Posts
320
Joined
12/4/2007
Location
Mc Donald, PA, USA
Edited Date/Time
1/26/2012 11:22am
So, I was thinking about some of the current suspension trends in mountain bikes and it made me question the suspension used in SX. Specifically, in the MTB world, there has been a progression over the last few years to increase the travel (6-10 inches) for Freeride/Big Hit bikes while the opposite has been true for 4X , Super D, Slalom racing, etc. The bikes used for these events typically have 4 or less inches of travel and sometimes even hardtails (no suspension in the rear) are used.
To me, these latter events are more closely related to SX in that you have "ramp to ramp" type jumps and banked berms as compared to the "drop" style landings in freeriding where more travel comes in handy. In these events that use artificial (i.e.; man-made jumps and turns) courses, the riders have found less travel to be better in that when you have to react, you don't want the suspension to be wallowing mid-stroke.
This made me wonder about the current SX bikes and the standard "12ish" inches of travel that most bikes have. Aside from a longer travel bike maybe having an advantage in the whoops, would a shorter travel (e.g., 8-9 inches) bike overall work better for SX? Or, would the forces that are applied to the suspension due to the motor negate any advantages of having less travel?
Not going to save the world with the question, but I was just curious if the "less is more" approach has been taken by any riders.
To me, these latter events are more closely related to SX in that you have "ramp to ramp" type jumps and banked berms as compared to the "drop" style landings in freeriding where more travel comes in handy. In these events that use artificial (i.e.; man-made jumps and turns) courses, the riders have found less travel to be better in that when you have to react, you don't want the suspension to be wallowing mid-stroke.
This made me wonder about the current SX bikes and the standard "12ish" inches of travel that most bikes have. Aside from a longer travel bike maybe having an advantage in the whoops, would a shorter travel (e.g., 8-9 inches) bike overall work better for SX? Or, would the forces that are applied to the suspension due to the motor negate any advantages of having less travel?
Not going to save the world with the question, but I was just curious if the "less is more" approach has been taken by any riders.
The Shop
Free shipping: VITALMX
DeCal Works Huge Plastic Inventory of UFO and Polisport kits.
Luxon 4-Post Bar Mounts
$189.95 - $239.95
As Newman mentioned regarding Carmichaels bikes... The way the bike was set up it was built to sit lower in the stroke but very firm. having the extra travel used for drop-out in the whoops.
a) Increase pedaling efficiency
b) Save weight
You don't pedal a motorcycle and there are better places to save weight than simplifying the suspension
RC's bikes didn't look 2 inches shorter, they looked 4 inches shorter.
Another thing why this would work in SX...like the OP said, if you land the jumps right you don't need much travel. I bet you use more up travel taking off than you do landing...when done right. The whoops don't care about a lot of travel, just throttle and wheel base.
MX is a completely different story and that's why it is so much more badass than SX!
Post a reply to: Less Suspension Travel for SX?