What's that all about? Does the confusion come from trousers? WTF do people call it forks?
Bike Forum
[closed]
Why call it forks?
-
Posted 1 year ago #
-
Can I get some handles for forks?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Fork handles?
Which reminds me!! WTF is handlebars?
Posted 1 year ago # -
as for "gears"
:niche:
Posted 1 year ago # -
only got 3 candles I'm afraid
maybe because a fork has 2 "legs"?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Like underpants
Posted 1 year ago # -
me too !
Posted 1 year ago # -
The one I always find a bit weird is when people say "front forks"... what, as opposed to your rear forks?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Well what most folks call a rear swinging arm is actually a fork as it has two sides. A swinging arm is one sided if you want to be pedantic
Posted 1 year ago # -
what, as opposed to your rear forks?
yes
Posted 1 year ago # -
So could you make a lefty-like rear swingarm?
Posted 1 year ago # -
The rear of a bike has always been the chain/seat stays as far as I was concerned.
Posted 1 year ago # -
So could you make a lefty-like rear swingarm?
No reason why not, hell of a lot of modern motorcycles are made like that.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Rear forks:
Not sure there'd be any point in a lefty swingarm..?
Oh wait - you'd have to have the chain and the disc on the same side...
Posted 1 year ago # -
How do motorcycle manufacturers get round that problem then?
Posted 1 year ago # -
muddy - the usual way mwith chain drive is to have a stub axle in teh swingarm and a deeply dished wheel -
Posted 1 year ago # -
Single-sided swingarms FTW. So much easier to adjust the chain & get at the rear calipers. Plus they look the chihuahua's cojones.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Heavier tho - needs to be to get the torsional rigidity
Posted 1 year ago # -
Even I (Mr Pedantic) am starting to accept that there is no longer any distinction between singular and plural. Even the BBC News pronounces "There's two teams in the race for..." instead of "There are two teams"
I always try to say fork instead of a pair of forks.
But Cannondale's Lefty causes a problem. Is it a tine?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Didnt cannondale make a righty rear swingarm once, I'm sure I remember seeing a photo in a mag of that?
Posted 1 year ago # -
BMW maintain that what MTBers regard a rear shock us the most effective form Of suspension arrangement. See the duolever they use.
I seem to remember that whyte tried that and it died on it's arse.
Dunno why, I was riding BMWs then :/
Posted 1 year ago # -
What was the disadvantage of that Whyte? I though it looked good.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Teh whyte was comprimised by using the top wishbone for steering as well as for suspension unlike the BMW that separates the two. Thus it ended up with very unequal length wishbones and geometric effects that many folk did not like and that could not be tuned out
Posted 1 year ago # -
It seems as though what should be technically the worst design for suspension is actually the most popular. Odd that.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I just googled for info on the whyte fork and came up with the STW thread from a year ago.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I would have thought the other BMW system would work well on mountainbikes.
Posted 1 year ago # -
What does that give?
Posted 1 year ago # -
The Millyard DH bike, raced at the NPS, had a single sided swingarm, complete with internal chain routing -
Posted 1 year ago # -
the BMW paralever is ace when you brake from 130 mph to 30 mph in a hurry with hardly any dive and the forks can still respond to small bumps. It works really well
Posted 1 year ago # -
"I would have thought the other BMW system would work well on mountainbikes"
From the 2 BMW designs above would the height of them be a problem on MTB's especially on smaller sized frames. Purely guessing here, but could whyte have chosen to go with 'loosing' a link from the top BMW design in order to get the front end down a bit?The other problem being stuck with the (likely own brand)fork/frame combination? Something people can be weary of?
Posted 1 year ago # -
James - not at all - both BMW designs can be built low at the front. FReamember you don't need a headtube as such - just a ball joint.
I think the reason why whyte did it as they did was to save weight - I suspect it might be an issue to build either design light enough.
You would obviously not be able to change "forks" but you could change the shock. You need a specific frame however clearly
Posted 1 year ago # -
TandemJeremy - Member
I would have thought the other BMW system would work well on mountainbikes.
Not really. The types of bikes that would potentially benefit from the advantages the Hossack/Telelever front suspension system would be race bikes - XC or downhill. I doubt a similar design could be made light or strong enough to be a viable option in either discipline. BMWs' race bikes (WSB and Enduro) both use convential telescopic forks for this reason.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Ero - thats not why they use teles. On a motorcycle it is lighter to use a hossack style system. Smaller lighter frame, no lower yoke, no headstock - wishbone extra weight instead
I agree tho with a bicycle it would be hard to build down to the required weight.
Posted 1 year ago # -
"bikes that would potentially benefit from the advantages the Hossack/Telelever front suspension system would be race bikes - XC or downhill"
I don't get this bit?
Why wouldn't bikes in between benefit if XCrace and DHrace bikes are the extreme ends of the range (for the sake of argument, where the bikes in between 'fall' between these two. ie 'trail'/'all mountain' bikes?Posted 1 year ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
