General characteristics of dw link compared to switch infinity- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    780

    General characteristics of dw link compared to switch infinity

    Hello everybody.
    With the covid situation and not being to demo bikes Iím faced with a situation where I really need to upgrade my existing 8 year old ride due to geometry issues and being over biked and heavy.
    My local shop has Ibis and Yeti frames, plus a Niner Jet 9.
    No new frames will be in stock from Pivot or Santa Cruz before December, same with Ibis. So if I want a bike right now, it either has to be a Ripmo or a sb150. (I think thereís an sb130 but not in my size.)
    The sb150 feels better than the Ripmo in the parking lot, it just feels like a better fit. But can anybody comment on the differences in suspension feel between the 2, particularly, is there anything that stands out as a deficiency in either oneís personality, for example a situation where the suspension system doesnít work so well or gets overwhelmed ?
    My current riding trails have a mix of twisty rolling singletrack littered with sections of chunky square edged rocky stuff, short punchy climbs, often with chunk thrown in to make it technically difficult, as well as steep drops and roll ins, sometimes off camber and can be chunky as well, kind of typical southwest US terrain.
    Iím not worried about pedal feedback with either design.
    I donít need it do be super plush, but I donít want it to feel harsh or bouncy on repetitive hits and braking bumps either.

  2. #2
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    34,463
    The biggest difference is DW has more anti-squat at zero travel, Yeti starts at around 100%. According to DW, this is to help drive the wheel back down into the ground during negative-travel events (like little dips, potholes, etc.) when climbing.

    But it's not a big difference. Both drop off from ~100 AS about 2/3rds of the way though the travel, meaning the majority of the travel (where you'd be pedaling) is with around 100% AS.

    DW, AS starts higher, plateaus around 100%, then falls off 2/3rds to 3/4 through the travel.

    Yeti, starts at around 100%, goes a little higher than that in the middle (but not by much) then falls off around 2/3rds of the travel.

    You'll probably see bigger differences with the shocks/shock tunes and leverage ratio/curve than by the suspension type or AS amounts.

    Just because it's a DW doesn't mean they have nailed these things perfectly, and likewise, just because it's Yeti doesn't mean they suck. What is fairly constant is that they both pedal pretty well, but suspension and bump absorption are pretty much independent of this and dependent on (or limited by) the other factors.

    Just my 2 cents, the Yeti SI is a more complicated way of doing what A, mini-link bikes do and B, Mini-link bikes like the DW aren't all that unique anymore. The mini-link bikes like the DW can end up laterally stiffer if implemented correctly, but the SI is just over-complication to get around existing patents like SC, DW, etc. It adds weight and decrease reliability. Santa Cruz has nearly the same profiles as Yeti. There's a little more that a DW can do than a single pivot, but it's not a lot. The big design challenge 15 years ago was trying to design around 3 different size front rings. With that out of the way, even single pivots work excellent. I wouldn't personally go for a bike with such a glaring design issue like the Yeti, but it could make me eat crow by going for a bike that may have an equally bad design issue that was just not as obvious.
    "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
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    780
    Thanks for that, Jayem, and youíre probably right for the most part.
    The only thing I disagree with is that there are significant differences that any dual link/4 bar system can impart from just a millimeter difference in placement or alignment of the linkages, as this can have a multiplied effect on the axle path as it moves through its travel. Itís amazing to me though, how much marketing bs goes unchallenged by the mtb press, none of the claims are ever asked for verification.

    I still like a combination of good anti squat and good bump compliance, and so far, in a general sense anyway, the dw link seems to offer the least significant compromises in any particular area of performance compared to any other design Iíve ridden.

    I went from the original VPP as my first dually back in Ď06, didnít like the pedal feedback, then went through a couple Horst frames but wanted something that was more efficient pedaling.
    I think you live in AZ, donít you ?
    I do too, so itís important for me to have a suspension that can have the rear axle migrate a tad away from the direction of the bump force, this makes for a much less jarring ride over the sharp, square edged chunk stuff that is such a common part of rides here.

  4. #4
    WillWorkForTrail
    Reputation: Cotharyus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    4,975
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    The biggest difference is DW has more anti-squat at zero travel, Yeti starts at around 100%. According to DW, this is to help drive the wheel back down into the ground during negative-travel events (like little dips, potholes, etc.) when climbing.

    But it's not a big difference. Both drop off from ~100 AS about 2/3rds of the way though the travel, meaning the majority of the travel (where you'd be pedaling) is with around 100% AS.

    DW, AS starts higher, plateaus around 100%, then falls off 2/3rds to 3/4 through the travel.

    Yeti, starts at around 100%, goes a little higher than that in the middle (but not by much) then falls off around 2/3rds of the travel.

    You'll probably see bigger differences with the shocks/shock tunes and leverage ratio/curve than by the suspension type or AS amounts.

    Just because it's a DW doesn't mean they have nailed these things perfectly, and likewise, just because it's Yeti doesn't mean they suck. What is fairly constant is that they both pedal pretty well, but suspension and bump absorption are pretty much independent of this and dependent on (or limited by) the other factors.

    Just my 2 cents, the Yeti SI is a more complicated way of doing what A, mini-link bikes do and B, Mini-link bikes like the DW aren't all that unique anymore. The mini-link bikes like the DW can end up laterally stiffer if implemented correctly, but the SI is just over-complication to get around existing patents like SC, DW, etc. It adds weight and decrease reliability. Santa Cruz has nearly the same profiles as Yeti. There's a little more that a DW can do than a single pivot, but it's not a lot. The big design challenge 15 years ago was trying to design around 3 different size front rings. With that out of the way, even single pivots work excellent. I wouldn't personally go for a bike with such a glaring design issue like the Yeti, but it could make me eat crow by going for a bike that may have an equally bad design issue that was just not as obvious.
    I don't think, in general, any of this is wrong - although opinions may vary about how the bikes actually FEEL to ride. It's going to be more important to put a good shock on either one of those frames than it is to nit-pick the differences in the frames, in my opinion. If one fits you better than the other, get the one that's more comfortable, and make sure you have a good shock on it with the right tune.

  5. #5
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    6,981
    In Phoenix, owned Ripmo and SB130LR. Both climb really well. The Yeti felt really fast at the pedals, but when you start looking at real data, it was about the same. For technical climbing (ie, up National), the Yeti felt really nice. For every other aspect of riding, Iíd give the nod to the Ripmo.

    Sizing is definitely different on both brands and I can see that being a deciding factor. I was XL on both and the Yeti was the bigger bike.

    Then, you have to deal with potential drama with Yeti as a brand. Ibis has arguably the best customer service in the industry. Yeti not so much. I know Iíd never buy another one.
    Just like a raindrop, I was born to fall.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    780
    Quote Originally Posted by Blatant View Post
    In Phoenix, owned Ripmo and SB130LR. Both climb really well. The Yeti felt really fast at the pedals, but when you start looking at real data, it was about the same. For technical climbing (ie, up National), the Yeti felt really nice. For every other aspect of riding, Iíd give the nod to the Ripmo.

    Sizing is definitely different on both brands and I can see that being a deciding factor. I was XL on both and the Yeti was the bigger bike.

    Then, you have to deal with potential drama with Yeti as a brand. Ibis has arguably the best customer service in the industry. Yeti not so much. I know Iíd never buy another one.
    Ok, thanks. Have you ridden the 150 ?
    Since youíre in Phoenix, can you comment on which one (pretending for a moment that the all the issues associated with Yeti didnít exist) you would grab for a ride on National, including the climb to get to it, assuming you had both sitting in your garage ?

  7. #7
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    6,981
    Between those two, the Ripmo. Without question.
    Just like a raindrop, I was born to fall.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    780
    Quote Originally Posted by Blatant View Post
    Between those two, the Ripmo. Without question.
    What were the shocks on the 2 bikes ?
    And why did you get rid of the Ripmo and what are you riding now,
    if you mind my asking ? Thanks for the replies.

  9. #9
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    6,981
    I had the V1 Ripmo, with angleset. Ran DPX2, X2 and DVO Topaz. On that bike, the Topaz was the star. On the Yeti, just the DPX2. If Iíd kept it, wouldíve gone to coil to try and tame the janky rear, but I knew quickly it wasnít for me in this terrain.

    I change bikes a bit. Currently on a 2020 Fuel. With a proper Lyrik and good brakes, itís surprisingly capable and fun.
    Just like a raindrop, I was born to fall.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,789
    Quote Originally Posted by Blatant View Post
    I had the V1 Ripmo, with angleset. Ran DPX2, X2 and DVO Topaz. On that bike, the Topaz was the star. On the Yeti, just the DPX2. If Iíd kept it, wouldíve gone to coil to try and tame the janky rear, but I knew quickly it wasnít for me in this terrain.

    I change bikes a bit. Currently on a 2020 Fuel. With a proper Lyrik and good brakes, itís surprisingly capable and fun.
    You like your fuel over the Ripmo? If so, why.

    I enjoyed 5 days on a ripmo and am curious why a Fuel vs Ripmo.

    I also own a 2020 Top fuel and have to check bolt tightness weekly as things back out. Do you experience this with the regular fuel?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    1,554
    The DW link is efficient and RELIABLE. The Switch Infinity is over-engineered, over-priced gimmickry that needs constant attention and earplugs to avoid the creaking. Yeah, I said it and I stand by it. Bring it Tribe, I don't care. Rides pretty good if that's ALL you care about. Well, except for the flex that they "built into it". lol
    Ibis Ripmo V2
    Ibis Ripley V4
    Pivot Mach 4SL
    Pivot LES SS
    A road bike

  12. #12
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    6,981
    Mmm, I didnít say that, but hadnít really thought about it. Iíve had 5-6 other bikes since the Ripmo.

    I do check linkage bolts often, but I do that on all bikes. Havenít noticed that the Fuel is any worse in that regard. Are you using Loctite on the threads?

    Quote Originally Posted by FJSnoozer View Post
    You like your fuel over the Ripmo? If so, why.

    I enjoyed 5 days on a ripmo and am curious why a Fuel vs Ripmo.

    I also own a 2020 Top fuel and have to check bolt tightness weekly as things back out. Do you experience this with the regular fuel?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Just like a raindrop, I was born to fall.

  13. #13
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    6,981
    I mostly agree. Not to mention how they kill linkage bearings. It rides OK, but really not anything to write home about. Iíd take my Fuel at roughly half the price.

    Quote Originally Posted by BmanInTheD View Post
    The DW link is efficient and RELIABLE. The Switch Infinity is over-engineered, over-priced gimmickry that needs constant attention and earplugs to avoid the creaking. Yeah, I said it and I stand by it. Bring it Tribe, I don't care. Rides pretty good if that's ALL you care about. Well, except for the flex that they "built into it". lol
    Just like a raindrop, I was born to fall.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    92
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    The biggest difference is DW has more anti-squat at zero travel, Yeti starts at around 100%. According to DW, this is to help drive the wheel back down into the ground during negative-travel events (like little dips, potholes, etc.) when climbing.

    But it's not a big difference. Both drop off from ~100 AS about 2/3rds of the way though the travel, meaning the majority of the travel (where you'd be pedaling) is with around 100% AS.

    DW, AS starts higher, plateaus around 100%, then falls off 2/3rds to 3/4 through the travel.

    Yeti, starts at around 100%, goes a little higher than that in the middle (but not by much) then falls off around 2/3rds of the travel.
    Based on Linkage Design, this is not accurate.
    SB150: https://linkagedesign.blogspot.com/search?q=sb150

    Old Ripmo (The new one hasn't changed much beyond a bit more progression https://linkagedesign.blogspot.com/2...o-29-2019.html

  15. #15
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    34,463
    Quote Originally Posted by xtrpickels View Post
    Based on Linkage Design, this is not accurate.
    SB150: https://linkagedesign.blogspot.com/search?q=sb150

    Old Ripmo (The new one hasn't changed much beyond a bit more progression https://linkagedesign.blogspot.com/2...o-29-2019.html
    Yeah, I didn't update, but I realized several days ago that I was describing the Santa Cruz kinematics, that "bow", vs the Yeti that is around 100% to about 1/2 to 2/3rds, where it falls off. Still same general effect though. If you look close at that, you'll see the Ibis (DW) starting off even higher, plateau, then drop off.
    "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.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 19
    Last Post: 06-11-2015, 10:43 AM
  2. Switch Infinity versus old switch
    By Huntro in forum Yeti
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 12-13-2014, 08:20 PM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-23-2013, 12:10 PM
  4. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 11-01-2008, 12:30 PM

Members who have read this thread: 143

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.