Dave Weagle granted Split Pivot patent
Concentric Drop Out Pivot Suspension system patented by Dave Weagle
Dave Weagle, the man behind the DW Link found on bikes such as those available from Turner, Pivot and Ibis, has been busy working on a new suspension system, for which he has just been granted a patent for.
The suspension design has been kept behind closed doors since he announced it several years ago in 2007, and Dave is clearly proud of the development of the Split Pivot, saying: "Wow, what a trip this one has been."
Of course a new suspension design is nothing without a bicycle manufacturer to adopt it and take it to market, but there's been no lack of interest in those wanting to work with Dave. "Since I launched the existence of this design publicly in May of 2007, I've been inundated by requests from bike brands interested in partnering up to develop new Split Pivot frames."
Dave has been able to carefully pick those brands he feels will best work with the new Split Pivot. "I feel like I've chosen some great brands to welcome into the Split Pivot family, brands that have their own individual flavor and ideas, and who really complement each other. It's been a crazy ride getting the Split Pivot design to this point, and I'm thrilled for my partners to finally be able to show off that patent number proudly on their bikes.
"We've been testing prototypes from different brands for some time, and I know the member companies of the Split Pivot family are excited for the world to see the benefits of our collaborations and hard work. We've discussed, designed, tested, and refined, and we feel like the bikes that we'll be bringing to the market with Split Pivot
technology showcase a level of suspension refinement that riders of any skill level can appreciate on the trail.
"It has been so difficult keeping the existence of new prototype models secret for so long so I am glad that part is nearly over and that it's time for the world to see how good this design can really be when dialed in. I think that riders are really going to enjoy this system. It allows for atypical main pivot placement that works great for acceleration and bump absorption, and the concentric dropout pivot lets me tune braking forces and leverage ratios to a high degree at the same time. Basically the Split Pivot design helps us to make bikes that are a lot of fun to ride."
What's a Split Pivot?
For the explanation of exactly what the Split Pivot is, we're going to give you the press release verbatim:
Split Pivot is a patented suspension system, where traction, efficiency, maneuverability, and frame stiffness are important factors on the track and trail. Split Pivot's [concentric dropout pivot], a pivot at the rear wheel axle joining the seatstays and chainstays on a bicycle, is the heart of this new design.
Each unique Spilt Pivot frame is engineered to combine the best performance traits of single pivot and long arm linkage suspensions. Split Pivot is all about having fun on the trail, and each unique suspension layout is designed to offer a ride that will make you smile no matter what your riding style or ability level.
How does it work?
Split Pivot's [concentric dropout pivot] design separates acceleration forces from braking forces in the suspension. The system reduces excess suspension reaction to acceleration forces, and at the same time reduces excess reaction to braking forces.
Braking neutrality can be tuned independently of acceleration characteristics, and suspension feel can be tuned by varying leverage ratio curves in a wide range of options. It's no secret that mountain bikers like individuality, and the Split Pivot design lends itself to a wide range of different looking and performing designs.
With so many possible mechanical layouts, not every Split Pivot bike looks or performs the same. Shock layout can be vertical, horizontal, floating, or even driven by a rate modifier link. This variability lets Dave tune the suspension performance and feel to each manufacturing partner's preference, giving each Split Pivot bike its own personality unique to each brand.
When will they be available?
Currently there are six licensees of the patented Split Pivot technology worldwide. 2011 Split Pivot models will be available in late 2010 from four USA and International brands. Two of the six brands have already announced their collaboration with Dave Weagle and Split Pivot.
Seven Cycles will be offering a full line of Split Pivot suspension frames, including the world's first ever custom suspension kinematics. A product of Seven's custom bike fit and design philosophy and Dave's work in human ergonomics and suspension tuning, each Seven Split Pivot frame is custom tuned to accentuate an individual's specific riding style, ability level, and body type.
East Coast brand Spooky Cycles will be offering two models in 2011, a downhill race model reviving the Project X moniker and a 145mm trail bike for aggressive XC called Mothership.
Eurobike and the UCI World Championships will see the launch of full Split Pivot MTB lines from two highly respected International mountain bike brands that have yet to be announced.
Riders can learn more about the Split Pivot design, and those with too much time on their hands can download and read the Split Pivot 7,717,212 patent at www.split-pivot.com.
It's nothing short of ridiculous that this can be patented in the first place. Registering it as a design would be possible, but that would be difficult too since all the individual features of the design have been done before and 4 bar linkages have been around for hundreds or more likely thousands of years. I have no doubt lots of people have considered putting a pivot around the back axle but abandoned it because it's a more awkward way to do things. In the US the first person to show evidence they thought of the idea gets the patent, not the first to file as in the EU. It's just nobody has the money or is bothered to put a legal challenge in I'd say. To qualify an invention as patentable it's supposed to have an 'inventive step not obvious to a person skilled in the art when presented with the details of the problem'. This and the specialized Horst Link most definitely don't qualify under that requirement. The Trek/new DW design is not a 4 bar suspension setup anyway as there's only one pivot between the frame and the back axle. It's the same as the DH bikes with a floating rear caliper linked back to the mainframe except the geometry used doesn't perfectly cancel the braking forces and the shock is actuated by the link from the floating caliper to the frame. I have a sneaking suspicion that all bike suspension designers do is build a morph chart listing all the ways of building a rear suspension system and try to pick combinations that haven't been used before (By anyone big enough to sue them). The loads the suspension has to carry and the bump and brake forces are all measurable, the desired performance is also measurable, so choosing pivot locations to give desirable behaviour isn't difficult and most setups can be made work. Platform shocks have allowed even bad designs to work well enough to be easily usable too, so even less pressure to get a 'perfect' linkage setup.
Posted: 27/07/2010 18:10
However you word it, its just a basic engineering concept that has no basis for a patent to be issued, the fact that these kinds of patents are issued shows the commercial corruption at the heart of modern business practices. edit: like specialized having the rights to the word "epic" FFS how can that happen.
Posted: 28/07/2010 13:26
@Hoodlum: Not for every component you are right, but for something as significant as suspension design, there is a great deal of engineering and prototyping that happens, which is certainly the case for ABP, and true, the split pivot as well. The ABP/Full Floater/DRCV combo was a game changer as far as bring Trek seriously back into the forefront of the MTB market, and as such there were literally years spent developing and testing before going forward with it.
For the record, Trek also has patents pending for various aspects of suspension design, including ABP. The patent process is not transparent, and the issuing of the SP patent just happens to have taken place first. It does not impact Trek, and we will continue to be developing the ABP platform going forward.
There is plenty of room in the market to support Dave and his designs. Having a patent issued is a significant thing, and he is to be congratulated for it.
Posted: 28/07/2010 13:54
If he can get the same patent in the European patent office it would be a significant thing. Given that this is a genuine US patent I'm not sure I have a lot of faith in the US system: http://www.totallyabsurd.com/extremecombover.htm. I'm pretty sure the patent office is a lot more interested in taking money off people than they are in determining the originality or otherwise of a particular invention. This is part of the reason there's so much litigation between big computer companies regarding patents as various companies have managed to get patents and therefore legal protection on ideas that were either already around or that were obvious enough to anyone who worked in the industry that it wouldn't even occur to most people to try patenting it.
Posted: 28/07/2010 14:10
I'm buying the Anthem X2 (I've had a Trance since 2005 and it's still going strong). I wouldn't even consider buying a Trek though. Just about everyone I know who rode their Trek hard off road had the frame break, though that was a good few years ago and Trek are probably doing a better job now, but nobody I know is willing to risk buying one having been burned on them before. The lifetime warranty on many Trek frames is great, but I'd rather no warranty and a frame that didn't break. The Giant bikes other people had at the same time are still working fine too, with Raleigh/Mtrax probably being the only less reliable frames out there. Treks historically tend to have very slow handling geometry too, good if you spend a lot of time at speed on fire roads, bad if you like to ride off road and use weight shifting to tweak the bike. For example a friend of mine who had a 2000 vintage Trek 8000 hardtail was amazed when he hopped on a €350 Giant and discovered he could lift the front wheel really easily by just pulling up on the bars - both bikes were sized correctly for him. Since Trek don't allow their bikes to be sold on the internet, to buy a Trek I'd have to go with my local dealer, who recently did a deal with Trek that he'd stop selling their bikes at a big discount off RRP if Trek didn't give any other shop in the area a Trek dealership. The same shop is giving me a very generous discount on a Giant. The last nail in the coffin is the rear hub fitting on the Treks, which is a faff at best, but will likely leave you stranded at some point when one of the proprietary parts goes wrong. I take it all back about the US patent office being full of frivolous patents - I just found this: http://www.totallyabsurd.com/bethebike.htm 
Posted: 28/07/2010 14:45
@Hoodlum: Ultimately, it should come down to how a bike feels to the potential buyer. Some people are going to prefer how a Trek rides, and some a Giant, and some a different brand. If you can, come see us at a demo, where you will also be able to test ride both a Giant and a Fuel or Remedy. Specialized and Santa Cruz are also there, as is Merida and LaPierre. Unfortunately, there's only one left this year and unless you are down south it's probably a hike, but we will have 2011 bikes to ride as we have just gotten them in: http://www.britishxc.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=15&Itemid=28
@Cormac: In the early production runs of the 2007 Fuel EXs, there was an issue with the weld just above the rear brake mount on the seat stay. That weld was changed early on, but there were many bikes sold with the old weld that were covered under full warranty replacement.
We've had no other widespread known issues with Trek frames since that one. We have have an issue with a sleeve fitting in the suspension linkage in 2010, again on pre-pro bikes, but it was not a frame piece, but rather an insert that ran through the frame and surrounded the main pivot bolt. It was a bit too long.
I'm not sure what you mean by the rear hub fitting. ABP isn't any more difficult to fit than a standard dropout design. Since nearly all of the bikes are coming spec'd with SRAM though, I can tell you that a SRAM rear mech does make it significantly harder to slot the rear wheel than a Shimano mech. That isn't down to the dropout though. And, considering the advantages of ABP over any other dropout design it might be worth the extra effort due to the derailleur, no?
I have to say that making a blanket statement about how a Trek handles after comparing a 2000 bike to a new bike is perhaps not a fair assessment. We've made loads and loads of changes to the entire range in the last decade, and even a Fuel from 3 years ago isn't going to have the same ride quality as a current model.
I'm not out to change your opinion of Trek, as I fully understand that there are plenty of people out there who aren't 'fans', and there's plenty of room in the market to support lots of bike brands. Everyone has their preference.
As a consumer though, your opinion matters to others (as it should), perhaps more so than mine since I will be looked at as a spin doctor simply due to who I work for (which I work very hard not to be), so please make sure that the information you are sharing with people is accurate and fair. While I understand that someone having a frame break would make them hesitant to ride said brand again, it's another matter entirely to suggest that it's happened to just about everyone you know without saying what year or model the frame was. We make thousands and thousands of bikes every year, and it's inevitable that some are going to break, either due to a random manufacturing defect or due to a crash. This does not bad frame construction make.
We aren't beyond reproach, and we firmly believe that you learn more by making mistakes, but we also don't have a history of making bad frames that break constantly. In fact, given the positive press we're getting, it's safe to say that the construction quality of our bikes, and the ride quality, are some of the best out there.
Posted: 30/07/2010 15:17
@Hoodlum: Not for every component you are right, but for something as significant as suspension design, there is a great deal of engineering and prototyping that happens, which is certainly the case for ABP, and true, the split pivot as well. The ABP/Full Floater/DRCV combo was a game changer as far as bring Trek seriously back into the forefront of the MTB market, and as such there were literally years spent developing and testing before going forward with it.
For the record, Trek also has patents pending for various aspects of suspension design, including ABP. The patent process is not transparent, and the issuing of the SP patent just happens to have taken place first. It does not impact Trek, and we will continue to be developing the ABP platform going forward.
There is plenty of room in the market to support Dave and his designs. Having a patent issued is a significant thing, and he is to be congratulated for it.
Posted: 30/07/2010 17:34
@Hoodlum: Ultimately, it should come down to how a bike feels to the potential buyer. Some people are going to prefer how a Trek rides, and some a Giant, and some a different brand. If you can, come see us at a demo, where you will also be able to test ride both a Giant and a Fuel or Remedy. Specialized and Santa Cruz are also there, as is Merida and LaPierre. Unfortunately, there's only one left this year and unless you are down south it's probably a hike, but we will have 2011 bikes to ride as we have just gotten them in: http://www.britishxc.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=15&Itemid=28
@Cormac: In the early production runs of the 2007 Fuel EXs, there was an issue with the weld just above the rear brake mount on the seat stay. That weld was changed early on, but there were many bikes sold with the old weld that were covered under full warranty replacement.
We've had no other widespread known issues with Trek frames since that one. We have have an issue with a sleeve fitting in the suspension linkage in 2010, again on pre-pro bikes, but it was not a frame piece, but rather an insert that ran through the frame and surrounded the main pivot bolt. It was a bit too long.
I'm not sure what you mean by the rear hub fitting. ABP isn't any more difficult to fit than a standard dropout design. Since nearly all of the bikes are coming spec'd with SRAM though, I can tell you that a SRAM rear mech does make it significantly harder to slot the rear wheel than a Shimano mech. That isn't down to the dropout though. And, considering the advantages of ABP over any other dropout design it might be worth the extra effort due to the derailleur, no?
I have to say that making a blanket statement about how a Trek handles after comparing a 2000 bike to a new bike is perhaps not a fair assessment. We've made loads and loads of changes to the entire range in the last decade, and even a Fuel from 3 years ago isn't going to have the same ride quality as a current model.
I'm not out to change your opinion of Trek, as I fully understand that there are plenty of people out there who aren't 'fans', and there's plenty of room in the market to support lots of bike brands. Everyone has their preference.
As a consumer though, your opinion matters to others (as it should), perhaps more so than mine since I will be looked at as a spin doctor simply due to who I work for (which I work very hard not to be), so please make sure that the information you are sharing with people is accurate and fair. While I understand that someone having a frame break would make them hesitant to ride said brand again, it's another matter entirely to suggest that it's happened to just about everyone you know without saying what year or model the frame was. We make thousands and thousands of bikes every year, and it's inevitable that some are going to break, either due to a random manufacturing defect or due to a crash. This does not bad frame construction make.
We aren't beyond reproach, and we firmly believe that you learn more by making mistakes, but we also don't have a history of making bad frames that break constantly. In fact, given the positive press we're getting, it's safe to say that the construction quality of our bikes, and the ride quality, are some of the best out there.
Posted: 30/07/2010 17:45
Chris: Thanks for taking the time to comment on this thread. It's rare enough that anyone working for a bike company is willing to stand up for their products when, especially on a web forum such as this, they have everything to lose and very little to win by doing so. Any chance of Trek reviving the Klein brand - or possibly just their paint jobs? 
Posted: 03/08/2010 11:37
|
|
