MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
I've got a 2010 Yeti 575 frame & they come with 150mm forks as standard when bought built. As the 150mm forks are expensive & like rocking horse sh1t to get hold of secondhand, would it be [i]that[/i] much of a difference with 140mm instead of the 150's?
Any help would be good....
Roughly half a degree head angle difference if they are the same make
Yup...i.e. **** all - unless you are a riding god, which many on here are! 😛
ok, I'd have 80mm & still feel the same then. 😯
Yup...i.e. **** all - unless you are a riding god, which many on here are!
I don't know about you but I can feel the difference and I'm no riding god. That makes you no good and me average.
I'm Awesome!! ha
10mm static difference is more like 7mm when sagged, so less than half a degree steeper head angle - as above, many claim they can tell!
but there could be more to it, whats the relative axle-to-crown of each fork?
10mm static difference is more like 7mm when sagged, so less than half a degree steeper head angle
Except his old forks sagged too, making it all relative. And the rear end sags keeping the angles the same. So no matter what, adding a longer fork will slacken the head angle.
as above, many claim they can tell!
I can. I had 36's set to 140mm on my Five, then a Five with 140mm 32's. There was still a 10mm difference between the two forks at the same travel, and it was very noticeable.
The reason I was asking is that I don't have any forks for the frame (only 120mm Reba Teams, which are for sale 😉 ) & was wondering if 140mm Revs would work ok instead of spending the extra on 150mm Revs but I now think I'm just going to bite the built & buy some new 150mm RS Revelation RLT Ti Dual air maxle lite.
Any thoughts on these forks? Any good?
make your mind up flow, either the rear end sags keeping the angles the same, or it was very noticable - cant have your cake and eat it... or maybe you* can....
Whos - get the cheaper 140revs, as no mortal* will notice the ride difference.
make your mind up flow, either the rear end sags keeping the angles the same, or it was very noticable - cant have your cake and eat it... or maybe you* can....
No matter what forks you have the rear end sags.
If you fit longer forks it will make it slacker.
Which part of those two statements confuses you?
Whos - get the cheaper 140revs, as no mortal* will notice the ride difference.
I'm a mere mortal, you just don't have a clue.
flow - Member
I can. I had 36's set to 140mm on my Five, then a Five with 140mm 32's
2 different forks and possibly 2 different bikes? Loads of other variables then 🙄
flow - Member
Except his old forks sagged too*, making it all relative**. And the rear end sags keeping the angles the same. So no matter what, adding a longer fork will slacken the head angle*.
* correct
** what do you mean?
this is wrong
* yes - and contradicting ***
FWIW soobalias is right, you might be, but what you're saying doesn't make sense.
2 different bikes and possibly 2 different forks? Loads of other variables then
No, a 2011 five with 36's set to 140mm, and a 2012 Five with 140mm 32's both in the house at the same time. Like I said the A2C was 10mm different and it was very noticeable.
No other variables other than the forks, and your inability to read what I wrote.
*** The only thing you are changing is the forks, the rear sag settings are the same, your head angle will slacken.
The lack of intelligence never fails to amaze me.
flow - Member
No, a 2011 five with 36's set to 140mm, and a 2012 Five with 32's both in the house at the same time. Like I said the A2C was 10mm different and it was very noticeable.
so, like I said:
2 different forks? Loads of other variables then
You did of course measure sag, damping etc to ensure there were no other variables when riding?
If all you can do now is to slag me off, go crazy...your posts above still make no sense....and it usually shows a poster is just trying to defend the indefensible.
🙄
So, would you care to tell me how I am to compare two of the same bike with a different fork length, without actually changing the forks?
2 different forks and possibly 2 different bikes? Loads of other variables then
Loads of other variables, really?
so you are all in agreement then, the sagged (25% XC) height of the new 140mm forks will be only 7mm less than the sagged (25% XC) original 150mm fork, all other things being equal thats less than 0.5deg steeper head angle.
you could put a slightly taller tyre on the front to counteract this change, blah blah blah
much more importantly
new 150mm RS Revelation RLT Ti Dual air maxle lite.
of course new shiney bits is the best way to deal with this
😉
flow - Member
So, would you care to tell me how I am to compare two of the same bike with a different fork length, without actually changing the forks?
A fork with wind-down/u-turn/talas - simples.
Loads of other variables, really?
Of course, the fact that you are asking shows how little you know about the effects of damping etc on ride - not least on the same fork model let alone 2 different ones.
soobalias - aktewaerly 0.35 deg but I'll let you off 😉
Of course, the fact that you are asking shows how little you know about the effects of damping etc on ride - not least on the same fork model let alone 2 different ones.
I've forgotten more than you know about bikes mate.
Well, your riposte proves that emphatically 🙄
What was it I said earlier..."defending the indefensible"?
You had your dinner yet?
flow - Member
I've forgotten more than you know about bikes mate.
Actually, on reflection, this appears to be quite correct 😎
Yep, clearly does.
You are telling me I am wrong for being able to tell the difference in a 0.5 degree HT angle, longer wheelbase, and higher B/bracket.
Obviously you have a lot to learn 😆
No, I am telling you there are numerous other factors which you have still not accounted for that affect how the fork sits when riding and "feel": e.g. pressure/spring rate and corresponding sag, damping (and I've not even mentioned subjectivity & un-blindness of any comparison). Not to mention that you compared 2 different forks.
Longer wheelbase? - 0.5 deg on 40" wheelbase would make it 4mm longer - that's 0.4%
Higher BB? - 2.5mm higher - that's 0.7% higher
If you need a hand with the maths just ask.
I'd say the only way to make a meaningful comparison would be a blind test on the same fork, wound down.
I am telling you there are numerous other factors which you have still not accounted for
Really? Here when I set them up were you?
You get more comical every post Al, you should do stand up 😆
Longer wheelbase? - 0.5 deg on 40" wheelbase would make it 4mm longer - that's 0.4%
Higher BB? - 2.5mm higher - that's 0.7% higher
On their own they sound insignificant, together they make a lot of difference.
flow - Member
Really? Here when I set them up were you?
Of course I wasn't, but you've not posted a single word to even suggest that you considered their effect.
*waits for next empty riposte*
Of course I wasn't, but you've not posted a single word to even suggest that you considered their effect.
Exactly Al, you weren't there were you.
Still you go on [b]thinking[/b] you know what you're on about, and jumping to conclusions as usual.
cynic-al - Member
*waits for next empty riposte*
flow - Member
Still you go on thinking you know what you're on about, and jumping to conclusions as usual.
If you could establish that you'd considered and accounted for all the factors, and made your comparison (relatively) meaningful, you would have done so, no?
But you haven't, you've not even stated that you'd considered them, though by implication you accept they are relevant...so it's you that is jumping to conclusions, not me.
If you could establish that you'd considered and accounted for all the factors, and made your comparison (relatively) meaningful, you would have done so, no?But you haven't, you've not even stated that you'd considered them, though by implication you accept they are relevant...so it's you that is jumping to conclusions, not me.
Ahhh so I'm the one jumping to conclusions! Thats where we went wrong 😆
So what did you to do to ensure it was a reelvant comparison?
Any other posts are meaningless guff.
Cant you just run the back a tad softer ?
10mm is noticeable.. not a massive diff but it's there.
Cheers all, I love the bickering.
I think I'm going to go for a new pair of 150mm RS Revelation Ti with 20mm maxle lite.
Wouldn't you be better comparing axle to crown lengths rather than travel, especially if you're changing from one brand to another?
Wouldn't you be better comparing axle to crown lengths rather than travel, especially if you're changing from one brand to another?
Yep
I think I'm going to go for a new pair of 150mm RS Revelation Ti with 20mm maxle lite.
I got some last week to upgrade my Pikes and they are excellent forks.
However Fishers aren't importing the 20mm version for 2012, only 15mm, so if you can't live with 15mm, you'll have to hunt for a 2011 fork in stock with 20mm (be quick, not many, if any, left) or pick one up second hand.
When I got my 150 Rev Teams, I'm sure the "quoted" axle to crown difference was only 4mm compared to the old 140's. Now you somebody with have to do all maths over again 😕
Just ordered some of these...Bargain.. 😆
https://www.bike24.net/1.php?content=8;navigation=1;menu=1000,2,121;product=19113
Sos
Have ordered from them before?
No, some on here have tho & have been happy..worth a try for £412..
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/140mm-coil-forks-20mm-bolt-thru#post-3180102
If I was you I would cancel that order and get these, they are about 4 models higher up the range, 2012 versions, and with the new damping system.
Yeh, i seen them but I can't do 15mm only 20mm, bloody shimano hubs!!
Ahh, I would buy a hub, £40 for a Pro 2, not much to get it built if you can't do it yourself.
oh well, I'm happy with what I've ordered, thanks anyway, your a good'un!
flow - no further response then?
oh well, I'm happy with what I've ordered, thanks anyway, your a good'un!
As long as your happy mate, thats all that matters.
flow - no further response then?
Sorry Al, not today mate, not feeling too good TBH.
Oh well, looks like your original position falls on its face then.
Shame
Whatever you say almighty one.
Have to remember as well that the flex in a 32 at 140 will be a fair few more tenths of a percent greater than the flex in a 36 lowered to 140, thus increasing the gap between both ride height and perceived bike handling. 😉
Have to remember as well that the flex in a 32 at 140 will be a fair few more tenths of a percent greater than the flex in a 36 lowered to 140, thus increasing the gap between both ride height and perceived bike handling.
That would be correct, except I was talking about the angles, not suspension performance. You can tell the difference in geometry riding down the road 😉
That would be correct, except I was talking about the angles, not suspension performance. You can tell the difference in geometry riding down the road
So was I... the flex and its resultant angleset style geometry makeover will be apparent in much of its miniscule glory the moment the bike is loaded; the suspension performance is more a product of springs, damping and whatnot.
Steerer length and stem placement surely also contribute more to effective weight distribution and difference in ride feel more than a minute geometry change.
You're forgetting about offsets too 😉
Aargh, my mind 😀
the suspension performance is more a product of springs, damping and whatnot
Stiffness isn't performance? Think about that a bit more.
Steerer length and stem placement surely also contribute more to effective weight distribution and difference in ride feel more than a minute geometry change.
Correct, same stem and steerer length though.
Edit: I am properly bored of this thread now
why on earth would you put lowered 36's on a bike and ride down a road?
ohh and how the trail from different heights tyres in conjuntion with the offsets 😆 sorry I'll go back to work now 😀