i dont see how comventional anti-wrap bars have the problems he thinks they do. how do they limit flex? how do they bind? and they can be mounted pretty close to the center. IMO the conventional one is perfectly fine. he is comparing his to an antiwrap bar that does not use a shackle on the frame end. which is a terrible idea to use. most that i have seem use a shackle on the frame side and heims or flex joints to compensate for all of the twisting and suspension travel without allowing axle wrap
his design seems like it would bind through the motion of the axle since the wheelbase changes with droop and compression. rotating the pumpkin, which his allows and forces it to do under compression and droop, as he shows in his third diagram, will sort of defeat the purpose wont it? im sure its minimal but it seems like more of a problem than what he states as problems with the more conventional method only present in ones without a shackle.
build a conventional one with a shackle at the frame side and be done.
someone correct me if im wrong.
