May 13, 2016, 8:37 p.m. -  DrewM

#!markdown The problem with comparing static geo numbers is sag. Some bikes (Intense for example) like to be run at ~30% sag. Nice mid-stroke pocket right there. Mmmmm… Some bikes (Specialized in general for example) are happier around ~25% sag or even less depending on how you run your fork and how hard you are going to push the bike. I know of at least one guy riding his Giant Reign with a coil shock at less that 20% sag in the rear. If the only rule of suspension setup (and it's a rule) is that the rear suspension needs to be softer and slower (i.e. the fork needs to be run faster and firmer) then the actual sagged numbers from bike to bike and rider to rider can be all over the map. I'm riding a bike right now where the rear suspension has really nice mid- stroke support at around 30% sag but the air pressure (and how it sits into that sag point) differs greatly depending on whether I'm running the stock Pike (~25% sag / very light initial damper support from Charger) or the X-Fusion I've been testing (~20% sag / lots of initial damper support from Roughcut). Anyways, the point is that much like looking at rates/curves without considering what shock you are running -- or in many cases the tune of the shock that is being run -- is pretty cursory the same way that buying a bike based on a geo chart is… I think the real question is what % of people read bike reviews for entertainment and what % of people read bike reviews because they need to know the sagged headangle to make up their mind on what luxury toy they want to buy. I'm guessing its mainly the former?