Author |
Message |
Reepicheep
| Posted on Monday, February 10, 2014 - 08:08 am: |
|
2. 20110291382 (Note: This is a Patent Application only.), December 1, 2011, REAR SUSPENSION FOR A TWO-WHEEL VEHICLE, Plantet, Pierre-Geoffroy, Audrieu, French Republic(FR), French Republic(); 123224, August 3, 2011, ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST (SEE DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS)., CYCLES LAPIERRE, RUE EDMOND VOISENET, DIJON, FRANCE( ), 21000, reel-frame:026697/0495, PLANTET PIERRE-GEOFFROY, French Republic(FR) ... July 25, 1995, BUELL ERIK F [US], ... |
Slaughter
| Posted on Monday, February 10, 2014 - 08:11 am: |
|
Is there a link? |
Reepicheep
| Posted on Monday, February 10, 2014 - 11:50 am: |
|
Looks like this one (the orginal alert I got was just triggered by a change in status for the patent, it is behind a paywall application.) http://www.google.com/patents/US20110291382 |
Natexlh1000
| Posted on Monday, February 10, 2014 - 12:12 pm: |
|
So a french guy invented it too? Improved upon it? I don't understand. |
S21125r
| Posted on Monday, February 10, 2014 - 12:51 pm: |
|
It looks like the patent is to prevent squatting of the rear when applying torque to the crank set. Based on the first drawing it looks like any squat (or extension) of the rear would pull linkage 22 backward which in turn pivots the crank set forward around pivot 20. That movement would be mitigated by the torque applied to the crank set. Cool idea. Seems though that a portion (although probably small) of the crank set is now part of the unsprung mass as up down motion of the suspension is now fore/aft movement of the crank set. |
Reepicheep
| Posted on Monday, February 10, 2014 - 01:15 pm: |
|
Ahh! I see now. It triggered my alert (yes, I am an EBR stalker) because it cited a Buell patent. http://www.google.com/patents/US5435584 |
|