You bring up an excellent point that I have always been curious about, does the suspension curve before the sag matter much? A lot of bikes claim progressive but most is before the sag. Once you get past the sag, the second 2/3rds of the progression is minimal. We tend to use the maximum to minimum value to define progression. I feel this is inaccurate, at least start at the 20% mark to the end. Is it really progressive if most of the progression is in the first 1/3rd? I don't think so.
Ignoring the overall progressive number, especially the first 3rd, does the curve shape matter or more the leverage ratio past the sag point? If the number is low and flat, then the bike leverage is reduced and the curve shape only modifies this slightly. Let's say two bikes have the same average leverage suspension curve number past the sag point, if bike A, has flat curve but lower number past sag, and bike B has linear progression, so less upfront and more at the end. I would assume Bike A is actually more progress because it hits lower number earlier in the travel.
Anyway, I looked at a lot of suspension curves past the sag, and they are often number overly progressive. The so-called progressive bikes have more of e-folding decay until the sag point. it seems the linear or flatter curves, often get to the lower numbers sooner and have even lower numbers in the tail.
Coming back to Ibis....I have an Ibis Ripley V4 - fun bike, but like others, I find it can be harsh. I believe it is actually progressive because it hits a low number sooner, even though it is flat. I think this can make it harsh. With the light tune, it is plush in the initial travel but then overly ramps up making it feel harsh. I have never bottomed out the shock, but it sure feels like it. I recently got a different shock that uses more compression damping. It loses the initial plushness, but the shock utilizes the travel better throughout the strock. It doesn't seem to have the harsh ramp up like the fox shock.
June 28, 2021, 8:40 a.m. - Dude@
You bring up an excellent point that I have always been curious about, does the suspension curve before the sag matter much? A lot of bikes claim progressive but most is before the sag. Once you get past the sag, the second 2/3rds of the progression is minimal. We tend to use the maximum to minimum value to define progression. I feel this is inaccurate, at least start at the 20% mark to the end. Is it really progressive if most of the progression is in the first 1/3rd? I don't think so. Ignoring the overall progressive number, especially the first 3rd, does the curve shape matter or more the leverage ratio past the sag point? If the number is low and flat, then the bike leverage is reduced and the curve shape only modifies this slightly. Let's say two bikes have the same average leverage suspension curve number past the sag point, if bike A, has flat curve but lower number past sag, and bike B has linear progression, so less upfront and more at the end. I would assume Bike A is actually more progress because it hits lower number earlier in the travel. Anyway, I looked at a lot of suspension curves past the sag, and they are often number overly progressive. The so-called progressive bikes have more of e-folding decay until the sag point. it seems the linear or flatter curves, often get to the lower numbers sooner and have even lower numbers in the tail. Coming back to Ibis....I have an Ibis Ripley V4 - fun bike, but like others, I find it can be harsh. I believe it is actually progressive because it hits a low number sooner, even though it is flat. I think this can make it harsh. With the light tune, it is plush in the initial travel but then overly ramps up making it feel harsh. I have never bottomed out the shock, but it sure feels like it. I recently got a different shock that uses more compression damping. It loses the initial plushness, but the shock utilizes the travel better throughout the strock. It doesn't seem to have the harsh ramp up like the fox shock.