Is this the future of motorcycle racing?

[@bernhtp]

While racing focused, I was still surprised there was no mention of the telelever and duolever fronts on BMW R-series and K-series bikes.

[@juicy9592]

Well its racing focussed

[@ibidu1]

Im a racer who also rides a R1250gs. The gs has no front fork feeling at all, my r6 race bike you can feel the front tire push or slip under hard trailbraking. On the gs its comfy plush smooth, although the front end does have plenty of front grip. I think not having front fork feeling would not be good for racing.

[@paultruesdale7680]

The BMW design was bought from Hossack, which was used in racing machines. If you care to know. Norman Hugh Hossack is a Scottish inventor and engineer, who invented the Hossack motorcycle front suspension system, used on some BMW Motorrad K series motorcycles

[@bernhtp]

@@ibidu1 I had a K1300S and have rented several GSs for long tours. The K was better, but both feel vague. I prefer the S1000XR for tours when I can get it.

[@richardcarroll3102]

@@paultruesdale7680 Didn't Hossack make a bike with BMW back in the day but they shelved using his design until just after the patent ran out?

[@wyleegiles2936]

In the early 90's, I designed, machined, welded and built every part of my own hub centre bike, using a vfr750 engine.... I wish I still had the photos but alas they have been lost to time... Very sad that I can't show it off...

[@Irfan87]

Do you still do any kind of engineering today?

[@AaronChristopher869]

What happened to the bike? Sounds like it didn't have a happy ending

[@skydaddy1678]

what happened to the bike? (1)

[@aaronf8710]

Ah the early 90s. The last time it was conceivable to not have a picture of something

[@andreashabeck1155]

Would love to know more about this bike, even if you can't find any pictures.

[@ChristianMulvihillThom]

It's not in use because the problems with conventional forks that you mentioned are benefits, the geometry change when braking is what makes it better. You can have a bike that's stable in the straights but can still lean in fast for the corners.

[@ShirazHansen]

5:12 - Alan Cathcart says he was able to brake late and still get into the apex because of the hub steering mechanism.

[@wingracer1614]

A swing arm front still dives when braking. The benefit of it is you can actually change the amount of dive by changing the angle of the arm. And yes in theory, you could even have 100% anti-dive so it wouldn't dive at all if that is what you wanted. The problem with standard forks is geometrically, they actually have quite a bit of pro-dive, meaning they actually increase the amount of dive under braking. So much so in fact that in high performance applications, this needs to be counteracted in some other way, usually by increasing spring rate or hydraulically. So what are the downsides? Weight, cost and complexity for one thing (ok, that's three things but you know what I mean). The other problem is that anti-dive geometries at the front tend to be much harsher over bumps. Now there is a common misconception over this point. It's not anti-dive itself that causes the harshness, that should have no effect but the geometries needed to accomplish it create that harshness for totally different reasons. If you look at the motion of the wheel from the side, when a conventional fork suspension compresses over a bump, the wheel not only moves up but also to the rear, better absorbing the force of the bump. But anti-dive geometry also causes the wheel to move forward during compression, essentially amplifying the force of the bump the rest of the bike feels. There are some things that could be done to reduce this but it really can't be totally eliminated (at least no one has figured out a way to do so yet) and doing so adds yet more weight, cost and complexity. Now in cars, we see widely varying amounts of anti-dive depending on the application. Offroad vehicles tend to have none or even pro-dive but this isn't because pro-dive is better for cornering, it's because the advantages it gives you in soaking up the bumps outweighs the downside of more dive. Ground effect cars such as F1 often have quite a bit of anti-dive because they are very sensitive to the car's attitude (angle of attack or rake) so they want as little pitch change as possible though fortunately for them, the high spring rates they have to run to resist all that downforce plus the low center of gravity helps so they usually don't have to run 100% anti-dive. Interestingly, nearly all cars and motorcycles have at least some anti-lift geometry at the rear. Not only does this help reduce how much the rear lifts during braking, it also helps with the bumps and usually also provides some anti-squat under hard acceleration.

[@steveoglesby4120]

@@ShirazHansen What did Lawson, Rainey, Spencer, Roberts or Schwantz say?

[@kevinburke6743]

So, explain "Counter Steering" or Opposite Lock! Then if you the hub steering principle on the back wheel only in the vertical axis Shaft driven. You use it as Automatic Camber Correction! ( Ref: Lamborghini 's AWC as applied to Rear Wheel Steering.) You have less need for lean angle into bends/ corners, Whilst maiming a bigger tyre Contact Patch & similar shape to Straight ahead pattern! Also you apply the brakes both Lesser & Later still maintain a higher speed through the corner! As the two hubs work in conjunction with each other, having the hub canted off the vertical axis you change the effictive wheel centre distance through the turn like normal front forks!

[@future62]

That ELF is my favorite motorcycle of all time. I hope someone in MotoGP gives it a chance. The Japanese have nothing to lose at this point.

[@paultruesdale7680]

I’m with you, unfortunately the majority are fully sold on telescopic forks. You should have a look at the Nissan Deltawing concept racer. When you see the steering and compare it to the four wheeled racers you will be amazed just how little reinforcement is required to steer a racing vehicle.

[@andreashabeck1155]

It would undermine their road bikes.

[@kasperkjrsgaard1447]

But they DID gave it a chance. Rocket Ron tried for a couple of seasons on the ELF with the mighty Honda power behind them, and nothing happened. They tried in Endurance race with TZ 750 Yamaha to RCB 1000 Honda power, to no real progress.

[@paultruesdale7680]

You mentioned three against the world. The ELF was the better funded. They were using the V3 two stroke up against the V4s. Ron was always a very fast starter but would usually fall back, maybe stamina of the rider or the machine would go off, tires etc. John Britton fielded his V twin with his non conventional suspension and the bike had limited success.

[@kasperkjrsgaard1447]

@@paultruesdale7680 The V4 NSR was used too. In ‘84 if I remember correct.

[@BikeStandByMe]

I saw the Elf race at Laguna Seca in 88 and from what I remember they had clearance problems on the off camber turns. Ron was scraping the front arm in the corners. After that year we never saw it in Grand Prix again.

[@motorcyclemadness6006]

Don’t forget Ron rode in quite an old fashioned high corner speed style ..not “always” a bad thing and suited to this type of design . Was grounding out part of what the bike enabled and or enhanced by him and the bike …the last elfs had very advanced designs tight in and scolloped they were costly using lots of mag alloy to get the weight down & single disc brakes caused some issues.. he said it handled well but wasn’t quite as fast as conventional in the wet ( he was fast in the wet ..probably due to feel and lower w transfer.. He did win the Macau gp on it and thought it would be perfect for the tt if i remember correctly..but most of all he was 4th in gp racing on it 87 hardly slow..

[@actualsize123]

My dad used to have a gts1000 and his only complaint was that the swingarm could scrape on the ground

[@motorcyclemadness6006]

@@actualsize123 did your dad hang off?

[@actualsize123]

@@motorcyclemadness6006 he said he didn’t really need to

[@steveoglesby4120]

I was there in '88. You're right. Lawson's victory was worth the trip from Indiana.

[@terrybrown8539]

Many years ago I read that the problem was that they feel quite different to telescopic forks and when you engineer "feel" into them the advantages they do have reduce and you finish up with a compromise that doesn't have any overall advantage over telescopic forks. The article did suggest that they build hub center systems and simply let riders adjust to the feel. I guess feel on the edge is a big deal though as a crash awaits when that hard to feel limit is exceeded. Perhaps electronics would help but that's a new field that wasn't available when people last played with the concept.

[@stoicthedog]

This and risk. What top tier rider or team is going to risk their championship hopes over waiting to understand feel. I rode a hub centre steered bike many years ago and I agree. It was brilliant on the road as there was no dive on the brakes or even the slightest hint of a head shake or anything potentially unsettling. I have no doubt it could be ridden much faster than I have the skills to do but there was basically no feel from the front tyre. Couldn't tell where it was or what it was doing. I would imagine that makes finding the limit a very difficult task, never mind keeping it just the right side of that limit for a race distance.

[@firstnamelastname2669]

@@stoicthedog My experience with a hub centre mountain bike matched that. Great suspension but the linkages hide those tiny vibrations that are 'feedback'. You had to 'trust' it. Though F1 apparently get enough feel bikes are on a very fine edge.

[@stoicthedog]

@@firstnamelastname2669 Yes, that's it, exactly. It's numb. Would be good on touring bikes where comfort is king but not a MotoGP bike, imo.

[@olivialambert4124]

I always find it weird how people obsess over the drawbacks of a conventional fork setup rather than considering it's benefits. Every other technology people seem to focus on the benefits first. Even the video claims "the front end dive is bad", when in reality the dive is the biggest benefit of a fork setup. It reduces the rake and trail whilst also slightly reducing the wheelbase. Thus you get a bike far better on turn in which then allows a more stable platform on exit and on the straight. That's critical for race bikes particularly MotoGP bikes which have an especially unstable platform. Without a fork suspension dive the bikes would be borderline unridable. Instead a hub center bike needs to reduce turn in and agility to increase stability across all regimes so the bike is actually usable. Or in other words fork suspension is actually more stable for the same level of agility (both can trade agility for stability). The "inconsistent" handling is exactly what is desired here. It's more stable when you need it, it's more agile when you want it. There's a reason so many millions are spent on racing bikes each year yet all of the repeated attempts at using another technology have died off. If race teams could gain a fraction of a second dropping the forks they would do it in an instant.

[@paultruesdale7680]

Very good argument. The benefits you described I would argue the opposite. The machine has to be setup one way or the other. Lots of dive to quicken the steering and reduce the wheelbase, like this it becomes a shopping cart very twitchy and more prone to tucking the front. Or the machine has to be slowed down and made truckish until you are on the brakes. With the steering and suspension separated this becomes less of a compromise. Of course this is very simplistic for the sake of this discussion.

[@olivialambert4124]

@@paultruesdale7680 A lot of that will depend on your setup. Fork bikes require an especially individualised setup based on rider, riding style, even track style (one of the drawbacks). Commonly superbikes will come with spring rates for more novice riders. Intermediate or expert riders will brake harder and so increasing spring rate is one of the most common changes made to supersports bikes as it accounts for that harder braking. When springs are too soft you get everything you have described, harder springs remedies that. Of course for non-racing and non-superbikes that's just part of it - they're happy to lose ultimate race performance for a better ride quality. But broadly for any track racing you essentially always want a more agile turn in with more stability on exit compared to a neutral bike. Instability on exit has historically been one of the main problems in race bikes with riders being thrown semi-regularly. Indeed rear suspension design is also largely driven by this desire. For the front a fork setup allows pretty much anything from almost no difference to the excessively extreme difference you report. Geometry changes, spring rates, oil gaps, damper adjustments can all moderate how and when you get that stability change. By decoupling that effect entirely you're intentionally taking away one of the tools you have to set the bike up as you want it. The upside obviously is to remove the effect you report - riders will rarely have that adverse riding characteristic. But race teams are going to have the ability to set up the bikes as they wish and they're the ones driving superbike design and geometry. More tools means a better fit for the rider. But even for us mere mortals the front forks are one of the easiest tweaks to set up if you track the bike semi-regularly. The real benefit of decoupling braking and suspension is in allowing softer spring rates. As mentioned hard spring rates are part of the toolbox to getting the bike to ride properly. Removing the effect means softer spring rates can be used which allows for a far better bump compliance as well as better plushness. That is far less important for a race track where the track is ultra smooth and bump compliance is barely a factor but it's a good argument for touring bikes and less sporty road bikes to use a hub center design. For some reason people seem to take a backwards approach demanding it for race bikes and ignoring the non race bikes which could actually benefit from decoupling braking and bump compliance.

[@paultruesdale7680]

Thank you for taking the time. Some of what you have said I agree with, but a lot of your explanation is based on compromise, due to the nature of the design. Fundamentally the idea of the telescopic is fundamentally flawed from the beginning. But it has been adopted and a lot money and solid engineering has been spent making it work as good as it does today. The entire assembly of the triple tree , bearing tube and huge diameter male slider forks has to be massive to contend with all the forces trying to bend and flex them. Most of the alternative suspension designs came about when forks and frames were flexing all over the place, and they were trying to come up with a more rigid system that separated the key components of steering, braking and suspension. Some of the ideas come from cars, planes and ideas that were born at the same time as the telescopic fork. The biggest restriction to better designs in car and bike racing comes from to many rules and regulations. The Formula in the top championships has left the bikes pretty much the same as the machines thirty years or more ago. So the designers have maximized what they can and what we have now is the result

[@infidelmat]

You can tune the amount of dive, he didn't quite show how the suspension action is tuned.

[@olivialambert4124]

@@paultruesdale7680 Every engineering decision is always a compromise. If it wasn't it would become universal as there's literally no reason not to take that route. Indeed the fact that forks have become near universal highlights how strong the advantages are compared to the disadvantages and how little of a compromise it is. Absolutely engineering the forks is a huge challenge. There's not only huge forces from all directions (braking, sideways, rotational), but the forks need to have very tight tolerances to keep the oil contained within the forks and allow a smooth movement. But the fact that motorbike designers have opted to use a difficult and expensive design over frankly a cheaper (and thus more profitable) front swingarm design should say a lot. There has to be a reason, and that reason is the improved performance. Of course today prices are lower and tolerances are easier for cheap forks, but you've still got a decent cost from the extended frame and precision headstock. I disagree that rules and regulations are a restriction here. The fact that such a variety of front suspension has raced would suggest that isn't an issue. The focus of this discussion, the hub centered front suspension has indeed been a repeated design seen so it clearly isn't restricted by the ruleset. There has also been an absolutely huge improvement in motorbike designs over the years (with a very rapid change over the past 30 years) so I would disagree on that point too. They may look vaguely similar, but there's been an absolute ton of experimentation in radical front fork concepts, massive internal changes (dampers are now massively different and there's a very scientific approach now), huge geometry changes, just about everything I can think of has changed. The flexing issue used to be true, but over the past 20 years the mindset has inverted. With the advent of super stiff carbon fiber materials it's simple to make very low flex components. That lead to the discovery that flex (in particular side flex) was actually a very important part towards compliance and grip - Honda and Suzuki leading the way on that. When going straight the suspension may move up and down to stay in contact with the track. At high lean angles the bumps push the wheel partially sideways, and so a side flex becomes part of the suspension compliance whilst cornering. So as things have become stiffer there's been a big move to add sideways flex whilst remaining stiff in other directions. That's actually an area where front swingarm designs like the hub centered suspension has an advantage - it's very easy to engineer sideways flex in a swingarm. However despite that advantage (ultimately resulting in lower tire usage and better race performance) the benefits I outlined initially are still substantially better and produces a far faster bike so that all the many experiments and tests of non-conventional suspension have been tried and dropped for competitive racing.

[@RestlessThunder1]

I have a Tesi 3D Edition Finalé and, as well as riding it on back roads, i took it on a trackday at Donington. I have no complaints with lack of feel or dive and was riding round the likes of GSXR's in the bends. A little high speed instability which I havent had time to sort yet, but can/will. Definitely deserves development.

[@vegassasin]

wow must be an amazing machine

[@martimattia1997]

you have one of the 45 made amazing

[@CoolArrowRacing]

The instability in the hands of a skilled rider can become a handling edge. Im reminded of the "snap oversteer" conversations in automobiles... Now if im writing software to control a vehicle I want flat cornering and a perfect front-rear balance. I think thats why its a focus in automobiles. Dunno about self riding bikes. But still, I believe what is responsive and agile in the hands of a skilled rider could be considered unstable to a rookie or on paper.

[@TheWombat40]

I've had a 2013 Bimota Tesi 3D Evo for 5 years, I ride it a lot, never struck any instability issues

[@julvatn]

This explains so much. Sci-fi and cyberpunk iften feature these bikes, and I always thought they were drawn by people that just disnt understand how forks worked!

[@martylawson1638]

I've built several off road motorcycles with AWD and a funny front end. (Hossack double A-arm) So I've got some experiance. Hub center and other linkage front suspension really shine when paired with all wheel drive. It's just a pain in the rear to run drive parallel to telescoping forks. The other factor holding it back is that the extra design freedom of a linkage front end gives as many new ways to screw up handling as it gives ways to help. For instance a forward sloping wheel track is quite bad vs big bumps. Anti-dive in particular has it's biggest benefit when applying and releasing the brakes. I.e. you can snap them on and off without waiting for the forks to extend or compress. So it shines the best in uncertain conditions or with newer riders.

[@magnograil6825]

As forks compress the trail shortens which reduces steering force. Lateral tyre loads are taken by bearings near the stanchions, whereas with centre hub the loads are in the middle of the axle further away from the support arms (unless a single sided arm is used which results in wheel twist under load). A lot of steering linkages to wear. Limited steering lock. Other ways to separate steering and suspension besides forks and centre hub..

[@stephendrake8145]

How about John Britten’s bikes???

[@mylordass8120]

Agree, it's the first bike I thought of when I saw this.

[@serhiy883]

that is what I was waiting fr

[@robbrightwell4605]

Leading link suspentions give a different feedback also and the front end rises instead of diving and decreases fork angle, its very controllable ,sidecars are more common test beds for alternative steering

[@Rose_Butterfly98]

Another advantage is tgat they look awesome. Bimota Tesi H2 is my dream bike, it has my favourite engine but with linkage front suspension and lever action steering.

[@bladetc]

I met a guy from Australia last Nov in a ARRC race (Asia Championship) whom i cannot recall which team he was working for. Anyways he showed me the photos of a Hub center bike racing in some Moto2 racing which he was also working on. So they are still developing this technology as of now.

[@cableguy130]

Guy Martin said " it's the best period but the riders need to learn it at an early age, it's not something you can simply adapt to and be fast" Or something pretty close to that.

[@jarnosaarinen4583]

He's pretty Stupid! If it was any good it be on ever GP Bike!!

[@barrypuccini6142]

So, knowing Guy's speech pattern, it was more like 'It'sthebest, period; buttheridersneedtolearnitatanearlyage, it'snotsomethingyoucansimplyadapttoandbefast'

[@PaulG.x]

@@barrypuccini6142 More like: 'It'sthebest, period; buttheridersneedtolearnitatanearlyage, 'It'sthebest, period; buttheridersneedtolearnitatanearlyage, it'snotsomethingyoucansimplyadapttoandbefast' it'snotsomethingyoucansimplyadapttoandbefast' He always says everything twice

[@ReignitedAuto]

I suspect he might have said something involving a bird, a semi truck and perhaps a small clock, but realistically without an interpreter no one really knows.

[@blantant]

😂😂

[@steveochoa7801]

I've never seen this before. Awesome video. One crash and all those steering linkages would go boom

[@paultruesdale7680]

Not all of the designs used linkages, some used hydraulics. Try not to crash if you can. Same fate awaits any machine that goes down.

[@Showmetheevidence-]

I had 1 crash and my forks went boom… so .????

[@punkbutcher5321]

Replacing clamped forks with a swing arm actually sounds more resilient to me, maybe less issues with alignment as well? Also getting rid of exposed fork seals sounds great to me. It also would get easier to exchange the front wheel without centre stand (silently cursing exhaust pipes below the engine).

[@player55redcrafter8]

Uhh, the same happens with conventional bikes in a crash?

[@doriantolman95]

Learning about this suspension makes me one step closer to building my Akira bike!

[@roxasparks]

No that's my idea and has been for a while I will race you!! Bike to bike,n

[@paultruesdale7680]

Ron Haslam was a top racer on the ELF, but the bike was using the V3 not the higher powered V4. So it’s hard to say how the bike might have faired had it had the more powerful engine.

[@firstnamelastname2669]

Also in his book Ron said the carbon fibre front swinging arm was even heavier than the alloy one. Composites have come a long way since then.

[@kazabubu10]

What about telelever/duolever of BMW and Britten V1000? How they differ with hub-steering and why aren't these designs widely used?

[@io3204]

The duolever is related in concept to the elf type machines or the Yamaha. Apart from not being a fork it has little in common with hub center steering like bimota etc.

[@kazabubu10]

@@io3204 thanks for the info...would be nice if LaL can make a video regarding this as well...

[@PaulG.x]

Oh , you mean Norman Hossack's design , that he offered to BMW , which they feigned no interest in until his patent had expired and that was later copied by Britten

[@slartybartfarst9737]

Put 40,000 miles on a Yamaha GTS 1000 over a few years of commuting to the Isle of Man that bike was staggering with its stability. Only 100 BHP but even with a small lawn mower, 20L of emulsion and small step ladders on the back went over the mountain course quicker than a group of UK sports bikes, not a good look on your GO Pro!

[@lezoer]

thank you for your analysis can you do a case study, concerning the late Mr Michael Czysz on his 6X-FLEX latch design; from the E1pc from the Isle of Man with the suspensions in the tank... with us in France, JBB fourche, lazareth, BOXTER. are also interesting in terms of brain wringing elbow grease

[@Guds777]

There were a motorcycle that had very clever setup, when you did break the part of the breaking fluids would go into the front struts and did stiffens the front suspension so it wouldn't dive...

[@ItsMeeJon]

Old goldwings do that

[@BearsTrains]

Kawasakis in the early to mid 80's tried this system (Yamaha too I think). It increased the compression damping so that the front would not dive so much. The trouble was, if you hit a bump whilst braking, the extra damping would make the wheel bounce over the bump instead of absorbing it. Especially nasty if you were leaned over whilst braking. Combine this with a 16 inch front wheel and the shit could go bad quite quickly. Universally despised and now forgotten.

[@clintvosloo7694]

Katanas too . . Suzuki

[@williamrae9954]

I have photos of the Yamaha GTS at the Gooseneck at the '95 TT Races... ideally suited for racing on those sort of roads!

[@geoffbridge6695]

The GTS was designed by James Parker RADD

[@zounds13]

@@geoffbridge6695 actually Yamaha licensed his design but then messed up the geometry, so it never worked as well as it could have. According to Parker.

[@paultruesdale7680]

And it wasn’t intended as a sports touring GT.

[@zibingotaeam3716]

the unsprung weight part is wrong - everything beyond the lower tubes on the forks are not part of the unsprung weight, especially not the headstock etc meanwhile the hub center steering requires an entire swingarm, which isn't light

[@mrdjangofreeman5560]

Makes sense, i do agree.

[@trash3570]

That whole section doesn’t make sense to me. First he labelled it “sprung weight”. This would just be the weight of the frame and engine and he claims the hub steering bike to be lighter, which is has not been clearly established. If he meant to say unsprung mass, then the hub steering bike probably has MORE unsprung mass than the fork bike. Sounds like gibberish, or maybe i’m misunderstanding

[@wingracer1614]

He said SPRUNG weight, not unsprung. Now I would argue that may also be false. Never having designed and built one, I can't say for sure.

[@HaveFunBikes]

while talking about the history, not one mention about the legendary John Britten that made his own 1000cc bike in a SHED, and went on racing? He developed motor, chassis, aero, all by himself and raced the motorcycles, darting over the competition? He entered some major races won some, but never won a championship because of reliability issues. Either way, when talking about front ends that differ from telescopic forks, John Britten is a legend and must be talked about. Also, there were some mountain bike designs that were good, but eventually went out of business because it is a hard place to design and produce something different. Trust forks and Motion E18 are the ones that come on top of my head.

[@paultruesdale7680]

Not by himself. He was the project leader of his own design. He was helping by many like minded enthusiastic individual's who brought their own ideas and special skill sets and they were able to build a wonderful race bike.

[@LifeatLean]

I was mainly focusing on HCS applications (or ones close to it) but I agree the V1000 probably should have got an honourable mention.

[@RE650NZGraeme]

@@LifeatLean John was a pioneer of carbon fibre in the frame elements attached to the V1000 engine, plus a huge horsepower engine that did race in the UK and Europe in the Bears I think. It basically folded when he died. The bike won acclaim for performance and design, esp in the US. It often only failed when an external component died - eg battery charging unit while capable of winning Daytona!

[@gsilva220]

The problem with all those linkages is elasticity. You have to tension the entire mechanism before it lets you change the steering angle. it's the same problem with the steering system on the VW bus.

[@jurban7998]

Dont the forks help stabilize the bike by having the contact patch behind the wheel axis? Allows the front wheel to act almost like a caster, letting you steer the bike by leaning as well as by turning the bars.

[@Chevsilverado]

It happens with this too. Caster is when you draw a line along your steering axis, in the case of forks it’s along the line of the forks. The line has to hit the ground ahead of the contact patch. These bikes also have a steering axis that’s in the same spot as if it has forks since the wheel still needs to turn left and right like normal. It actually has nothing to do with the physical connection point to the bike, just the steering axis of the wheel. You can adjust the caster to anything you want on this bike by just changing the hub.

[@iamtimsson]

1:00 You know, with the most common thing breaking on my triumph is being the shift linkage I really want more linkages so that when I go down I really can't take my bike home.

[@blandrooker6541]

Why no mention of the Kawasaki/Bimota Tesi H2?

[@LifeatLean]

This is mainly focused on racing applications to a high level 👍

[@ADobbin1]

are these more complicated and maintenance intensive compared to forks? It also looks more fragile and prone to damage. I've seen this set up on a custom build sport bike but it cost 500k. I would be curious to try riding this sort of steering setup but I don't have connections.

[@Deric_Rocks]

Sorry but, if it was faster they'd use it, nothing to do with budgets, everything to do with results. 'Conventional' forks transfer the weight of the bike and rider onto the front tyre giving massive front end grip, hub centre bikes don't behave that way, and are heavier. Game over, move on

[@AustinArrowsmith]

I think you missed that point about being lighter in the video. Oh, and that in racing at that level, fractions of a second are the differences between faster and slower. If a team as a whole has to get used to the new tech and whilst getting used to it, achieves slower results, they won't risk it. It *could* be faster, but isn't... until they invest time into the product.

[@patrickfitzpatrick1600]

VHS vs BETAMAX! Often the inferior technology wins the race! It then becomes easier to go with the flow than try to invests more R&D with the risk of not becoming profitable fast enough! Money talks!!

[@257796]

I'm with Deric. If it was better it would be a thing already

[@giuliobuccini208]

​@@257796not really... the one that is giving you engine, frame, forks (and selling well thousands of that type of bike on the market) is not your ideal partner in testing something new.

[@jaydencooke5506]

I also question the strength of the linkages that steer the bike

[@the.happy.mechanic]

My next door neighbor has a salt flat bike he made that he has been racing professionally for over 10 years that has center hub steering on it.

[@chadwells7562]

Salt flat racing is hardly mainstream, I’m sure it works well for that application

[@nibv6996]

There is a race bike call3d the "Metiss" using this center hub steering tech in the EWC for a long while now, it’s been about a decade qince the bike debuted and is still running in the championship to this day. Easy to miss but still. It’s an endurance world championship.

[@paultruesdale7680]

I will check that out. Thanks

[@MrDeepseadweller]

Motoinno have been testing their version of the concept down here in Australia at Phillip Island and Sydney Motorsport Park (SMSP). I’ve had a look up close and it certainly seems like a very interesting concept. I understand they have been gradually whittling down the lap times thru on track tweaks with various test riders.

[@firstnamelastname2669]

Good to see on FB they are still refining it. Would add much needed technical interest to Moto2 if they could get there.

[@andypughtube]

I have a hub-centre steered motorcycle and the one time I took it on the race track (at Cadwell Park) it was rubbish. I had to put a leg out to push it up Coppice and The Mountain was completely impossible. Of course you might argue that taking a 1921 Ner-a-Car with 2.25hp on the race track was a silly idea, And you would be right, :-)

[@twsquash]

What was the front end on the 1994 Britten race bike ???

[@FruitisLife75]

Never heard of this type of design before so thanks for the information. As you mentioned, there probably isn't a huge advantage to switching to a new system and the industry is so ingrained in the current setup. Like that saying ' you can't teach an old dog new tricks'

[@WildBikerBill]

Or "If it ain't broke, don't fix it". The advantage of forks is the design simplicity and everyone is familiar with how they work. Also, I'd like to know how those exposed hub center steering linkages fare when a bike goes down.

[@paultruesdale7680]

I’m sure they get bent like forks

[@alphafort]

i've been waiting for exactly this video! thx bro!

[@Juliajules1010]

Hello 👋

[@firstnamelastname2669]

For the sake of completeness the Aerial Ace is also available with (or with teles).

[@EYES2CU]

I. Don’t mind trying this out on the roads we got, it will be interesting to feel how it performs and document it I love bikes and live in the Caribbean

[@dannydandaniel8040]

Bimota has done this several times with varying success. Riders complained about not having feedback from the front end so it was almost impossible to find where the limit was. You had to crash to find it

[@Chris.Davies]

4:53 - "That CAME before it." Come is present tense, not past tense.

[@io3204]

The elf type machines and similar designs like the GTS 1000 are not hub center steering. They have some sort of kingpin and the wheels/rims are asymmetrical. They have an upright which is connected to steering bearing. The hub center ones like bimota/vyrus usually have several push rods an bearings to achieve steering.

[@bikeaddictbp]

With normal forks, the steering axis does not pass through the exact center of the front wheel (it misses the exact center, and is behind it, by the offset visible in your upper triple clamp). Having an upright and an offset wheel allows that geometry to be simulated because the lower ball-joint need not be in the exact center of the wheel. True hub-center steering forces the steering axis to go through the exact center of the front wheel and eliminates the design option of changing the offset - basically, you would be stuck with having a normal trail and an extremely steep steering head angle, or a normal steering head angle and extremely long trail, or some combination of somewhat steep steering head angle and somewhat too much trail (relative to "normal" geometry). What effect this would have on steering feel and feedback and stability ... is beyond my pay grade, but if forced to put money on it, I would put that money on "probably bad".

[@KaiSong-vv7wh]

Huh? I don't get the argument: In either configuration, you have one vertical and one axial degree of freedom. The axial DOF is not affected by the vertical stresses, while the vertical is freely configurable (i.e. resistance to displacement x and derivative v of displacement are fully custumable for every pair ). Thus, how would either of them be better at nose dive or steering decoupling when nose dive is fully customable in both configurations and steering is always decoupled?

[@KaiSong-vv7wh]

weight and weight distribution are of course an important consideration but I assume that is rather on the end of material science and manufacturability. I.e., I would expect a fork to be more easily constructable with high stability then a hub-arm because of its standardization.

[@itsmebatman]

I remember a custom bike from the 90ies with a combination of hubcenter steering and a fork. A German motorcycle magazine made a big article about it. And they seemed to like it very much. Unfortunately I can't remember any details. I think detaching steering from suspension should make the bike better in any case.

[@oddsman01]

Sprung weight is less, yes, but unsprung weight goes up not an insignificant amount. It’s like the chain I suppose. There’s a reason some things have stuck around for so long.

[@ahmedalogaili787]

Been thinking the same thing.

[@robm.4512]

Exactly.

[@gonzaloferreyra7295]

The ARC Vector is an incredible example of the use of this technology, amazingly ingeneered!

[@cliveadams7629]

Used to love the Tesi, ran the team that raced one in BSB many years ago. Weird things to ride, no dive takes some getting used to. Itlf I win the lottery I'd quite like to get myself one.

[@davide4456]

I am a designer and builder of many things and I designed a few center hub styled motorcycles in the 90's. A couple years ago, I decided to work on an updated version of my designs and now I am ready to start building. Years ago there was a company called ISR that would build you a Center Hub Steering mechanism but they don't answer any emails so I think they no longer exist. I was wonder if you knew of a company that would build a front wheel and steering hub for an individual. Anyone else reading this, Please let me know if you have any information as well. Thank you.

[@pierrebroccoli.9396]

Fail to mention the alteration of Forks under compression of a Motorcycles Trail which shortens up the Motorcycles Wheelbase altering Geometry making the Bike more nimble when under hard Front End Braking. Gives better tip in to corners which what Trail Braking is all about and a key component of cornering with Forks. Shortened Wheelbase, and larger contact patch of the front tire under braking as the bike goes into the corner and through the corners apex after which the rider eases up on the brakes and and at the same time applies gas having the bike to stand up and power onto the straight with a longer wheelbase which lends to stability to the next corner. Rinse - Repeat. Sort of Adjustable Geometry of which I don't think the tele lever front ends do.

[@LucG29]

The big name in the elf project was the frenchman Eric "Pépé" Offenstadt. He did try again the design with the GECO project, test riden by Freddie Spencer and WSSP world champion Lucas Mahias. But again lack of founding...

[@Juliajules1010]

Nice bike

[@nickrider5220]

I read up about John/Jack Difazio from Frome in Somerset, what a fascinating tale ! I thought his first hub steering bike was made in 1956 though. Because 'feel' is vital for racers, it's the blurring of that which limits unconventional front ends......great for the road and near track speeds. The added complexity, added cost and weight over the latest forks are the negatives ....not to mention a redesigned frame in many cases. Still, I would like to try one !

[@MyToxicMasculinity]

Why wouldn't you still get dive under braking? The dive comes from the shifting weight and the shifting weight under braking is still absorbed but the suspension. Sure, I guess to detached the steering device from being directly attached to the suspension but since when is that an issue? Yeah, you may have a stiffer frontend but is that really necessary and is it worth all of the added complexity? If it was a better system it would have been done on a massive scale.

[@maestrovso]

The first 19 seconds told me all I need to know. Hell, I don't ride anymore but I know better anything that goes beyond keep it simple will invariably fail.

[@SixxWolfZx]

Okay bye then lol

[@pmwaffle9348]

The vyrus m2 was great and competitive on race day and was incredibly special in road trim. It was 100lbs lighter wet compared to the standard 600s which is absolutely nuts

[@MrJay_White]

modern forks are far from simple though

[@arcanewyrm6295]

You get some serious miles on steering links and they're sure to loosen over time. Sure, maintenance and preventive repair will eliminate just about all risks... aside from possible material defects. Or smacking a curb or pothole the wrong way and causing a link end pop off - far easier to lose all steering that way than just about anything you can do to a fork.

[@soraaoixxthebluesky]

If they can get sweet lateral flex and front feedback I believe they’ll implement it in the next decade or so. Cause the aero demand in Motogp is ever increasing. Just like how they heavily invested on ground-effect when the bike lean (Aprilia tech video) I think this type of front suspension will open more possibilities for a cleaner aero while maintaining a somewhat acceptable both aero performance and mechanical grip of the bike.

[@rico_cavalierie]

In the auto/moto racing world the phrase "Evolution rather than revolution" comes to mind. Sad, because tiny evolutionary steps sometimes hold back great advances. The Norton Manx stayed competitive way longer than it really should have. Norton stuck with what worked and incrementally improved on it just enough to keep it relevant. Eventually the reliability, weight and power of the "Multis" were put in a strong package and we haven't looked back. Radial tyres would have to be the next far and few between revolutions in M/C racing. John Britten (may they have spanners in heaven) had a working suspension I think would had been further developed had this maverick been able to stay with us. Great clip Mr Lean, I appreciated it a lot.

[@pasischei6951]

I don't understand, why the front will not dive. Can anyone explaine? Beacuse you can also use stronger Springs to have the same effect.

[@glennmorgan4197]

2:43 It also modifies the levels of shock absorbing

[@Juliajules1010]

Hello 👋

[@Kirixthemech]

I ride an italjet dragster 2023, it's front swing arm certainly gets attention from other road users. At first it felt very different especially when breaking at 70mph. At low speed it felt like I had a flat tyre. Once I got used to how it works it's very fun to ride and cornering at speed is amazing. As its a light bike you can really flick it into corners. Perception is hard to change especially if it's different.

[@Docv400]

It broke at 70mph? Were you OK, was the Scooter wrecked? : )

[@critical]

Awesome to hear the history of this. Channel feels like it could be called "Rider61" lol ;)

[@dominiccaffey7214]

This would likely reduce the occurrence of low side crashes in turns where the rider downshifts while not letting off the throttle enough. With front end forks this often causes a tiny wheelie that causes loss of front tire traction as the rider is turning and when the front tire comes back down it's too far out of alignment in the turn and just comes out from under the bike. I'd love to see it be used in MotoGP, MotoAmerica & WorldSBK to see how it changes things but as many have pointed out manufacturers are very conservative on the racetrack.

[@Tzhz]

Straight to the point in 20 seconds, that's how you do youtube.

[@MikeonBikes]

If 2WD motorcycles become realized together with electric powertrains I think we will see "funny front ends" (Hossack, Hub center .. etc) becoming a thing. The old attempts at 2WD failed primarily because it was so complex to transfer power to the front wheel, and because forks behave really weird when you add driving as a function. With electric the challenge with transferring power is not the same, and hub center steering as well as Hossack (BMW re-branded it to their own name) front ends will be very suitable to function for steering, driving, braking and cornering.

[@ItsDaJax]

The only one I know of is the christini 2wd dirtbike. Now Honda did make an AWD moto gp bike; it had a hydrostatic front drive.

[@LifeatLean]

Interesting! Haven't looked much into 2WD bikes. Hope you're doing well Mike 😊

[@ItsDaJax]

Actually a correction; the Christini is AWD not 2WD. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any 2WD motorcycles aside from Rokons.

[@baconberries8097]

I want one, if for no other reason than it just looking really cool! Especially on a naked style bike, it's incredibly futuristic and actually provides some functionality.

[@grantlauzon5237]

How about forks for steering and a hub mount for suspension.

[@tonyw4863]

I toured on a Yamaha GTS1000. Lovely bike but it had three problems. It was too heavy, too expensive and the turning circle was awful. Other than that, it was absolutely great to ride. The one I rode was borrowed but I still wish I'd found enough spare cash to have bought one for myself.

[@graymattermedia5046]

You missed the NUDA. Suzuki's approach that also included a drive shaft to the front wheel (2wd). It had EFI, which was rare in '87 and still one of the best-looking prototypes ever built.

[@graymattermedia5046]

Footnote, racing itself can be measured in milliseconds. In the event of a crash, replacing a single has a heim joints and linkage that needs to be adjusted vs. forks & trees can be pre setup and swapped in minutes, this is the reason you don't see them on the track.

[@jedok1677]

Is it really that much better? More linkages and moment arm makes it sound like more risk for part failure. Rather than just having a set of shock absorbers directly mounted on the chasis and the front wheel with the ability to angle the travel of the forks.

[@Drunken_Hamster]

Look into Robert Horn's virtual hub center steering. Is basically a double lower ball joint front suspension from a car turned sideways. Pretty slick and MUCH less mechanically complicated to design and implement than actual hub center steering. You can't do a fancy single sided swingarm with it, but TBH, who needs to when making a new evolution of motorcycle front suspension has to be about function first?

[@robm.4512]

Yup, and then go back a little further and have a look at the Norman Hossack designs.

[@Drunken_Hamster]

@@robm.4512 Yeah, but those still have the leverage problem of forks. Rob Horn's doesn't.

[@robm.4512]

@@Drunken_Hamster Sorry ol’buck, what’s “the leverage problem of forks” ?? I’m only a simple engineer so you’ll have to put it in language that I can understand. In what plane is the “leverage” and what point or points does it rotate about? Every motorcycle front end, of any and all designs, is subject to a variety of forces and they are common to all types. If you could narrow it down a bit I might be able to make a sensible comment.

[@Drunken_Hamster]

@@robm.4512 Laterally about the pitch axis. Hossack suspension is just a solid fork attached via double wishbones, so you go from having a 30-inch lever arm to a 20-inch lever arm. Big whoop, it'll still be susceptible to strong bending forces as you apply heavy brakes. This necessitates a reinforced (read, heavier) construction instead of just using geometry to your advantage and placing the wishbone arms directly in line with the forces they'll be taking, AKA how Robert Horn's design does it.

[@robm.4512]

@@Drunken_Hamster Thanks, I understand where you’re coming from now. In practice the Hossack upright (“fork”) derived a very acceptable level of rigidity through form stiffness and was ridiculously light. If I remember correctly the fabricated aluminium unit that I worked with was around 1.5mm wall section. One thing that’s worth bearing in mind is that outright lateral or torsional stiffness is rarely your friend when it comes to motorcycle chassis characteristics. Too stiff tends to create a thoroughly unpleasant and unnatural “wooden” feel and a tendency to overload the tyre sidewall at times, producing sometimes quite inconsistent vicious characteristics of grip loss and recovery, plus an element of increased inconsistency of torque-steer as the contact patch varies rapidly in width. A more laterally compliant assembly provides a damping element to those effects, certainly as far as the rider’s perception is concerned. I can’t say that I’ve ridden the Horne variant on the theme but I have ridden (and worked on) many of the non-telescopic front ends that were around in the eighties and nineties, including the ASP, Tesi, Hossack, Foale, Yamaha et al. I also had the absolute pleasure of spending time discussing them with John Britten at Daytona and the team at the IOM. I will say that the one constantly recurring theme that cropped up was the relationship between torsional rigidity about the headstock/front suspension assembly and tyre sidewall compliance, along with the difficulty of marrying the two. Everyone involved had initially gone for the ultimate practical torsional rigidity but eventually arrived at the same conclusion, that it was not in fact especially desirable beyond a certain level. The same is true of both main frame and rear fork assemblies and all of them have a dramatic effect on required tyre sidewall characteristics. Again, I’m by no means anti-development or disinterested in the field, nor do I believe that I’ve reached the stage of ingrained dogmatism that I’ve known others to fall in to over the years. It’s important to keep an open mind as an engineer but I have to say, both as an ex-rider and now retired engineer, that though many of the novel suspension and steering systems that I investigated had areas in which they excelled, they all had their shortfalls in one or another area. Quite early on in my career I stumbled upon a pearl of wisdom that I came to realise was a best-kept secret amongst the most successful race engineers, I took it on board and practiced it to extremely good effect. It was that, for the rider, no matter how much power is available and how much grip at his disposal, if he does not feel comfortable and safe to use them he simply won’t because unless he’s got no sense of self-preservation (in which case you definitely don’t want him near you or your race-bike) his hind brain will not let him. Given that realisation it became clear to me that the race engineers real art is to pull a confidence trick upon the rider by presenting him with a machine that makes him feel safe to open the throttle a little more, a little sooner. To brake a little harder, a little later. To turn in a little faster and to carry a shade more speed mid-corner…. And to continue to feel safe to repeat all of those actions. For me the highest possible accolade was for a rider to get off a bike in pitlane and say that it felt slower when he’d actually just set a better laptime. The joke that was sometimes thrown at me was that by the end of the season we’d developed a bike that anyone’s granny could ride to the shops, which was exactly what I wanted to achieve. Nowadays I tend to be more pragmatic in accepting that by its very nature a conventionally tele-forked motorcycle is a very tightly packaged collection of unpleasantly difficult to measure and define compromises that, if married together with an equally healthy dose of intuition and knowledge can perform remarkably well. I have yet to experience an alternative that genuinely moves the goalposts. Though now I’m in my 60’s and out of the game for good I still live in hope that someone will put enough R&D resource into defining a combination of the myriad of parameters that will produce a near perfect machine, which would then allow the purist engineers a framework within which to base their designs. However, because by necessity of its own very nature the best of motorcycles is such an imperfect beast, I suspect that it may not happen soon. Cheers, R.

[@lizziebutdiff698]

This opens up more creativity in designing bikes for the sportbike market its not as efficient as forks but it goes well with modern angular designs of bikes today.

[@JW_Haze]

Yeah, the geometry of modern race bikes has mitigated most of the dive issues. You’ll notice that the wheelbase lengthen slightly under breaking due to the shock geometry.

[@MattH-wg7ou]

That front steering lever and pushrod design could be used for adjustable gain steering, like analog flight control system computers. 🤔 I never knew this was a thing. Neat.

[@MoonBernie]

I used to drive Yamaha gts 1000 for a few weeks while my own motorcycle was in repair. I know its wasnt a racebike but took it to the track anyway. And to be honest it wasnt the fun I expected. I was used to drive race motorcycles. And those days I drive Ducati 888. What was a pure racehorse for track. On the road the GTS was comfortable but felt heavy in curvy country roads. And I wasnt too happy about the braking too. And a few times on accelerating out of corners sudden understeer, what gave me no confidence in the bike.

[@pauliewalnuts240]

Rather then using what is essentially trailing arms front and rear, Why dont we use forks front and rear? I dont know the answer to this...but its interesting to think about.

[@muhammadgalihsutrisno6745]

why you put sc project sticker in thumbnail when that motorcycle doesn't have exhaust??

[@albinoviper2876]

so what are those things holding the front wheel? oh they are forks just laid down horizontally

[@Xavier1...]

Wow really good video you got yourself a new sub. I never new about those types of motorcycle are there anything else ? Like another type of "forks" ?

[@Juliajules1010]

Hello 😌😌😌

[@andykerr3803]

Thanks, well explained with the commercial and practical issues added. Of course you have scooters using that system for a long time now... Everyone seems happy... The Peugot Speedfight II comes to mind. Ill check your next vid 👍 PS Don't forget the sidecar conversions also... Standard forks fall short with the demands.

[@lezc3733]

Ask Rand Mamola, he was a test rider for the Bimota and reported that the feedback was seriously lacking.

[@dukewilliam1st]

The lack of bicycles using the tech is probably why it will never take off. Every motorcycle experience takes its roots there and I do not want to relearn the feeling of breaking without a fork at more than 25 km per hour.

[@TheBadMadMan786]

Does the BMW K1300R use this design or is it a different design?

[@paultruesdale7680]

It uses the Hossack design Norman Hugh Hossack is a Scottish inventor and engineer, who invented the Hossack motorcycle front suspension system, used on some BMW Motorrad K series motorcycles

[@zounds13]

Just FYI, Elf 3 and the Yamaha GTS are not hub-center. The steering kingpin isn't inside the hub.

[@paultruesdale7680]

Agreed, they are an alternative to tele forks.

[@Scoots1994]

The BMW Telelever front suspension was regularly praised but never made much impact in racing either. I think MotoCzyz had some new front fork designs that resolved stiction issues, but again, running out of money is an issue. As far as racing trying new things ... in motocross it took years before they went from steel to aluminum frames saying things like "they can't be tuned" and "they feel numb" ... which sounds REALLY familiar ... but now they are much faster and ubiquitous. Carbon fiber frames, wheels, and suspension parts had the same issues with being accepted.

[@yaksauce]

Would like to see a comparison of hub/centered steering to BMW’s telelever/duolever.

[@garrycoates2147]

Hi LatL, great video but I think you are missing a major point. Development in the 1970s started with different bike front ends to allow them to run WIDER tyres. One of the key benefits to the original endurance elf bikes was that test riders reported no limit to front end grip. Motorcycle front tyre width has stagnated for atleast 30 years because it remains at 120mm. Wider fronts with telescopic forks make them hard to turn. In the 1980s, Gallina Suzuki even tried different mechanical gearing in the headstem to improve turning leverage . The biggest potential improvments with hub-centre are: 1. Wider front with better grip 2. Faster turning as rake and trail can be very aggressive 3. 2WD Remember the speed out of a turn is far more important than the speed into a turn because of the time on the straights. The first manufacturer to achieve these benefits would probably destroy motogp as the bikes would be too fast for track saftey. Having ridden a hub centre bike on the road they certainly have benefits for heavier bikes.

[@chrisbel6780]

But what about the weight? the total weight of wheel/hub and arm (especially the wheel) is much more than a conventional fork system..

[@GroovyVideo2]

rode a DKW in 1970s that had Leading Link suspension - worked better than forks did at that time

[@juicy9592]

But did you race that bike.

[@GroovyVideo2]

@@juicy9592 yes I did

[@FGGiskard]

The telelever system by bmw does similar and is why gs models have been so praised

[@YTRopp]

I still wonder why the BMW *lever solutions are not use more. It solves the diving issue, the geometry issue, as well as the less shock absorbing issue. While keeping (some) feedback. And is a relative simple and lightweigt solution

[@bikeaddictbp]

Packaging. It fits nicely with BMW's flat-twin mostly-aircooled longitudinal-crankshaft drivetrain layout. The place that it puts high loads into the chassis - the "front swingarm pivot" - is pretty close to where the top of the engine wants to be, but it's above the engine and doesn't interfere, so it fits well. Other powertrain layouts have other stuff in that space - cylinder heads, radiators, exhaust systems, etc. Not saying it "couldn't" be done but it would force a pretty major re-think to do it with anything other than the BMW flat-twin layout. BMW themselves don't use Telelever on the F-series (parallel twin) or S-series (inline four) bikes. The S1000RR is used in roadracing, and BMW has experience with Telelever and basically owns the design, and opted not to use it in that application.

[@YTRopp]

@@bikeaddictbp Thanks. Never thought of the 'Packaging'. Indeed with a BMW boxer it fits nicely. The main drawback of the front suspension is the lesser feedback, which is not suitable for racers.

[@sha_663]

Why not both? Fork steering with basic moveable pistons and center based dampening

[@Showmetheevidence-]

I’d love to know what this kind of setup would feel like as a rider

[@terencebinks2574]

Didn't a company called Buelle run hub centre steering in the 1990's. This was the work of a New Zealand enginner who sadly died of cancer quite young. I seem to recall that he achieved reasonable success in world superbikes?

[@paultruesdale7680]

No on the first question. John Britton did produce his bike and it had mixed success.

[@mrdjangofreeman5560]

Thx, good job, quite a very interesting summary. Pls let me share some of my quick side notes: 1.) BMW are applying for such a front suspension design, for decades in massive production. Worth to mention it. 2.) Conventional front design have drawbacks, but advantage as well: the reduced wheel base -while fast and short radius cornering (down force)- improves a lot the manover, meanwhile the same design makes the bike loosing some of its stability (due to a shooter WB) in big radius high speed cornering. 3.) Front shock absorber with hug design: allows to apply for high pressure gas monotubes, like Bilstein or Penske technologies, which might be another advantage for these hug design geometry, car-like actually. So, it is not so Black and White nor easy to state which ine is technically better, without even considering the cost aspects.

[@patx35]

2:55 Is incorrect, as hub center steering has less Unsprung weight. Unsprung weight, which is everything under the spring such as the wheels and shocks, is detrimental to grip and predictability, as it forces the suspension to work harder with no benefits. Sprung weight, which is everything above the spring plus rider weight, isn't as bad as it can be simply corrected with different spring rates and damping rates.

[@ianjones5871]

You failed to mention the Mead and Tomkinsons Nessie

[@Tokopilbiru]

2:54 how is that big ahh swing arm raducing weight???

[@LaurenceGough]

On mountain bikes this is the future IMO! My next mountain bike will have this, and I wouldn't be against buying a motorbike like this too! Much smoother front suspension action.

[@brandonlouisb]

So my steering is controlled by some linkage just like my shift linkage that keeps breaking or coming loose😅yea I think I’m good

[@mikeabraham4224]

How does it affect wheel wobble?