RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - Cyclo-Cross


Archive Home >> Cyclo-Cross(1 2 3 )


Opinions on Fatty X cyclocross suspention forks?(7 posts)

Opinions on Fatty X cyclocross suspention forks?carsRcoffins
Nov 7, 2001 8:52 PM
Hey, I'm a relative newbie to cyclocross racing, and am looking at buying either a new 2002 cannondale ultra cyclocross or just the regular one. (Xs800 or XR800) Is the Fatty X suspention fork really worth it? Thanks in advance for all the advice!
re: Opinions on Fatty X cyclocross suspention forks?themayor
Nov 8, 2001 11:59 AM
The fatty does take the sting out of a real bumpy course...but it does ad about 1 1/2 lbs to the bike.I had both and sold the fatty. If the course is really rough I put on fat tubulars.
nice rip offnm
Nov 8, 2001 12:19 PM
re: Opinions on Fatty X cyclocross suspention forks?mosovich
Nov 8, 2001 1:34 PM
I had the head shock as well, and ditched that baby when I could. You don't need it. It weighs more, you'd have to constantly adjust it during a race and you'll wish you hadn't after your first race. I've been there! If I was buying a Cannondale, I'd definately go without the headshock!
re: Opinions on Fatty X cyclocross suspention forks?humunuku
Nov 8, 2001 3:19 PM
no need for suspension...just adds weight
I only consider a suspension seatpost, that'd help! nmJan_Gerrit
Nov 10, 2001 2:04 PM
re: Opinions on Fatty X cyclocross suspention forks?werner
Nov 25, 2001 12:09 AM
i have been in a similar situation and bought the xs-version (with Fatty X)! My opinion today: Why does´nt Fatty offer even MORE amount of travel (2 inches would be ideal!) for hammering down even rough terrain...
But even with one inch of travel i am able to compete in local mountain bike races ("Who´s the guy with the road racing bike?")
no question: If you want to descent really quickly, you should take the fatty! Let it roll!