|Rake - new fork||Rolf Sindoe|
Oct 5, 2001 8:24 AM
|I'm planning to upgrade my bike w. a new fork. My bike is approx. 1000mm measured from hub t. hub (c. to c.), and I would like it to be a bit shorter. - But how important is the rake, really?|
|It's pretty important||TJeanloz|
Oct 5, 2001 8:55 AM
|A lot more thought goes into designing a bicycle than most consumers give builders credit for. A fork rake is meant to work with the geometry of the bike. If another rake would have improved the bike, the builder would have spec'd the other rake in the first place. Reasons for wanting a shorter wheelbase- quicker handling and such- won't really be accomplished by shortening your fork's rake. But you will probably get a bike that doesn't handle as well as it used to.
That being said, some bikes, like the Litespeed Appalaichian/Blue Ridge, are designed for two different rakes and work well (but differently) with either.
|So who do you believe on rake measurements...||Cima Coppi|
Oct 5, 2001 9:45 AM
|This is a question I have regarding rake, because the CF Fork I'm interested in purchasing has two different rake measurements depending on the source. I have seen the rake listed at 45mm on the manufacturers website, but on several on-line retailers, its listed as 43mm. How is a consumer really to know what they are purchasing?
Personally, I'm more trust worthy of the manufacturers specs, but even that has proven to be inconsistant on occasion.
|They could both be right...||TJeanloz|
Oct 5, 2001 10:06 AM
|Most fork manufacturers make three rakes in each fork, a ~40-41, ~43, ~45. But mail order houses and other retailers tend to only buy the 43, because it fits the majority of bike sizes out there. My advice is to call your retailer and see if they have it in the rake that you want. It is almost always advisable to keep the rake of a new fork as similar to the rake of an old fork as possible.|
|They could both be right...||VW|
Oct 5, 2001 11:06 AM
Is there a difference in the length of the fork? Since all forks have to handle the 700C wheels, I wouldn't think the length would change that much. Is this also a concern?
|how short do ya want it?||Rusty McNasty|
Oct 5, 2001 11:42 AM
|If you shorten the wheelbase by anything more than a few mm's (say 5-15mm), the bike will be so dynamically unstable that you won't be able to ride it over 10 mph! Even in those first 15 or so mm's, you will notice significant degradation in high speed stability. Unless the bike is "too hard" to ride slow, or unless you wish to turn this bike into a shopping commuter (baskets, bags, and a bell), then don't screw around with it!|
|Just wondering....||Allen az|
Oct 5, 2001 2:15 PM
|Why did you post a picture of a guy? Is it you or something? Sorry it's not bike related, but I had to ask.
|Just wondering....||Rolf Sindoe|
Oct 5, 2001 11:07 PM
|Yes, that mean old bugger is me alright. Under the "message-box" there's a field, where you can put your picture. This service has come w. the new look of roadbikereview.com, and I guess the idea is to personalize the forum's a little.|
|oh! ok, thanks (nm)||Allen az|
Oct 6, 2001 10:03 AM
|They're asking for it....||grzy|
Oct 8, 2001 1:03 PM
|Someone will put a porno in there soon - I'm sure of it!|
|post head tube angle and frame size....||C-40|
Oct 7, 2001 5:06 AM
|Impossible to make suggestions without knowing the head tube angle and frame size. Reducing the fork rake will change the bike's wheelbase by a very small percentage. The percentage change in the trail will be much larger.
Reducing the rake will increase the amount of trail and slow the steering response at normal riding speeds. If you want faster steering response for criterium racing, the fork rake should be increased.
|From your post it sounds like you want to ....||Live Steam|
Oct 8, 2001 9:13 AM
|change the standover height for your frme. this cannot be done and it will spoil the ride charactoristics of your bike. The top tube will then slope from back to front. NOT GOOD! I hope I misunderstood.|| |