Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

1 - 20 of 53 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
850 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Can someone explain how these work for this type of design specifically.

On the yetis, schwins, and now Rotec, they arent attached to the frame like normal floaters. The rotec seems to have a slider arm attached to chainstay for the caliper to move, but the pictures of the yeti's i found seemed to just be a plate... like a rotatable link.

Also, What about the ASTRIX bikes? They arent true Lawwills, but similar. Im in a debate with someone on the Huckster bike that doesnt have a floating arm. At slow speed braking the rear end tends to rise alot. On the trail with front braking added in the mix person riding the bike felt like the HT angle was really steep. He had to fight being thrown, or so he said..and the rider is a PRO Dh racer. Ive also heard the old lawwill designs without floaters would tend to buck in hard braking. Oddly the HAVOC does have a floater, yet its mounted to the front TRI. What am i missing in looking at the Astrix bikes in comparison to the Lawwill? I know this inst an easy answer as the searching ive done has only gone on to confuse me as it all pertains to Single pivots Vs. FSR.....

Can anyone dumb it down a few notches?? Think homer simpson.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,116 Posts
oly said:
Can anyone dumb it down a few notches?? Think homer simpson.....
Hibbert: Homer, I'm afraid you'll have to undergo a coronary bypass operation.
Homer: Say it in English, Doc.
Hibbert: You're going to need open heart surgery.
Homer: Spare me your medical mumbo jumbo.
Hibbert: We're going to cut you open and tinker with your ticker.
Homer: Could you dumb it down a shade?

Sorry, can't help with your question, I just loved that episode. I once dreamed of buying a Huckster, the people I talked to said they hadn't noticed any brake jack, but that could be a perception thing as well. According to my extremely limited (read: non-existent) knowledge of suspension, I thought that they ~should~ have brake jack, but WTF do I know?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,261 Posts
the stock floater on the Yeti is similar in principal to the one found on the old V10; the caliper floater plate is seperate from the dropout but governed by the suspension linkage. This will not totally isolate it but can still tune out some undesirable behavior.

The Astrix guys will try to tell you otherwise, but the Huckster suffers from the same jack problems as Lawills do (for all intensive purposes, i would call their designs Lawills). Now why they chose not to use one here but only the Havoc is beyond me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
850 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
zedro said:
The Astrix guys will try to tell you otherwise, but the Huckster suffers from the same jack problems as Lawills do (for all intensive purposes, i would call their designs Lawills). Now why they chose not to use one here but only the Havoc is beyond me.
Thats sorta my point to my friend. Although the upper and lower arms arent equal lenght like the true lawwill designs, it still is very similar and seems to suffer like ive heard the lawwill without floater does. Ive yet to ride it more than on flat ground, but my judgment is already clouded by extreme rise of the middle of the bike (BB, SADDLE) under rear only braking........ Maybe this weekend if it doesnt snow.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,261 Posts
oly said:
Thats sorta my point to my friend. Although the upper and lower arms arent equal lenght like the true lawwill designs, it still is very similar and seems to suffer like ive heard the lawwill without floater does.
i dont think equal length arms are a requirement for the Lawill. Regardless the basic geometry operates on the same fundamentals.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
850 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
zedro said:
i dont think equal length arms are a requirement for the Lawill. Regardless the basic geometry operates on the same fundamentals.
I cant wait to ride the Rotec. Good thing im local to Sulley, and he sponsors our team through GRC.....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
850 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Zedro,

If this RISE trait is felt at slower speed braking on flat ground, do you think it would go away once the bike is at speed on a trail?

With the floater like on the Havoc will this trait be non existant? I too wonder why the Hickster doesnt have the floater (other than cost, and space limitations with 135mm) I'd assume though out of TW a machined plate of alum, 2 rod ends and some pipe would be hella cheap. I look to IH as an example of a stock bike from overseas with the floating caliper.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,261 Posts
the jacking effect is a function of force (or deceleration), so it wont matter what speed you are going, only that of how hard you're braking. Using a (proper) floater will eliminate this characteristic.

Astrix claimed the Huckster didnt *need* it for a bunch of BS reasons (i wont go further...)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
850 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
zedro said:
the jacking effect is a function of force (or deceleration), so it wont matter what speed you are going, only that of how hard you're braking. Using a (proper) floater will eliminate this characteristic.

Astrix claimed the Huckster didnt *need* it for a bunch of BS reasons (i wont go further...)
Zedro,

If you dont wish to post more about it here you could PM me. I'd like to hear the reasons.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,261 Posts
oly said:
Zedro,

If you dont wish to post more about it here you could PM me. I'd like to hear the reasons.
they werent real reasons, they were BS. The bike would benefit from a floater as much as the Yeti would. Astrix tried to say the pivot points were "just right" which is nonsense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
229 Posts
Astrix

oly said:
Can someone explain how these work for this type of design specifically.

On the yetis, schwins, and now Rotec, they arent attached to the frame like normal floaters. The rotec seems to have a slider arm attached to chainstay for the caliper to move, but the pictures of the yeti's i found seemed to just be a plate... like a rotatable link.

Also, What about the ASTRIX bikes? They arent true Lawwills, but similar. Im in a debate with someone on the Huckster bike that doesnt have a floating arm. At slow speed braking the rear end tends to rise alot. On the trail with front braking added in the mix person riding the bike felt like the HT angle was really steep. He had to fight being thrown, or so he said..and the rider is a PRO Dh racer. Ive also heard the old lawwill designs without floaters would tend to buck in hard braking. Oddly the HAVOC does have a floater, yet its mounted to the front TRI. What am i missing in looking at the Astrix bikes in comparison to the Lawwill? I know this inst an easy answer as the searching ive done has only gone on to confuse me as it all pertains to Single pivots Vs. FSR.....

Can anyone dumb it down a few notches?? Think homer simpson.....
I about live on my Huckster on the weekends and I am extreemly happy with the suspension and design, I haven't experienced at all the above noted issues with the suspension, maybe it is a locking up the brake issue? I'll have to try it, but rarely ride that way. Of course the Havoc has the option of the floater and I have ridden it with the floater and it feels great. I don't recal any brake jack or lifting.

A visual note for reference as to why the Astrix design is not like say the Tomac that used the lawwil design and no floater. It is critical for the lawwill design to have the upper control arm at a downward angle and due to the torque from braking and force in the drop link, this creates the extension of the suspension. The Astrix design has the control arm support in line with the braking forces so the there is a minimal lever arm able to extend or compress the suspension.

Thanks,

Doug aka-Shuntavi
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,261 Posts
Shuntavi said:
It is critical for the lawwill design to have the upper control arm at a downward angle and due to the torque from braking and force in the drop link, this creates the extension of the suspension. The Astrix design has the control arm support in line with the braking forces so the there is a minimal lever arm able to extend or compress the suspension.
while that angle between the linkages will determine the actual magnitude of the extension force, there still exists that component that wants to extend the suspension no matter what. By nature the design wants to jack, now weither that effect is noticible or detrimental to the rider is upto them. But there is no way around the fact that the linkage is being influenced to extend by the brake torque without the floater.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
350 Posts
Well, I just have to throw in my 1.57 cents...

oly said:
Can someone explain how these work for this type of design specifically.

On the yetis, schwins, and now Rotec, they arent attached to the frame like normal floaters. The rotec seems to have a slider arm attached to chainstay for the caliper to move, but the pictures of the yeti's i found seemed to just be a plate... like a rotatable link.

Also, What about the ASTRIX bikes? They arent true Lawwills, but similar. Im in a debate with someone on the Huckster bike that doesnt have a floating arm. At slow speed braking the rear end tends to rise alot. On the trail with front braking added in the mix person riding the bike felt like the HT angle was really steep. He had to fight being thrown, or so he said..and the rider is a PRO Dh racer. Ive also heard the old lawwill designs without floaters would tend to buck in hard braking. Oddly the HAVOC does have a floater, yet its mounted to the front TRI. What am i missing in looking at the Astrix bikes in comparison to the Lawwill? I know this inst an easy answer as the searching ive done has only gone on to confuse me as it all pertains to Single pivots Vs. FSR.....

Can anyone dumb it down a few notches?? Think homer simpson.....
First of all, the "lawill" type design (including Astrix) is very prone to causing the rear suspension to rise under braking, even without using the front brake. If it occurs in the parking lot, you can be sure that it happens at higher speeds and/or steeper slopes. In '98 John Tomac said the reason he broke his wrist at Big Bear was dure to this tendency, so we immediatly slapped a floater on it, which JT, Cheri Elliot, Sari Jorgensoon said it improved the bike immensly, and actually gave them confiddence instead of scaring them. I remember well my first ride in the parking lot on a non floater Tomac. The seat had a spooky feeling when it lifted your ass under even gentle rear brake application.

This floater was far from a perfect geometry, in fact it's very similar to what Yeti (not ours) and the Rotec pictured here (ours) are using. While the geometry is flawed, it's a VERY large improvement over the non floater configuration. It could be better (hopefully see attached pic) but it's questionable how much the improvement would be. I hope to do more testing to help determine this.

A simple visual (I hope) is to imagine the rotation of the rear link with the dropout and caliper attached. Under braking, this link tries to rotate forward. When it does do, it will forcethe upper "swingarm" downward, thus extending the suspension.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
350 Posts
ok, here's the pic..

zedro said:
the stock floater on the Yeti is similar in principal to the one found on the old V10; the caliper floater plate is seperate from the dropout but governed by the suspension linkage. This will not totally isolate it but can still tune out some undesirable behavior.

The Astrix guys will try to tell you otherwise, but the Huckster suffers from the same jack problems as Lawills do (for all intensive purposes, i would call their designs Lawills). Now why they chose not to use one here but only the Havoc is beyond me.
And BTW, the Rotec floater isn't attached to any sliding link, it is a solid linked attached to a fixed position on the floater, and a fixed position on the "chainstay".

And while there is simililarity to the stock v-10 floater in the fact that they both attach to a suspension link, the dynamic similarity is quite different. In fact the stock v-10 floater was roundly critisized for being ineffective, with most pros removing theirs and santa cruz discontinuing it for '05. While our v-10 floater was a significant improvement. (there's a review posted somewhere here).
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
350 Posts
and here's a pic of our v-10 floater....

oly said:
Zedro,

If this RISE trait is felt at slower speed braking on flat ground, do you think it would go away once the bike is at speed on a trail?

With the floater like on the Havoc will this trait be non existant? I too wonder why the Hickster doesnt have the floater (other than cost, and space limitations with 135mm) I'd assume though out of TW a machined plate of alum, 2 rod ends and some pipe would be hella cheap. I look to IH as an example of a stock bike from overseas with the floating caliper.
But it is probably a cost consideration. The 135 spacing is not really a problem, just a challenge. 99% of our floaters are for 135 mm hubs, simply beause 99% of bikes have 135 mm hubs.

But certainly ANY bike will be better with a floater, yes even fsr bikes (doubters who've never tried one, feel free to object).

I'm curious though, what IH bike are you talking about that comes with a stock floater? pics?
 

Attachments

·
Chillin the Most
Joined
·
4,025 Posts
Congrats..

shock said:
And BTW, the Rotec floater isn't attached to any sliding link, it is a solid linked attached to a fixed position on the floater, and a fixed position on the "chainstay".

And while there is simililarity to the stock v-10 floater in the fact that they both attach to a suspension link, the dynamic similarity is quite different. In fact the stock v-10 floater was roundly critisized for being ineffective, with most pros removing theirs and santa cruz discontinuing it for '05. While our v-10 floater was a significant improvement. (there's a review posted somewhere here).
on figuring out that pesky picture posting process. :D
 
1 - 20 of 53 Posts
Top