Suspension changes for chain drive?

[Woosh]

We are just debating about chain drive bikes.
One of the guys here thinks it might be better to do away with front suspension and just have rear suspension.
in his view the bike would handle better and not feel 'front heavy'.
Others not too sure.
What do members think, I'd be interested to know?

Hatti

 

[jackhandy]

Funny enough, the front suspension on my bouncer siezed solid recently & I can definitely say it gives a most peculiar ride:
The bumps in the trail were shaking the bars & my wrists & shoulders, but it felt like my backside was wallowing up & down on a feather bed.

It's certainly not a setup I'd recommend for rough going - a tad nausiating.

I'd suggest you ride a full-susser with the forks locked out & see what you think.

 

[oigoi]

I do not think it is a good idea to have a bike with rear suspension and no suspension on the front. The extra weight of a suspension fork is not enough to make any difference to the handling of the bike.

I think a bike with rear suspension and a rigid front fork would handle very strangely because the rear suspension moving would affect the rake (slope) of the front fork and feel quite unnatural to ride and I do not think it would appeal to customers much at all.
It would not cost you a lot to put a rigid front fork on a bike you already have that has rear suspension and try it for yourselves

If you are wanting to save weight I would keep the front suspension and have the rear of the bike rigid.

 

[colonel]

How much suspension travel are we talking about?
In my limited ebike experience suspension appears to be limited to 25-40mm travel, whereas mtb's are generally 100-200mm travel.
I don't believe you will notice much difference at the lower end, but from experience, I agree with the others that where larger travel affects the rake of the fork there will be a significant effect on the handling.

 

[KirstinS]

I agree with above posters - I've also had forks ona full suss sieze up like jackhandy - not a nice at all

whilst always good to challenge recieved wisdom I think there is a reason for the millions of "hardtails" around the globe but not once have I ever heard of a "hardnose" !

 

[flecc]

Never rear only suspension, it's often far less efficient than front suspension in the way it can affect pedal power and rhythm.

Either none, front only or for rough off-road, both.

 

[johnc461165]

For me front suspension is a must, personally not bothered about rear suspension.

 

[Woosh]

Interesting, and thank you all. Seems like rear only isn't flavour of the day but we may have a little experiment session and report back.
Hatti

 

[flecc]

Of course there is precedent for rear-only suspension, it's quite common on folders as rubber bung rear. Few are noted for efficiency though and some feel like your bungee-jumping over poor surfaces.

 

[alfie]

You could argue that a sprung saddle is a mild form of rear suspension and they have been used with rigid forks since the dawn of cycling. Sit up and beg Dutch style bikes often come with suspension seat posts as well, which is logical, since the weight is on your rear not your wrists. Road bikes (with aluminium frames) On the other hand, are often paired with carbon forks for the opposite reason.

 

[shemozzle999]

Only rear suspension on a Brompton - how many sold?

Bungee-jumping solved now that the rear triangle can be latched shut.