who can tell - either way could be interesting - especially as the patent may actually cover most layouts of any 4 bar links... depending who is arguing the point.. may be it is a plot for world dominance!!
Some other RAT-BASTARD attorney.he "won" it? so who was the loser? and why wasn't the fight televised live on pay-per-view!!!!???
So I've heard...therefore it may be difficult to defend the patent in court, if you can prove that 30million other designs covered under it were there first...who can tell - either way could be interesting - especially as the patent may actually cover most layouts of any 4 bar links... depending who is arguing the point.. may be it is a plot for world dominance!!
seriously...and a news article, and a PB article...yechDo we really need three threads about this announcement?
http://www.ridemonkey.com/forums/showthread.php?t=234597
http://www.ridemonkey.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3483225&postcount=67
Did he ever challenge Trek on their suspension layout the last three years they have been using it? It seems that would be very hard to past worries about other companies infringing on his suspension layouts.The only thing that sucks about all these threads and announcements is that none of them say what we all want to know. How does this impact (or does it) Trek?
Does he now get to sue Trek over the patent or what? No speculation. I just want Weage to tell us what happens next so I don't have to read 20 pages of e-spec.
Oh, and is it true that Weagle patented an element on the periodic table b/c he thought of it first?
I don't believe he's allowed to once the patent is in office waiting for approval. why challenge it before you are legally bound and own the patent?Did he ever challenge Trek on their suspension layout the last three years they have been using it? It seems that would be very hard to past worries about other companies infringing on his suspension layouts.
True to document protection it would start after it was accepted.I don't believe he's allowed to once the patent is in office waiting for approval. why challenge it before you are legally bound and own the patent?
as always its down to has the deepest pockets (with lawyers hands in them)So I've heard...therefore it may be difficult to defend the patent in court, if you can prove that 30million other designs covered under it were there first...
seriously...and a news article, and a PB article...yech
which is why Giant gets away with its copy cat with a micro difference designas always its down to has the deepest pockets (with lawyers hands in them)
Trek will keep doing what they always do..... build bikes, they have no plans on changing anything anytime soon.
You would actually be suprised how much more active the rear end is when setup like this. It really is a noticable change in how the bike feels and behaves.Is it just me, or did anyone else think the Trek concentric pivot design seemed to be more of a marketing gimmic than anything that would actually change the feel of a bike? How different could it really be compared to a single-pivot faux-4-bar that has the pivot an inch up the seat stay from the axle? The wheel path will still be exactly the same, because the chainstay is the same. I just don't see how pressuring the "rear swingarm" (with the seat stays) at the rear axle could be much different than loading it from an inch or two away from the rear axle.
Seems like other geometry changes would make a lot more difference than moving that rear pressure point around an inch...glad to see DW is making money on it though, after getting robbed on the DW link design.
Yeah, aluminium. Unforunately, American corporations having been getting around the patent by referring to it as 'aluminum'Oh, and is it true that Weagle patented an element on the periodic table b/c he thought of it first?
Yeah, aluminium. Unforunately, American corporations having been getting around the patent by referring to it as 'aluminum'
I'd be interested to hear how it makes any difference. Have you been on two identical frames and builds, except for one frame having the bearing at the axle and the other with it just above?You would actually be suprised how much more active the rear end is when setup like this. It really is a noticable change in how the bike feels and behaves.
It's equivalent to having a floating brake that also happens to drive the shock. Performance-wise it offers similar potential to what you could do with FSR if you were so inclined - the long and the short of it is basically:I'd be interested to hear how it makes any difference. Have you been on two identical frames and builds, except for one frame having the bearing at the axle and the other with it just above?
Can't really compare apples to apples if the frames are different in other ways, or the builds are different.
I will agree 100%!!!You would actually be suprised how much more active the rear end is when setup like this. It really is a noticable change in how the bike feels and behaves.
Yes Josh we need at least 50 or 60!!!Do we really need three threads about this announcement?
http://www.ridemonkey.com/forums/showthread.php?t=234597
http://www.ridemonkey.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3483225&postcount=67
this part pisses me off.....
Keep riding! (Just got back from 3 days of prototype DH testing at Highland and it was AWESOME!)
I was smiling all three days, wow it was awesome, makes me feel so lucky to do what I do and gives me the motivation to work harder and think harder so I can keep doing so.this part pisses me off.
I think that Rocky and a couple other people have patents on variations of axle pivots above the rear wheel, kind of the opposite thing as Specialized but different in layout. Any really long link suspension like Split Pivot etc.. will end up having similar capabilities from a design standpoint. I'm in no way trying to polish Split Pivot beyond what it is. It's a single pivot for acceleration and a multi link for braking and leverage ratio. This does let me choose main pivot locations for acceleration that so far none of the companies using FSR etc.. really have. I like to push the limits. The thing with designing any bike, a designer first needs to make educated decisions on how to balance out the many different factors that go into ergonomics, kinematics, and frame geometry. That balancing act really makes up the whole picture of what a bike is and how it rides, and that's a big reason why the different bikes that I work on have so many different personalities.Why use a cocentric pivot at the rear axle?
Wouldn't a very close rear chainstay pivot that is slighty above the rear axle accomplish the same things without stepping on specialized toes?
Same bearings, same amount of pivots, but with the Split pivot having the axle forces concentric with that pivot in my opinion make things easier to make stiff than a pivot that's close to but forward of the axle. It's tough to beat a triangulated rear end with short links for structural efficiency, but this is a nice choice based on the FEA that I've seen the prototypes that I've ridden.(It would also have the adavantage of being easier to design and properly seal)
Maybe im missing something here??
Thanks man, I am trying my hardest to work on things that will make the riding experience better for everyone. Not everything I work on will jive with every rider, but I'm hoping that it's getting to the point now where there are enough choices out there to satisfy more of the different styles and wants that riders have.And congrulations on the patent and thank you for your very valuable contribution to the MTB world!
As settlement Dave got Lance as his official spokesperson.So Dave, any comments on what is going on regarding Trek's ABP?
Cool, are you working on a high pivot split pivot bike with anyone? You could easily dial in your anti squat ideals, leverage rate, and brake effects.Thanks man, I am trying my hardest to work on things that will make the riding experience better for everyone. Not everything I work on will jive with every rider, but I'm hoping that it's getting to the point now where there are enough choices out there to satisfy more of the different styles and wants that riders have.
I'd be interested to hear how it makes any difference. Have you been on two identical frames and builds, except for one frame having the bearing at the axle and the other with it just above?
Can't really compare apples to apples if the frames are different in other ways, or the builds are different.
My official comment is that there is no comment.So Dave, any comments on what is going on regarding Trek's ABP?
I'd say that compared to most other single pivot, horst link, or similar type bikes on the market, every one of the designs that I've worked on would be considered a "high pivot". That's one of the real advantages to the Split Pivot design in my opinion, being able to use a higher main pivot location for acceleration. The Split Pivot's integrated floating brake and the ability to get a little more leverage ratio control tie it all together. You won't see any Split Pivot bikes come from my shop with low main pivot locations, I can guaranty that.Cool, are you working on a high pivot split pivot bike with anyone? You could easily dial in your anti squat ideals, leverage rate, and brake effects.
I know you can see the bennefits to a high pivot, as you alude to it in your previous posts in other threads, you just put it behind other ideals, but with your split pivot you have a great template to dial in all your other ideals, and still milk a rearward axle paths benefits.