Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
215 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
A few years ago Dave Weagle started talking about his Split Pivot suspension design.
I was wonder what ever happened to this, even split pivot.com seems dated with this verbage: "Split Pivot will be available Worldwide in late 2007 and early 2008". Did his DW link just make this obsolete? It sounded like such a good idea. Anybody got any current 2009 info on this?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,029 Posts
smithrider said:
Isn't the split pivot on the Trek line of suspension bikes?

No....

IIRC, last time DW said/posted something about this, he was still in legal negotiations/talks with trek.

Patent or no, little guys do not stand much of a chance preventing large corporations from infingment.
 

·
Elitest thrill junkie
Joined
·
35,008 Posts
pisgahrider said:
A few years ago Dave Weagle started talking about his Split Pivot suspension design.
I was wonder what ever happened to this, even split pivot.com seems dated with this verbage: "Split Pivot will be available Worldwide in late 2007 and early 2008". Did his DW link just make this obsolete? It sounded like such a good idea. Anybody got any current 2009 info on this?
Trek is using a "split" rear pivot on some bikes, they are doing this by mounting the shock to the linkage and the chainstay, it's what's known as a "floating" shock mount, supposedly they did this to get around the DW-split pivot design. It's the same rear-pivot arrangement. Trek may have exploited an area that DW left open (shock actuation), or maybe the lawyers will side with DW. We have to wait and see I guess.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
117 Posts
Been wondering about this one too. Any updates?
I got my Fuel EX-8, but haven't seen anything with DW's implementation (Split-Pivot) out yet.
Mainly interested in details, does it use standard hubs? I like how on my Fuel, once you take the skewer out, the wheel just drops down like on a regular bike, while on the split pivot, it looks like the dropout is a fully closed hole, and the skewer is thicker. Also I am seeing on my Trek, the seatstays are both inside, while chainstays are outside, while on the Split-Pivot, they are asymmetrical.
I don't want to get into the patentese and legalese too much, just very curios about the actual implementation differences.
 

·
Elitest thrill junkie
Joined
·
35,008 Posts
senseamp said:
Been wondering about this one too. Any updates?
I got my Fuel EX-8, but haven't seen anything with DW's implementation (Split-Pivot) out yet.
What about the Remedy and Session 88?
 

·
www.derbyrims.com
Joined
·
6,766 Posts
I thought Evil Bikes was coming out soon with a new DW designed suspension using the "split-pivot".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,999 Posts
Agent_ said:
I am pretty sure Trek is using an iteration of split pivot on the Fuel Ex 7+. Wikipedia is certainly doesn't have the last word on this stuff, but this article is interesting and may be useful: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_suspension#Split_Pivot

I doubt it, I have noticed that when TREK talks about the ABP, they mention the idea has been around for years - ie., trying to invalidate any of dw claims.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,999 Posts
Agent_ said:
Vespasianus, it sounds like Trek is being defensive because it IS just like Split Pivot.

I think you are right and I think they are trying to get out of paying!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Vespasianus said:
I think you are right and I think they are trying to get out of paying!
Different matter but just like Giant, Felt, etc.

A patent is only as good as the amount of money you are wiling to spend to protect it. Complexity vs. simplicity is also a factor. Think Croc's vs. DW Link.

Bigger entities will often go for it if they can come up with a historical argument or technical/design solution that will allow them to drag it out long enough that they bleed the other party dry.

When you get several large entities violating your patent at the same time it becomes virtually impossible to protect.
 

·
Doesntplaywellwithmorons!
Joined
·
10,913 Posts
As I recall DW originally argued his split-pivot was different in its execution to Treks, and that both were developed independantly of one another (meaning it wasn't one stealing the other's idea). Trek has a valid US patent in any case for their ABP linkage so if DW wants them to pay royalties, he's gonna have to pay for some good lawyers to overturn trek's patent.

As to the idea being around for years, it has actually... there were bikes from taiwanese frame makers available with the same sort of pivot arrangement seen at Interbike and the Taipei trade shows in the early to mid-90s. Of course they didn't do them for any braking advantage just to try EVERY damned linkage arrangement possible to try and garner some sales. You used to see some REALLY strange contraptions come out of taiwan factories and small european design firms at the tradeshows. I still remember a bike that used a round piece of carbon-fiber used as a spring for a full suspension frame. No shock otherwise, just this chunk of CF that would compress as the swingarm moved.
 

·
squish is good
Joined
·
4,933 Posts
DeeEight said:
As I recall DW originally argued his split-pivot was different in its execution to Treks, and that both were developed independantly of one another (meaning it wasn't one stealing the other's idea). Trek has a valid US patent in any case for their ABP linkage so if DW wants them to pay royalties, he's gonna have to pay for some good lawyers to overturn trek's patent.
This was my impression as well. I know DW has come out as saying that his system was different than Treks. I know his DW link isn't really a standard design that he just applies, it's more of a custom system that he engineers for whatever a company needs. I think he was developing split pivot as an easy system that he could license to a company without having to completely refine. DW link setups take years for him to engineer and refine before they come in to production, split pivot could easily be licensed and out within a year of a company deciding they wanted to pick it up. I'm not sure why we haven't see it, I don't even know what the patent status of his system is, I know as has been said already that Trek has a patent for their design.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
117 Posts
Maybe someone can explain to me how either DW or Trek can legitimately claim the idea of a concentric axle/pivot if there is prior art (patent) going back to 1890 that clearly demonstrates a link concentric to rear axle.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
658 Posts
senseamp said:
Maybe someone can explain to me how either DW or Trek can legitimately claim the idea of a concentric axle/pivot if there is prior art (patent) going back to 1890 that clearly demonstrates a link concentric to rear axle
Probably because the guy is dead.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,371 Posts
senseamp said:
Maybe someone can explain to me how either DW or Trek can legitimately claim the idea of a concentric axle/pivot if there is prior art (patent) going back to 1890 that clearly demonstrates a link concentric to rear axle.

Sorry, I'm at a loss too.
 

·
High Alpine Adventure
Joined
·
1,842 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
What about this suspension design

Unsure of how it really works and changes the ride even after reading the description
www DOT corratec DOT de/en/technologies/2circle

cant post links sorry
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top