Dave Weagle awarded Split Pivot patent

By Matt Pacocha, US Editor | Wednesday, Jul 28, 2010 11.27am

Dave Weagle has won the most recent battle in the war to get his Split Pivot suspension design to market. He now owns a suspension patent that covers pivots concentric to a rear wheel’s axle, among other attributes. But will it cause conflict with Trek, who offer a similar design with their ABP (Active Braking Pivot) system?

Weagle applied for the patent in 2006 and has licensed it to six others: Seven Cycles, Spooky, Devinci and three who’ve yet to be named. The licensees now have the use of a unique design with documented benefits, and it's protected by US patent. They are currently working on producing over a dozen different Split Pivot equipped suspension bikes that will be available in 2011.

“I think it’s a lot of relief for the people I’m working with,” Dave Weagle, the engineering entrepreneur responsible for the Split Pivot design, told BikeRadar. “A lot of these guys, these companies, are bringing out full bike lines, like, right now. Obviously we’ve been working on this for a long, long time, since ’06 or so when we first applied for the patent, so it’s awesome. It’s the start of a new chapter for all of those companies; it’s great.”

Trek remains the one rogue territory in Split Pivot’s war, as the company offers a similar, un-licensed, concentric pivot design. Trek representatives told us that the company has no plans to stop production or the future development of its design.

“We’re stoked that he’s [Weagle] helping progress mountain bikes and putting better performing bikes out in the market,” said Michael Browne, Trek’s global mountain bike brand manager. “We’ve been producing ABP since 2007 and we’re just going to continue refine and update our design. This year we unveiled ABP Convert.

"There’s nothing out there that says Trek needs to stop or needs to license or any thing like that, so as we see it, we’re going to continue doing what we’re doing.”

When asked if he saw any sort of design or patent conflict between ABP and Split Pivot, Browne said:

“We see them as different systems.”

Trek also claims to have filed a number of patents for ABP, all of which are still under review.

Same same but different?

Looking at the two sides, if there is a conflict, it’s shaping up to be a ‘Dave’ versus goliath type battle, but the Massachusetts based designer hopes it will never come to that. He holds expectations that all of his peers within the industry will respect his, now protected, IP.

When asked about Trek’s design, Weagle declined to comment specifically. He did, however, speak broadly.

“Any patent is deemed by the patent office as defendable,” said Weagle. “This patent has been under a pretty serious microscope, to a level that I’ve never seen before, and I will say that there’s absolutely no problem from a willingness or financial standpoint to defend this patent.

"My hope is that companies will respect it and not force that.

“It goes back to the people in the company,” he continued. “If they’re the kind of people who can put themselves in the shoes of someone who has worked really hard to develop something and spent the time to protect it, then they’ll hopefully do the right thing. Then there’s no problem and everybody’s happy, but there’s two kinds of people in the world.”

A cad rendering of the split pivot:

A CAD rendering of the Split Pivot design

A cad drawing of trek's apb design: a cad drawing of trek's apb design

A CAD rendering of Trek's APB design

Testing times

For the immediate future, however, Weagle is too busy to worry about what other companies are doing.

He is in the final stages of development with most of his licensee. The bike designs are done and now they’re dialing in the tunes of the shocks that will be used in production.

The New Englander has been so busy that he only just put out the press-release announcing the Split Pivot patent, which was officially awarded in the U.S. on 18 May; his European and Asian patents are still under review.

BikeRadar caught Weagle on his mobile phone in between downhill runs during a day of testing at Highland Mountain Bike Park in Northfield, New Hampshire.

“There are like a million things going on,” he said. “I knew I needed to get the press-release out there, but I’ve been more focused on riding prototypes and testing, it’s just been a lot of work.”

He just finished up work on two new downhill bikes that will be available in 2011. One model was Devinci’s 2011 Wilson downhill bike, which uses the Split Pivot design. The other was the much-hyped Pivot Phoenix, a DW-Link bike, which is now done and ready for production according to Weagle.

“This morning I finished two weeks of testing on the Pivot Phoenix with the 2011 [Fox] RC4,” he said. “So this afternoon I get to ride the new DW DHR [from Turner], the only one in the world right now, so I’m pretty psyched about that. The DHR has been in process for so long that it’s pretty exciting to have it, the final one that people are going to be able to buy, it’s a great feeling.”

A closer look at wilson's concentric rear pivot:

Devinci's 2011 Wilson downhill bike will sport the Split Pivot design

What is Split Pivot?

Split Pivot is Weagle’s answer to a call for a suspension system that is simpler to design and produce that his acclaimed DW-Link design, but still offers comparable performance. At the heart of the design and what could cause conflict with Trek is the use of a rear pivot that rotates around the wheel’s axle concentrically.

The design serves to isolate braking force and allow Weagle more leeway in choosing a main pivot location that would have previously detrimentally affected the bike’s braking performance.

“I can choose a single pivot location that would be horrible for braking but it’s great for acceleration and I don’t have to worry about the braking because I can control it with the linkage,” he said. “It’s like the best parts of a single pivot and the best parts of a multi-pivot kind of melded together.”

The appeal of the design to manufacturers and consumers is that the design is less reliant on tight tolerances and machining spec, which in the end means a mechanically robust high-performance system that costs less.

Another, yet to be released, split pivot rear end:

Related links

Another, yet to be released, Split Pivot rear end

Split Pivot also offers flexibility with all of the industry’s current rear thru-axle standards, including standard quick releases and in many cases it proves stiffer than other faux bar single pivot suspension designs.

In the end, Weagle is clear in stating the design goal of Split Pivot — to build a good bike.

“These [Split Pivot] bikes ride phenomenally well, really, really great,” he said. “I would put them up next to anything else, side-by-side, and if the rider is smiling at the end of the day then hey — that’s all that matters.”

You can follow BikeRadar on Twitter at twitter.com/bikeradar and on Facebook at facebook.com/BikeRadar.

User Comments

There are 18 comments on this post

Showing 1 - 18 of 18 comments

  • Well, Trek doesn't show any kind of respect for DW and his patent. I seriously doubt they will stop producing ABP and even if DW sues them, they'll go appeal after appeal until they design something else. It's a lost battle already.

    On the bright dise though, I'm very happy that many bike will feature the rear wheel concentric pivot. It's promising for the consumer.

  • Yep - although you can bet if Trek had won the case they'd have made a concerted effort to ensure no-one else was using it!

  • Trek announced ABP on August 16th, 2007, which was the very same day they filed the patent. Dave Weagle applied for his patent on 25th August, 2006. Hope this clears things up. All info was from the US Patent Office.

  • Rubbish ... and? yes, now I understand, they do what all the people to buy their crap. It will take a whole day to change the wheels ... hahaha

  • Why would it take a day to change the wheel, it's a normal 142x12...

  • Would the rear triangle not come apart when you take the wheel out?

  • No, the rear triangle does not come apart when you take the wheel out. It takes a few seconds longer than a standard 9mm QR. Try it at your LBS.

    No, I don't work for Trek.

  • What the guy from Trek is actually saying is that they are too big to give a **** about someone else's patents.

  • It looks like it BUT on the TREK system, the mech hanger and the piece on the other side are threaded, these then screw into the red "nuts" situated outside the bearings. The only piece that comes out is the axle.

    On the DW-Split Pivot, the non-drive side is similar to trek, although the "nut" is integrated into the end of the chainstay. The drive side looks to be held together via a nut, but the drawing isn't as clear.

    They are similar, infact almost the same ... the only difference I can spot in the pivot is that the TREK system has the chainstay on the inside, the seatstay on the out, an the DW system is the opposite.

    Also, if TREK started selling bikes with this system in 2007, when did they start development of that?

    One last difference spotted ... TREK use a "full-floater" system, with one end of the shock attached to extended chainstays beyond the pivot, the other to a rocker driven by the seatstays. DW split pivot (as you can see on the davinci wilson) has the chainstays "floating" from the bike with a link which is also connected to the shock. The other end of the shock is attached to the main frame, with the seatstays pivoting at the rear axle and on the seat tube. ACtually very different systems, but both use a concentric axle pivot.

  • Trek are allowed to use their ABP without infringment of Dave Weagle's patent because they had begun R&D three years previous. This means they hadn't stolen any ideas and can prove it.

    The patent office won't penalise a company for being pipped at the post to the actual patent because it's unfair.

  • Vegeeta has i right. If you can show you had independenly been wokring on he design prior to the patent being applied for yo ucan use it but can't license i to anyone else.

    If you spent years developing something and someone else had the same idea but bea you on the filing you wouldn't be prepared to dump it all either.

    I think the fact Trek had products on sale for years before he patent is granted then that must go in their favour. They haven't stolen anyones work or ideas here so why should they be penalised?

    It's easy to pick on the big guys and assume they must be evil and corporate but this simply isn't the case.

    Oh, and as for assuming Trek would enforce anything they own a patent on then think again, they own the patent on tapered headtubes as it was a klein one they got when they bought klein. They were happy for companies to use it as it pushed forward design and improved the availabilityof tapered forks by being more widely used.

  • DRCV is my favourite Trek design..... mmmmmmmmm!

  • kudos to bikeradar for calling and asking a few questions instead of just reprinting press releases.

  • +1 jizzlemynizzle

  • lazyarsehorse : The patent is for the rear wheel concentric pivot as far as I understand it so the other Trek techs are not affected by/related to this patent

  • Well - it looks like all the big copmanies basicly do what they want !

    First,Giant stole DW and called it Maestro and now Trek did the same !

    Go DW - take them to court and than let's see if they will do it again !

  • I'm a hardtail kind of guy but when I tested a load of bikes at demo days, it was the Trek with this concentric setup that won me over. An amazing ride. So we'll see a load of this design out there.

    non-US patents aren't granted so European manufacturers not interested in the US can just go ahead - as Lapierre do with the Host Link.

    al.

  • hi guys, i urgently look for Dave Weagle,

    if anyone knows him or familiar let me know his contacts, please. Badly interested in using DW links for my DH-FR bikes i am going to produce. Please, mail: uran.ekov@yahoo.com

Post a Comment:

You need to login or register to post comments.