RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - Cyclo-Cross


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


Talk me out of RockShox Ruby(10 posts)

Talk me out of RockShox Rubytriangleforge
Dec 19, 2001 10:31 AM
I've got a chance to pick up a brand-new, threadless RockShox Ruby (700c, elastomer/spring fork) for cheap. Of course, I don't have any immediate need for such a thing, but it's tempting just for the opportunity to mess around with such an odd bit of bicycling history.

There's one rationalization that's burbled to the top of my mind; I'd appreciate any assistance you can offer in shooting holes in it. Several of the courses used for cyclocross here in the mid-Atlatic are very mountain-bike oriented, with considerable amounts of modestly technical singletrack, and occasionally hairy descents & drop offs. By the same token, a lot of the mountain bike courses are pretty similar, with long stretches of grass, smooth trails, road segments, etc. and my mountain bike w/ fat tires and plush fork seem hardly necessary -- I've often thought I'd be faster on my 'cross bike.

Here's my hare-brained idea: set up the front shock fork to swap onto my 'cross bike just for these sorts of races, while using my nice steel rigid fork for most races & everything else.

That, and it'd just be kinda cool to play with one...

Cheers,
BRAD
Don't do it NO WAY Absolutely not Ut-uh Nope Stoppit now...muncher.
Dec 19, 2001 10:53 AM
Better yet?

Thought not.

I'd spend your hard gotten $ on something else. It's not worth the extra weight. You won't get a net speed gain. The comfort can be got by using wider/lower pressure tyres. It'll be a pain in the rear changing the fork. You'll always be wondering what fork to run on the day. You'll always be tooling around with suspension settings. You won't get as much sex. You will lose your inheritance. Civilisations will fall and cities crumble.

Mind you, would be nicNO!

Well, I tried. On the other hand, you could just bow to the enevitable now and go and buy it.

M.
re: Talk me out of RockShox RubyThe Walrus
Dec 19, 2001 10:58 AM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Ruby was a road fork, and as such was set up for calipers; there are no canti bosses. So much for 'cross...

There! I think I've solved your problem...
When You're Right...triangleforge
Dec 19, 2001 11:13 AM
I knew it was set up for caliper brakes rather than cantis, but thought I might be able to work with that.

But your note reminded me of something I'd noticed several years back (but since forgotten) on the one Ruby I've actually looked at in real life. As it's now coming back to me, I remember thinking how crowded a 23c road tire looked under that brake bridge. Forget about even a moderately tall cyclocross tire.

Thanks, to you & to Muncher -- mission accomplished.

Cheers,
BRAD
waitaminit!bn
Dec 19, 2001 11:42 AM
Ruby Metro had canti brake posts... and can still be had for less than some rigids
weight penalty and bob not worth the benefits ...swede16
Dec 19, 2001 11:38 AM
of the absorption in the rough sections. Cross is like any racing sport: the racer who capitalizes where others can't will do better. The no brainer statement. The prime example is Wells being able to bunny hop the barriers at Nationals where Johnson could/chose not to do so. So with the Ruby you will have the advantage over others in rough sections; but you won't have the advantage when you are sprinting out of the saddle, and while carrying the bike. In my opinion, the benefits do not outweigh the cons (you bet that pun was intended). For the nastier courses, just run higher volume tires with a little less tire pressure (the "suspension" for rigid MTBs: running 2.1s at 20 psi gives a nice inch to half inch of "suspension")
Look at Marzocchi.Jonathan
Dec 19, 2001 3:49 PM
We are at this point getting away from cheap, but if you really want to try it Marzocchi is making some forks (cant remember the exact models) that will fit 700C wheels.

I was thinking about getting that fork, some 38C tires, a higher rise stem and going at the singletrack. I love the way my cross bike eats singletrack, but I get beaten on downhills and rock fields. Then the idea of swapping all the time got to me.

Possible solution was a 29'er MTB with some steep angles. But getting the TT length I need would increase the wheelbase too much for technical singletrack. Ahhhh, yes well, what to do?

The point - check out the Marzocchi website, they can hook you up.
Also AMP forks might work . . .swede16
Dec 21, 2001 12:24 PM
All you would have to do is slide the brake bosses up the fork legs. Problems might be finding one (two up for grabs on E-bay right now) and fitting the fork to the cross frame since the suspension is couched between the down tube and the fork legs. But if you're looking for a light-weight suspension fork for your cross bike, you'll be hard pressed to find anything lighter than the AMP's carbon F3 (about 2.2 pounds)
re: Talk me out of RockShox Rubybadabill
Dec 19, 2001 4:03 PM
A true cross bike should allways win out if the course is halfway decent. Did the Sorrento cyclcross a couple of weeks ago and wished I had my MTB with me till I watched the pros. Trent Klasna was on a Gary Fisher Sugar and the best he could do was 4th. Granted he looked like he had a bad case of road rash but the true cross bikers are so much faster on most of the course. what little you would gain with this setup would be lost elswhere.
re: Talk me out of RockShox Rubypnk
Dec 21, 2001 1:53 PM
Whenever I ride my cross bike on trails, I do it partly for the challenge of seeing how well I can do on basically a road bike. It makes me feel a connection to the "old" days when people (Jobst Brandt) rode sew-ups off road. For myself, putting suspension on a cross bike (even a minimal one) is just the path to re-inventing the mountain bike. Besides, when everyone passes me now, I can use the excuse that I only have a rigid bike!