Likes: 0
Rouleur
steel frames with carbon forks
more and more we see builders pairing carbon forks with steel frames.
does it matter that that changes the front to rear weight distribution relative to a steel fork?
what factors, if any, must builders consider wrt the difference in weight distribution (i.e balance)?
Canada Eh....
The weight of the rider more than overwhelms any change in weight to the fork.
I'd imagine drinking from your waterbottle changes the weight distribution more than the
weight difference of a few ounces of fork.
it's not enough to change the way it handles.
-g
College, than bikes......
Yeh what Grant said. It is really more of an aesthetic question as the carbon forks have such a wider side profile.
On a related note, fully built up bikes are theoretically very laterally imbalanced since all the drivetrain components are on the ride side (FD, RD, Cranks, Chain, etc.), but again, it does seem that the rider weight is the biggest factor: 180 pound rider, 18 pound bike, only 10% of equation.
Rouleur
Originally Posted by GrantM
is it just me or does it seem that grant always gets the discussion to end quickly
by hitting you with the perfectly informed answer phrased in the perfectly understandable way? :thumbs_up:
Grimpeur
I agree. He ruins everything.
we are about to break the surly bonds of gravity and punch the face of God!
Breaking Away
I don't get the point of a custom steel frame with an off the peg carbon fork.
I FLY PLANES!
My Serotta CIII is welded custom steel and has a carbon fork. Speedvagens are the same way.
The Serotta fork on mine is basically an Ouzo Pro. It's the 02 fork. The S2 was a bit higher end I think.
I'm not a builder, but Serotta is pretty big and stopped making steel forks a long time ago. They must believe there is little negative and some significant positive. In the case of the Serotta I can assure anyone who's interested that it is not a negative thing.
That said, I bought my Zanconato without a second thought with a Zanconato-made steel fork. Wouldn't have had it any other way.
Steel forks are cool. And so are carbon ones, though it took me a long time to really trust them. I do now.
Free High Fives
i'll be honest.
id rather have a steel fork for comfort and durability
25.4 seatposts ONLY
What about Pegoretti, too?*
*other than the Responsorium (upgrade) and the Luigino.
resident tastemaker
I think the statement panders without really saying anything. Different bikes are set up differently. A sachs isn't a sachs without that amazing fork, but neither is a vagen. There's several ways to skin a cat. But with bikes it's always the gestalt.
shrink, terrorist, poet, president of concerned cyclists for the abolishment of bovine source bicycle parts and head of the disaffected commie dishwashers union.
Rouleur
Soooo TT's vagen is no longer a vagen because he put a steel fork on it?????
Fausto
Swoop's post is right on--there's no right or wrong both work fine.
btw--TT's vagen still has a carbon fork (as of last week).
laughter has no foreign accent.
Rouleur
A Peg is a Peg with whatever fork Dario specs ... period
Paceline
Totally agree with this sentiment. It would be unsound to presume Dario wasn't thinking when pairing my Duende with a Reynolds OP fork. He simply found the most optimal part for the job.
While we're on the subject...why stop at forks? Why doesn't the framebuilder create the perfect seatpost, stem and bars to accompany the bars?
Rouleur
If the fork build, rake, and dimensions compliment the design and geometry of the frame, why the heck does it matter if it's carbon?
On a fixed income
my hammer has a wooden handle.
my older hammer has a fiberglas handle.
which one works better?
25.4 seatposts ONLY
That was what I was saying too, but it ended up out of context. I was responding to mercxman's post "I don't get the point of a custom steel frame with an off the peg carbon fork" and Saab's reply about Serottas and Speedvagens. I was adding Pegoretti to that list.
My Cinghiale Pro was designed for either a carbon fork or a steel one, but I went with the steel fork because it epitomized Steve's vision, i.e., that the bike was "designed as a tribute to late 80s stage-racing bikes."* In that sense, I guess I was going for the Gestalt, as swoop would say, since late 80s stage-racing bikes had steel forks. Would the bike be any less perfect with a carbon fork? No, imo, just as other steel Hampstens "work" and ride perfectly with their carbon forks.
This topic comes up from time to time, and there's even a wiki on almost the same topic.
*Looking at the Hampco website recently, the steel fork is now the only listed option.
College, than bikes......
To the original subject, I still think its an interesting concept as to where the "balance point" of a bicycle is and whether it could make a difference as suggested.
If one could make a bicycle that was both fore/aft and laterally balanced, perhaps with some optimized 40/60 weight distribution fore/aft and 50/50 side to side, maybe it would make a bit of difference, especially for lighter riders.
That's Mr. Bob To You
The right-handed one.
Rouleur
that's a perfect example for the original question
so, did the hammer manufacturers take into consideration
the difference in weight of the wood versus fiberglass materials
when they determined the density for the fiberglass handle,
or when they decided to add weighted material on the handle side under the fiberglass,
to obtain a similar head-to-handle balance - or doesn't balance matter?
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks