[Raerdesign]

I have a new design of 3 structural component linkage front suspension and directly connected suspension which gives the breakthrough of no bouncing motion when pedalling with rear suspensin plus over 50 other advantages, seen at RaerDesign

[Industry_Hack]

April is months away.

[Raerdesign]

You have reason to be cynical as so many have falsely claimed this but here is the genuine breakthrough as with directly connected suspension where on compressing the front there is a slight extention of the rear and vice versa. So on compressing both when pedalling, both also want to extend thereby cancelling out, and that is the answer to what has eluded cycling for so long. Finally cycling technology can take an overdue step forward.

[Industry_Hack]

Your design appears to be an overly complicated solution to a problem that has already been resolved.

[Raerdesign]

The design of front suspension is of only 3 structural components and no complexity at all for the rear or with directly connected suspension. This could be argued to be the simplest ever dual suspended bike. And, the problem of bobbing has never been resolved, at best, up until now, they attempt to block it but not solve the issue.

[Industry_Hack]

Originally Posted by Raerdesign

[snip] the problem of bobbing has never been resolved, at best, up until now, they attempt to block it but not solve the issue.

This is not 1997. Through suspension design, (iDrive, Horst link, Kona 4 Bar) and intelligent shocks from Fox ( or the Specialized Brain), bobbing has become a non-issue.

Seriously?

[Raerdesign]

You have went on to list complex technology which still does not resolve the issue. None of which addresses the fundamental problem and only attempts to mitigate the symptoms.

[Mootsguy]

Questions, what is the weight penalty for the extra tubes? What is the wheelbase for the prototype? What happens to the steering?

[Industry_Hack]

Originally Posted by Raerdesign

You have went on to list complex technology which still does not resolve the issue. None of which addresses the fundamental problem and only attempts to mitigate the symptoms.

A Horst link or Kona 4-Bar is complex technology? Shock valving that uses variable orifices takes some R&D, but it's hardly complex technology.

Today, you can buy a full suspension bike with 4" of travel at each end that weighs the same or less than the fully rigid bikes we rode twenty years ago. Better frame construction and materials mean less rider fatigue, which greatly outweighs the small amount of energy absorbed by the suspension. It's a trade-off, but a very small one. It would appear that the gains from your design are more than offset weight and complexity.

You have time and money invested into your design, so of course you want to defend it. And I commend you for thinking outside the box. But I just don't see it as a viable solution to a problem that has mostly been solved already.

Could have been worse though :

[Raerdesign]

In answer to your questions #8. a finished version will have around a 5% weight reduction - weight savings are from the steering head area, where in theory by doubling the steering head distance you can save 75% of the weight in this area (obviously the saving will be a lot less), and telescopic forks require substantion mass to keep them rigid where again with a large triangulated fork, there is a weight saving. The wheelbase will be shorter with a new XC MTB design at 1027mm - the reason for this is directly connected suspension gives a self-levelling effect and therefore has a natural anti-wheelie aspect to it, such can be taken of advantage of with benefits in weight saving stiffness and cornering potential. As for the steering, upper and lower ball joints provide the steering axis where there is variable geometry again utilized as a handling advantage.