Talk:Bicycle suspension

message: While I can't yet find a source that explicitely addresses which is correct, dictionary.com defines
:;damping
:# a decreasing of the amplitude of an electrical or mechanical wave. 
:# an energy-absorbing mechanism or resistance circuit causing this decrease.
:# a reduction in the amplitude of an oscillation or vibration as a result of energy being dissipated as heat.  
:;dampening
:# to make damp
:# to deaden, restrain, or depress
SRAM uses 'damping' to describe their products (Rock Shox) on their web site. So does Fox Racing.
It seems that damping would be prefered. Should 'dampening' stay in just for completeness? Is there a manufacturer that uses 'dampening'? -AndrewDressel (talk) 18:48, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, without a reference, such as a manufacturer that uses 'dampening', it should come out. -AndrewDressel (talk) 13:33, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  damping vs dampening 

message: There are quite a few other suspension systems that have come along that all fall into a category that I'm terming "short link" based on their appearance. These include: Balfa's dual link suspension from the 2-Step, BMC's APS system, Canfield Brother's parallel link suspension, Giant Bikes's Maestro, Niner Bikes CVA suspension, Lapierre's thing, whatever it is. 
Here is what I propose should be included so far. Probably some kind of chronological order of when designs were introduced to the marketplace. For example, the Balfa 2-Step was introduced in 1999, and Niner Bikes showed a nearly identical version called CVA 7 years later. Canfield Brothers have been building what they call "parallel link" bikes since 2001. Based on prior art and use, it is understood that none of these designs are patented or at this time, even patentable. Based on the bicycle industry's fixation on patents, and IP, some discussion about the suspensions as it relates to patented designs should exist, especially in light of the widely understood situation with Giant's Maestro and the BMC designs and the previously patented dw-link. A similar discussion should be had about Lapierre's bikes and Santa Cruz's VPP patents. Another area that would be good to talk about is the reality of these suspension designs and performance. Most of these designs perform similarly to single pivot bikes when it comes to acceleration. All too often, wild claims are made about performance, when the actual product is incapable of "living up to the hype". Perhaps this could be the start of a different section altogether? Tremanaps (talk) 13:29, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Good luck. It sure could use some organization. -AndrewDressel (talk) 14:04, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  short link suspensions 

message: trek were independantly awarded a patent for the abp design as they were shown to have developed prototypes before weagle filed his patent. even if they hadnt been awarded the patent they could still have used the system in a simlar fashion to turner uding the fsr/ horst link system without having to pay specialzed as they were already using the system before the patent was awarded. also this article is biased towards one company and should be editted to remove this bias. - 141.163.196.38 07:31, 11 February 2011
: It would be great to find sources to confirm any of this. -AndrewDressel (talk) 19:06, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  If the names of the inventors/patent holders need to be mentioned, then I think it would be ok to mention that the matter is currently being settled in the court. A search engine will provide enough news to cover the matter in detail.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.157.17.8 (talk) 13:08, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias 

message: The previous version of this mentioned that a high forward single pivot suspension compresses when pedaled in the small ring. This is not accurate, so I changed it. The effect is just the opposite: you get an extending force that make the suspension somewhat resistant to compression, thus the term "semi-active". I have assumed this was common knowledge among people who are a well versed in suspension, so I do not have a citation for it. If this is an issue, feel free to remove my edit, but I would also remove that entire section, as the previous version is also not backed with a citation.
Kapusta7 (talk) 15:47, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  High Forward Single Pivot 

message: Article text:
"Mountain bike technology has made great advances since first appearing in the early 1990s."
This is severely misinformed. While early 1990's may be before the author of the above was born, there certainly existed mountain bikes in the 1980's. In fact, they exploded in popularity around that time.
Forks with shock absorbers appeared on mountain bikes well before 1990.
Citation: I was, like, there.
24.85.131.247 (talk) 05:04, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: So fix it. Find a good source for Gary Fisher riding fat-tyred cruisers downhill and add it.  Describe the BMX and cyclocross precursors to MTBs and add them. Whilst agreeing with you that 26" MTBs were sold as such in retail shops in the late '80s, I'm no more WP:RS on this than you are. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:31, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm pretty sure I had a mountain bike in 1984, which is early to mid 80's.  The reference we're looking for is in the Wikipedia itself. The Mountain Bike pegs the start of mass production of mountain bicycles to the 1970's to early 1980's. Certain improvements didn't appear until 1990, but it's not clear exactly which ones. Some weren't common on mass produced mountain bikes until later, like disc brakes or rear suspensions. I think it's safe to fix the 1990 reference in this page, in any case. 24.85.131.247 (talk) 05:40, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Okay, I fixed it to say that mountain bike suspension technology made advances since appearing in the early 1990's. That makes more sense and looks like what the intent may have been. There is no citation though. It would be better to have an externally verified fact which pins the first consumer MTB suspension to a particular year, make and model. 24.85.131.247 (talk) 05:45, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mountain bikes since early 1990's? What? 

message: I made loads of changes and rewritten a few sections in an overall attempt to improve quality.
I think better sectioning would be a great improvement at the moment.
Some things to mention/discuss/do:
* I recon suspension is never 'active' unless energy is supplied to the system, or the system itself changed, by something other than the rider. Terming things 'active' when they are not is purely for marketing purposes and as such does not belong in an encyclopedia. An active suspension system would for instance be one where electronics measure some input and change damper settings as a result.
* There is no such thing as 'isolating forces' or 'independent linkage'; the words create a paradox by itself.
* Four-bar ideally has its own article explaining linkages can be used for the rear axle, but also for the bottom bracket, or the shock, or the brake and any combination thereof. Wether they employ sliders, flexing members, eccentric bearings, links pointing forward, links pointing backward, concentric pivots, swingarms, rockers, pivots located here or pivots located there doesnt matter.For instance one could categorize designs like Trek Fuel EX as swingarm+4bar shock. Lapierre's DH720 as swingarm+4bar actuated shock+4bar actuated BB. Yeti's Switch link is simply 4bar with one really short link. And GT IDrive as swingarm+4bar BB.Furthermore it would explain some concepts like brake jack, brake squat, anti squat, bob, chaingrowth, pedal kickback, leverage ratio, axle path, instant center (virtual pivot point), center of curvature, etc.
* I dont particularly like the mentioning of multiple chambers in air suspension since the information is very incomplete now. Nor do I believe this article should attempt to explain how air would act as a spring and how exactly it would not have a constant rate. I believe it would require its own article to decently explain and most definitely graphs and diagrams to really properly explain.Sentences like "Air springs work by using the characteristic of compressed air to resist further compression." are rather pseudo-technical.Not sure what to do with how it is now.
* The part about 'dual chamber' in fact seems to somewhat advertise Trek's DRCV system.
* Soft tail could really do with a nice picture like this: Siren soft tail. Actually dozens of pictures would be really helpful for this article
* What's with all the stuff on patents? I do not see its value for this article. The section on Independent Drivetrain and Monolink seem almost as if companies or designers are trying to fight things out on wikipedia! They are filled with pseudo-technical marketing-like talk.
That's as far as I'v gotten so far.
Victorvandenberg (talk) 00:40, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Loads of changes 

message: Bicycles with only front suspension are referred to as hardtail and bicycles with suspension in both the front and rear are referred to as full suspension bikes.
Says who? In the USA, perhaps, bicycles with suspension in both the front and rear are referred to in the trade as full suspension bikes only. In Australia and in the UK, however, such bikes are also referred to as dual suspension bikes or simply as suspension bikes. 
For example, as I write, full-suspension bikes are listed on Australia's biggest online bike website https://www.bikeexchange.com.au under the category heading of Mountain - Dual Suspension Bikes for Sale in Australia. 
By contrast, Chain Reaction Cycles at http://www.chainreactioncycles.com who claim to be the world's largest online seller of bikes merely lists the same bikes as Suspension Bikes.
As always, editors need to beware of sounding pompous, of making sweeping statements in the passive voice or middle voice that sound plausible but in fact are incorrect, that may only reflect US practise or terminology, or as is so often the case, and most importantly of all, are uncited.124.186.93.94 (talk) 14:21, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: No need for a hissy fit. Just make the improvement. It would be helpful if you could find some non-sales related links to support your point. -AndrewDressel (talk) 15:06, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: US usage is not global usage

message: As per title, Does anyone know how it's correctly spelled? I think it's MonoLink as in ML7.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.191.27.236 (talk) 19:05, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  MonoLink or Monolink? 

message: I was wondering where to mention the Mongoose EC-D suspension in this article
http://www.sicklines.com/gallery/data/567/medium/mongoose_ec-d_suspension_detail.jpg
What do you think about it?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mib84 (talk • contribs) 22:58, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Mongoose EC-D suspension a floating drivetrain system? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Bicycle suspension. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://www.marzocchi.com/Template/detailSPAForksMTB.asp?IDFolder=208&LN=UK&Sito=usa%2Dmtb&IDAnno=2147&IDOggetto=56226
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120912040622/http://service.foxracingshox.com:80/consumers/Content/Service/QuickTech/setting_auto-sag.htm to http://service.foxracingshox.com/consumers/Content/Service/QuickTech/setting_auto-sag.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140714221745/http://www.norco.com/news/1900/explaining-advanced-ride-technology-a-r-t/ to http://www.norco.com/news/1900/explaining-advanced-ride-technology-a-r-t/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130210093316/http://www.feltbicycles.com/assest_img/technology_docs/suspension/suspension_12_v1.pdf to http://www.feltbicycles.com/assest_img/technology_docs/suspension/suspension_12_v1.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050414163327/http://www.velovision.co.uk:80/cgi-bin/show_comments.pl?storynum=507 to http://www.velovision.co.uk/cgi-bin/show_comments.pl?storynum=507
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.softride.com/about_softride.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:55, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The French link is wrong. It should point to fr:Suspension de vélo rather than to fr:Cadre suspendu which is Rear suspension!
Jop2~enwiki (talk) 15:41, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bogus interwiki French link