New innovative suspension from Tantrum Cycles. Any thoughts...- Mtbr.com
Page 1 of 13 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 200 of 2406
  1. #1
    Axa
    Axa is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    37

    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
    33,264
    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
    6,444
    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
    37
    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
    37
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,255
    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
    2017 Norco Torrent
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,090
    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
    99
    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
    37
    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
    99
    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
    1,255
    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
    2017 Norco Torrent
    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
    37
    ...
    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
    37
    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
    1,090
    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
    3,823
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,529
    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
    3,483
    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
    1,090
    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
    4,650
    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
    3,823
    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
    1,090
    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
    4,650
    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
    1,279
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,090
    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
    3,823
    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
    436
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,090
    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:	518 
Size:	85.2 KB 
ID:	1067223Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Tantrum Cycles Meltdown 2017_LevRatio.jpg 
Views:	521 
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
    436
    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
    1,090
    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
    156
    company appears to be aptly named..

  37. #37
    Axa
    Axa is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    37
    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
    436
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,090
    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
    33,264
    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
    6,444
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,090
    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
    5,432
    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.
    "The challenge is not in developing new ideas, but in escaping old ideas."

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,255
    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
    2017 Norco Torrent
    2014 Giant Trance (the boy's)
    2014 Kona Process 134a (the other boy's)

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,184
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,090
    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
    436
    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
    1,090
    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
    436
    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
    1,255
    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
    2017 Norco Torrent
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,090
    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
    843
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,090
    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
    436
    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
    33,264
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,279
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,184
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,090
    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
    33,264
    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
    1,331
    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
    1,184
    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
    1,184
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,090
    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
    no access to Internet
    Reputation: Haint's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,363
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,090
    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
    Tantrumcycles #1
    Reputation: Gunnar Westholm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    328
    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
    2,339
    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
    1,279
    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
    1,090
    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
    1,090
    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
    Tantrumcycles #1
    Reputation: Gunnar Westholm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    328
    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
    1,090
    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
    Tantrumcycles #1
    Reputation: Gunnar Westholm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    328
    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
    2,339
    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
    1,090
    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

  101. #101
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    32
    Anxious to hear about first ride impresions by Schoolie and Joe

  102. #102
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    186
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    Would you please drop me a line on the contact part of our website. Trying to set a little ride up this week. Home
    Done.

  103. #103
    Tantrumcycles #1
    Reputation: Gunnar Westholm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    328
    Don't miss out watching Brians tech talk explaining the physics behind Missing link suspension linkage..
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=uh44UM...ature=youtu.be

    Skickat från min SM-G900F via Tapatalk

  104. #104
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    883
    I'm wonder, would this be an update of the Magic Link, or does the design work differently from the Magic Link?

    I know you designed both, and they look a little similar, but looks don't always equate to equal kinematic properties.
    Goodbye '95 ZJ. Just so you know, transfering box of left behind womens panties to next truck. Thank you ZJ!

  105. #105
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    843
    Hey I saw the article on p. bike and had a question about your geo chart... you recommended a fork with 35mm offset (or something like that). Do you actually have a source for a mtb fork with an offset that low? I currently think that offsets are too high, but I can't seem to source forks with offsets less than about 42mm easily....

  106. #106
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by patrick2cents View Post
    Hey I saw the article on p. bike and had a question about your geo chart... you recommended a fork with 35mm offset (or something like that). Do you actually have a source for a mtb fork with an offset that low? I currently think that offsets are too high, but I can't seem to source forks with offsets less than about 42mm easily....
    Fox offer (or did anyways) forks with 37mm. I've got a 34 with 37mm offset.

  107. #107
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    843
    Quote Originally Posted by gtrguy2 View Post
    Fox offer (or did anyways) forks with 37mm. I've got a 34 with 37mm offset.
    I've looked into a 36 with a different offset; are they a special order item?

  108. #108
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    30

  109. #109
    mtbr member
    Reputation: norbar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,065
    Jesus is that Leverage curve posted by Vrock even close to accurate. Degressive leverage curve at the start? What is this? 2003?
    www.totalbikes.pl - Bike Camps not only in Poland

  110. #110
    mbtr member
    Reputation: scottzg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,444
    Quote Originally Posted by pdxmark View Post
    I'm wonder, would this be an update of the Magic Link, or does the design work differently from the Magic Link?

    I know you designed both, and they look a little similar, but looks don't always equate to equal kinematic properties.
    These are very different. Magic link used chainstay extension to alter leverage ratio and wheel path, this uses chainstay extension to add/remove load on the shock. Also, antisquat behavior and leverage ratios are very different between the implementations between these two designs, so far as i know. I'd expect the magic link suspension the be the better descender. Don't trust this reply.
    "Things that are complex are not useful, Things that are useful are simple."
    Mikhail Kalashnikov

  111. #111
    Tantrumcycles #1
    Reputation: Gunnar Westholm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    328
    There was som complaints about Magic link could behave unpredictable having a 3D wheel path but that is also why it reacts so good over sharp rocks and roots.
    Riding hard on Magic link bikes for 6 years on both the undampened open coil and the dampened air-coil auxiliary shock I would say the open coil version can sometimes give a short springy kickback when decending fast. But it's nothing I would call unpredictability and they do indeed decend in a great active way.
    On the later, dampened aux shock version its all up to adjustment in how predictable the suspensjon behaves.

    To me it seems like the main improvement with the Missinglink is the 100% "anti sag" compared to the ~35% Magiclink gives when climbing. And that the suspension is still active under pedaling, but still more plush when coasting then any suspension that relay on a pedal-platform shock can provide.

    But this is just from reading what Brian already clearly have been explaining in both text and video.
    I look forward to see how it all works in reality at Eurobike in Germany later this year.

    Skickat från min SM-G900F via Tapatalk

  112. #112
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    33,264
    Xpost from hmclay on RM:

    Quote Originally Posted by hmcleay, post: 4143635, member: 28424
    With Kona Magic Link, the axle path has two degrees of freedom (2dof), and therefore the axle can move within a 'window' of travel. It needs (and has) two independent springs/dampers to control this.

    On the Tantrum Meltdown, the axle path is governed by a 6-bar linkage. Therefore, the axle path has one degree of freedom (1dof), and can only move along a single pre-determined axle path. It only needs (and only has) one spring/damper.

    I find a lot of the marketing literature on this bike misleading.
    For example, in the video where he removes the shock bolt, it also completely removes one of the pivots necessary to govern the axle path.
    Then, with that bolt removed, goes on to demonstrate how the "missing link can respond to horizontal forces - forward for pedalling, rearward for bump..." To me it seems like he's trying to imply that the axle path can move horizontally as well as vertically (which it can't, because it's a 1dof system).

    As I always say with complicated suspension systems, regardless of the physical configuration, the Leverage Ratio, Anti-Squat, and Anti-Rise curves will describe the suspension behaviour. There is no 'magic' going on that can't be modelled in Linkage, it's just physics.

    To me, the simplest explanation would be something like: "The axle path is initially sharply rearward, which then becomes more vertical after around 10%-20% travel. This causes the suspension to extend into 'climbing mode' under hard pedalling efforts". No mention of 'magic' required.

    Vrock's explanation on mtbr sums it up nicely:


    The only other thing I would add to this, is that because the AS curve is decreasing so steeply near top out, it means when you are pedalling hard in this zone (e.g. climbing), it would significantly reduce the overall wheel rate.
    And since the wheel rate is ridiculously high near top out, hard pedalling in this zone would bring the overall wheel rate down to more reasonable levels (perhaps even enough to be able to absorb an impact if you encounter one while pedalling hard).
    However, when cornering/pumping/jumping etc, the initially very high wheel rate would surely make it incredibly harsh each time you make contact with the ground.
    Also, if it's intended to be at sag for coasting, and at top-out for pedalling, you're going to be dealing with a ton of chassis movement each time you get on the gas.



    The shitty shock rate on this bike is necessary for it to hold itself up at top-out position when pedalling, which appears to be the intent of the design.
    "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.

  113. #113
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    1,255
    Thanks for posting that.
    2016 SC 5010
    2017 Norco Torrent
    2014 Giant Trance (the boy's)
    2014 Kona Process 134a (the other boy's)

  114. #114
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by pdxmark View Post
    I'm wonder, would this be an update of the Magic Link, or does the design work differently from the Magic Link?

    I know you designed both, and they look a little similar, but looks don't always equate to equal kinematic properties.
    Call it an extension of the original concept. Same train of though. Same objectives and how to achieve them. I wanted to use the horizontal forces on the chainstay, through the ground/wheel contact patch, to influence the geometry and spring rate.

    I also wanted to manipulate the interacting leverage ratios to take advantage of these new properties.

    With the Magic Link, the horizontal forces were input to the bottom shock mount, with the aux spring/shock helping bias the motion as well as provide alternate spring rate capability.

    With the Missing Link, I discovered I could input the forces into the top of the shock, where they combine (or subtract) from the vertical bump forces input from the rocker linkage. The manipulation of cooperating leverage ratios is still very much a part of it, in similar and dissimilar ways.

    The advantages of the Missing Link solution

    1) ability to reach full extension while climbing, for max geo change

    2) ability to go to infinite spring stiffness on a smooth climb, negating the need for a lockout

    3) light/stiffer/cheaper/easier to make/setup/understand

    Disadvantage? Loss of the ability to instantly go to a softer spring rate and rearward axle trajectory, which makes the Magic Link unbeatable in terms of pure bump absorption. Which is also why you will see a hybrid Missing/Magic Link DH bike in the Tantrum future.

  115. #115
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by patrick2cents View Post
    Hey I saw the article on p. bike and had a question about your geo chart... you recommended a fork with 35mm offset (or something like that). Do you actually have a source for a mtb fork with an offset that low? I currently think that offsets are too high, but I can't seem to source forks with offsets less than about 42mm easily....
    It should be 37 mm for the 160 mm 27.5 fork, which is pretty standard.

    There will be updated geo charts soon, longer reach, shorter CS, boost option

  116. #116
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    Xpost from hmclay on RM:
    When I remove the bolt, it is only to give a physical demonstration of how the horizontal forces are fed into the shock mount, thus influencing the geometry and spring rate. When the linkages are connected, there is only as fixed axle path, but the influence of those horizontal forces remain. Removing the bolt was the easiest way to show this.

    I also replace the bolt and show exactly the same effect, with just the shock removed. It is more dramatic, because it does show the assembly in action, as opposed to the individual forces on each link. Hopefully, in combination, people can start to understand what's really going on instead of the overt fixation with AS and LR.

    Vrock's conclusion is just wrong. It is based on incorrect assumptions and poor analysis. In reality, there is no harshness whatsoever while cornering/pumping/jumping. None. Incredibly plush.

    That is really the way the bike rides. With pedaling action that's "better than all of them" (famous independant review). This means in the rough and smooth.

    Be happy about it.
    Last edited by TantrumCycles; 06-29-2016 at 10:18 PM.

  117. #117
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    419
    Very interesting concept. I hope I can test ride one in Europe at some point. Also like your spirit towards innovation and quite striking how motivated some seem to be to criticizing it before riding it.

    About the chainstay length. I reckon 434mm is a very good all-round length, I would reconsider shortening it too much. I think the kind of rider who would buy one of your bikes is more likely looking for a good all-round climbing and riding bike and is not likely to be someone skidding around every tree in the woods and pulling manuals at every possible occasion. Fun as it is I would guess that is a different demographic of rider. Could be wrong though.

    The mentioned 460mm reach and 434mm CS would be the perfect dimensions for me personally.

  118. #118
    MarkyMark
    Reputation: MarkMass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    1,352
    Thanks for generating something actually new that has promise of actually being better. I appreciate clever/novel engineering and not just marketing BS/hype (carbon version of the same bike, a new coat of paint in the color-de-jour, wider wheels/tires, etc.).

    I’m looking forward to buying a Meltdown frame (L) so keep us up-to-date on your Kickstarter (?) production plans. One BIG thing: Please don’t compromise it with a press fit BB—that’s an instant non-starter for me.

    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    Vrock's conclusion is just wrong. It is based on incorrect assumptions and poor analysis.
    I read this thread and the one on PinkBike, watched your videos, and I think you're handling this right. You're proving nay-sayers wrong and backing it up with copious amounts of evidence. I hope these folks aren't too invested to their opinions and take it personally.

    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    That is really the way the bike rides. With pedaling action that's "better than all of them" (famous independant review). This means in the rough and smooth.
    This sounds absolutely fantastic, but I'm going to need to ride the bike before believing. That's something I'm looking forward to!

  119. #119
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    321
    The variety of mtb rear suspension configuration is pretty remarkable. Hat's off to tantrum for something totally new

    Makes me think back to my first motos, in the seventies. Long travel suddenly appeared, as first modders then factories began forward mounting shocks on the swing arm. Then the RM 250 appeared in 76 with a cantilever where the top mounts came way down and the bottom mounts stayed forward.

    New innovative suspension from Tantrum Cycles. Any thoughts...-s1200_cagiva_cases_001_large.jpg

    Meanwhile Yammi showed the first mono shock:
    New innovative suspension from Tantrum Cycles. Any thoughts...-1975yz250-copy.jpg

    The Suzuki was better in use, according to most.

    Now besides my DW link Mojo SL I have a 07 KTM 250SX which uses one shock but no linkage, and a GG trials 300 which has the more common linkage system you see in practically all motocross bikes. KTM has gone to the same sort of linkage. They all are slightly different but the overall design is similar, compared all the varied mtb systems.

    New innovative suspension from Tantrum Cycles. Any thoughts...-2012-crf450-2.jpg

    What's nice about the older KTM PDS is it's so simple, much less maintenance.

    But I suppose the motos are much simpler in power delivery: a chain pulls the sprocket from the countershaft, end of story. None of the human issues LOL

    But I will say, mtb suspension is a joke compared to moto suspension on backcountry ST. At least in my experience. Mtb forks are especially horrible on the all mtn models. Maybe it's because with so much power you can afford softness


    Dangerous Siren by unoh7, on Flickr

    These forks don't have alot of travel but they are fantastic. Maybe the DH bikes are like this, but every all mtn bike I try is pretty silly by comparison in the front.

  120. #120
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    419
    Quote Originally Posted by uhoh7 View Post
    These forks don't have alot of travel but they are fantastic. Maybe the DH bikes are like this, but every all mtn bike I try is pretty silly by comparison in the front.
    I'm not saying it's the whole picture, but of course the sprung weight is higher on a motorbike, aiding suspension performance.

  121. #121
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    33,264
    Quote Originally Posted by CS645 View Post
    I'm not saying it's the whole picture, but of course the sprung weight is higher on a motorbike, aiding suspension performance.
    The bike is so much heavier that the range of tuning can be much narrower, allowing for the suspension tuners to get much closer to optimal, vs. having to design for a system that will be somewhere between 150-250lbs, on a mountain bike, an incredibly wide range that will never offer optimal suspension performance with a "one size fits all" tune. Go aftermarket for mtb suspension tuning (Avalanche, Push). There's your "moto" amazing feel, where it gets softer/smoother the harder you push it in rough terrain, rather than more jackhammer the faster you go like OEM.

    I also agree though to a big extent, that mountain bike suspension manufacturers have been using dipsh*t compression and rebound circuits that are a joke. The aftermarket tuners I mentioned will tune both XC and DH stuff, but the common theme is they won't have any of the stupid gimmicks in there, like propedal, etc. They'll gut the shocks and use proper low speed and high speed circuits, where you can have a lot of low speed compression stability which does NOT cause the high speed to act choppy and harsh. Somewhere Fox and all the mtb manufacturers agreed that 1) XC riders don't need real damping and 2) "descend" modes should have no low speed compression damping (stability). This has been extremely annoying, as well as the fact that you can't (or couldn't) get damping circuits such as what came in the CCDB, Fox RC4 and others, in air-shocks for normal riding. No, you got overly harsh ill performing stuff like RP3s without true shim stack valves and they bucked you over every impact. It's annoying because this technology (the good stuff) has existed for years, it's not a secret, Avalanche has been using it since 1998 or something, but it took many years before mountain bike manufacturers stopped putting POS joke-of-a-dampers even in their DH forks. In 2012, Marzocchi virtually copied what Avalanche had been doing. Only very recently have we been able to get stuff like the new Fox air X2, CCDB air, and a couple others, and even still they suffer from what I mentioned in the first paragraph.
    "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.

  122. #122
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by CS645 View Post
    Very interesting concept. I hope I can test ride one in Europe at some point. Also like your spirit towards innovation and quite striking how motivated some seem to be to criticizing it before riding it.

    About the chainstay length. I reckon 434mm is a very good all-round length, I would reconsider shortening it too much. I think the kind of rider who would buy one of your bikes is more likely looking for a good all-round climbing and riding bike and is not likely to be someone skidding around every tree in the woods and pulling manuals at every possible occasion. Fun as it is I would guess that is a different demographic of rider. Could be wrong though.

    The mentioned 460mm reach and 434mm CS would be the perfect dimensions for me personally.
    Will you be attending Eurobike? We will not have our own booth, but I will have bikes to demo.

    The criticism, I think, is standard resistance to change amplified by internet anonominity. You would like to think calmer discussions could ensue, but.....the world, exhibit A

    I hear you on CS length. In reality, I could just change the geo chart and leave the bike alone and 90% would never complain. It is a lot of "trend".

    The goal of the bikes is really to be super all around trail bike. I want it to be great at everything. Maybe not possible, but we can keep working on it. The good news about CS length on this bike, is that it is fairly easy to manipulate with the bolt on dropouts. I will test down to 430 cS or so.

    How tall are you?

  123. #123
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by MarkMass View Post
    Thanks for generating something actually new that has promise of actually being better. I appreciate clever/novel engineering and not just marketing BS/hype (carbon version of the same bike, a new coat of paint in the color-de-jour, wider wheels/tires, etc.).

    I’m looking forward to buying a Meltdown frame (L) so keep us up-to-date on your Kickstarter (?) production plans. One BIG thing: Please don’t compromise it with a press fit BB—that’s an instant non-starter for me.



    I read this thread and the one on PinkBike, watched your videos, and I think you're handling this right. You're proving nay-sayers wrong and backing it up with copious amounts of evidence. I hope these folks aren't too invested to their opinions and take it personally.



    This sounds absolutely fantastic, but I'm going to need to ride the bike before believing. That's something I'm looking forward to!
    Hi Mark, Thanks for the good words. The Kickstarter will start around mid Aug, so it will overlap both Eurobike and Interbike. There will be bikes to ride at both events.

    BB. At the moment, it is press fit. Why? After doing a lot of research, I have discovered, what I think is the main problem with PF BB. Plastic bearing cups. I couldn't believe it when I saw it. Most PF BB's have a plastic cup to interface between the bearing itself and the BB shell. Don't know who came up with that BS. Right now, I'm using a Wheels MFG, aluminum cup BB. It's been great.

    Why bother with PF? In theory, it is better. Bigger, wider shell=stronger frame. bearings not hanging out past the BB=better. BTW, those bearings are pressed in also, they're just pressed into a threaded aluminum cup.

    This might change, but the first run is PF. Aside from Wheels MFG, there are some other quality options, like Praxxis that has a shell that threads together.

  124. #124
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by uhoh7 View Post
    The variety of mtb rear suspension configuration is pretty remarkable. Hat's off to tantrum for something totally new

    Makes me think back to my first motos, in the seventies. Long travel suddenly appeared, as first modders then factories began forward mounting shocks on the swing arm. Then the RM 250 appeared in 76 with a cantilever where the top mounts came way down and the bottom mounts stayed forward.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	s1200_Cagiva_cases_001_Large.jpg 
Views:	282 
Size:	252.1 KB 
ID:	1080603

    Meanwhile Yammi showed the first mono shock:
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	1975YZ250-copy.jpg 
Views:	439 
Size:	277.1 KB 
ID:	1080606

    The Suzuki was better in use, according to most.

    Now besides my DW link Mojo SL I have a 07 KTM 250SX which uses one shock but no linkage, and a GG trials 300 which has the more common linkage system you see in practically all motocross bikes. KTM has gone to the same sort of linkage. They all are slightly different but the overall design is similar, compared all the varied mtb systems.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	2012-crf450-2.jpg 
Views:	628 
Size:	33.2 KB 
ID:	1080607

    What's nice about the older KTM PDS is it's so simple, much less maintenance.

    But I suppose the motos are much simpler in power delivery: a chain pulls the sprocket from the countershaft, end of story. None of the human issues LOL

    But I will say, mtb suspension is a joke compared to moto suspension on backcountry ST. At least in my experience. Mtb forks are especially horrible on the all mtn models. Maybe it's because with so much power you can afford softness


    Dangerous Siren by unoh7, on Flickr

    These forks don't have alot of travel but they are fantastic. Maybe the DH bikes are like this, but every all mtn bike I try is pretty silly by comparison in the front.
    Thanks Uhoh.

    I lived thru that entire moto era. I started welding shock mounts further up the swingarm in the early 70's. We didn't know what we were doing, blew shocks up and screwed up the geo, but when it worked, it WORKED. And my '76 RM 125 was the shiite.

    Onward thru Fox air shox, tuneable with Holley carb main jets (everyone asking, what's a carb, what's a main jet) on my Maico, then test riding for WP shocks when Maico went single shock. I still have that bike, '83 Maico 250 spider, bad motor scooter, 54 HP, 13.7 inches of rear travel can't touch the ground. Air cooled, drum brakes. Ya.

    One of my early partners (for the F1 and Citroen shock program), invented the Suzuki full floater. So, I've seen a lot come and go. A lot of thought went into this and yes, moto is somewhat easier by comparison, not just for the sprung/unsprung weight ratio, but for the fact that the human powered bike can benefit from pedaling optimization, which is pretty much in direct conflict with bump absorption.

    Check out my website at Home for a little pictorial moto history.

  125. #125
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 006_007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,196
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    Check out my website at Home for a little pictorial moto history.
    What an awesome read that is!

  126. #126
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    321
    here is an interesting rear suspension, also:

    New innovative suspension from Tantrum Cycles. Any thoughts...-hnf-heisenberg-xf1.jpg


    that's a BMW design on the Heisenberg XF1

  127. #127
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by 006_007 View Post
    What an awesome read that is!
    thank you kind sir. It was awesome to experience.

  128. #128
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by uhoh7 View Post
    here is an interesting rear suspension, also:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	HNF-HEISENBERG-XF1.jpg 
Views:	387 
Size:	132.6 KB 
ID:	1081014


    that's a BMW design on the Heisenberg XF1
    interesting, I can't tell what's going on. I'm thinking on the e-bike, they're not too concerned with any pedaling action. And why didn't they do the front?

  129. #129
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Hey everyone, we're going to have a graphic design contest for 2017 graphics. Grand Prize, 100% off a 2017 Tantrum frame.

    I'l post details here tomorrow and on the website

  130. #130
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,442
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    One of my early partners (for the F1 and Citroen shock program), invented the Suzuki full floater.
    Don's book was a good read and I'm running Intiminators and Vibranators on 2 bikes

    From looking at your site, your book would be a good read too

  131. #131
    Tantrumcycles #1
    Reputation: Gunnar Westholm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    328
    Quote Originally Posted by NordieBoy View Post
    Don's book was a good read and I'm running Intiminators and Vibranators on 2 bikes

    From looking at your site, your book would be a good read too
    Do you have links to the books?

    I'm driving an Citroën C5 and enjoy the great suspension and cornering grip.

    I'm dreaming of getting an Xantia Activa https://youtu.be/09-C33SrJi8
    Old and dull looking. But with its advanced hydropneumatic suspension, still never out cornered by any other standard production car! 😊

  132. #132
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,442
    Quote Originally Posted by Gunnar Westholm View Post
    Do you have links to the books?
    Don Richardson's is on Amazon and when Brian writes his, I'll buy it too

  133. #133
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by NordieBoy View Post
    Don's book was a good read and I'm running Intiminators and Vibranators on 2 bikes

    From looking at your site, your book would be a good read too
    I had no idea Don had a book. last talked to him maybe 15 years ago at interbike and lost touch. Reading the book will be fun, but it also has my stomach roiling remembering some of the "good times". Ya, I have stories. The website was sort of my beginning of organizing my professional life in preparation.

  134. #134
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by Gunnar Westholm View Post
    Do you have links to the books?

    I'm driving an Citroën C5 and enjoy the great suspension and cornering grip.

    I'm dreaming of getting an Xantia Activa https://youtu.be/09-C33SrJi8
    Old and dull looking. But with its advanced hydropneumatic suspension, still never out cornered by any other standard production car! 😊
    We didn't do any work on the production cars, just the Rally/Raid, Dakar type cars.

  135. #135
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    The graphic design contest is ON. Grand Prize up to 100% off a 2017 Tantrum frame. Lower level awards also available. Check out the rules at Home

  136. #136
    NWS
    NWS is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,468
    It would be interesting to see how this compares quantitatively with a rearward-axle-path setup like the Canfield Jedi. Chain tension stiffens the rear / raises the ride height on that frame too. The axle path is roughly similar to what you'd get from a single-pivot setup with the pivot halfway up the seat post.

    And I <3 my Jedi.

  137. #137
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by NWS View Post
    It would be interesting to see how this compares quantitatively with a rearward-axle-path setup like the Canfield Jedi. Chain tension stiffens the rear / raises the ride height on that frame too. The axle path is roughly similar to what you'd get from a single-pivot setup with the pivot halfway up the seat post.

    And I <3 my Jedi.
    In theory, your Jedi should have a bit more pedal kickback and maybe a bit harsher pedaling in the bumps. How do you feel it performs in those 2 areas?

  138. #138
    Your bike sucks
    Reputation: Carl Mega's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,902
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    Check out my website at Home for a little pictorial moto history.
    Deserves another bump. This is an awesome recount and I can't wait to hear more.
    Working to stomp out redundancy, I repeat, working to stomp out redundancy.

  139. #139
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 006_007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,196
    I will admit that seeing your professional background has made me pay much more attention to these bikes then I would otherwise. Going to keep my eyes open for a chance to throw a leg over one.

    As far as the graphic design - I am out - zero talent here. I have always had a soft spot for the JPS lotus black/gold color scheme from the late 70s/early 80s.

  140. #140
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by Carl Mega View Post
    Deserves another bump. This is an awesome recount and I can't wait to hear more.
    Kind, kind, kind sir. Thank you so much. I AM lucky. I did make my own luck by stupid refusal to listen to naysayers. Ok, I caved in college when they told me pick baseball or engineering, but I never looked back.

  141. #141
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by 006_007 View Post
    I will admit that seeing your professional background has made me pay much more attention to these bikes then I would otherwise. Going to keep my eyes open for a chance to throw a leg over one.

    As far as the graphic design - I am out - zero talent here. I have always had a soft spot for the JPS lotus black/gold color scheme from the late 70s/early 80s.
    Sir 0067. I appreciate the ever so slight credibility my career might warrant.

    At that, I'm very much a "what have you done for me lately" kinda guy. My past is relavant, it's how I got here. But if my bike doesn't work, who cares. I'm looking forward to everyone getting a chance to try it.

    JPS. Black gold, hell yeah. Jochin Rindht. The only driver to be crowned world champ posthumously. I saw him race it at Watkins Glen. Dreaming I might some day work in F1. Later, the UOP shadows appeared in F1, Can -AM and F5000. They had dodge 318 and 340 engines. I was going thru a run of black dodge chargers at the time, My Shadows. Much later, I worked with/for Trevor Harris, the singularly most successful and prolific race car designer ever. Google it. Trevor was the engineer for the Shadow F1 team and designed some early, radical Shadow can am cars in the late 60's.

    black/gold is classic. Not against that. Just sayin.

  142. #142
    NWS
    NWS is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,468
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    In theory, your Jedi should have a bit more pedal kickback and maybe a bit harsher pedaling in the bumps. How do you feel it performs in those 2 areas?
    I don't notice either of those things, but it's my first and only DH bike so I haven't got much to compare it against. At some point I'll have to swap bikes with a friend and see if I notice any difference.

    I was surprised at how well it climbs though, after everything I read about how climbing on DH bikes is supposed to be terrible. Until recently it had an 11-36 cassette, and I used to ride it everywhere.

  143. #143
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by NWS View Post
    I don't notice either of those things, but it's my first and only DH bike so I haven't got much to compare it against. At some point I'll have to swap bikes with a friend and see if I notice any difference.

    I was surprised at how well it climbs though, after everything I read about how climbing on DH bikes is supposed to be terrible. Until recently it had an 11-36 cassette, and I used to ride it everywhere.
    Your first point is the best one. All bikes are fun. Some do some things better than others.

    keep inmind, the meltdown is not a DH bike. At least not a dH race bike. More like Enduro.

  144. #144
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    5,432
    Doesn't the idler pretty much control all the chain/pedal input effects on the Jedi?

    On a bike with super high kickback, notably Evil's The Following, some consider it to be speed boosting. I figure if the frame's trying to make the cranks backpedal 20 degrees on each significant hit, and you are trying to hold your pedals steady, it's akin to cranking forward 20 degrees, hence a possible reason for the speed boosting. You feel the bumps in the form of kickback, and it can interrupt smooth pedaling, but if you're going downhill and just plowing...
    "The challenge is not in developing new ideas, but in escaping old ideas."

  145. #145
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by Varaxis View Post
    Doesn't the idler pretty much control all the chain/pedal input effects on the Jedi?

    On a bike with super high kickback, notably Evil's The Following, some consider it to be speed boosting. I figure if the frame's trying to make the cranks backpedal 20 degrees on each significant hit, and you are trying to hold your pedals steady, it's akin to cranking forward 20 degrees, hence a possible reason for the speed boosting. You feel the bumps in the form of kickback, and it can interrupt smooth pedaling, but if you're going downhill and just plowing...
    Oops, didn't even look at the bike before I spoke. The idler pulley will certainly help a lot. I was just going by his description of pivot location.

    You could sorta call that speed boosting, but when it's bad, it feels like your leg went weak. The pushback can feel like it's pushing backward.

    The best description I can give is if you go to spike a volleyball at the net and somebody else hand reaches the ball at the same time from the other side. All of a sudden, you're weak and can't follow thru with your stroke.

  146. #146
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    5,432
    Yea, definitely not for an XC FS bike. An FS bike for XC gains time through pedaling where an HT can't, usually through the rough, also saving the rider's energy. If high kickback is making the rider feel reluctant to continue spinning through the rough, such as that feeling that you'd risk great danger by pedaling through the rough (maybe due to some instability and foot security issues), that pretty much makes the bike more DH oriented, in sort of a sledding style, rather than a high tempo racing way.

    On that note, I see Norco has a similar belief. Their bigger DH oriented bikes have a lot more AS/kickback, while their shorter travel bikes have less. In most of their promo videos, the riders are standing (and pedaling, if it's featuring a shorter travel bike) a majority of the time. They seem to be rather innovative on the geo side too, having proportional sizing. Their latest bike seems to have gone far longer than much bigger names, showing boldness. Worth noting that their pro rider, Blenki, has been testing his enduro and DH bike with an idler to reduce pedal feedback, and he's known to be very fit and likes to really spin those cranks. Hardly a promo video that shows the Evil being pedaled...
    "The challenge is not in developing new ideas, but in escaping old ideas."

  147. #147
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by Varaxis View Post
    Yea, definitely not for an XC FS bike. An FS bike for XC gains time through pedaling where an HT can't, usually through the rough, also saving the rider's energy. If high kickback is making the rider feel reluctant to continue spinning through the rough, such as that feeling that you'd risk great danger by pedaling through the rough (maybe due to some instability and foot security issues), that pretty much makes the bike more DH oriented, in sort of a sledding style, rather than a high tempo racing way.

    On that note, I see Norco has a similar belief. Their bigger DH oriented bikes have a lot more AS/kickback, while their shorter travel bikes have less. In most of their promo videos, the riders are standing (and pedaling, if it's featuring a shorter travel bike) a majority of the time.
    I had an old c'dale super v. Super crazy kickback. After awhile, I just unconsciously adjusted and wouldn't put as much pressure on the pedals. Would I lose time or make up for it on the downside? Who knows. But it's much nicer being able to pedal thru stuff.

    On a DH bike, the upside of kickback is usually a more rearward axle path to help with square edge stuff. a fair trade off

  148. #148
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,442
    Still have a Super V3000.
    I treated it as a rigid with a bit of give in the back end.
    Pedaling through bumps was... interesting... the first part of the pedal stroke would jack the suspension up, and only then would it go forward...

  149. #149
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by NordieBoy View Post
    Still have a Super V3000.
    I treated it as a rigid with a bit of give in the back end.
    Pedaling through bumps was... interesting... the first part of the pedal stroke would jack the suspension up, and only then would it go forward...
    Old timer.

    I still have 2. One was my first long travel DH race bike, with at least an inch of headshok travel and probably a 73 degree HT angle.

  150. #150
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    anyone here ride at Vietnam?

  151. #151
    Tantrumcycles #1
    Reputation: Gunnar Westholm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    328
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    We didn't do any work on the production cars, just the Rally/Raid, Dakar type cars.
    I just notice they are going for a totally different but still far from traditional approach on production cars next year http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/ne...nvent’-comfort
    Maybe something you have contributer to in som way. 😉

    Skickat från min SM-G900F via Tapatalk

  152. #152
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Interesting link.

    We did use a hydraulic bottoming cushion when I was designing rallye shocks for them, but it was so long ago ('92), I doubt anyone from that era is still at the company.

    We talked to a few OE's about it at the time, but the projected cost, at less than $1 a shock, was deemed too much. The beancounters sat me down and said " 500,000 vehicles times 4 shocks= $2 Million." That's what we were going to cost the company.

    One reason I liked racing better. They didn't count beans as much as long as you made the car faster.

  153. #153
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    hello everyone, This is Brian, from Tantrum Cycles. I will be in the Boston area within 2 weeks time.

    I will have a 160 mm 27.5 Meltdown and a 125 x 29 Outburst with me, both M frames.

    I would like to set some appointments with a few people for a demo ride, maybe at Russell Mill.

    Pleased drop me a line on our website if interested.

    In case you missed RC's take on the bike:

    “Does the impossible; pedals like a hardtail and delivers a plush ride over the bumps-without levers or electronics”.

    ”The Missing Link delivers the goods. Compared to the current crop of carbon superbikes, the Tantrum Meltdown performs well on the downs-essential for any 160-millimeter trail bike-and its pedaling action is better than all of them”.

    First Ride: Tantrum Cycles Missing Link Suspension - Pinkbike

    thanks.

    cheers,

    Brian

  154. #154
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sgill32's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    126
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    hello everyone, This is Brian, from Tantrum Cycles. I will be in the Boston area within 2 weeks time.

    I will have a 160 mm 27.5 Meltdown and a 125 x 29 Outburst with me, both M frames.

    I would like to set some appointments with a few people for a demo ride, maybe at Russell Mill.

    Pleased drop me a line on our website if interested.

    In case you missed RC's take on the bike:

    “Does the impossible; pedals like a hardtail and delivers a plush ride over the bumps-without levers or electronics”.

    ”The Missing Link delivers the goods. Compared to the current crop of carbon superbikes, the Tantrum Meltdown performs well on the downs-essential for any 160-millimeter trail bike-and its pedaling action is better than all of them”.

    First Ride: Tantrum Cycles Missing Link Suspension - Pinkbike

    thanks.

    cheers,

    Brian
    Really interested to demo an Outburst...any plans to visit DFW area?

    Also any plans for a 29F/27.5R specific frame in the not too distant future?

  155. #155
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by sgill32 View Post
    Really interested to demo an Outburst...any plans to visit DFW area?

    Also any plans for a 29F/27.5R specific frame in the not too distant future?
    We'll have a more clear picture of demo dates soon.

    As for the mix wheel bike, I did build one frame up as the Downburst, with a 150 mm 29er fr and a 165 mm 27.5 rear. Pretty fun bike. The plan is to offer a few on Kickstarter (in a week or so) and gauge interest for future production.

  156. #156
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    I just finished this. It shows some of the unique properties of the Missing Link Suspension

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjlyimeL7yM

  157. #157
    Cycologist
    Reputation: chazpat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,310
    Great job with the video, Brian, it really shows how your design works.

    chaz
    This post is a natural product. Variances in spelling & grammar should be appreciated as part of its character & beauty.

  158. #158
    mtbr member
    Reputation: banditpowdercoat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    366
    So how much and when can I buy?

  159. #159
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by banditpowdercoat View Post
    So how much and when can I buy?
    MSRP for frame and shock will be around US$2600. But there will be a kickstarter launch in a week or so, with significant discounts on frames and complete bikes. I'll announce it here in a few days.

  160. #160
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,411
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    I just finished this. It shows some of the unique properties of the Missing Link Suspension

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjlyimeL7yM
    This is your best video yet. The one suggestion I would make is that you shoot the on-trail demos in high speed. It looks like you are just slowing down 30 fps footage. Any recent go-pro or cell phone should be able to shoot that at high speed and give you a much better looking end result.

  161. #161
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,442
    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    The one suggestion I would make is that you shoot the on-trail demos in high speed.
    "Frame rate" is what you're after.

  162. #162
    mtbr member
    Reputation: banditpowdercoat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    366
    Also, should show back to backs of ML and a leading other brand suspension over the same rock or root.

  163. #163
    Axa
    Axa is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by banditpowdercoat View Post
    Also, should show back to backs of ML and a leading other brand suspension over the same rock or root.
    I doubt the differences in sag adjustment and plushness would show good on even a good b to b video. I think that have to be experienced in real life, and i hope to be able to do that in an near future. I'm getting more and more frustrated in compromising shock settings and with having to adjust in between climbs and descends to get the best out of what I got now.
    Im really looking forward to leave remote lockouts, CTD and platform adjustments to be remembered in the history books.. :-)

  164. #164
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by hillharman View Post
    This is your best video yet. The one suggestion I would make is that you shoot the on-trail demos in high speed. It looks like you are just slowing down 30 fps footage. Any recent go-pro or cell phone should be able to shoot that at high speed and give you a much better looking end result.
    Thanks, that was 60fps on my old gopro. maybe I'm just riding too damn fast. And/or a crappy video producer. Still learning.

  165. #165
    damned rocks...
    Reputation: Aglo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    2,339
    No, you problem is light, or the lack of it in this case.
    Besides frame rate, you need the shutter speed to match the frame rate, and to accomplish that you need light, lots of it .

    Any way, good demonstration on the suspension work. It clearly show how it work and the strong points of it

  166. #166
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    158
    Will 27.5 x 2.8 or 27.5 x 3.0 tires fit in the rear triangle of the Outburst?

  167. #167
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by Aglo View Post
    No, you problem is light, or the lack of it in this case.
    Besides frame rate, you need the shutter speed to match the frame rate, and to accomplish that you need light, lots of it .

    Any way, good demonstration on the suspension work. It clearly show how it work and the strong points of it
    thanks Aglo. next, I'm working out how to do split screen, which should be pretty cool.

  168. #168
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by Ridge Rider View Post
    Will 27.5 x 2.8 or 27.5 x 3.0 tires fit in the rear triangle of the Outburst?
    Yes, Either bike should fit a 27.5 x 3.25 in the rear.

  169. #169
    NWS
    NWS is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    1,468
    Just watched the video... The word "innovative" has been so abused it barely registers to me anymore, but this really earned it.

    Kudos.

  170. #170
    high pivot witchcraft
    Reputation: mtnbkrmike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    3,722
    I am still kicking myself for missing out on one of the Magic Link Konas. Maybe this is my chance to remedy that screw up.

  171. #171
    EAT MORE GRIME
    Reputation: 127.0.0.1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    5,140
    ok so when can we buy one ? despite my earlier complaint about things, I may want to buy one to beat on

  172. #172
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,007
    Any update on the Kickstarter campaign?

    I'm bummed to have missed you on your Boston area visit. Hopefully you found some good riding.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  173. #173
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by NWS View Post
    Just watched the video... The word "innovative" has been so abused it barely registers to me anymore, but this really earned it.

    Kudos.

    thank you kind sir.

  174. #174
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by mtnbkrmike View Post
    I am still kicking myself for missing out on one of the Magic Link Konas. Maybe this is my chance to remedy that screw up.
    The Magic Link was good. Of course, I'm biased, but properly setup.......

    But, the Missing Link is better. Lighter, stiffer, better climbing, easy to setup. Hopefully easier on the eye.

  175. #175
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by 127.0.0.1 View Post
    ok so when can we buy one ? despite my earlier complaint about things, I may want to buy one to beat on
    Soon

  176. #176
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by incubus View Post
    Any update on the Kickstarter campaign?

    I'm bummed to have missed you on your Boston area visit. Hopefully you found some good riding.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Working hard to launch kickstarter this week, in advance of Interbike. I'll announce it here.

    I will have bikes at Dirt Demo

  177. #177
    high pivot witchcraft
    Reputation: mtnbkrmike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    3,722
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    The Magic Link was good. Of course, I'm biased, but properly setup.......

    But, the Missing Link is better. Lighter, stiffer, better climbing, easy to setup. Hopefully easier on the eye.
    A buddy of mine (a former Cdn Olympic bobsledder) still hammers a 2012 Magic Link Abracadabra. He has beaten that bike bad, but refuses to buy a new one because he loves it so much (and it's one of the few bikes he has not destroyed). But yeah - that is one ghastly looking shock area, and a beast (for a lot of people) to set up properly. But like you said, once properly set up...

    I, and likely a few friends of mine, will be looking very closely at your offerings. The problem is that the CDN $ is still in the toilet. CDN bikes (Konas and Norcos especially) have MUCH more headroom in my neck of the woods on pricing than any non-CDN products. But like I said, I wish I would have sprung for a Kona Magic Link back in the day, so I may just have to suck it up and bite the bullet on one of these, despite the swift and deadly hit on my wallet.

  178. #178
    Tantrumcycles #1
    Reputation: Gunnar Westholm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    328
    I'm intrigued to hear how other riders think about the influence of alterations in BB height and geometry.

    On my local favourite trails there is several very steep climbs that I mostly make as long as I use the lockout - Removing all of the 30% sag.
    The noticeable higher BB/pedal to ground clerence in combination with the geometry steepeneing the HT angle and also making it easier to balance as much weight on the rear for traction and in the same time making the front wheel as light as possible for least rolling resistance over obstacles.

    I can see that I might appear overly obsessed with this.
    But it makes me enjoy going up almost as much as decending. Making as much of my ridingtime as enjoyable as possible.

    The downside with manually operate lockouts or pro-pedal levers, is that the rider have to constantly make desicions when to lock and un-lock, while also doing the same desicions about the seat post height adjustments, gearing and braking.
    The pure amount of operations can many times be the limiting factor that makes me fail when it gets technical on the limit of my abilities.

    Also many times an on-off lock out shock is a limiting compromise when suspension can help traction. But for me the pro - pedal RP3 shock was even more compromising.




    Sent from my GT-I9506 using Tapatalk
    Last edited by Gunnar Westholm; 09-15-2016 at 11:19 PM.

  179. #179
    EAT MORE GRIME
    Reputation: 127.0.0.1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    5,140
    if you are gonna make offers for complete bikes then PLEASE do not lock us
    into 1x....2x should be an option please. some of us ride 8 miles of road to hit trails, kick out 20 trail miles, then ride 8 miles road back

    then again maybe front der might not work on your frame

  180. #180
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by mtnbkrmike View Post
    A buddy of mine (a former Cdn Olympic bobsledder) still hammers a 2012 Magic Link Abracadabra. He has beaten that bike bad, but refuses to buy a new one because he loves it so much (and it's one of the few bikes he has not destroyed). But yeah - that is one ghastly looking shock area, and a beast (for a lot of people) to set up properly. But like you said, once properly set up...

    I, and likely a few friends of mine, will be looking very closely at your offerings. The problem is that the CDN $ is still in the toilet. CDN bikes (Konas and Norcos especially) have MUCH more headroom in my neck of the woods on pricing than any non-CDN products. But like I said, I wish I would have sprung for a Kona Magic Link back in the day, so I may just have to suck it up and bite the bullet on one of these, despite the swift and deadly hit on my wallet.
    I would still be riding my Cadabra if I didn't have the Meltdown. I think there are a lot of Magic Link holdouts. I think I will start an owners club to keep them all running.

    You didn't have to say ghastly....ok, for G1......

    I get plenty of crap for putting the shock loads at right angles to the DT on this design, but sometimes, hings have to go where the have to go. And we design around it.

    The KS is launching really soon....good discounts .....

  181. #181
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by Gunnar Westholm View Post
    I'm intrigued to hear how other riders think about the influence of alterations in BB height and geometry.

    On my local favourite trails there is several very steep climbs that I mostly make as long as I use the lockout - Removing all of the 30% sag.
    The noticeable higher BB/pedal to ground clerence in combination with the geometry steepeneing the HT angle and also making it easier to balance as much weight on the rear for traction and in the same time making the front wheel as light as possible for least rolling resistance over obstacles.

    I can see that I might appear overly obsessed with this.
    But it makes me enjoy going up almost as much as decending. Making as much of my ridingtime as enjoyable as possible.

    The downside is that I have to constantly make desicions when to manually operate the lockout remote while also doing the same desicions and the seat post height adjustments, gearing and also braking.
    The pure amount of operations can many times be the limiting factor that makes me fail when it gets technical on the limit of my abilities.

    Also many times an on-off lock out shock is a limiting compromise when suspension can help traction. But for me the pro - pedal RP3 shock was even more compromising.




    Sent from my GT-I9506 using Tapatalk
    I think the fun thing about the geometry change is that there is no real indication that it's happening or has happened. It just is. And it's sooo much better.

    You don't really notice, but a couple weeks ago, I got to back-to-back with a competitive design. When I rode it, it felt like pedaling in mud in comparison. It was notably harder just to climb and markedly slower. Where the Meltdown just sprinted up the hill like an XC bike.

    It does make the climbing more fun. It was not fun on the other bike (in comparison), more like a chore.

  182. #182
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by 127.0.0.1 View Post
    if you are gonna make offers for complete bikes then PLEASE do not lock us
    into 1x....2x should be an option please. some of us ride 8 miles of road to hit trails, kick out 20 trail miles, then ride 8 miles road back

    then again maybe front der might not work on your frame
    It is 2x compatible, but my market research says give it up. And that real estate down there is too valuable for linkage pivots, etc. So for now it will be, but no build kits like that. Bottom line is, I have to limit the options on build kits to be able to offer them at all. Low quantities.....

  183. #183
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    13,944
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    I would still be riding my Cadabra if I didn't have the Meltdown. I think there are a lot of Magic Link holdouts. I think I will start an owners club to keep them all running.

    The KS is launching really soon....good discounts .....
    I almost bought a Kona magic-link bike. I went back to look at it several times, but the porkiness was a stoke killer. Glad to see you are coming out with an updated version. Good to hear RC liked it. It would be great to get more reviews from folks like that as most of us will not get a demo so purchasing is a big leap of faith.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  184. #184
    Tantrumcycles #1
    Reputation: Gunnar Westholm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    328
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    I think the fun thing about the geometry change is that there is no real indication that it's happening or has happened. It just is. And it's sooo much better.

    You don't really notice, but a couple weeks ago, I got to back-to-back with a competitive design. When I rode it, it felt like pedaling in mud in comparison. It was notably harder just to climb and markedly slower. Where the Meltdown just sprinted up the hill like an XC bike.

    It does make the climbing more fun. It was not fun on the other bike (in comparison), more like a chore.
    Efficiency is fun for sure.
    The only fun thing about a lock-out/up remote is that it's kind of a "side by side" test that shows how inefficient a specific geometry at ~25-30% sag, is for steep climbing compared to the locked position at 0% sag.
    And the other way around it shows how important suspension can be to maintain traction when a locked out or an hardtail bike will bounce around and lose traction on obstacles.

    As far as I know there is no other suspension patent that can adapt to the terrain like this. Completely automatic and seamless.



    Sent from my GT-I9506 using Tapatalk
    Last edited by Gunnar Westholm; 09-17-2016 at 12:18 AM.

  185. #185
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    30
    Love, love, love my Cadabra...

  186. #186
    Tantrumcycles #1
    Reputation: Gunnar Westholm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    328
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    Yes, Either bike should fit a 27.5 x 3.25 in the rear.
    Does that mean Boost hub standard or possibly even "Super boost" 157?

    Sent from my GT-I9506 using Tapatalk

  187. #187
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    158
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    Yes, Either bike should fit a 27.5 x 3.25 in the rear.
    Without hitting the seat tube at full compression?

  188. #188
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,007

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

    Edit... Censoring my wise-ass mouth

  189. #189
    Tantrumcycles #1
    Reputation: Gunnar Westholm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    328
    Is there any chansen you could try to convince X-Fusion to make the Revel USD fork available as an (hopfully affordable) option on your pre-order bikes? 😇

    Sent from my GT-I9506 using Tapatalk
    Last edited by Gunnar Westholm; 09-24-2016 at 10:20 AM.

  190. #190
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    522
    Nice design and congrats! Im sure you spent many a hour perfecting this and your still making adjustments. Questions, it would seem to me that maybe the shock is "worked" more then on the standard suspension bikes out there. Any ideas on shock maintenance and life with this new design?
    Also, Will there be aluminum frames as well. Or just carbon frames?
    Thanks

  191. #191
    mtbr member
    Reputation: crazedmodder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by 65bug View Post
    Nice design and congrats! Im sure you spent many a hour perfecting this and your still making adjustments. Questions, it would seem to me that maybe the shock is "worked" more then on the standard suspension bikes out there. Any ideas on shock maintenance and life with this new design?
    Also, Will there be aluminum frames as well. Or just carbon frames?
    Thanks
    I cannot answer you about the shock question but right now their bikes are aluminum.

  192. #192
    Tantrumcycles #1
    Reputation: Gunnar Westholm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    328
    When I'm trying to work out of the shock somehow will get "worked " harder or more then in an conventional suspension I get to the conclusion that the load (from weight and impacts) must be the same. But the shock will actually be to varying degree be unloaded when climbing depending on how smooth the surface is. I doubt that can make any measurable difference in maintenance intervals and wear.
    So much more important is that all the pivots and shock mounts have good seals.
    Pivot less seat-stays, if that's possible with 162mm travel. And a flexible rubber shockmount in the frame would be nice. But it only takes a few minutes to renew them, so it's probably not worth it costeffectively at least in the first production.
    I fear the hardest obstacle is to explained that for potential buyers so the don't get scared away by the "Uuuuuuh, that's to many bearings, soooo it must be crap..." argument.

    Sitting here and truing another wheel also makes me clinch on to the hope for Superboost rear hub standard.
    Even with boost the rear wheel is the weakest link on bikes that are ridden properly hard!

    Sent from my GT-I9506 using Tapatalk

  193. #193
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by Gunnar Westholm View Post
    Efficiency is fun for sure.
    The only fun thing about a lock-out/up remote is that it's kind of a "side by side" test that shows how inefficient a specific geometry at ~25-30% sag, is for steep climbing compared to the locked position at 0% sag.
    And the other way around it shows how important suspension can be to maintain traction when a locked out or an hardtail bike will bounce around and lose traction on obstacles.

    As far as I know there is no other suspension patent that can adapt to the terrain like this. Completely automatic and seamless.



    Sent from my GT-I9506 using Tapatalk
    Axa, that is the really cool thing. If you can imagine the efficiency of the steeper geometry at 0% sag without any loss of traction.......

  194. #194
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by gtrguy2 View Post
    Love, love, love my Cadabra...
    thank you thank you thank you. The Meltdown is the GrandSon of Cadabra, skipped a whole gen and takes it to another level. As a fellow cadabra lover, I know you'll love the Meltdown.

  195. #195
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by Gunnar Westholm View Post
    Does that mean Boost hub standard or possibly even "Super boost" 157?

    Sent from my GT-I9506 using Tapatalk
    It does mean 148 mm boost rear dropouts as standard. There are tangible benefits to the increased flange spacing and moving the chainring outboard. And plenty of players for components. I will offer 142 mm dropouts as an option. No superboost.

  196. #196
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by Ridge Rider View Post
    Without hitting the seat tube at full compression?
    that is correct for all models, even if you put 29 x 3.25 plus tires in the Outburst. The Meltdown will take 27.5 x 3.25.

  197. #197
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by Gunnar Westholm View Post
    Is there any chansen you could try to convince X-Fusion to make the Revel USD fork available as an (hopfully affordable) option on your pre-order bikes? 

    Sent from my GT-I9506 using Tapatalk
    At last notice, I have no information about the Revel's continued availability.

  198. #198
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by 65bug View Post
    Nice design and congrats! Im sure you spent many a hour perfecting this and your still making adjustments. Questions, it would seem to me that maybe the shock is "worked" more then on the standard suspension bikes out there. Any ideas on shock maintenance and life with this new design?
    Also, Will there be aluminum frames as well. Or just carbon frames?
    Thanks
    Thank you 65bug. Perfecting? I hope not. but it has reached a point where it is substantially better than the competition in several key areas, so time to let people ride it.

    The main factor affecting how much a shock is "worked" is the leverage, or motion ratio. A bike that moves the rear wheel 3 mm for each mm of shock stroke has a 3:1 motion ratio. Similarly, a bike with a 2:1 motion ration will move the rear wheel 2 mm for every mm of shock stroke. For comparison, a telescopic front fork has a 1:1 motion ratio (discounting fork rake).

    Shock mfg prefer that a given design does not exceed 3:1. Ratios higher than this put too much demand on a small amount of shock stroke. It's hard to control and correctly dampen and spring 4 mm of wheel travel with only 1 mm of shock stroke. Air pressures, especially for a heavy rider, can exceed 300 psi.

    The other factor that can accelerate maintenance is the angle of shock rotation relative to the linkage and frame. This can wear the bushings and cause slop.

    The motion ratio on both the Meltdown and Outburst averages about 2.5 to 1 and doesn't exceed 3:1. The static pressure is relatively low, about 160-170psi for a 185 lb rider, about 230-240psi for a 260 pound rider.

    For the rotation factor, the lower shock mount uses bushings, but the rotation is less than 5 degrees, so wear is not an issue. At the top shock mount, the shock is mounted between the bearings of the Missing Link, so the bushings receive no rotation and no wear..

    The first production batch will be aluminum. i am in discussion about producing carbon frames, but have no current plans.

  199. #199
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TantrumCycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    1,090
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    I almost bought a Kona magic-link bike. I went back to look at it several times, but the porkiness was a stoke killer. Glad to see you are coming out with an updated version. Good to hear RC liked it. It would be great to get more reviews from folks like that as most of us will not get a demo so purchasing is a big leap of faith.
    A couple more test rides will be surfacing in the coming weeks. I was trying to time the kickstarter launch to coincide with the release of the articles as well as Eurobike and Interbike.

    That didn't work out, just too much to do and coodinate. So now, Kickstarter will launch around mid-oct, with test rides available to the public at the fall cyclefest in Charlotte, Oct 20-23

  200. #200
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hikerdave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,279
    Quote Originally Posted by TantrumCycles View Post
    Thank you 65bug. Perfecting? I hope not. but it has reached a point where it is substantially better than the competition in several key areas, so time to let people ride it.

    ...
    I let a friend who outweighs me by about 15 pounds ride my bike last week so I pumped up the rear shock. On my short ride this morning I noticed that the lower than usual amount of sag made the bike climb so much better in the short steep climbs out on South Mountain's desert classic trail -- less need for speed and modulation in pedaling effort.

    I suppose that if I had a Tantrum I could run my normal 30 percent sag and still get that good climbing feeling. Until then, I might just start carrying a shock pump around so I can adjust the suspension to the trail condition -- add air before the climb and take it out on the descent.
    "Thank you, God, for letting me have another day"
    The Milagro Beanfield War

Page 1 of 13 1234511 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Tantrum Cycles Demo locations across the U.S.
    By TantrumCycles in forum All Mountain
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 09-12-2018, 08:54 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: 228

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.