|Merlin & fork rake question.||ol|
Aug 13, 2003 7:30 PM
|Hello to everyone.
I have a merlin size small compact frame which requires a fork. At the moment I have available a carbon fork with a 43mm rake as opposed to 45mm which merlin geometry chart states. Should I install the 43mm fork or should I buy the recommended 45mm fork.
|re: Merlin & fork rake question.||jtolleson|
Aug 13, 2003 7:47 PM
|I'm sure I'll get corrected if I get this backwards, but putting a fork on with LESS than the recommended amount of offset sounds less problematic than the other way around. Less rake = more trail, which can mean slightly less responsive steering.
My gut says that the difference between a 43 and a 45 isn't worth losing sleep over.
What do others think?
|I think your right and..||koala|
Aug 14, 2003 3:38 AM
|go to google and input bicycle steering geometry. A Kreuzotter site has a neat table where you input the variables and the trail is computed.|
Aug 14, 2003 6:37 AM
|I switched my Trek 5500 from a 43 to a 40mm rake.
I felt the difference immediately. The 40 "slowed" the steering slightly. With the steep head tube the steering was very quick, so slowing it down slightly was good. But I think if I was a serious crit racer I would put the 43 back in. I would not normally have made the change, I would be happy with either rake, but I had an extra Ouzo Pro fork when my wife got her new 5200 WSD with 650 wheels.