IIRC the chatter I saw spoke to the HL being used on the 'e' because of the lesser impact of pedalling on suspension, so I'm guessing CVA on the 'p' version of the WFO ... unless they decided there's a different benefit to focusing the WFO on "less pedally" pursuits, then the HL with the increased under-bb clearance may still make more sense.
I'm a little challenged that both linkage types can't be tuned to desired behavior.
OTOH, maybe it's a much lesser effort to tune the eWFO to a pWFO than a whole new frameset.
shrug.
rambling on a Sunday morning. hah!
They are probably just seeing the light, the CVA has provided basically the same kinematics as older HL bikes for years. If they tweaked it to a better pedaling design, it'd be infringing on the lines of SC, Ibis, etc. HL is free for anyone to use and *can* provide a decent pedaling bike if implemented correctly (which hasn't been done much in the past, but we are finally starting to see improvements over the last couple years). Although HL doesn't really provide any benefit over linkage SP and linkage SP ends up a little stiffer laterally, again, the HL can work just well and there was definitely no reason to be using CVA due to how niner has been tuning the kinematics. It'd be one thing if they were using a flat AS profile like Yeti, SC, Intense, (out to around 50%-75% of travel), but they haven't, just the giant sloping AS, like classic HL bikes.