This is where I’m tempted to buy the 2T ‘rocker plates’. The 2T has side to side down, so front to back would be the only motion that they don’t do without a significant amount of effort and risk (joking). The problem is, it’s not ‘a lot of motion’. The amount of side-to-side sway on the 2T is good, but how does that compare to the front-to-back of their plate(s).
Their Neo Smart could sure use some movement in SOME direction, but that’s a different tangent.
That’s really awesome! Thanks!!
I have not use the Neo Motion Plates, but from reading & watching reviews (specifically Ray’s recent Neo 3m vs Kickr Move video) the Motion Plates are a smaller option for travel. Not to say it’s bad, because most people I’ve seen try them end up liking them. Just a shorter travel option compared the the Move and other rockers with that motion.
If you can stomach their high price or snag them on sale, I see them as a worthy upgrade, especially if you are happy with the flex in the Neo frame.
It seems like it gives a little of everything for owners. I also haven’t seen them on sale yet. I tink even on ebay, they are the same price. 
Yeah, for that price I’d be more tempted by some actual rockers instead. One I have to test and find super interesting is the TrainerTweaks rocker. It is a DIY style but features fore-aft along with lean action for less than the Neo Motion Plates.
$234 from a local Montana builder that seems to have cracked the fore-aft code for the lowest price I have seen.
I understand the point of lateral movement, but why fore-aft? That motion doesn’t occur when riding outside if I am thinking about this correctly
I have not taken the time to demonstrate my hypothesis, but I believe there is some subtle fore-aft motion in regular riding. Most present in lower inertia situations like climbing, but I can also be present on flats in specific cases like standing and sitting. In short, our body is the largest mass of the whole system, with that staying most “stable” in holding speed / inertia / momentum. As such, there are situations where our non-continuous power production can lead to slight surges and slides.
Regardless of that black box, the presence of fore-aft motion on trainers is an additional “Degree of Freedom” that aids the improvement in seated saddle comfort. I feel that minor motion adds to the lean action to make seated comfort just that much better.
There are some other considerations that I think apply in rarer use cases like standing and sprinting, but those are often disputed while the seated improvement is nearly universal.
I’ve seen people’s bikes shoot backwards when standing up to sprint. Probably not what people are thinking of for front/back motion?
Yeah, that is one instance I hinted at above. Relates to the body mass I mentioned relative to the lower bike weight. That “rearward” slide can be improved and even worked on inside by paying attention to the fore-aft motion as you stand. That mass delta is also why a “bike toss” where the rider shoves the bike forward by extending their arms and legs works to get a bike across the line sooner.
Neither of those are all that important to most people, so the slight motion seated is still the big win.
That’s where so much of the ‘motion’ has been odd to me. Maybe the Wahoo Move gets it better. Standing to sprint is going to push the bike backwards under the rider, it’s not going to cause the bike angle to change. I think the Saris gets that motion down better, and using springs to return to center/neutral is great, depending on how sharp that force is. Standing up, the body shifts forward, the bike going back, and eventually the body shifts back to hit the seat. If the ‘return’ shoots the bike forward, that would seem to make it awkward, and potentially injurious.
It seems to me that in some ways pulling off ‘realistic motion’ on a static bike trainer is not unlike the early astronomers trying to explain the motion of the planets and stars. 
So many of their ideas for the motion were so outlandish and Rube Goldberg… But that said, the TrainerTweaks kit looks pretty interesting. (1’s left so trying to restrain my urge to splurge is getting difficult)
(And below that is a handmade bullet proof vest! But I’ve never been on Etsy before)
Saris uses gravity as the centering force, effectively “controlled” but the use of a curved track (think upward “smiley” mouth) which was also adopted by Tacx first with the Motion Plates and then Wahoo in the Move. The exact shape of the curve (single radius vs compound curve) along with the height delta from center to peak manipulates the centering return force along with surge travel distance.
The original fore-aft system was the Inside Ride E-motion rollers and they had a patent on that IIRC. They use flat motion with centering via “rubber bands”. It was licensed at one point with an Elite roller too. Then Elite made their Quick Motion rollers, presumably licensed by Inside Ride but I have no idea.
Seems that patent might not have applied to a separate rocker plate as to a reason Saris was able to get their patent. Considering the early hints I heard about Saris going after some rocker makers, I am guessing their change of hands and current financial issues are restraining them from going after Tacx and Wahoo? That or there are some other considerations at play that I don’t know.
Again, all of these motions don’t have to be an exact match to outside riding to be beneficial to a rider inside. Remember the baseline here is a totally rigid bike & trainer setup that is nothing like riding outside. So even minor or “wrong” movements added prove useful in nearly all cases I have seen.
True… You are so right. The Neo Smart is a great trainer, but it is so rigid. The Kickr Bike was so much more flexible that I do kind of miss it and the Climb feature, although the first few times I had it enabled, I started to feel seasick. 
on seasickness.
I played with a Climb on rockers for a bit. Coming from my sim auto racing background (and desire for motion systems as a proxy for G-force) it made some sense. There is a bit of fun from it but I don’t consider it essential compared to lean & f-a motion. Particularly true for me since I spend most of my time on the trainer in TR workouts where the pitch control is not well implemented.
If I did more Zwift riding via terrain, I could see it being more useful. But I have not used my Climb in 3+ years and don’t miss it. Stepping onto a fixed trainer at our shop for Zwift demos feels SO ODD since I have been on rockers from late 2015. Fixed is just wrong 
Yeah, the MP1 doesn’t use springs. I saw a plate that did, can’t remember which one, but not important now. Knowing that some are using rubber balloons is encouraging. People are thinking outside the box.
I did tolerate the Climb seasickness rather quickly, but it was interesting at the beginning. I apparently started on one of the hilliest routes on Zwift. Up/down/uuuup/dowwwwn/etc… Some routes were like riding an electric bull at times, being ‘bucked off’ would be interesting.
I have used a kom rocker plate with fore aft movement. It has made the greatest change for me in indoor comfort. There is more fore aft movement going on then I think we notice riding outside. It is obvious just getting on the bike and starting there is that movement going on as well as the side to side.
I’m thinking that fore/aft movement could be more important than side to side. I suspect that a little bit in each direction is probably all one needs for comfort.
I was watching the DC Rainmaker video and it’s interested how much tiny fore/aft movement there is when just steady state riding.
I totally agree. Per my saddle pressure mapping testing, I believe it takes just minor lean action to make a big difference on comfort.
I never got a chance to do the same test with fore-aft before our mapper died, but i suspect it may offer similar gains from what appears to be minor motion.
All of that is of course focused on seated position which makes up the large majority of time inside-ride-kickr-e-flex-trainer-motion-system on trainers.
Standing is interesting to me personally and a point of interest, but it is secondary to most riders from what I’ve seen.
Your observation that even small motions (lean or fore-aft) are benefits despite the apparent small amount totally jivea with my experience on many designs of different level. A little bit goes a long ways IMO.
Not sure if joking… but that is a current “trend” seen all over on FB, especially in the Zwift Riders group. It’s a resurgence that also happened years ago, so everything old is new again.
This latest GCN vid showed up in my rocker group (2x yesterday). It’s the Hack I have told tons of people to try over the last 5+ years. Dead simple and a quick way to figure out if motion may be an improvement for people. It’s well short of some of the other advantages of a real rocker, but it can make a big change over pure rigid in mere minutes of work and super low cost to try.
I use these, wouldn’t trust the stability for full gas sprints but I don’t do these on the trainer anyway. For everything else they work really well, the bike moves in response to pedal strokes in a much more ‘real-world’ way
Bit of trial and error when setting up to get the bike / trainer level but once that’s sorted they’re a big improvement over a rigid trainer imo and for just a few quid from Amazon. Been using them for several months now
