explain it and answer all questions.

    Your kids process has a version of "lockout". It may not lock it up completely, but the shock has "2 position compression, pedaling and open". Call it stiffening instead of lockout. Your CTD does the same thing, climb, trail descend. You select a stiffer damping setting to help pedaling and/or climbing. And if you're on a smooth climb, a complete lockout is better.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by scottzg View Post
    Haven't ridden the bike, obviously, but the design gives me three concerns

    *looks like they're using chain tension to prevent chainstay growth. This makes for a ton of pedal feedback as the chainstays try to extend and pull on the chain.

    *Using chain tension to 'pick up' the rider means the rider is using energy to extend the suspension with each pedal stroke. Reverse pedal bob.

    *Locking out the suspension this way makes the suspension pretty unresponsive to bumps under power.

    Maybe it's the biz, but by now it seems like suspensions are pretty well sorted and designers only have to tweak their parameters to get the ride character they want. Interesting design, but I wouldn't be interested without an extended dirt test ride.
    Chain tension affects ALL suspension designs. That's how anti-squat works. Yes, the reaction at the tire contact patch is part of the equation, but that reaction doesn't exist without chain tension.The design does not use chain tension in the traditional sense. The chaingrowth on this design is actually pretty minimal, it does not need growth to achieve the desired effect. No pedal bob, or reverse pedal bob.

    Read the full description, it locks out fully and goes to full extension....until it hits a bump, which causes the missing link to rotate in the direction to compress the shock, offering a softer bump response than normally possible.

    That's the whole point. It locks out and extends to steepen geometry when you need it and still complies to bumps when required.

    Bikes are pretty well sorted, to a point. The point being you can only do so much with conventional suspension geometry and layouts. Then you have to start adding crutches like lockouts and pedaling platforms, which generally are not good for bump performance.

    So you have to come up with something pretty special and unique to offer a new performance capability that no other bike has or can have. That's what we've done.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    96
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    Well, for one, on many bikes, it's not "bob" that decreases your efficiency, if you pedal completely smooth and get no bob, there's still squat that compresses the rear shock beyond it's sag point, as a result of the torque you supply to the chainring, which in turn tugs the rear cassette up and keeps the shock compressed. That's where the efficiency is made/lost. That they are marketing "bob" just goes to show they are trying to pander to the uninformed masses.

    I don't want the rear wheel to stiffen during climbing, I want it to absorb bumps and give me traction. That's why I bought an FS bike.
    Well, that excellent and simple explanation finally made this topic click for me...thanks!

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    230
    I'm no engineer or suspension expert but this design makes sense to me. I refuse to believe bike designs have already hit there pinnacle and all that's left is minor tweaking.

  12. #12
    Axa
    Axa is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by cgdibble View Post
    Well, that excellent and simple explanation finally made this topic click for me...thanks!
    Maybe not that excellent since they are actually not marketing "Bob" att all.
    I suggest you take a closer look at the tech page http://www.tantrumcycles.com/technology.html
    Don miss out on watching the well explaining video that makes it easier to understand how all this is possible with out any remote lockout/TCD/pedal platform levers on the bars or shock, electronics or other gizmos I don't want to fuzz with besides gearing, braking and adjusting my remote seatpost as I frequently do on most trails I prefer to ride.
    The more technical (for my ability) the more fun.
    I hope to get to ride a demo bike soon.
    I suspect this can be what I have been waiting for trough all this year's of marketing hypes.


    Skickat från min SM-G900F via Tapatalk

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    96
    Quote Originally Posted by Axa View Post
    Maybe not that excellent since they are actually not marketing "Bob" att all.
    I suggest you take a closer look at the tech page Technology
    Don miss out on watching the well explaining video that makes it easier to understand how all this is possible with out any remote lockout/TCD/pedal platform levers on the bars or shock, electronics or other gizmos I don't want to fuzz with besides gearing, braking and adjusting my remote seatpost as I frequently do on most trails I prefer to ride.
    The more technical (for my ability) the more fun.
    I hope to get to ride a demo bike soon.
    I suspect this can be what I have been waiting for trough all this year's of marketing hypes.


    Skickat från min SM-G900F via Tapatalk
    I am more about the application of what he said outside of just this suspension design. I definitely will watch those videos and learn about this design, but my understanding of what impacts suspension while peddling has been hazy and Jayem helped with that regardless of what Tantrum cycles and their suspension.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,093
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    Your kids process has a version of "lockout". It may not lock it up completely, but the shock has "2 position compression, pedaling and open". Call it stiffening instead of lockout. Your CTD does the same thing, climb, trail descend.
    The P134a doesn't have a lockout, just adjustable rebound. Not saying it might not benefit from one, but it's far less bobby than my FSR was.
    Agree that CTD could be construed as a lockout of sorts, but I leave it in T all the time, so it may as well not be there. Pedal bob is a nonissue, and it's way active on uphill terrain.

    Your design may very well be the magic bullet the industry's been waiting for... hell, you could be the next Dave. But given all the respect seemingly low-tech designs get, I'm not sure pedal jack is the coming thing.

    Then again, I spin a 66*HTA uphills and haven't died yet.
    2016 SC 5010
    2014 Kona Taro
    2014 Giant Trance (the boy's)
    2014 Kona Process 134a (the other boy's)

  15. #15
    Axa
    Axa is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    32
    ...
    Last edited by Axa; 04-21-2016 at 12:16 PM. Reason: double posting

  16. #16
    Axa
    Axa is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by cgdibble View Post
    I am more about the application of what he said outside of just this suspension design. I definitely will watch those videos and learn about this design, but my understanding of what impacts suspension while peddling has been hazy and Jayem helped with that regardless of what Tantrum cycles and their suspension.
    That's all good. Since it was me that drags the word "Bob" into the discussion I just felt it was appropriate to point out that Tantrum is not marketing any anti "Bob" feture at all.
    They are actually just mention the word Bob one time on ther website, an that was in relation to other suspension designs that have to much anti-squat, or I suppose any kind of automatic and "adaptive" sag adjustment, as afa i can understand, Missing link can give 100% of?

    Skickat från min SM-G900F via Tapatalk
    Last edited by Axa; 04-21-2016 at 12:22 PM.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by kyle242gt View Post
    The P134a doesn't have a lockout, just adjustable rebound. Not saying it might not benefit from one, but it's far less bobby than my FSR was.
    Agree that CTD could be construed as a lockout of sorts, but I leave it in T all the time, so it may as well not be there. Pedal bob is a nonissue, and it's way active on uphill terrain.

    Your design may very well be the magic bullet the industry's been waiting for... hell, you could be the next Dave. But given all the respect seemingly low-tech designs get, I'm not sure pedal jack is the coming thing.

    Then again, I spin a 66*HTA uphills and haven't died yet.
    Count your kid's 134 as one more bike no longer available without some kind of lockout. Even at the lowest price point, that model now has one.

    Controlling pedal induced suspension motion remains the biggest goal of all bike brands. Many are happy to use the most simple suspension and add a shock that is quite capable of helping the situation (as shock makers are continually coming up with new ways to help), although ALWAYS at the expense of bump absorption. Most brands have settled on some variation of chain tension controlled anti-squat, and yet they still all have a shock/damper with some sort of pedaling assistance/stiffening effect. Some have additional setting like the Scott variable travel.

    So the entire industry is continually focused on this problem. Why? As good as bikes and suspension are, they can and will get better. Always.

    There's no magic bullet. Bikes are good and fun. They always were and always will be. And there will always be people like myself wanting to make them better. in this case, I have come up with something that no other bike has and no other bike can do. Would you disagree with the following?

    1) in general, for climbing, steeper geometry is better (say 70-78 degree HT), for descending, slacker is better (say 62-70).

    2) in general, for climbing, a shorter travel bike, maybe with a firmer suspension to counteract weight transfer, would be beneficial

    3) on a paved, smooth climb, no suspension would be better

    4) for descending, a longer travel, more bump responsive suspension would be better.

    Those are the characteristics that the missing link can provide. With no loss of active suspension when needed. Ever.

    Pedal jack WAS the coming thing. It's exactly what you and every other anti-squat suspension rider are using. The simplest form was an old Super V or Super 8. Pedal jack in the extreme. The current forms are simply a more refined version.

    The Missing Link is completely different. Understand how the link can take ALL of the forces on the chainstay, from bump, pedaling, braking and continually modify the force on the shock, from helping it compress, to hindering it's compression. All at the right time for the conditions. You will have a better understanding of what's happening.

  18. #18
    > /dev/null 2&>1
    Reputation: Procter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,639
    Very interesting. So based on the diagram on the technology page, it makes sense. One comment, the green and red arrows point to the point where the lower link pivots on the frame. This point is stationary, relative to the frame. If the red and green arrows pointed to the pivot point where the chain stay attaches to the lower link, it would be more clear, because, pedal forces pull this pivot closer to the bb, extending the shock.

    I'm with others though, I have some natural skepticism that it will feel active and jack free during climbing. I don't see chain growth in the diagram but it's hard to visualize the physics of how bumps will affect compression under full pedal power.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    Very interesting. So based on the diagram on the technology page, it makes sense. One comment, the green and red arrows point to the point where the lower link pivots on the frame. This point is stationary, relative to the frame. If the red and green arrows pointed to the pivot point where the chain stay attaches to the lower link, it would be more clear, because, pedal forces pull this pivot closer to the bb, extending the shock.

    I'm with others though, I have some natural skepticism that it will feel active and jack free during climbing. I don't see chain growth in the diagram but it's hard to visualize the physics of how bumps will affect compression under full pedal power.
    Hi Proctor, thanks for the input. The red and green arrows don't actually point to that pivot, rather they come from it. The intent is to show the leverage (torque) that the force on the chainstay and on the the link as it rotates around that pivot. It is the link's rotation around that frame pivot, that makes all the magic happen, not the chainstay rotation on the link.

    Skepticism is good, it keeps things in check. Of course, there's nothing like a ride. Expect to see some test rides in the nearish future.

    In the meantime, imagine the chainstay pushing and pulling fore and aft on that link as it encounters drive and bump/braking forces. This pushing and pulling is translated through the Missing Link to the top of the shock, where it continually can stiffen, soften of be neutral (coasting on smooth, level ground). This is completely unlike the way a high pivot or other high anti-squat (two short links) delivers pedaling/drive force into the system, which are also unable to alter the spring force relative to horizontal forces on the chainstay..

    When you are under FULL power, almost by definition, you are on a very steep, smooth climb. If you encounter any bumps, typically, you will have to modulate your pedal stroke slightly, timing it with the bump. as you do this, the force of the bump drives the chainstay to the rear, assisting compression of the shock. In, fact, it does this at a very low spring force at the wheel, lower than the normal spring rate of the shock would deliver under the same circumstance. So the bump is easily absorbed and you are back at full power and full "lockout".

    If you are pedaling through a rock garden, the suspension will be firm enough to keep high in the travel, but not too firm to hurt traction or control. In a rock garden, you simply can't pedal hard enough to "lock out" the suspension (nor can you on level ground). And the bump force is continually pulling the chainstay back, assisting bump response, allowing the wheel to easily get up and over rocks or obstacles. It's all a continual force battle. I've done a lot of work to balance those forces to a desirable effect.

    There's a lot going on and it's hard to decide how best to illustrate it and get the point across without losing interest (see my responses).

    I hope this helps.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CrozCountry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,347
    Companies have achieved any axle path and shock rate you can imagine with much simpler 4 bar designs.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,042
    Quote Originally Posted by Axa View Post
    What's your thoughts on this?
    Looks like a flipped around GT RTS.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by CrozCountry View Post
    Companies have achieved any axle path and shock rate you can imagine with much simpler 4 bar designs.
    The thing is, you can't. Even if you could get the "optimum" wheel path, it would come at great compromise to some other desired quality, for example, pedal feedback through excessive chain growth. Every single parameter that a designer chooses is a compromise. Do I want a better climber or descender? Pedaler or bump performance. And it's always much more complicated than that.

    The Missing Link helps bridge those compromises. A better pedaler AND better bump performance. A better climber AND a better descender. The Missing Link adds performance that is not possible with any other design or linkage.

  23. #23
    orthonormal
    Reputation: andy f's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,200
    I was just thinking that this design reminded me in some ways of Kona's old Magic Link and noticed on the website that Tantrum's founder/designer also designed that suspension. The new design certainly looks more robust.

    I'd like to try one when they become available. My one personal nitpick based on geo numbers is TT length/reach. Would be nice if you added ~15 mm to each size. Also, I think you may find many people are looking for a slightly shorter CS these days. 5-7 mm shorter there could help you sell more frames.
    The glass is twice as large as it needs to be

  24. #24
    > /dev/null 2&>1
    Reputation: Procter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,639
    Quote Originally Posted by CrozCountry View Post
    Companies have achieved any axle path and shock rate you can imagine with much simpler 4 bar designs.
    This design isn't about axle path. What's unique here is that chain force pulls the chainstays forward, rotating the lower link, in turn extending the shock. I've never seen anything like it.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by andy f View Post
    I was just thinking that this design reminded me in some ways of Kona's old Magic Link and noticed on the website that Tantrum's founder/designer also designed that suspension. The new design certainly looks more robust.

    I'd like to try one when they become available. My one personal nitpick based on geo numbers is TT length/reach. Would be nice if you added ~15 mm to each size. Also, I think you may find many people are looking for a slightly shorter CS these days. 5-7 mm shorter there could help you sell more frames.
    Hi Andy, yes, the Missing Link is a continuation of thinking on what I was doing with the Magic Link. I figured out how to communicate the chainstay input into the upper end of the shock. On the Magic Link, it was through the lower end, with the small auxiliary shock as the main component being manipulated by the force.

    With the Missing Link, I was able to remove the auxiliary shock, making it lighter, stiffer, easier to make and easier to setup. Not necessarily easier to grasp all that is going on, but I think, less visually intimidating and cumbersome. The Magic Link still has an advantage in pure bump eating, due to the ability of the main and auxiliary spring to work in series, offering an incredibly plush bump response. It also was aided in this regard by the variable axle path, which could have a more rearward trajectory on a square edge hit. For the reasons, don't be surprised to see a Magic Link DH bike in Tantrum's lineup.

    The Missing link is better at pedaling and climbing, due to the ability to completely lockout the shock and go to full extension under max power, which also gives it more geometry change than the Magic Link.

    Regarding geometry, we are always watching trends and tweaking things. The final geometry may be slightly different, but those are the numbers of the current samples, and they sure are fun. My personal opinion is that we may be reaching a plateau of diminishing returns on those trends, as some negative comments are starting to crop up in bike tests about ultra short CS and ultra long TT. But we will always make sure we are aware of test a variety of geometries to be sure we are not missing out on an advantage. For example, I have found I can use a much slacker HT angle than anticipated, due to the geometry changing effect that makes it climb about 4 degrees steeper. My Meltdown Race for the Sea Otter Enduro had a 64 degree HT angle, and still climbed great.

  26. #26
    orthonormal
    Reputation: andy f's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,200
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    Hi Andy, yes, the Missing Link is a continuation of thinking on what I was doing with the Magic Link. I figured out how to communicate the chainstay input into the upper end of the shock. On the Magic Link, it was through the lower end, with the small auxiliary shock as the main component being manipulated by the force.

    With the Missing Link, I was able to remove the auxiliary shock, making it lighter, stiffer, easier to make and easier to setup. Not necessarily easier to grasp all that is going on, but I think, less visually intimidating and cumbersome. The Magic Link still has an advantage in pure bump eating, due to the ability of the main and auxiliary spring to work in series, offering an incredibly plush bump response. It also was aided in this regard by the variable axle path, which could have a more rearward trajectory on a square edge hit. For the reasons, don't be surprised to see a Magic Link DH bike in Tantrum's lineup.

    The Missing link is better at pedaling and climbing, due to the ability to completely lockout the shock and go to full extension under max power, which also gives it more geometry change than the Magic Link.

    Regarding geometry, we are always watching trends and tweaking things. The final geometry may be slightly different, but those are the numbers of the current samples, and they sure are fun. My personal opinion is that we may be reaching a plateau of diminishing returns on those trends, as some negative comments are starting to crop up in bike tests about ultra short CS and ultra long TT. But we will always make sure we are aware of test a variety of geometries to be sure we are not missing out on an advantage. For example, I have found I can use a much slacker HT angle than anticipated, due to the geometry changing effect that makes it climb about 4 degrees steeper. My Meltdown Race for the Sea Otter Enduro had a 64 degree HT angle, and still climbed great.
    Thanks for the explanation. I agree some are taking the long TT/short chainstays too far for where and how I ride but I do like the recent geometry trends in moderation. The steeper climbing geometry of your design sounds great to me. The best climbing bikes I have ever owned (hardtail and FS) had 90's NORBA-standard XC geometry but current trail and AM bike geometry is much more fun in almost every other way.

    I hope you had a chance to try the bikes in Santa Cruz while you were here for Sea Otter.
    The glass is twice as large as it needs to be

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hikerdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    The thing is, you can't. Even if you could get the "optimum" wheel path, it would come at great compromise to some other desired quality, for example, pedal feedback through excessive chain growth. Every single parameter that a designer chooses is a compromise. Do I want a better climber or descender? Pedaler or bump performance. And it's always much more complicated than that.

    The Missing Link helps bridge those compromises. A better pedaler AND better bump performance. A better climber AND a better descender. The Missing Link adds performance that is not possible with any other design or linkage.
    Proof is in the riding. Bring one out to the Sedona Mountain Bike festival next spring and I'll give it a try. There are some short steep climbs within a half mile of the venue and a nice set of difficult rock steps on a jeep road that are a perfect test of your claims.
    "Thank you, God, for letting me have another day"
    The Milagro Beanfield War

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by andy f View Post
    Thanks for the explanation. I agree some are taking the long TT/short chainstays too far for where and how I ride but I do like the recent geometry trends in moderation. The steeper climbing geometry of your design sounds great to me. The best climbing bikes I have ever owned (hardtail and FS) had 90's NORBA-standard XC geometry but current trail and AM bike geometry is much more fun in almost every other way.

    I hope you had a chance to try the bikes in Santa Cruz while you were here for Sea Otter.
    I think what most designers want is for their geometry/designs be taken as a whole, which of course means riding it. For example, because the rake is a little slacker on the Meltdown compared to some comparative bikes, this adds to the front center length without adding to the reach. So adding to the TT can be detrimental to handling in that it increases the wheelbase.

    Another compromise; shorter CS, at some point, require a steeper ST angle, moving the rider forward when seated, and moving the headtube further forward to maintain the same reach. A slacker ST angle can keep the rider further to the rear, not only seated, but by moving the HT to the rear to maintain the same reach.

    It's all a juggling match and the proof is in the ride. (you'll start seeing tests soon)

    And keep in mind that I'm claiming both steeper for climbing AND slacker for descending.

    Did not get a chance to go to SC. Que lastima. But generally get to ride in a lot of awesome places. next time.........

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by hikerdave View Post
    Proof is in the riding. Bring one out to the Sedona Mountain Bike festival next spring and I'll give it a try. There are some short steep climbs within a half mile of the venue and a nice set of difficult rock steps on a jeep road that are a perfect test of your claims.
    Sedona, Love to. Closest I'd been was an ancient old race called Cactus Cup. No telling where we will end up. Next stop is Big bear in June.

  30. #30
    > /dev/null 2&>1
    Reputation: Procter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,639
    TC, so what happens under standing pedalling (in terms of the physics of the lower link and it's behavior)?

    Sorry if you already answered.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vrock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    427
    At the end of the day this bike follows the sames principles as any other bike. It's a Virtual Pivot with a "Spike" of Anti-squat at the beginning of the travel 180% at 0% and 120% around 25%. The Leverage Ratio has another "Spike" at the beginning of the travel where it goes really low (1.6), but around 25% it's quite normal (2.7).

    If you are pedalling slowly, the bike it's going to stay around sag like any other bike and work the same as any other bike with 120% of Anti-squat. If you start pedalling really hard it's going to extend, top out, and stay there for a while, because that LR (combined with that AS Curve) works "as a trap" for the rear wheel. If you hit something and you keep going the bike it's not going to absorb the bump, but I think that there is an instinct to relax a bit when you hit something really big, if that happens the suspension can react to the bump.

    New innovative suspension from Tantrum Cycles. Any thoughts...-tantrum-cycles-meltdown-2017_anti-squat.jpgNew innovative suspension from Tantrum Cycles. Any thoughts...-tantrum-cycles-meltdown-2017_levratio.jpg

    Best regards,
    Tony.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Procter View Post
    TC, so what happens under standing pedalling (in terms of the physics of the lower link and it's behavior)?

    Sorry if you already answered.
    Basically, the physics aren't changing at all when standing, unless you as a rider are just bouncing around more while standing. so, it's really about the effort, the torque that you are generating, so seated or standing, if you can generate max torque, it will go to full extension and lockout (until you hit the bump).

    What if you can't generate max torque? The stiffening effect will be proportional. On level ground, you cannot deliver max torque, so the stiffening affect keeps it stable, not at full extension, but at static sag level.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Vrock View Post
    At the end of the day this bike follows the sames principles as any other bike. It's a Virtual Pivot with a "Spike" of Anti-squat at the beginning of the travel 180% at 0% and 120% around 25%. The Leverage Ratio has another "Spike" at the beginning of the travel where it goes really low (1.6), but around 25% it's quite normal (2.7).

    If you are pedalling slowly, the bike it's going to stay around sag like any other bike and work the same as any other bike with 120% of Anti-squat. If you start pedalling really hard it's going to extend, top out, and stay there for a while, because that LR (combined with that AS Curve) works "as a trap" for the rear wheel. If you hit something and you keep going the bike it's not going to absorb the bump, but I think that there is an instinct to relax a bit when you hit something really big, if that happens the suspension can react to the bump.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Tantrum Cycles Meltdown 2017_Anti-squat.jpg 
Views:	325 
Size:	85.2 KB 
ID:	1067223Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Tantrum Cycles Meltdown 2017_LevRatio.jpg 
Views:	307 
Size:	79.0 KB 
ID:	1067224

    Best regards,
    Tony.
    Hi Tony,

    At the end of the day it does, but that's why we are starting a new day! Sorry, couldn't resist. so, it must follow the same laws of physics, but the missing link adds another input tot he suspension that works in combination with the rest of the linkage.

    I was wondering why your numbers are (in some cases) extremely skewed. I looked at the software you are using. It doesn't appear that it has the capability to accurately model this design (although I didn't buy it, so I'm not sure how flexible it is). Maybe it's just the inaccuracy of doing it from as picture.

    To call it another "virtual pivot", is essentially a non-description, right?? That's only every non-single pivot bike ever made, from the horst link to DW. It really does nothing to differentiate any design from another. There seems to be no mention of the forces input by the missing link in your analysis. Which are very important.

    But a couple of trends are correct, The motion ratio does start out very "stiff". Yes, your description of this as a "trap", kinda works. Although it has nothing to do with pedaling slowly or not. You can pedal so slow you are about to stop, but if the torque is there, so will the effect. It will reach top out and stay there as long and you are delivering the torque. Conversely, you can pedal really fast with almost no torque whatsoever. Think sprinting on level ground. In this case, the suspension would stiffen slightly, enough to keep still and at static sag level.

    Now, think about getting out of the "trap". Say you are trying to climb a staircase. There is no way you can attack this at full torque. Before the rear wheel even gets there, the front wheel hits the first step and upsets the whole applecart. So the rider is continually making adjustments in weight shifts, pedal position, power delivery, etc. The missing link is then able to counter rotate and help compress the suspension at a softer than normal rate.

    The missing links contribution cannot be overstated. It is continually modifying the spring force softer and stiffer than normal.

    All of these forces and effects took a LONG time to work out, with thousands of iterations to get all of the effects working in right direction at the right time.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vrock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    427
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    Hi Tony,

    At the end of the day it does, but that's why we are starting a new day! Sorry, couldn't resist. so, it must follow the same laws of physics, but the missing link adds another input tot he suspension that works in combination with the rest of the linkage.

    I was wondering why your numbers are (in some cases) extremely skewed. I looked at the software you are using. It doesn't appear that it has the capability to accurately model this design (although I didn't buy it, so I'm not sure how flexible it is). Maybe it's just the inaccuracy of doing it from as picture.

    To call it another "virtual pivot", is essentially a non-description, right?? That's only every non-single pivot bike ever made, from the horst link to DW. It really does nothing to differentiate any design from another. There seems to be no mention of the forces input by the missing link in your analysis. Which are very important.

    But a couple of trends are correct, The motion ratio does start out very "stiff". Yes, your description of this as a "trap", kinda works. Although it has nothing to do with pedaling slowly or not. You can pedal so slow you are about to stop, but if the torque is there, so will the effect. It will reach top out and stay there as long and you are delivering the torque. Conversely, you can pedal really fast with almost no torque whatsoever. Think sprinting on level ground. In this case, the suspension would stiffen slightly, enough to keep still and at static sag level.

    Now, think about getting out of the "trap". Say you are trying to climb a staircase. There is no way you can attack this at full torque. Before the rear wheel even gets there, the front wheel hits the first step and upsets the whole applecart. So the rider is continually making adjustments in weight shifts, pedal position, power delivery, etc. The missing link is then able to counter rotate and help compress the suspension at a softer than normal rate.

    The missing links contribution cannot be overstated. It is continually modifying the spring force softer and stiffer than normal.

    All of these forces and effects took a LONG time to work out, with thousands of iterations to get all of the effects working in right direction at the right time.
    If you are going to complain about the numbers not being accurate you have to post the real ones and prove it. That's how it works, if you don't post anything the only thing I can say is that having an aproximation is a lot better than having nothing.

    The program can handle your design without any problem, it's a 6-bar with the same layup as the Equilink System. I don't have a super nice picture and I know the results are not perfect, but I'm sure they are close, and I'm sure the general idea behind the system is correct.

    I call it a Virtual Pivot because that's what it is, the system has one degree of freedom, and compared to the the Magic Link of the old Konas there is nothing weird going on... It follows the same rules as any other Virtual Pivot.

    Best regards,
    Tony.

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Vrock View Post
    If you are going to complain about the numbers not being accurate you have to post the real ones and prove it. That's how it works, if you don't post anything the only thing I can say is that having an aproximation is a lot better than having nothing.

    The program can handle your design without any problem, it's a 6-bar with the same layup as the Equilink System. I don't have a super nice picture and I know the results are not perfect, but I'm sure they are close, and I'm sure the general idea behind the system is correct.

    I call it a Virtual Pivot because that's what it is, the system has one degree of freedom, and compared to the the Magic Link of the old Konas there is nothing weird going on... It follows the same rules as any other Virtual Pivot.

    Best regards,
    Tony.
    That's how it works? I'm sorry, but I will refrain from posting proprietary information. The devil, is indeed, in the details, in terms of how the magic is accomplished. Nice try though.

    If you care to do some research, please look at the tech page on Home. If you want to get deeper into the patents, you kind find links here: Home. True, I do not post an exact leverage curve or anti-squat curve or even a wheel path. Why? Because those parameters, on their own, are fairly minor in the big picture of this design. What's more, they are, for the most part, fairly meaningless to most of the market. It's easy to geek out on this kind of stuff, but it can really make peoples eyes glaze over in a hurry. Trust me, I know.

    What matters is the ride. So, what I included on the website, hopefully, has a little more meaning. I show, what we call in an engineering term, the wheel rate under various conditions. The wheel rate, or force, is the rate or force seen at the wheel itself. In a simple sense, it is the spring force linked to the leverage curve. But it can be extremely manipulated by the air volume, not to mention any anti-squat characteristics. What I am trying to show on the website is what all of this really means to the rider. Nobody else really does this, they explain why their leverage curve/wheel path/anti-squat is the ideal one, but this is always subjective and difficult to prove.

    My main problem with your analysis, is that, until you just posted that you didn't have a "super nice picture", you kinda represented your results as definitive and accurate. I won't even touch "an approximation is better than nothing". It kinda does a serious disservice to every engineer and designer that labors over minute details to make things right. It's also why bikes with very similar specs on paper can ride very differently. It turns out, an approximation is just fodder.

    Some small points, the Felt Equilink, would technically be a 5 bar linkage (which does offer an additional flexibility over a "common" vpp) controlling wheel path and primary kinematics, with a secondary 4 bar linkage in parallel, which interacts between the 2nd and 5th link of the 6 bar linkage.

    The Missing Link is also a 5 bar linkage controlling the wheel path and primary kinematics, although with quite different results. In addition, the Missing Link provides another 4 bar linkage IN SERIES, to drive the shock directly. Altogether different to the Equilink and everything else on the market.

    The Magic Link, was also a (virtual pivot) 5 bar linkage to control the wheelpath, but the primary and general kinematics were influenced by the primary and auxiliary shock, which were driven interactively in series by another 3 bar linkage.

    I do appreciate your attempts to analyze it, I hope I cleared up a few things for you.

    cheers,

    Brian

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: D34ThL0rd69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    154
    company appears to be aptly named..

  37. #37
    Axa
    Axa is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by D34ThL0rd69 View Post
    company appears to be aptly named..
    “The distance between insanity and genius is measured only by success.” :-)

    Not sure if it was your comment alon, Or also your (interestingly written) forum alias that made me think of that famous quote.. ;-)

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vrock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    427
    If you don't post any real data you are free make a lot of "Marketing Claims"... Just like in the old days.

    You can say "The Missing Link removes the need to EVER use a lockout", but that's just a lie. Your system only top-out when you are pedalling really hard, the rest of the time it's active and the only way to stop an active system from bobing is having 100% of Anti-squat. Does it have 100% of AS in all the gears? Nope, that's actually impossible, so there is going to be a little bit of bob, even if you are close to 100% AS, and some people hate bob.

    You can say that "The chaingrowth on this design is actually pretty minimal", but that's another lie and you don't want to post the real data because then everyone would see that you are not telling the truth.

    You can say "If you are pedaling through a rock garden, the suspension will be firm enough to keep high in the travel, but not too firm to hurt traction or control". All I can say it's that your bike has a lot of Pedal-kickback and a Regressive LR, so it's not going to work as well as many other bikes in that situation. A Knolly, a Lenz or a Rocky Mountain it's going to work much better than your bike climbing trough a rock garden...

    Your system is patented and you say that nobody can archive the same goals with a 4-Bar, so there isn't any risk of being copied... if there is no risk, why don't you post the real data???

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Vrock View Post
    If you don't post any real data you are free make a lot of "Marketing Claims"... Just like in the old days.
    Hi Tony, how quickly on the internet we go from "best regards" to " you're a liar!!" I wasn't trying to incite you, just pointing out a few areas where your analysis had flaws, so we could discuss things on an even ground.

    It's true, I am making marketing claims. Just like every other company trying to sell something on the face of the earth. My marketing claims, (like many others), happen to be true and can be proven on a quick test ride..

    I posted data that I hope makes more sense to the average rider, AND the scientist/engineer. The wheelrate I mentioned, is the end result of all the other crap we put into our suspension design, therefore most relevant. Posting leverage curves on their own without the spring force is meaningless. Why do you think so many bike reviews include the phrase "it needed more (or less) volume spacers?

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Vrock View Post
    You can say "The Missing Link removes the need to EVER use a lockout", but that's just a lie. Your system only top-out when you are pedalling really hard, the rest of the time it's active and the only way to stop an active system from bobing is having 100% of Anti-squat. Does it have 100% of AS in all the gears? Nope, that's actually impossible, so there is going to be a little bit of bob, even if you are close to 100% AS, and some people hate bob.
    Tony, please. How can you possibly claim it's a lie? Why haven't you even mentioned the Missing Link? have you manged to use its input in your program?

    You are absolutely correct on one point. AS cannot achieve the results that the Missing Link can. I've said all along that the Missing Link does not rely on AS. There is a component, but it would never achieve the results I can achieve with the added input of the Missing Link. The Missing Link is independent of gears, it responds to the torque you as a rider are inputting into the ground to move forward. if you can create the same torque with a taller or shorter gear, its reaction will be the same.

    The system is calibrated to top out only on a fairly step climb. This is the only time you would want the steep geometry. On level ground, it is calibrated to lock out at your static sag level. And if you are pedaling at a consistent rate, it will do exactly that. Can you make it misbehave? Of course. But not while riding like you want to ride.

    If you are in a situation where you are thinking of reaching down and locking out your shock, it will already be locked out. If you are riding in alternating terrain, where you have no time (and you're too busy) to lock the shock out for a second or two, the missing link will provide that effect for you automatically, and then release when you hit the next bump.

    Please look at the video of the climb on the website, Home. I will trim that one down and just post the slomo smooth climb with the roots at the top. You can clearly see the shock going to full extension and staying absolutely still at the smooth, steep beginning of the climb. then you can easily see the shock move to absorb the roots at the top and then go back to full extension lock out for the remainder of the steep climb.

    I didn't fake or photoshop that video. That's me riding on some of my test trails. It really happens.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Vrock View Post

    You can say that "The chaingrowth on this design is actually pretty minimal", but that's another lie and you don't want to post the real data because then everyone would see that you are not telling the truth.
    Now we're getting carried away. The word "minimal" is pretty vague. It's an opinion, right? How do I form my opinion? Decades ago, when I first started designing suspension, I did a series of tests to determine an "acceptable" rate of chain growth. One that had a minimal (to me) amount of pedal kickback. I've ridden the worst and the best. I decided on a "minimal" value, and it's been pretty good to me over the years. If you concentrate and are a perceptive test rider, you can make yourself aware of it. But when you ride the bike the way you want, it's a non-issue.

    Again, I don't post a chain growth number because it is meaningless to me, and really, the feel of the bike, therefore to every other rider. I am trying my best to not overload the customer with meaningless marketing jargon that can't be proven, i.e., my AS/LR/WP/chaingrowth/dick is better than yours. I am showing meaningful RESULTS to my marketing claims, hopefully in a way that people can identify with, rather than arcane specifications.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Vrock View Post

    You can say "If you are pedaling through a rock garden, the suspension will be firm enough to keep high in the travel, but not too firm to hurt traction or control". All I can say it's that your bike has a lot of Pedal-kickback and a Regressive LR, so it's not going to work as well as many other bikes in that situation. A Knolly, a Lenz or a Rocky Mountain it's going to work much better than your bike climbing trough a rock garden...
    I can say that because I've spent a few years, thousands of hours and iterations, untold dollars, a few prototypes and samples, shocks, developments, (and wheel sizes) to achieve that result. It's not a marketing claim I cooked up and tried to figure out how to back it up. It's a goal I worked hard to achieve. And I did. And I want people to enjoy it.

    Still, you attack "pedal kickback" as if you had ridden the bike. And are extremely worried about your incorrectly calculate LR, without even trying to worry about the other forces involved (namely, spring progression and missing link contribution.) Do you call that a good engineering analysis? Good enough to call me a liar?

    I have never ridden a Knolly, but I have ridden some RMs and actually raced a Lentz in a DH, when Devin was kind enough to loan me a bike when fedex lost mine at a NORBA National DH event.

    Those bikes have tendency to compress under power, especially while climbing, so this is not better in a rocky climb. The rear will be deeper into its travel, with a higher spring force and a slacker geometry. Not optimum. It's better to stay higher in the travel, keeping a higher BB for pedal clearance and a steeper geometry for power transfer and rider position.

    How do I know this? Countless hours of backtobacktobacktoback testing. Being objective and open minded (hint). Looking for a solution where nobody else is looking. Not relying soely on theory and software but seat of the pants and experience.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Vrock View Post
    Your system is patented and you say that nobody can archive the same goals with a 4-Bar, so there isn't any risk of being copied... if there is no risk, why don't you post the real data???
    Whew, last paragraph. But I appreciate the opening to explain some misconceptions you and others might have. You might not believe how hard it is to get new innovation accepted. I was there for bicycle suspension and disc brakes, among many other "lies" and marketing claims (anyone remember Risego?).

    My previous design, the Magic Link, from which this is an extension of philosophy, is patented. The Missing Link is U.S. and Internationally Patent Pending. Both are available for public consumption if you care to dig. If you're lazy, I provide the links here, Home

    But a patent protects your general concept, the trick to making it work is the grunt part of the equation. And when you write a patent, you cover not only your ideal scenario or "preferred embodiment", but every other way that you think someone might use your idea to gain even 20% of your theoretical 100% preferred embodiment. the goal of the patent is to make any potential infringer work quadruple hard to figure out if it's even WORTH trying to infringe. And hopefully dissuade them altogether when they can't figure out the finer details.

    And it is the goal of any potential designer or infringer to try to figure out EXACTLY how everything works, the better to find a way around.

    good luck to all of you.

    cheers,

    Brian

  44. #44
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,612
    Ok, so when are you going to post the data?
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  45. #45
    mbtr member
    Reputation: scottzg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    4,292
    I'm seeing a pivot that moves ~100% rearward, a falling leverage rate, and a designer who wants to crusade against the lockouts that we all know are decorative on any good linkage design. Arguing with antonio and not knowing what Linkage is is just weird. I have no idea what the bike rides like, but a more candid approach from the designer would make me more interested in the bike as more than just a novelty linkage and amusing forum drama.

    It took a fair bit of effort just to find a clip of the suspension cycling, and that doesn't really show its operation either.
    Last edited by scottzg; 05-03-2016 at 06:54 AM.
    "Things that are complex are not useful, Things that are useful are simple."
    Mikhail Kalashnikov

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    Ok, so when are you going to post the data?
    Please check out the website, Home

    There is a ton of data, possibly overload. Along with videos and slomos. Please try to look at this while thinking about what you would like the bike to do in each riding situation. This is the data that matters to me and should matter to you.

    I'll be happy to answer specific questions, but please understand when I decline for proprietary reasons.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by scottzg View Post
    I'm seeing a pivot that moves ~100% rearward, a falling leverage rate, and a designer who wants to crusade against the lockouts that we all know are decorative on any good linkage design. Arguing with antonio and not knowing what Linkage is is just weird. I have no idea what the bike rides like, but a more candid approach from the designer would make me more interested in the bike as more than just a novelty linkage and amusing forum drama.
    Suspension designers have been crusading against lockouts since they first appeared, and yet they're still on every bike. And NECESSARY, if you really want no movement (such as a smooth climb).

    What's more, this is as much or more about climbing geometry. The real reason I want the shock to fully extend is to give me steeper climbing geometry. Automatically. Nothing else can do that except for the Magic Link.

    Arguing with antonio is just weird? Why? Is his knowledge and superiority just a given? Is he "The One Who Should Not Be Argued With"? Is it not possible he has misrepresented what he thinks he sees and is not taking the entire design into account? I agree with the drama part. A bit ridiculous to try and have an intelligent engineer discussion and have that thrown in. Oh, wait, this is the internet. Funny how these discussions stay more respectful and logical in person.

    As for not knowing what Linkage is, this is where it's a little hard to not be condescending. I bet there are apps I don't have on my phone and you thinks that's weird too. I have never played angry birds or candy crush.

    I have done pages and pages of calculations by hand to determine LRs and RC's of 4 wheeled race cars (a bit more complicated), which I designed and drew with pencil and paper, before the PC was invented. When we finally got punch cards, I wrote programs in assembly level language to do that. I had one of the first PC's in '86, which was a godsend. Now, in addition to writing my linkage software, I could write my own finite element code.

    I still write and use my own analysis software. You can provide the exact inputs and outputs and you know there isn't a bug or error that you might find in a canned program. I do use solidworks for all of my modeling, which is great, but you have to be careful with some of their analysis as well. It doesn't always work the way you want.

    so no. I'm not familiar with Linkage. Nor do I really care. I have better things to do than take bad pictures of other peoples designs and try to figure out what's happening using sketchy numbers.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by scottzg View Post

    It took a fair bit of effort just to find a clip of the suspension cycling, and that doesn't really show its operation either.
    Almost forgot, while there are a number of videos that should be easy to find that show the suspension in action, once again, Home, I am also working on an "instructional" video where I cycle the suspension and demonstrate some force reactions. It will help everyone get a better idea. Why haven't I yet?? I'm busy as hell. It turns out there's a lot to do to start up a bike company. And keep in mind these are 2017s

  49. #49
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,691
    Tough crowd. I see Jekyll, Strive, Bionicon, etc. kind of ambitions in this. Automatic adjustments to suspension and geometry for climbs, descents, etc, rather than use of a switch that you can forget is set in 1-mode or another.
    We're all on the same ship, and it's sinking.

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,093
    Quote Originally Posted by scottzg View Post
    I'm seeing a ... designer who wants to crusade against the lockouts that we all know are decorative on any good linkage design.
    Well put.
    2016 SC 5010
    2014 Kona Taro
    2014 Giant Trance (the boy's)
    2014 Kona Process 134a (the other boy's)

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    847
    Anyone may feel our shocks' lockouts are merely decorative, but you shouldn't actually believe that no one ever uses them just because you don't. I love how the Pedal setting on my RS Monarch RT changes the Kona P134 into a much better peddler. I also rarely use that setting because the trails I ride are rough enough that the loss of traction is sucky and I notice it pretty quickly. When I owned a SC Blur w/ VPP the platform setting on my RP23 NEVER got used, but I also didn't enjoy the feel of an elongating chain-stay. (To be totally honest I loved the way the Blur held traction in the roughest climb even with the pedal-jack VPP delivers.) I bought a single pivot bike because of VPP feel, and a pedal platform has it's (limited) place.
    oops I wasn't clipped in

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Varaxis View Post
    Tough crowd. I see Jekyll, Strive, Bionicon, etc. kind of ambitions in this. Automatic adjustments to suspension and geometry for climbs, descents, etc, rather than use of a switch that you can forget is set in 1-mode or another.
    Hi Varaxis, everybody is tough on the internet....

    the Bionicon was around when I did the Magic Link, and yes, they had the same motivation, but their system of changing geometry was very cumbersome. I haven't seen what they're up to lately. Peter Denk went from Scott to C'dale with the shocks that change travel, but again, you have to flip a switch.

    the Strive is very close to a manually activated Magic Link. Which, had I been smart, I would have covered under that patent. But I didn't (and still don't) want manually activated anything. i want the suspension to know. and it does.

    Ya, nothing worse than forgetting your lockout is on after a long climb and you started bombing the descent. And what I really want it for is all of trails that you don't have time to mess with settings. Short, steep, rapidfire up and down. I don't use a dropper on those trails either, run the saddle low and rip it.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by jim c View Post
    Anyone may feel our shocks' lockouts are merely decorative, but you shouldn't actually believe that no one ever uses them just because you don't. I love how the Pedal setting on my RS Monarch RT changes the Kona P134 into a much better peddler. I also rarely use that setting because the trails I ride are rough enough that the loss of traction is sucky and I notice it pretty quickly. When I owned a SC Blur w/ VPP the platform setting on my RP23 NEVER got used, but I also didn't enjoy the feel of an elongating chain-stay. (To be totally honest I loved the way the Blur held traction in the roughest climb even with the pedal-jack VPP delivers.) I bought a single pivot bike because of VPP feel, and a pedal platform has it's (limited) place.
    Hi Jim, Right, nobody WANTS to use a lockout. Get on that long paved climb up to Mt Wilson and you'll take lockout, fork shorter, saddle waaay up. The climb still sucks.

    Your comments about the pedal setting are really what I'm talking about. EVERY manufacture still feels the need to use this crutch. But as you mentioned, with a loss of traction. Funny, I seem to recall an earlier protagonist claiming they didn't want or need any pedal assist, but always leave their shock in pedal position. Purposely giving up supple traction......

    Interesting comments on the Blur. I've had some friends say it jacks them off the bike when it gets rock garden-y

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vrock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    427
    Nobody wants to use a lockout, or a button that change the geometry.
    Nobody wants a bike with a Regressive LR.

    Each option has pros and cons.

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Vrock View Post
    Nobody wants a bike with a Regressive LR.
    why not? what is your basis for this statement? Have you tested and ridden such designs? Do you have examples of bikes with regressive LR's that were poor performers?

    i'm happy to discuss these parameters.....

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation: banditpowdercoat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    366
    Ya, Regressive LR with a Progressive Air shock can make a linear, or even slightly Progressive total suspension. Most likely lighter weight with the smaller air shock compared to a linear LR and coil shock.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vrock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    427
    You think you are fixing a problem with a small air shock, but you are actually creating a new problem... Breaking the balance between the Spring Ratio and the Damper Ratio.

    The only bikes that use a regressive LR are some XC Race bikes, and they are the exception, not the norm.... Nobody use it in a DH bike, and almost nobody uses it in an Enduro bike.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,093
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    I seem to recall an earlier protagonist claiming they didn't want or need any pedal assist, but always leave their shock in pedal position. Purposely giving up supple traction......
    If that was me, I don't ever use pedal ("Climb" in fox speak). It's in Trail all the time. Decend is underdamped.
    2016 SC 5010
    2014 Kona Taro
    2014 Giant Trance (the boy's)
    2014 Kona Process 134a (the other boy's)

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Vrock View Post
    You think you are fixing a problem with a small air shock, but you are actually creating a new problem... Breaking the balance between the Spring Ratio and the Damper Ratio.
    ok, here's the key, there is NO official "balance" between Spring and Damper. Since springs are position sensitive and damping is velocity sensitive, there actually is always a conundrum between the two. That is to say, they frequently don't want to act well together. One of the keys to damper tuning for performance, is to find that for each unique combination. You might be surprised what appears to be a mismatch can offer significant gains.

    But for the shock companies, they're screwed. They are trying to find this balance for the myraid of LR's, progressions, linkages, AS, etc. It is not really possible. Typically, they will offer 3 stages of generic "tune". None of which is optimum for any particular design. And they are very reluctant to do any special tuning for an oe.

    I prefer to rely less on compression damping and more on spring rate and rising rate spring rate deep in the travel. Too much damping gives a muddy feel. Yes, you need some, it will cycle ridicolously without enough, but too much causes problems, especially deeper in the travel, where you really need the shock to react quickly.

    Most of the available shocks have too much compression damping for optimum bump performance. It is there for one reason. Pedaling. In spite of everyone's magic suspension, this remains the single most sought after aspect, better pedaling with ever increasing travel and bump performance. So the shock companies comply by overdamping the shock to make up fro what the linkages cannot do.

    I'm actually using a lower damping package than recommended. Why? Better bump performance and I do not need the extra damping to "calm" the pedaling.

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Vrock View Post
    The only bikes that use a regressive LR are some XC Race bikes, and they are the exception, not the norm.... Nobody use it in a DH bike, and almost nobody uses it in an Enduro bike.
    You might be surprised what some bikes are using and what bike companies are working on.

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    837
    Ok, so if I'm looking at your suspension correctly (at work, your website won't open so I'm relying on one picture), you have more of a wheel 'envelope' than a wheel path? a sort of 2-d space for the wheel to exist in rather than a 1-d line/curve?

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by kyle242gt View Post
    If that was me, I don't ever use pedal ("Climb" in fox speak). It's in Trail all the time. Decend is underdamped.
    Yes, I think it was. Sorry, I call the middle setting "pedal". Climb is usually the lockout.

    Shock lingo naming aside, you are making my point exactly. Some very smart engineer at Fox, who presumably has been working on shocks for a long time, decided the for pure bump performance, there needed to be a softer compression setting. And he got together with a very experienced PM at Kona and decided that that package of damping, with that range of settings, was best. That you needed a climb (lockout) for extreme cases. That you needed a soft compression mode for the other extreme of pure bump eating, and the middle mode for general use. This implies the middle mode gives up something on the climbs as well as something on the DH.

    Whether the DH mode is underdamped or not, I cannot say. I haven't ridden your model of bike and shock. Maybe it isn't for pure bumps, but you just don't like the extra movement while pedaling. Or maybe that combo of damping and settings just doesn't quite work right for the rest of the package. Either case is very likely.

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by patrick2cents View Post
    Ok, so if I'm looking at your suspension correctly (at work, your website won't open so I'm relying on one picture), you have more of a wheel 'envelope' than a wheel path? a sort of 2-d space for the wheel to exist in rather than a 1-d line/curve?
    No. That was my previous design, the Magic Link. It had an extra degree of movement, but it required the smaller auxiliary shock to control. This does give it some serious advantages in the bump eating ability compared to the Missing Link, which is why you will see a Magic Link equipped Tantrum DH bike in the future.

    The Missing Link has a very defined pivot and axle path. It's just that is has an additional input link to determine response to pedaling and bumps.

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vrock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    427
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    You might be surprised what some bikes are using and what bike companies are working on.
    No, I won't be surprised any time soon.

    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    ok, here's the key, there is NO official "balance" between Spring and Damper. Since springs are position sensitive and damping is velocity sensitive, there actually is always a conundrum between the two. That is to say, they frequently don't want to act well together. One of the keys to damper tuning for performance, is to find that for each unique combination. You might be surprised what appears to be a mismatch can offer significant gains.

    But for the shock companies, they're screwed. They are trying to find this balance for the myraid of LR's, progressions, linkages, AS, etc. It is not really possible. Typically, they will offer 3 stages of generic "tune". None of which is optimum for any particular design. And they are very reluctant to do any special tuning for an oe.

    I prefer to rely less on compression damping and more on spring rate and rising rate spring rate deep in the travel. Too much damping gives a muddy feel. Yes, you need some, it will cycle ridicolously without enough, but too much causes problems, especially deeper in the travel, where you really need the shock to react quickly.

    Most of the available shocks have too much compression damping for optimum bump performance. It is there for one reason. Pedaling. In spite of everyone's magic suspension, this remains the single most sought after aspect, better pedaling with ever increasing travel and bump performance. So the shock companies comply by overdamping the shock to make up fro what the linkages cannot do.

    I'm actually using a lower damping package than recommended. Why? Better bump performance and I do not need the extra damping to "calm" the pedaling.
    On the rebound side of the shok Speed and Position are related and you can say "they go together", on the compression side it's a bit different but setting up a progressive bike is ten times easier than a regressive one, and they are always going to work a lot better.

  65. #65
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,612
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    Yes, I think it was. Sorry, I call the middle setting "pedal". Climb is usually the lockout.

    Shock lingo naming aside, you are making my point exactly. Some very smart engineer at Fox, who presumably has been working on shocks for a long time, decided the for pure bump performance, there needed to be a softer compression setting. And he got together with a very experienced PM at Kona and decided that that package of damping, with that range of settings, was best. That you needed a climb (lockout) for extreme cases. That you needed a soft compression mode for the other extreme of pure bump eating, and the middle mode for general use. This implies the middle mode gives up something on the climbs as well as something on the DH.

    Whether the DH mode is underdamped or not, I cannot say. I haven't ridden your model of bike and shock. Maybe it isn't for pure bumps, but you just don't like the extra movement while pedaling. Or maybe that combo of damping and settings just doesn't quite work right for the rest of the package. Either case is very likely.
    On every "3 position" OEM shock I've ever ridden, the "descent"/"bump absorbing" setting is a joke. It wallows all over the place and blows through travel. There's no chassis stability and it's poor for DH. The middle setting usually is much more stable, resists g-outs, etc. The only problem is that on most OEM tune shocks, they sacrifice the high-speed damping in this setting. You can fix this with an aftermarket tune, or a few shocks that actually are intended to run in a middle-setting or actually can be set up with decent support without blowing through the travel, but that's sure not the CTD/RC3 and other such shocks. Sometimes this forces us to go back to that "descend" setting due to trying to avoid the high speed spikes, but then we're back to sacrificing chassis stability.

    To a large extent, the shock companies have been putting out crap for air shocks for years (in terms of damping). Luckily we can get them tuned by several companies and fix the above issues.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Vrock View Post
    No, I won't be surprised any time soon.
    That quote is so wrong on so many levels....it would fill a thread on its own.

    I prefer to be surprised every day. An engineering surprise is awesome. It means I managed to step outside my current thoughts on what does or does not work. And prove myself wrong. Occasionally. Once in a while.

    So, does this mean you are in contact with all of the worlds bike and suspension designers and have the inside track on all the new developments they have in line 2-3 years down the road?

    Or maybe we're all so predictable that you have already anticipated everything anyone might come up with? Or would have if you'd only have bothered?

    Anyway, surprises are a ton of fun. I wish there were more from the current crop.

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Vrock View Post

    On the rebound side of the shok Speed and Position are related and you can say "they go together", on the compression side it's a bit different but setting up a progressive bike is ten times easier than a regressive one, and they are always going to work a lot better.
    Not 100% sure of your point on the first sentence. I think what you are saying is that there IS some kind of set balance and relationship between rebound damping (and it's speed sensitivity) and shock position (spring sensitivity). Of course they are related. if the spring is highly compressed, it will try to extend the shock at a very high rate of speed, which then will create a high level of rebound damping.

    However, it is WAY too easy to over or under dampen on rebound and slow the shock down much more than desirable. Over damping resulting in that muddy, thud like feel and packing down in a series of quick bumps. Underdamping results in more continuous shock oscillation after bumps and the dreaded kick up the rear over jump lips.

    So rebound damping curves can be tailored in many different ways, although the typical valving on most MTB shocks give pretty limited options. My point is, it ain't right. There is no balance. It's generic, bland stuff designed to be ok with all designs and will never be optimum for any.

    As for setting up a progressive bike 10 times easier and ALWAYS (I hate that word, like impossible) work better? I don't doubt that this is your personal experience and opinion. But would you possibly consider that there are people doing just that with regressive traits, possibly winning races and championships and selling tons of bikes, that are doing just that? Maybe? And just maybe working better than a pure progressive bike? humor me that it's possible.

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    On every "3 position" OEM shock I've ever ridden, the "descent"/"bump absorbing" setting is a joke. It wallows all over the place and blows through travel. There's no chassis stability and it's poor for DH. The middle setting usually is much more stable, resists g-outs, etc. The only problem is that on most OEM tune shocks, they sacrifice the high-speed damping in this setting. You can fix this with an aftermarket tune, or a few shocks that actually are intended to run in a middle-setting or actually can be set up with decent support without blowing through the travel, but that's sure not the CTD/RC3 and other such shocks. Sometimes this forces us to go back to that "descend" setting due to trying to avoid the high speed spikes, but then we're back to sacrificing chassis stability.

    To a large extent, the shock companies have been putting out crap for air shocks for years (in terms of damping). Luckily we can get them tuned by several companies and fix the above issues.
    MR Jayem. Sir. BING-FVCKING-O.

    I just don't get this idea people are presenting that suspension is like "settled science" and shocks are all dialed in and it's as good as it gets. What? We ALL want something better, all the time. Can I still feel a bump? Not good enough yet.....

    My point is you're making my point exactly. Those setting were designed and tested by reasonably highly paid (for the bike industry) and reasonably intelligent (for a concussion prone sample group) of shock designers, engineers and bicycle product managers. Whether they actually think this is better, or just think this is what the market wants, is sometimes difficult to tell. But the results are the same. It ain't right.

    And ya, that's exactly why the aftermarket shock tune companies can exist. The big guys DO NOT want that biz. They need to focus on maximizing profit by minimizing skus and options. Go for big numbers. It's ok, everybody has to eat and the reality is that only a small percentage of riders can even tell the difference, and not all of them even care.

    For the rest of us, we like to make things better, because there's plenty of room for improvement and it's fun to do.

    I get paid to ride my bike

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    On every "3 position" OEM shock I've ever ridden, the "descent"/"bump absorbing" setting is a joke. It wallows all over the place and blows through travel. There's no chassis stability and it's poor for DH. The middle setting usually is much more stable, resists g-outs, etc. The only problem is that on most OEM tune shocks, they sacrifice the high-speed damping in this setting. You can fix this with an aftermarket tune, or a few shocks that actually are intended to run in a middle-setting or actually can be set up with decent support without blowing through the travel, but that's sure not the CTD/RC3 and other such shocks. Sometimes this forces us to go back to that "descend" setting due to trying to avoid the high speed spikes, but then we're back to sacrificing chassis stability.

    To a large extent, the shock companies have been putting out crap for air shocks for years (in terms of damping). Luckily we can get them tuned by several companies and fix the above issues.
    Hey Jayem, just for the hell of it, try plugging in a couple volume spacers (or a smaller can) and then try the DH setting. You might find it plusher off the top with better midstroke and bottoming support.

    Of course I have no idea what you're riding with which shock...........but you might be surprised!!

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hikerdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    Hi Varaxis, everybody is tough on the internet....

    the Bionicon was around when I did the Magic Link, and yes, they had the same motivation, but their system of changing geometry was very cumbersome. I haven't seen what they're up to lately. Peter Denk went from Scott to C'dale with the shocks that change travel, but again, you have to flip a switch.

    the Strive is very close to a manually activated Magic Link. Which, had I been smart, I would have covered under that patent. But I didn't (and still don't) want manually activated anything. i want the suspension to know. and it does.

    Ya, nothing worse than forgetting your lockout is on after a long climb and you started bombing the descent. And what I really want it for is all of trails that you don't have time to mess with settings. Short, steep, rapidfire up and down. I don't use a dropper on those trails either, run the saddle low and rip it.
    If the missing link climbs as well as my recently departed Bionicon (failed after 9 years on South Mountain, Phoenix with a cracked chainstay) I'll be impressed. I want to be able to leisurely just ride up over obstacles again, instead of rushing and powering through.
    "Thank you, God, for letting me have another day"
    The Milagro Beanfield War

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by hikerdave View Post
    If the missing link climbs as well as my recently departed Bionicon (failed after 9 years on South Mountain, Phoenix with a cracked chainstay) I'll be impressed. I want to be able to leisurely just ride up over obstacles again, instead of rushing and powering through.
    Hi Dave,I can't say for sure it will climb better than your bionicon, as I've never ridden one. How much geo change could you get? But I can say it climbs unbelievably good. One brand PM said "it's more efficient at 160 mm of travel than any bike in our lineup". The bikes you see on our site weigh 29 pounds with pedals, with sort of a mid-build. Final component spec TBD.

    But seriously, 9 years on South Mountain? I'd say you got your money worth and then some.

    Now, leisurely just ride up over obstacles???? For my personal bike, I'm thinking of putting that cheater motor in my BB, because no matter how good my bike climbs......i just can't seem to pull of leisurely climbs! It does have a nice way of popping up over obstacles. Like when you have to lift the front under power just to get it up and get to the back tire to the obstacle without hitting the chainring.

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    847
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    Now, leisurely just ride up over obstacles???? For my personal bike, I'm thinking of putting that cheater motor in my BB, because no matter how good my bike climbs......i just can't seem to pull of leisurely climbs! It does have a nice way of popping up over obstacles. Like when you have to lift the front under power just to get it up and get to the back tire to the obstacle without hitting the chainring.
    This is what I like about the Kona P134. Sure it settles into the travel a bit, but simply being on the back of my saddle the front will lift almost effortlessly for those log-overs/rocks.
    Looking at the Tantrum Tech page has me wanting to ride it, looking forward to that day.
    oops I wasn't clipped in

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by jim c View Post
    This is what I like about the Kona P134. Sure it settles into the travel a bit, but simply being on the back of my saddle the front will lift almost effortlessly for those log-overs/rocks.
    The Missing Link will have that behaviour if you're not on power, it lets you lean back, compress the rear a bit as you pop the front up. BUT, when you want/need to get the front and the whole bike up and over a high obstacle, and you give it that pedal kick as you loft the front, the bike kinda rears up and mounts it, helping momentum and bb/crank/chainring clearance immensely. When the rear wheel gets there, you are unweighting the rear and backing off the power and it just kinda hops/rolls over.

    Here's an interesting point I notice with you and Jayem and Kyle242. They both prefer the pedal setting, saying the DH setting is underdamped. You prefer the DH setting, saying the pedal setting is too rough.

    I have no reason to believe that you are not all correct. who knows why., your respective rider weight? Your local terrain? You personal feel preference?

    It doesn't really matter why, it just proves my point that this is not a dialed in art by a long stretch. To further throw water on this "perfect balance" between spring rate LR and damping, what happens when you go from a 130 pound to a 250 pound rider on the same bike?

    This is what happens, you crank up the air pressure 100 psi and add a few clicks of rebound and send it. It's all just a rough, mass market compromise.

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by jim c View Post
    Looking at the Tantrum Tech page has me wanting to ride it, looking forward to that day.
    Hey Jim, where are you? As I mentioned, these are 2017s, but we will have production bikes in august and start doing some demo tours after interbike, throughout the fall and winter.

    Too early for an exact schedule yet, but stay tuned, we might be coming near you.

    I'll confirm soon that we will be at Big bear in June, but test rides will be very limited.

  75. #75
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,612
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    Hey Jayem, just for the hell of it, try plugging in a couple volume spacers (or a smaller can) and then try the DH setting. You might find it plusher off the top with better midstroke and bottoming support.

    Of course I have no idea what you're riding with which shock...........but you might be surprised!!
    That's not really how it works. Making it more progressive allows you to run more sag, because it will ramp up more at the end, that's not "mid-stroke-support". If you want it to not blow into the travel more, using just the spring, go more linear, but you might have to run it a lot stiffer and hence, it will be harsher. If you want mid-stroke support, you do it with damping, assuming you have a decent spring curve and because you can't just wildly change the spring rate curve and assume the damping is going to be set to it, it's not. Yes, I've tried more and less spacers.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,134
    Quote Originally Posted by Vrock View Post
    If you are going to complain about the numbers not being accurate you have to post the real ones and prove it. That's how it works,
    WOW. That's not how it works. You will make a great politician someday.

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    847
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    That's not really how it works. Making it more progressive allows you to run more sag, because it will ramp up more at the end, that's not "mid-stroke-support". If you want it to not blow into the travel more, using just the spring, go more linear, but you might have to run it a lot stiffer and hence, it will be harsher. If you want mid-stroke support, you do it with damping, assuming you have a decent spring curve and because you can't just wildly change the spring rate curve and assume the damping is going to be set to it, it's not. Yes, I've tried more and less spacers.
    True Jayem, but that IS how it works because dampening knobs and volume adjust are the tools we have to work with. Example; my fork (RS Revolution) has 6 clicks of compression dampening. When I use #3 I DON'T get more (exclusively) mid-stroke support, but I still use it sometimes because the stiffer fork helps with the push-off needed for clearing table-tops (more air). It doesn't take long for me to switch back to #2 because that same stiffer fork is lame (beats my hands/arms) for most of the trail.
    Note; I don't think I disagree with your statements, but I am enjoying the conversation.
    oops I wasn't clipped in

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    847
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    Hey Jim, where are you? As I mentioned, these are 2017s, but we will have production bikes in august and start doing some demo tours after interbike, throughout the fall and winter.

    Too early for an exact schedule yet, but stay tuned, we might be coming near you.

    I'll confirm soon that we will be at Big bear in June, but test rides will be very limited.
    I live/ride in South Florida. Ft. Lauderdale will never make people think of mountains. When I moved here from Reno NV my pals started calling me a flatlander. We have some pretty good MTB parks here, and the trail builders have done a great job of spoiling us. One-way trails with no hikers/horses. Tech enough to use up some brake pads, but enough flow to explore the small cogs. If you consider we don't have gravity to help and it's only pedal power, you can see how it is something to wear out a set of brakes in a year.
    oops I wasn't clipped in

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    186
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    Hey Jim, where are you? As I mentioned, these are 2017s, but we will have production bikes in august and start doing some demo tours after interbike, throughout the fall and winter.

    Too early for an exact schedule yet, but stay tuned, we might be coming near you.

    I'll confirm soon that we will be at Big bear in June, but test rides will be very limited.
    Got any plans for local demos? I'm in the Indy area...

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    That's not really how it works. Making it more progressive allows you to run more sag, because it will ramp up more at the end, that's not "mid-stroke-support". If you want it to not blow into the travel more, using just the spring, go more linear, but you might have to run it a lot stiffer and hence, it will be harsher. If you want mid-stroke support, you do it with damping, assuming you have a decent spring curve and because you can't just wildly change the spring rate curve and assume the damping is going to be set to it, it's not. Yes, I've tried more and less spacers.
    It can work that way. instead of running more sag, you run the same amount of sag as with the higher volume. So, it absolutely MUST ride higher all through the travel. The fact that you have not increased the compression damping means that it can still plunge into the travel under certain conditions, but it will be at a higher ride height.

    I personally, would never go more linear to cure this problem. I've come up through coilovers on every type of racing vehicle (using a linear rate spring) and after all of it, prefer the advantages of a smooth rising rate airspring on every single type. From F1, to Dakar type Rallye cars, Motocross bikes, Indycars...........and mountian bikes.

    Running too linear almost always results in too much reliance on damping, causing spikes and using giant foam bottoming cushions, which are a crappy black art all to themselves. From my personal bike experience, too linear always required a higher spring rate, or in the case of a coil over, too much preload. Otherwise it would just sag too much.

    The main disadvantage of a rising rate air spring is the high initial force, which obviously, the negative spring addresses to some degree. The other main complaint is seal friction. Interestingly, seal friction increases with an increase in compression damping. As the higher damping resistance causes pressure spikes inside the shock, so it also increases seal pressure and thus drag.

    So you may or may not want to do it (mid stroke support, or anything else necessarily) with damping. It's all about combining the variables in the most optimum combination. There is no one "right amount" of anything. You just made two assumptions in your argument, that the spring rate/curve was right in the first place and assuming the damping was right, or as you put it "set". The shock companies are making thase assumptions and more when they make their products.

    Mountain bike shock damping, as you pointed out, is one of the most basic forms around. It's way better than it used to be, I remember sliding cans with a hole in a piston for oil to squirt through. And I was trying to market an externally adjustable rebound, compression and air volume shock. In 1993. The bike industry would not have it.

    So ya, it's better than it used to be, but that shock damping spec in yours and everybody else's is shock is lucky if it is optimum for one specific type of bump with one specific rider weight with one specific spring rate. At best.

    If you like it better your way, I'm fine with that too. I will continually preach that there is no, one right answer. I've seen too much crazy stuff go too fast to be that closed minded.
    Last edited by TantrumCycles; 05-06-2016 at 06:58 PM.

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by jim c View Post
    I live/ride in South Florida. Ft. Lauderdale will never make people think of mountains. When I moved here from Reno NV my pals started calling me a flatlander. We have some pretty good MTB parks here, and the trail builders have done a great job of spoiling us. One-way trails with no hikers/horses. Tech enough to use up some brake pads, but enough flow to explore the small cogs. If you consider we don't have gravity to help and it's only pedal power, you can see how it is something to wear out a set of brakes in a year.
    Jim,

    No real plans to be in Fla anytime soon. Next time for sure will be feb, in the Ft Myers area. Depending on what's left of the state after the governments zika experiment. Just kidding. I think.

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by schoolie View Post
    Got any plans for local demos? I'm in the Indy area...
    Well, it's possible we could go riding sometime. Where's your favorite spot?

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post

    Running too linear almost always results in too much reliance on damping, causing spikes and using giant foam bottoming cushions, which are a crappy black art all to themselves. From my personal; bike experience, too linear always required a higher spring rate, or in the case of a coil over, too much preload. Otherwise it would just sag too much.

    Before somebody else busts me, of course there are downsides to too much rising rate. For extreme example, if you're running 45% sag and don't use full travel, you probably have too much rising rate.

    If you are running 35% sag and not using full travel, do you have too much rising rate? Maybe, but not necessarily.

  84. #84
    ...but I'm a Silly Hunter
    Reputation: Haint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,220
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    Jim,

    No real plans to be in Fla anytime soon. Next time for sure will be feb, in the Ft Myers area. Depending on what's left of the state after the governments zika experiment. Just kidding. I think.
    From arguing on the Internet to baiting conspiracy.

    Borrowed Time.
    I like Sand - I don't like Witches


  85. #85
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    32
    @TautrumCycle,
    I really like the frame and his shapes. I looked at Otburst geometry numbers and my questions are:
    *Is It designed around a 150mm fork?
    *Fork offset is listed as 37mm. I have 44-45-46-51mm offset forks available in the market, which should work best? What do you think about Ohlins forks for that frame with 551mm lenght and 46mm offset (140mm)
    As far as suspension system I only hope It works great in real life. All I ask for is a trouble free and fun bike to ride.
    Thanks in advance for the answers.
    Cheers (from Argentina)

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Haint View Post
    From arguing on the Internet to baiting conspiracy.

    Borrowed Time.
    is that why black drones are following me around?

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by lactatofilo View Post
    @TautrumCycle,
    I really like the frame and his shapes. I looked at Otburst geometry numbers and my questions are:
    *Is It designed around a 150mm fork?
    *Fork offset is listed as 37mm. I have 44-45-46-51mm offset forks available in the market, which should work best? What do you think about Ohlins forks for that frame with 551mm lenght and 46mm offset (140mm)
    As far as suspension system I only hope It works great in real life. All I ask for is a trouble free and fun bike to ride.
    Thanks in advance for the answers.
    Cheers (from Argentina)
    Hi lacto,

    it was designed around a 140 mm fork. it currently has 125 mm rear travel in 29er form, although we just came out with a mixed wheel size with the 140mm 29er front end combined with a 165 mm 27.5 rear end.

    Also, if you wanted more of an XC application, you could install a 120-130 mm fork, steepen up the rake and save a few grams.

    The fork offset listed is out of date. My apologies, we'll correct it with 2017 info.

    The good news is the it DOES work great in real life and reliability has been stellar in prototype and production sample testing.

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by robinhood2894 View Post
    TC, so what happens under standing pedalling (in terms of the physics of the lower link and it's behavior)?

    Sorry if you already answered.
    The physics are the same. if you are standing to deliver max torque, the suspension will go to full extension, progressively, as torque increases until it is essentially locked out if the effort is sustained and there are no bumps.

    BUT, since someone did ask this earlier, if you are standing and pedaling, say on level ground, but you don't really have to, you can make the bike bounce around. If you are truly sprinting at max effort on smooth pavement, the rear shock will not extend like it will on a climb, but will stay solidly at the sag level without bobbing, seated or standing.

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Many of the questions that have come up, I've tried to answer in this video. I know it's far from perfect, but I think it definitively shows a few characteristics that are unique and beneficial.

    Among the points being illustrated:

    1) A smooth, paved climb, where the shock extends fully to give optimum climbing geometry

    2) A very rocky climb, showing a very active rear suspension action

    3) A very steep climb, starts out smooth, (after compressing at the transition to carry speed) and requires a max, out of the saddle effort, but has some roots near the top that the rear must absorb to maintain traction, despite being max effort.

    This last one is especially interesting because it shows the rear go to full extension and briefly "lock out" until it hits the roots. You can see the shock compress quickly to absorb the roots and then go right back to full extension for the rest of the climb, slowly settling back down as the grade decreases at the top.

    I welcome any and all comments about how to make the video better. I've shot a ton of footage and it's mind numbing to try to whittle it down to something that actually SHOWS something, instead of being a cool action shot.


  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Gunnar Westholm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    176
    If you can find a way to film a closeup side by side on how the linkage is working, I think that could help for making the video even more clear on how the suspension is funktioning. Hard to do on freehand I guess.
    But maybe you could use a Feiyu Gimbal on an extra long stick or on a suspended and balance boom ťhat can follow the bike closely on an climb that have about the same arch as the boom can cover.

    What are you plans for bike demos in Europe?

    Skickat från min SM-G900F via Tapatalk
    Last edited by Gunnar Westholm; 05-11-2016 at 09:03 AM.

  91. #91
    damned rocks...
    Reputation: Aglo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,300
    A side by side video would also be good, that way we could better correlate what's happening in the shock and what's happening in the terrain.

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hikerdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    Hi Dave,I can't say for sure it will climb better than your bionicon, as I've never ridden one. How much geo change could you get? But I can say it climbs unbelievably good. One brand PM said "it's more efficient at 160 mm of travel than any bike in our lineup". The bikes you see on our site weigh 29 pounds with pedals, with sort of a mid-build. Final component spec TBD.

    But seriously, 9 years on South Mountain? I'd say you got your money worth and then some.

    Now, leisurely just ride up over obstacles???? For my personal bike, I'm thinking of putting that cheater motor in my BB, because no matter how good my bike climbs......i just can't seem to pull of leisurely climbs! It does have a nice way of popping up over obstacles. Like when you have to lift the front under power just to get it up and get to the back tire to the obstacle without hitting the chainring.
    The Bionicon would change from 67 degrees to 74 degrees in climb mode. Pretty much guarantees disaster to head downhill with the uphill setting.

    I think that your bike will be a bit more popular, since there isn't a massive cluster of extra tubes on the front. But I had no reason to buy a new bicycle until it broke.

    Hopefully you include 2x10 in the component specification. I bought the lower-end model of my current bike specifically to get that 22 x 36 low gear and at 58 years old and 200 pounds with a lot of hard miles on me I would even like a step lower.
    "Thank you, God, for letting me have another day"
    The Milagro Beanfield War

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Gunnar Westholm View Post
    If you can find a way to film a closeup side by side on how the linkage is working, I think that could help for making the video even more clear on how the suspension is funktioning. Hard to do on freehand I guess.
    But maybe you could use a Feiyu Gimbal on an extra long stick or on a suspended and balance boom ťhat can follow the bike closely on an climb that have about the same arch as the boom can cover.

    What are you plans for bike demos in Europe?

    Skickat från min SM-G900F via Tapatalk
    I am working on a video where I am just with the bike, with some of the linkage removed. I can clearly show how the forces act on the chainstay and the result of those forces on the shock, through the Missing Link. Hopefully soon, although "other" work keeps coming up....Lots to do to launch a brand.

    I'd like to try some drone shots too, if I can get it to track the bike....

    I will be at Eurobike this year with a couple bikes. I will not have my own booth inside, but may try to get in on the demo days.

    After that, it may depend on how I proceed with European distribution in general, for which I have no concrete plan at the moment, although I am in discussion with several interested parties.

  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by Aglo View Post
    A side by side video would also be good, that way we could better correlate what's happening in the shock and what's happening in the terrain.
    You mean like a split screen? I thought about that but I thought it would just be too much to take in. Maybe in superslomo, although it does get a bit grainy

  95. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Gunnar Westholm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    176
    Quote Originally Posted by hikerdave View Post
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
    Hopefully you include 2x10 in the component specification. I bought the lower-end model of my current bike specifically to get that 22 x 36 low gear and at 58 years old and 200 pounds with a lot of hard miles on me I would even like a step lower.
    Have you looked into the ratios the new 10-50t cassettes can provide? I like the idea of larger steps that makes for quicker gearing in varying terrain.
    And to be honest I don't really need to pedal as fast as the top gears on 2×10 goes.
    Hers a really good gear calculator i like to use http://www.gear-calculator.com/

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by hikerdave View Post
    The Bionicon would change from 67 degrees to 74 degrees in climb mode. Pretty much guarantees disaster to head downhill with the uphill setting.

    I think that your bike will be a bit more popular, since there isn't a massive cluster of extra tubes on the front. But I had no reason to buy a new bicycle until it broke.

    Hopefully you include 2x10 in the component specification. I bought the lower-end model of my current bike specifically to get that 22 x 36 low gear and at 58 years old and 200 pounds with a lot of hard miles on me I would even like a step lower.
    67 to 74 degrees is pretty extreme. The Missing link gives up to 4 degrees, so the Meltdown would go from 66 to 70ish. I say ish because it's always changing and varies with conditions. So, no way you will have anything bUT a 66 degree HT when headed downhill.

    There will be an option to use a front derailleur. I feel your pain. Sometimes on the monster long climbs, it just helps to spin a bit easier. A 22 x 50 might be a bit much, but a 22-42 would basically be one more lower first gear.

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Gunnar Westholm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    176
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    67 to 74 degrees is pretty extreme. The Missing link gives up to 4 degrees, so the Meltdown would go from 66 to 70ish. I say ish because it's always changing and varies with conditions. So, no way you will have anything bUT a 66 degree HT when headed downhill.

    There will be an option to use a front derailleur. I feel your pain. Sometimes on the monster long climbs, it just helps to spin a bit easier. A 22 x 50 might be a bit much, but a 22-42 would basically be one more lower first gear.
    I was thinking 28t x 50t is a slightly lower lowest gear with 1x12 (500% ratio) in enchant for the highest gear on a 2x10 (536% ratio) with a 22-42t cassette.
    https://www.sram.com/stories/introducing-sram-eagle-1x

    But I suspect it will cost a bit more then equivalent 2×10 setup..

    Skickat från min SM-G900F via Tapatalk

  98. #98
    damned rocks...
    Reputation: Aglo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,300
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    You mean like a split screen? I thought about that but I thought it would just be too much to take in. Maybe in superslomo, although it does get a bit grainy
    Yes, a split screen, forgot to mention the slomo. And obviously both videos synchronized.
    For me, it's easier to visualize what's happening to the shock this way, and it also allows to see in which points the shock is fully compressed/expanded.

  99. #99
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    186
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    Well, it's possible we could go riding sometime. Where's your favorite spot?
    Ha, well my brother (Joe S.) beat me to it. I showed him your site and told him about the design concept and he took it from there Hope to meet you soon!

  100. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    445
    Quote Originally Posted by schoolie View Post
    Ha, well my brother (Joe S.) beat me to it. I showed him your site and told him about the design concept and he took it from there Hope to meet you soon!
    Would you please drop me a line on the contact part of our website. Trying to set a little ride up this week. Home

Page 1 of 6 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Tantrum Cycles Demo locations across the U.S.
    By TantrumCycles in forum All Mountain
    Replies: 38
    Last Post: 03-19-2017, 10:40 AM
  2. Tantrum Cycles Kickstarter is ALIVE
    By TantrumCycles in forum All Mountain
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-31-2016, 02:36 PM
  3. New Tantrum Cycles video
    By TantrumCycles in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-03-2016, 08:29 PM
  4. Tantrum Cycles Kickstarter is ALIVE
    By TantrumCycles in forum 27.5
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-03-2016, 11:59 AM
  5. Tantrum Cycles Demo coming up in Aug
    By TantrumCycles in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-02-2016, 07:58 AM

Members who have read this thread: 613

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •