HeavyFlow profile

Similar story;  49 years old, riding since the late 80's, just got my *first* hardtail ever in 2020 (went from fully rigid in 1988 - not counting a Girven flex stem and Koski fork - to fully suspended in 1996).  Just stopped wearing a chamois and looking into pants.  but I still see no need for inserts.  I run 20psi on both bikes (27.5x2.6EXO+x30mm, and a 29x2.3EXOx27mm) and I never flat and never destroy rims.   Not in New England and not in SoCal.  I am 180lbs wo gear and ride hard and aggressively.    Maybe if I go into the 14psi range I would appreciate them, but I hate the idea of adding the grams to the worst place on the bike (outer rotating mass).

I think you are correct.  However, I would think that the small contribution in forward momentum caused by the rebound is trivial compared to the momentum carried by to ~200+ pounds that the rider and bike have travelling at even a few miles per hour.    This is also where unsprung mass comes into play.  The lighter the rear end, the faster it can react (the less momentum in the rebund).

Anti-squat, anti-rise aside my comment was about the fact that a true four-bar with horst link remains more active while braking.    Single pivots need  floating brake system to achieve the same effect.   Horst link's get it for free.    I would think that would be a good selling point.

Yeah - it's real.   I tried going to a 30t from 32t on a horst link bike before and it moved the line of force below the pivot and the suspension became noticeably less active while pedaling (one of the reasons I like horst link bikes) and I could feel kickback that was not there with the 32t (also not normally felt on a well done horst link design).

FWIW I am on my third horst link bike with a brief time on a faux bar and the faux bar was noticeably worse in terms of braking and pedaling over rough stuff (New England Rocks and Roots are great for testing suspensions).

Excellent point about the braking isolation - shame that the review/norco did not point this out.

Also, the review glossed over the "4 bar can be made more durable" part.  I would guess this is because of the two attachment points as opposed to one.   But I can imagine using a large (think BB) main pivot would compensate but maybe that is heavier?

I am starting to like the idea of a horst link 4-bar with high pivot and idler.

The other thing the review failed to mention (or maybe glossed over) is that with modern wide range cassettes and 1x drivetrains, people need to be able to customize the chainring size without affecting the way the frame was designed to handle pedaling forces.

I find the A2 with shimano to be the best looking "deal".

But I also find the bike quite ugly and would have a hard time buying one because of that.

It is not all about "clamping force".  Good brakes absorb energy - how?  Heat dissipation.

More piston area (as you said - please give us the numbers!) will allow more surface area to dissipate heat.    They may or may not also have one piston contact first which can help with modulation (do they do that?)

I tend to believe the science here.
However, perception is reality to some extent.
I wonder if what people are experiencing is vibration damping and not compliance?

Ah so that's how Magura get's the brakes so light!