GUESS WHAT IT WAS, B3 guessed it:First MuddyFox INTERACTIVE!

[Santercruz]

Well he's newbie taking the P**s, no need for that crap in these places.

Have a laugh yep.. rip no.

I like the bike, just thought it's something different to throw in..

Take it easy..

 

[GrahamJohnWallace]

from Wikipedia:

The 1948 2CV featured:

four wheel independent suspension that was inter-connected front to rear on the same side,

The inter-connection transmitted some of the force deflecting a front wheel up over a bump, to push the rear wheel down on the same side. When the rear wheel met that bump a moment later, it did the same in reverse, keeping the car level front to rear. This made the suspension more responsive, enabling the 2CV to indeed be driven at speed over a ploughed field

:!: Muddy Fox Interactive...
...has two wheel non-independent suspension that is inter-connected front to rear with both wheels sharing the same spring....
...The interconnection transmits all of the force deflecting a front wheel up over a bump, to push the rear wheel up at the same time. When the rear wheel meets that bump, it does the same in reverse, making the bike behave like an unsprung bike but less harsh. This made the suspension less responsive to braking and pedelling forces, enabling the Muddy Fox Interactive to be more efficient than other suspension bikes of its day. :!:

I have never ridden an 'Interactive' but have some magazine articles (New Cyclist) on the Dave Smart roadbikes that preceded it. It's a very 'latteral', 'outside of the box' way of making an energy efficient suspension bike. Most other designs use stiff springs, lockouts or simply pretend that suspension bikes don't have efficiency issues.

In theory it should work especially if you pre-load the spring. Though it should squat slightly under heavy braking. The downside is that its suspension is not independent.

people who have ridden an Interactive, please let me know if I'am talking rubbish about its charactaristics.

The 1955 Citroen DS used hydrallics for its interconnection: Semi-independent, adjustable, and lightweight. Now there's an idea for a project. :twisted:

 

[Santercruz]

Yup pretty much nailed it.

Strange feeling but suprisingly comfortable... the way the bike acts under heavy breaking is the best.. Soooooo stable!
Nothing you will ever experiance riding any other bike out there!!!

Mines up for sale now.....

http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/viewto ... nteractive

Take it easy

 

[GrahamJohnWallace]

I've had a Citroen 2CV and a Mehari (the plastic jeep style version of the 2CV). The weirdest effect of the front and back linked suspension is that if you brake really hard (and assuming the tires hang on) is that the back of the car dives and not the front.

The 2cv suspension is in fact the opposite, in terms of interconection, when compared to the Interactive.

2cv: front goes up - rear goes down.

Interactive: front goes up - rear also goes up. (more like the action of an anti-roll bar on a car).

The anti dive braking on the 2cv is not the result of the interconnection. The front-down, rear-up interconnection should exagerate any tendency to dive.

The 2cv anti-dive system is a brilliant piece of engineering/physics. In fact there is no anti-dive mechanism at all, just a geometrical relationship between the leading-link and trailing-link suspension arms and the cars low centre of gravity. when well set up, the lift and dive forces exactly cancel each other out. To achieve this Citroen had to invent an inboard braking system to stop the braking forces from messing things up.

:cry: This system wouldn't work on a bike as the centre of gravity of a bike is way too high. Shame! :cry: