I'll bet it will handle like an expensive, fast, pogo stick. With the shocks at this angle they have decreasing mechanical advantage (becoming easier to compress) and you never get the dampening or spring right - either being to stiff initially (compliance over small bumps) or too soft for the big hits.
Sorry MX, but I think you have that arse about.
Inclined [laid down] shocks have a rising rate, not falling as you say.
When a shock is at 90° to the swingarm [assuming that the shock is in line with the axle] then 1mm of axle movement results in 1mm of shock travel.
When the shocks are inclined at a 45° angle 1mm of axle movement results in 0.5mm of shock travel
[that ratio is from memory, and I can't be bothered to get the calc to check it, so sorry if it is not absolutely correct].
So on a bike with laid down shocks the biggest difference in mechanical advantage is achieved if the shock ends up at 90° to the swingarm at the end of the shocks travel. Eyeballing this one, that wouldn't happen so the ratio would be less, but it is definitely still a rising rate.
It could as you say be a 'Pogo Stick' but that would be more likely from having to run a much heavier spring rate to compensate for the increase mechanical advantage due to the extreme shock angle - vs. the primitive damping provided by the shocks. It would be more likely to top-out due to the springs overpowering the rebound damping.
