Rigid fork A2C – much difference 425mm v 445mm?

Home Forum Bike Forum Rigid fork A2C – much difference 425mm v 445mm?

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Rigid fork A2C – much difference 425mm v 445mm?
  • Premier Icon drain
    Subscriber

    Hello, thought I’d seek the collective wisdom of the forum on whether or not going for a 445mm rigid fork would make much difference to the handling on a frame (Soma Groove) designed for 80mm suspension (425mm equivalent rigid).

    The frame is to replace my Flo, nicked a few weeks ago 🙁 , which was set up really well for off-road touring / bikepacking. I’m assuming that the longer fork will make the wheelbase longer/more stable (not a bad thing given its intended use), with possible downsides being to make the steering slower / maybe a bit wandery on really steep climbs.

    Your views on any similar experiences gratefully received 🙂

    Premier Icon cp
    Subscriber

    pretty much exactly as above. Your call whether you like that or not!

    Premier Icon mattjg
    Subscriber

    I’ve run my Salsa Selma, which is designed for 80mm forks, with an 80mm rigid equivalent, and a 100mm sus. It’s not a big deal to me but I prefer 100mm making the steering a tiny bit slacker.

    Premier Icon drain
    Subscriber

    Ta muchly, folks. Choices, choices….

    Premier Icon miketually
    Subscriber

    IIRC, an extra inch of fork A-C slackens the head angle by 1 degree.

    I run a 420mm fork on my Inbred.

    Premier Icon drain
    Subscriber

    Ta. Thinking that a longer fork might be No Bad Thing if it lifts the BB a tad too, as it’s got a BB drop that’s about 10mm deeper than I had on my Flo.

    Also found a few build specs after trawling around on t’interweb a bit more, seems people mix it up between 80 – 100mm with no climbing no worries on the Groove.

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)

The topic ‘Rigid fork A2C – much difference 425mm v 445mm?’ is closed to new replies.