| |
Main
Date: 14 Sep 2007 22:38:26
From: Jeff
Subject: New carbon fork install
|
I have a 12 year old titanium road frame that was custom sized for me by a
small frame builder and still in decent shape. It has an older steel fork
that I would like to replace with a carbon one. The frame requires a 1"
steerer. I'm currently about 220 pounds and ride hard and long, but don't do
any real racing - but I do train with some fairly serious racers who really
push me.
...anyway, I've never ridden or installed one of the threadless headsets or
forks, but have installed one or two of the older threaded versions, have
the proper headset press, and have read the instructions for the threadless
variety.
I don't want to spend a fortune upgrading a decent, but not terribly
expensive frame so I'm looking for a few used parts on ebay.
I'll be getting a new Chris King headset, and I've already bought a good
carbon handlebar. ...still need to find a good stem of the right length.
Three questions:
1) what do I need to consider in regard to carbon forks for larger riders?
brands to looks for and avoid? ...most current forks seem to claim that they
have no weight limits, but I've read some comments that some aren't quite
stiff enough for 200+ pound riders.
2) any special considerations for used carbon forks? ...other than to make
sure that the steerer tube is long enough?
3) any special tricks or advice when installing the fork and/or new headset?
Thanks in advance
Jeff
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
|
| |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 11:17:12
From: joseph.santaniello@gmail.com
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
On Sep 16, 10:50 am, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 00:58:36 -0700, "joseph.santanie...@gmail.com"
>
>
>
> <joseph.santanie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Sep 16, 8:34 am, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> >> You're claiming that a psychological effect causes you to go from from
> >> 8 mph and 377 watts to 12 mph and 587 watts because of an overall
> >> weight change of 1 / 255 pounds, or a 0.4% change in weight leading to
> >> a 58% increase in power output.
>
> >I'm sure the 12 and 8 were more or less just arbitrarily chosen for
> >the sake of the discussion. While I don't dispute the hard figures, I
> >belive the placebo effect and mental attitudes while riding should
> >never be underestimated.
>
> >Speaking as a gravitationally challenged rider, I know first hand it
> >is very easy to have a defeatist attitude when trying to hang with
> >fast riders up steep hills. Having lighter equipment helps keep me
> >focused on not having any excuses, and perhaps allows me to push
> >myself those few extra watts or seconds that I would not have been
> >able to do had I been thinking to myself "oh well, I'm so heavy and my
> >bike is so heavy that I was going to get dropped anyway..."
>
> >For hilly races I use my famous 1200g wheels which are 1100g less than
> >my regular wheels and I swap out my seat (comfy Rolls) and seatpost
> >for a lightweight combo to save 400g. Is this 1500g really going to
> >make or break my race? Probably not, but it allows me to keep a more
> >positive attitude which may just make or break my race.
>
> >That said, I don't think the fork in question will make any
> >difference. ;-)
>
> >Joseph
>
> Dear Joseph,
>
> Painting the fork red ought to accomplish similar results.
>
> :)
>
> More seriously, the thread really does illustrate our classic weight
> obsession, where the loss of a single pound leads to wild hopes of a
> Clydesdale increasing his speed quite noticeably up a steep climb,
> followed by even wilder examples of psychology and "lighter handling"
> somehow increasing speed 50% up the same climb while approaching
> Armstrong's watts per kilogram.
>
> The weight removed from the fork will produce less than half a second
> improvement in 150 seconds in the situation described, not the vague
> but impressive results claimed. It's likely that the _obsession_ with
> the weight of the fork produces similarly inflated claims. The placebo
> effect of new equipment tends to wear off quickly when toiling up 8%
> grades that believe in gravity.
If the cyclist is a very consistent machine that can be parked at a
nice effort level, than that is 100% so. But what happens with
everyone when the overdo it on hills is they go too hard over some
magic threshold for too long, and then their power output drops like a
stone. This is all the more drastic with big folks, as they are often
the ones closest to (and over) the threshold, and they lose the most
time when the power runs out.
I train with a few guys much stronger than me, and one of our rides is
up a 3km 4% avg hill that has a 6% at the beginning, a slight
leveling off, and 7% at the end. If I manage to hold somebody's wheel
at 400W on the first part, I'm sitting pretty and can get over the top
with them by saving my 500+ for the last few meters. If somebody
decides to jump in the beginning, even for just a few seconds, and I
have to up the output, I get fried, and finish the hill WAY back.
Lighter equipment (even by very small margins) might allow me to
weather the storm better. It's not that the gear gives me magical
powers of extra watts, but it helps avoid the situation of losing
significant watts from overdoing it. That's my theory at least.
> Of course, a few dozen light-weight aluminum spoke nipples, anodized
> to the right color, might revive--
>
> Er, never mind.
Tell me you don't think my famous Oro 10's don't have gold nipples!
Bling!
>
> For the fun of it, let's send a 235 pound rider up the calculator's 8%
> half-mile grade with a steady 377 watts and 8 mph and see how much
> weight we have to remove from his bike to raise his speed to 12 mph.
>
> http://austinimage.com/bp/velocity/velocity.html
>
> Hmmm . . . we need to reduce the 22 pound bike to -77 pounds. You
> might think that this is possible only with a calculator, but here's
> how to obtain negative bicycle equipment weight:
>
> http://www.earlyaviator.com/archive/DS/DS438.1907.SkyCycle.Dixon.jpg
>
> :)
I prefer to add weight to my companions. On a ride a few months ago
for laughs one of my buddies took a backpack with weights in it so he
could match my all-up weight. It was funny. At the time we had very
similar threshold power levels, he of course much faster than I due to
his -25kg. But with the weights, I clobbered him. Not even close. Why?
Joseph
|
| |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 14:13:08
From: Paul Kopit
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 22:38:26 -0500, "Jeff" <none@nothingX.com > wrote:
>1) what do I need to consider in regard to carbon forks for larger riders?
>brands to looks for and avoid? ...most current forks seem to claim that they
>have no weight limits, but I've read some comments that some aren't quite
>stiff enough for 200+ pound riders.
Contrary to popular opinion, I beleive that the only thing you gain
with a CF fork is weight savings. A threadless steer tube is an
advantage but if what you have is working, the upgrade fork is no
upgrade.
|
| | |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 08:37:19
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
Paul Kopit wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 22:38:26 -0500, "Jeff" <none@nothingX.com> wrote:
>
>> 1) what do I need to consider in regard to carbon forks for larger riders?
>> brands to looks for and avoid? ...most current forks seem to claim that they
>> have no weight limits, but I've read some comments that some aren't quite
>> stiff enough for 200+ pound riders.
>
> Contrary to popular opinion, I beleive that the only thing you gain
> with a CF fork is weight savings. A threadless steer tube is an
> advantage but if what you have is working, the upgrade fork is no
> upgrade.
except that carbon forks give a smoother ride because they transmit
vibration differently...
|
| | | |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 13:05:51
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote in message
news:DZednVQdltQt0HDbnZ2dnUVZ_ovinZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> Paul Kopit wrote:
>> Contrary to popular opinion, I beleive that the only thing you gain
>> with a CF fork is weight savings. A threadless steer tube is an
>> advantage but if what you have is working, the upgrade fork is no
>> upgrade.
>
> except that carbon forks give a smoother ride because they transmit
> vibration differently...
Rubbish, beamboy. No one has ever produced any numbers nor any scientific
tests that indicate this.
But then again, you are the CF fork whisperer and CF forks talk to you,
don't they?
|
| |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 04:07:32
From: Kenny
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
I think the calculator is flawed, not in its math but in leaving out
one important aspect of which I think produces results that cannot
match the numbers of an actual climb. That is if "x" is the fitness of
the cyclist and "y" is the weight of the bike and "y2" being the
weight of the bike that weighs a pound less, then the question is
"what is the caloric difference?" If, the cyclist was a machine then
by all means use this calculator but in real life riding, weight
economy does make a big difference in terms of energy conservation and
maximization.
|
| | |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 12:31:09
From:
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 04:07:32 -0700, Kenny <Postoasted@gmail.com >
wrote:
>I think the calculator is flawed, not in its math but in leaving out
>one important aspect of which I think produces results that cannot
>match the numbers of an actual climb. That is if "x" is the fitness of
>the cyclist and "y" is the weight of the bike and "y2" being the
>weight of the bike that weighs a pound less, then the question is
>"what is the caloric difference?" If, the cyclist was a machine then
>by all means use this calculator but in real life riding, weight
>economy does make a big difference in terms of energy conservation and
>maximization.
Dear Kenny,
Calories are predicted at the bottom of the calculator.
http://austinimage.com/bp/velocity/velocity.html
Plug in some numbers and observe the caloric effect of using a fork
that weighs 1 pound less.
The rider is in fact a machine. You can't just click your heels
together and wish that the calories would expend themselves.
Removing a pound from the bicycle and rider that weigh over 250 pounds
is not going to make "a big difference in terms of energy conservation
and maximization."
This is the kind of wishful thinking that leads to wider waistlines.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 02:48:27
From: Hank Wirtz
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
On Sep 16, 1:50 am, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 00:58:36 -0700, "joseph.santanie...@gmail.com"
>
>
>
> <joseph.santanie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Sep 16, 8:34 am, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> >> You're claiming that a psychological effect causes you to go from from
> >> 8 mph and 377 watts to 12 mph and 587 watts because of an overall
> >> weight change of 1 / 255 pounds, or a 0.4% change in weight leading to
> >> a 58% increase in power output.
>
> >I'm sure the 12 and 8 were more or less just arbitrarily chosen for
> >the sake of the discussion. While I don't dispute the hard figures, I
> >belive the placebo effect and mental attitudes while riding should
> >never be underestimated.
>
> >Speaking as a gravitationally challenged rider, I know first hand it
> >is very easy to have a defeatist attitude when trying to hang with
> >fast riders up steep hills. Having lighter equipment helps keep me
> >focused on not having any excuses, and perhaps allows me to push
> >myself those few extra watts or seconds that I would not have been
> >able to do had I been thinking to myself "oh well, I'm so heavy and my
> >bike is so heavy that I was going to get dropped anyway..."
>
> >For hilly races I use my famous 1200g wheels which are 1100g less than
> >my regular wheels and I swap out my seat (comfy Rolls) and seatpost
> >for a lightweight combo to save 400g. Is this 1500g really going to
> >make or break my race? Probably not, but it allows me to keep a more
> >positive attitude which may just make or break my race.
>
> >That said, I don't think the fork in question will make any
> >difference. ;-)
>
> >Joseph
>
> Dear Joseph,
>
> Painting the fork red ought to accomplish similar results.
>
> :)
>
> More seriously, the thread really does illustrate our classic weight
> obsession, where the loss of a single pound leads to wild hopes of a
> Clydesdale increasing his speed quite noticeably up a steep climb,
> followed by even wilder examples of psychology and "lighter handling"
> somehow increasing speed 50% up the same climb while approaching
> Armstrong's watts per kilogram.
>
> The weight removed from the fork will produce less than half a second
> improvement in 150 seconds in the situation described, not the vague
> but impressive results claimed. It's likely that the _obsession_ with
> the weight of the fork produces similarly inflated claims. The placebo
> effect of new equipment tends to wear off quickly when toiling up 8%
> grades that believe in gravity.
>
> Of course, a few dozen light-weight aluminum spoke nipples, anodized
> to the right color, might revive--
>
> Er, never mind.
>
> For the fun of it, let's send a 235 pound rider up the calculator's 8%
> half-mile grade with a steady 377 watts and 8 mph and see how much
> weight we have to remove from his bike to raise his speed to 12 mph.
>
> http://austinimage.com/bp/velocity/velocity.html
>
> Hmmm . . . we need to reduce the 22 pound bike to -77 pounds. You
> might think that this is possible only with a calculator, but here's
> how to obtain negative bicycle equipment weight:
>
> http://www.earlyaviator.com/archive/DS/DS438.1907.SkyCycle.Dixon.jpg
>
> :)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel
OK, since you're obsessed with numbers, I went back and measured the
grade I was thinking of. Only 4.5%, over a third of a mile. Sure, an
overinflated claim, but it was a guess off the top of my head. Harumph
all you want.
If my light bike gets me to put out 360 watts instead of 250 (numbers
derived from your calculator), then I'll ride the light bike. Yes,
it's 100% in my head, but it doesn't change the fact that I got up the
hill much faster than on a bike that feels sluggish.
(I'll tell you where to stick your calculator....)
|
| | |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 12:29:39
From:
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 02:48:27 -0700, Hank Wirtz <hank@wirtznet.net >
wrote:
>On Sep 16, 1:50 am, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>> On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 00:58:36 -0700, "joseph.santanie...@gmail.com"
>>
>>
>>
>> <joseph.santanie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Sep 16, 8:34 am, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>> >> You're claiming that a psychological effect causes you to go from from
>> >> 8 mph and 377 watts to 12 mph and 587 watts because of an overall
>> >> weight change of 1 / 255 pounds, or a 0.4% change in weight leading to
>> >> a 58% increase in power output.
>>
>> >I'm sure the 12 and 8 were more or less just arbitrarily chosen for
>> >the sake of the discussion. While I don't dispute the hard figures, I
>> >belive the placebo effect and mental attitudes while riding should
>> >never be underestimated.
>>
>> >Speaking as a gravitationally challenged rider, I know first hand it
>> >is very easy to have a defeatist attitude when trying to hang with
>> >fast riders up steep hills. Having lighter equipment helps keep me
>> >focused on not having any excuses, and perhaps allows me to push
>> >myself those few extra watts or seconds that I would not have been
>> >able to do had I been thinking to myself "oh well, I'm so heavy and my
>> >bike is so heavy that I was going to get dropped anyway..."
>>
>> >For hilly races I use my famous 1200g wheels which are 1100g less than
>> >my regular wheels and I swap out my seat (comfy Rolls) and seatpost
>> >for a lightweight combo to save 400g. Is this 1500g really going to
>> >make or break my race? Probably not, but it allows me to keep a more
>> >positive attitude which may just make or break my race.
>>
>> >That said, I don't think the fork in question will make any
>> >difference. ;-)
>>
>> >Joseph
>>
>> Dear Joseph,
>>
>> Painting the fork red ought to accomplish similar results.
>>
>> :)
>>
>> More seriously, the thread really does illustrate our classic weight
>> obsession, where the loss of a single pound leads to wild hopes of a
>> Clydesdale increasing his speed quite noticeably up a steep climb,
>> followed by even wilder examples of psychology and "lighter handling"
>> somehow increasing speed 50% up the same climb while approaching
>> Armstrong's watts per kilogram.
>>
>> The weight removed from the fork will produce less than half a second
>> improvement in 150 seconds in the situation described, not the vague
>> but impressive results claimed. It's likely that the _obsession_ with
>> the weight of the fork produces similarly inflated claims. The placebo
>> effect of new equipment tends to wear off quickly when toiling up 8%
>> grades that believe in gravity.
>>
>> Of course, a few dozen light-weight aluminum spoke nipples, anodized
>> to the right color, might revive--
>>
>> Er, never mind.
>>
>> For the fun of it, let's send a 235 pound rider up the calculator's 8%
>> half-mile grade with a steady 377 watts and 8 mph and see how much
>> weight we have to remove from his bike to raise his speed to 12 mph.
>>
>> http://austinimage.com/bp/velocity/velocity.html
>>
>> Hmmm . . . we need to reduce the 22 pound bike to -77 pounds. You
>> might think that this is possible only with a calculator, but here's
>> how to obtain negative bicycle equipment weight:
>>
>> http://www.earlyaviator.com/archive/DS/DS438.1907.SkyCycle.Dixon.jpg
>>
>> :)
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Carl Fogel
>
>OK, since you're obsessed with numbers, I went back and measured the
>grade I was thinking of. Only 4.5%, over a third of a mile. Sure, an
>overinflated claim, but it was a guess off the top of my head. Harumph
>all you want.
>
>If my light bike gets me to put out 360 watts instead of 250 (numbers
>derived from your calculator), then I'll ride the light bike. Yes,
>it's 100% in my head, but it doesn't change the fact that I got up the
>hill much faster than on a bike that feels sluggish.
>
>(I'll tell you where to stick your calculator....)
Dear Hank,
Good! You're starting to use a calculator and realizing what actually
happens.
:)
The next step is to realize that it isn't the bike that feels
sluggish.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| | |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 13:01:26
From: Jeff
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
>>
>> Hmmm . . . we need to reduce the 22 pound bike to -77 pounds. You
>> might think that this is possible only with a calculator, but here's
>> how to obtain negative bicycle equipment weight:
Which is some of my point. I just took off over 30 pounds by riding and if I
get even more comfortable, I can take off 20 more.
So doing something to make the bike more comfortable so that it is ridden
longer and harder can shave 50 pounds from that
uphill weight. ...perhaps not your 99 in the example above, but half that.
J
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 00:58:36
From: joseph.santaniello@gmail.com
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
On Sep 16, 8:34 am, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> You're claiming that a psychological effect causes you to go from from
> 8 mph and 377 watts to 12 mph and 587 watts because of an overall
> weight change of 1 / 255 pounds, or a 0.4% change in weight leading to
> a 58% increase in power output.
I'm sure the 12 and 8 were more or less just arbitrarily chosen for
the sake of the discussion. While I don't dispute the hard figures, I
belive the placebo effect and mental attitudes while riding should
never be underestimated.
Speaking as a gravitationally challenged rider, I know first hand it
is very easy to have a defeatist attitude when trying to hang with
fast riders up steep hills. Having lighter equipment helps keep me
focused on not having any excuses, and perhaps allows me to push
myself those few extra watts or seconds that I would not have been
able to do had I been thinking to myself "oh well, I'm so heavy and my
bike is so heavy that I was going to get dropped anyway..."
For hilly races I use my famous 1200g wheels which are 1100g less than
my regular wheels and I swap out my seat (comfy Rolls) and seatpost
for a lightweight combo to save 400g. Is this 1500g really going to
make or break my race? Probably not, but it allows me to keep a more
positive attitude which may just make or break my race.
That said, I don't think the fork in question will make any
difference. ;-)
Joseph
|
| | |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 02:50:40
From:
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 00:58:36 -0700, "joseph.santaniello@gmail.com"
<joseph.santaniello@gmail.com > wrote:
>On Sep 16, 8:34 am, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>> You're claiming that a psychological effect causes you to go from from
>> 8 mph and 377 watts to 12 mph and 587 watts because of an overall
>> weight change of 1 / 255 pounds, or a 0.4% change in weight leading to
>> a 58% increase in power output.
>
>I'm sure the 12 and 8 were more or less just arbitrarily chosen for
>the sake of the discussion. While I don't dispute the hard figures, I
>belive the placebo effect and mental attitudes while riding should
>never be underestimated.
>
>Speaking as a gravitationally challenged rider, I know first hand it
>is very easy to have a defeatist attitude when trying to hang with
>fast riders up steep hills. Having lighter equipment helps keep me
>focused on not having any excuses, and perhaps allows me to push
>myself those few extra watts or seconds that I would not have been
>able to do had I been thinking to myself "oh well, I'm so heavy and my
>bike is so heavy that I was going to get dropped anyway..."
>
>For hilly races I use my famous 1200g wheels which are 1100g less than
>my regular wheels and I swap out my seat (comfy Rolls) and seatpost
>for a lightweight combo to save 400g. Is this 1500g really going to
>make or break my race? Probably not, but it allows me to keep a more
>positive attitude which may just make or break my race.
>
>That said, I don't think the fork in question will make any
>difference. ;-)
>
>Joseph
Dear Joseph,
Painting the fork red ought to accomplish similar results.
:)
More seriously, the thread really does illustrate our classic weight
obsession, where the loss of a single pound leads to wild hopes of a
Clydesdale increasing his speed quite noticeably up a steep climb,
followed by even wilder examples of psychology and "lighter handling"
somehow increasing speed 50% up the same climb while approaching
Armstrong's watts per kilogram.
The weight removed from the fork will produce less than half a second
improvement in 150 seconds in the situation described, not the vague
but impressive results claimed. It's likely that the _obsession_ with
the weight of the fork produces similarly inflated claims. The placebo
effect of new equipment tends to wear off quickly when toiling up 8%
grades that believe in gravity.
Of course, a few dozen light-weight aluminum spoke nipples, anodized
to the right color, might revive--
Er, never mind.
For the fun of it, let's send a 235 pound rider up the calculator's 8%
half-mile grade with a steady 377 watts and 8 mph and see how much
weight we have to remove from his bike to raise his speed to 12 mph.
http://austinimage.com/bp/velocity/velocity.html
Hmmm . . . we need to reduce the 22 pound bike to -77 pounds. You
might think that this is possible only with a calculator, but here's
how to obtain negative bicycle equipment weight:
http://www.earlyaviator.com/archive/DS/DS438.1907.SkyCycle.Dixon.jpg
:)
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| |
Date: 15 Sep 2007 22:00:15
From: Hank Wirtz
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
On Sep 15, 8:52 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 20:21:25 -0700, Hank Wirtz <h...@wirtznet.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Sep 15, 7:17 pm, frkry...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> On Sep 15, 12:08 pm, Lou Holtman <lholremovet...@planet.nl> wrote:
>
> >> > frkry...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> > > On Sep 14, 11:38 pm, "Jeff" <n...@nothingX.com> wrote:
> >> > >> I have a 12 year old titanium road frame that was custom sized for me by a
> >> > >> small frame builder and still in decent shape. It has an older steel fork
> >> > >> that I would like to replace with a carbon one.
>
> >> > > Why???
>
> >> > That is a relevant question.
>
> >> > > Do you _really_ think it will make you faster??
>
> >> > That is a irrelevant question. Why do people have to get faster when
> >> > they buy something new?
>
> >> Well, perhaps I misread his intent, but when he explained his riding,
> >> he said "[I] ride hard and long, but don't do any real racing - but I
> >> do train with some fairly serious racers who really push me."
>
> >> It sure sounds like he wants the fork for speed. If so, it's not
> >> going to work. If not - why does he want it?
>
> >> - Frank Krygowski
>
> >Might work for climbing speed. A pound off the front end makes a
> >difference on an 8% grade. At least it did for me.
>
> Dear Hank,
>
> This calculator is set up for convenient comparisons:
>
> http://austinimage.com/bp/velocity/velocity.html
>
> For a 150 pound rider putting out a steady 300 watts on the hoods and
> a 22 pound bike heading up a 20-mile long 8% grade, the predicted time
> drops from 129.901 minutes to 129.264 minutes, or 0.637 minutes, about
> 38.22 seconds in over two hours.
>
> That's just under a 0.5% speed increase, from 9.238 to 9.283 mph.
>
> The effect is just a little less than a 0.45 mph tailwind blowing you
> up the same 8% grade.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel
I'm not talking about a 20-mile grade. I'm talking about a half-mile
one. A pound off the front affects the bike's handling, making it FEEL
lighter. And psychologically, that can inspire you to push it harder,
and do that hill in a bigger gear out of the saddle at 12 mph instead
of gearing down and slogging it seated at 8mph. And there's a minute
saved in the span of about three.
|
| | |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 00:34:27
From:
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 22:00:15 -0700, Hank Wirtz <hank@wirtznet.net >
wrote:
>On Sep 15, 8:52 pm, carlfo...@comcast.net wrote:
>> On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 20:21:25 -0700, Hank Wirtz <h...@wirtznet.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Sep 15, 7:17 pm, frkry...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >> On Sep 15, 12:08 pm, Lou Holtman <lholremovet...@planet.nl> wrote:
>>
>> >> > frkry...@gmail.com wrote:
>> >> > > On Sep 14, 11:38 pm, "Jeff" <n...@nothingX.com> wrote:
>> >> > >> I have a 12 year old titanium road frame that was custom sized for me by a
>> >> > >> small frame builder and still in decent shape. It has an older steel fork
>> >> > >> that I would like to replace with a carbon one.
>>
>> >> > > Why???
>>
>> >> > That is a relevant question.
>>
>> >> > > Do you _really_ think it will make you faster??
>>
>> >> > That is a irrelevant question. Why do people have to get faster when
>> >> > they buy something new?
>>
>> >> Well, perhaps I misread his intent, but when he explained his riding,
>> >> he said "[I] ride hard and long, but don't do any real racing - but I
>> >> do train with some fairly serious racers who really push me."
>>
>> >> It sure sounds like he wants the fork for speed. If so, it's not
>> >> going to work. If not - why does he want it?
>>
>> >> - Frank Krygowski
>>
>> >Might work for climbing speed. A pound off the front end makes a
>> >difference on an 8% grade. At least it did for me.
>>
>> Dear Hank,
>>
>> This calculator is set up for convenient comparisons:
>>
>> http://austinimage.com/bp/velocity/velocity.html
>>
>> For a 150 pound rider putting out a steady 300 watts on the hoods and
>> a 22 pound bike heading up a 20-mile long 8% grade, the predicted time
>> drops from 129.901 minutes to 129.264 minutes, or 0.637 minutes, about
>> 38.22 seconds in over two hours.
>>
>> That's just under a 0.5% speed increase, from 9.238 to 9.283 mph.
>>
>> The effect is just a little less than a 0.45 mph tailwind blowing you
>> up the same 8% grade.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Carl Fogel
>
>I'm not talking about a 20-mile grade. I'm talking about a half-mile
>one. A pound off the front affects the bike's handling, making it FEEL
>lighter. And psychologically, that can inspire you to push it harder,
>and do that hill in a bigger gear out of the saddle at 12 mph instead
>of gearing down and slogging it seated at 8mph. And there's a minute
>saved in the span of about three.
Dear Hank,
Let's look at the prediction for a half mile 8% grade for a 235 pound
rider (judging by your other post) putting out enough watts to do 12
mph, given a 22 pound bicycle equipped with a 1 pound lighter fork.
Same calculator:
http://austinimage.com/bp/velocity/velocity.html
If you managed to do 12 mph up an 8% half-mile grade while still
seated (standing will increase wind drag considerably, but let's be
generous), you'd be putting out 587 watts for 2.49862 minutes.
If you subtract a pound of weight hidden in the front steering tube,
the predicted time will be 2.49057 minutes.
2.49862
-2.49057
-------
0.00805 minutes * 60 seconds / minute = 0.483 seconds out of 150
seconds
Not even half a second faster.
You're claiming that a psychological effect causes you to go from from
8 mph and 377 watts to 12 mph and 587 watts because of an overall
weight change of 1 / 255 pounds, or a 0.4% change in weight leading to
a 58% increase in power output.
As for the lighter handling, it's unlikely that you could tell the
difference while riding, given that the hidden weight is so trivial
and bicycle handling is so inconsequential at 12 mph up 8% grades.
We all have our illusions, so no offense is intended, but this is a
classic example of a 235 pound rider convincing himself that removing
1 pound from his ~20 pound bicycle is going to turn him into Lance
Armstrong zooming up the Alp d'Huez.
That climb averages about 7.7% and is the second Alp d'Huez on this
list of detailed profiles of European climbs:
http://ciclismo.sitiasp.it/motore2.aspx?sid=77dc7b9a7f5946e9896f84344137da9a&lista=true&quanti=20&url=fr&ID=0&pagina=1&filtra=null&da=az&come=af&lingua=eng&commenti=False
Kraig Willet estimated that Armstrong put out around 450 watts for 16
km, with a little bit of flat approach, at 6.38 watts/kg:
http://www.biketechreview.com/performance/la_cant_doit.htm
Whatever the hill and your speed are, if you're going faster up the
hill, give yourself the credit, not wishful thinking about removing 16
ounces from the 4,000 or so that you pedal up the hill.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| |
Date: 15 Sep 2007 20:21:25
From: Hank Wirtz
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
On Sep 15, 7:17 pm, frkry...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sep 15, 12:08 pm, Lou Holtman <lholremovet...@planet.nl> wrote:
>
> > frkry...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Sep 14, 11:38 pm, "Jeff" <n...@nothingX.com> wrote:
> > >> I have a 12 year old titanium road frame that was custom sized for me by a
> > >> small frame builder and still in decent shape. It has an older steel fork
> > >> that I would like to replace with a carbon one.
>
> > > Why???
>
> > That is a relevant question.
>
> > > Do you _really_ think it will make you faster??
>
> > That is a irrelevant question. Why do people have to get faster when
> > they buy something new?
>
> Well, perhaps I misread his intent, but when he explained his riding,
> he said "[I] ride hard and long, but don't do any real racing - but I
> do train with some fairly serious racers who really push me."
>
> It sure sounds like he wants the fork for speed. If so, it's not
> going to work. If not - why does he want it?
>
> - Frank Krygowski
Might work for climbing speed. A pound off the front end makes a
difference on an 8% grade. At least it did for me.
|
| | |
Date: 15 Sep 2007 21:52:28
From:
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 20:21:25 -0700, Hank Wirtz <hank@wirtznet.net >
wrote:
>On Sep 15, 7:17 pm, frkry...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Sep 15, 12:08 pm, Lou Holtman <lholremovet...@planet.nl> wrote:
>>
>> > frkry...@gmail.com wrote:
>> > > On Sep 14, 11:38 pm, "Jeff" <n...@nothingX.com> wrote:
>> > >> I have a 12 year old titanium road frame that was custom sized for me by a
>> > >> small frame builder and still in decent shape. It has an older steel fork
>> > >> that I would like to replace with a carbon one.
>>
>> > > Why???
>>
>> > That is a relevant question.
>>
>> > > Do you _really_ think it will make you faster??
>>
>> > That is a irrelevant question. Why do people have to get faster when
>> > they buy something new?
>>
>> Well, perhaps I misread his intent, but when he explained his riding,
>> he said "[I] ride hard and long, but don't do any real racing - but I
>> do train with some fairly serious racers who really push me."
>>
>> It sure sounds like he wants the fork for speed. If so, it's not
>> going to work. If not - why does he want it?
>>
>> - Frank Krygowski
>
>Might work for climbing speed. A pound off the front end makes a
>difference on an 8% grade. At least it did for me.
Dear Hank,
This calculator is set up for convenient comparisons:
http://austinimage.com/bp/velocity/velocity.html
For a 150 pound rider putting out a steady 300 watts on the hoods and
a 22 pound bike heading up a 20-mile long 8% grade, the predicted time
drops from 129.901 minutes to 129.264 minutes, or 0.637 minutes, about
38.22 seconds in over two hours.
That's just under a 0.5% speed increase, from 9.238 to 9.283 mph.
The effect is just a little less than a 0.45 mph tailwind blowing you
up the same 8% grade.
Cheers,
Carl Fogel
|
| | | |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 12:22:53
From: Jeff
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
>>> > > Do you _really_ think it will make you faster??
>>Might work for climbing speed. A pound off the front end makes a
>>difference on an 8% grade. At least it did for me.
>
> Dear Hank,
>
> This calculator is set up for convenient comparisons:
>
> http://austinimage.com/bp/velocity/velocity.html
>
> For a 150 pound rider putting out a steady 300 watts on the hoods and
> a 22 pound bike heading up a 20-mile long 8% grade, the predicted time
> drops from 129.901 minutes to 129.264 minutes, or 0.637 minutes, about
> 38.22 seconds in over two hours.
>
> That's just under a 0.5% speed increase, from 9.238 to 9.283 mph.
>
Sure I want it to go faster and the fork will help me do so. I'm figuring it
will get me at least 6 MPH faster.
The old fork is the threaded type and the bars are too high and the stem
reach is too long.
I get some vibration on the old steel fork and the rake is a bit too much so
it isn't as steady as it should be.
So it isn't comfortable. I don't really want to replace stems and such with
other threaded types that are outdated.
So I might as well replace a few things all at once.
If it makes me more comfortable, I'll be able to ride longer and harder.
That will allow me to lose more weight.
If I keep biking hard, I should be able to lose another 20 pounds. 20 pounds
x 453 grams/pound = 9060 grams.
The weight loss combined with the additional training will allow me to keep
from getting dropped by the group.
That will allow me to continue to draft from them, so that will decrease my
work 10-15%. This will also make the
rides more enjoyable so I'll want to ride longer and more often.
I threw all of the above into that calculator and it told me that I would go
at least 6 MPH faster.
J
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 06:56:26
From: Lou Holtman
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
carlfogel@comcast.net wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 20:21:25 -0700, Hank Wirtz <hank@wirtznet.net>
> wrote:
>
>> On Sep 15, 7:17 pm, frkry...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Sep 15, 12:08 pm, Lou Holtman <lholremovet...@planet.nl> wrote:
>>>
>>>> frkry...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> On Sep 14, 11:38 pm, "Jeff" <n...@nothingX.com> wrote:
>>>>>> I have a 12 year old titanium road frame that was custom sized for me by a
>>>>>> small frame builder and still in decent shape. It has an older steel fork
>>>>>> that I would like to replace with a carbon one.
>>>>> Why???
>>>> That is a relevant question.
>>>>> Do you _really_ think it will make you faster??
>>>> That is a irrelevant question. Why do people have to get faster when
>>>> they buy something new?
>>> Well, perhaps I misread his intent, but when he explained his riding,
>>> he said "[I] ride hard and long, but don't do any real racing - but I
>>> do train with some fairly serious racers who really push me."
>>>
>>> It sure sounds like he wants the fork for speed. If so, it's not
>>> going to work. If not - why does he want it?
>>>
>>> - Frank Krygowski
>> Might work for climbing speed. A pound off the front end makes a
>> difference on an 8% grade. At least it did for me.
>
> Dear Hank,
>
> This calculator is set up for convenient comparisons:
>
> http://austinimage.com/bp/velocity/velocity.html
>
> For a 150 pound rider putting out a steady 300 watts on the hoods and
> a 22 pound bike heading up a 20-mile long 8% grade, the predicted time
> drops from 129.901 minutes to 129.264 minutes, or 0.637 minutes, about
> 38.22 seconds in over two hours.
>
> That's just under a 0.5% speed increase, from 9.238 to 9.283 mph.
>
> The effect is just a little less than a 0.45 mph tailwind blowing you
> up the same 8% grade.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Fogel
So the answer to the question 'does it make you faster?' is YES it does
when cimbing! That is what I say every time this question is asked to me.
Lou
--
Posted by news://news.nb.nu (http://www.nb.nu)
|
| |
Date: 15 Sep 2007 20:19:58
From: Hank Wirtz
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
On Sep 14, 8:38 pm, "Jeff" <n...@nothingX.com > wrote:
> I have a 12 year old titanium road frame that was custom sized for me by a
> small frame builder and still in decent shape. It has an older steel fork
> that I would like to replace with a carbon one. The frame requires a 1"
> steerer. I'm currently about 220 pounds and ride hard and long, but don't do
> any real racing - but I do train with some fairly serious racers who really
> push me.
>
> ...anyway, I've never ridden or installed one of the threadless headsets or
> forks, but have installed one or two of the older threaded versions, have
> the proper headset press, and have read the instructions for the threadless
> variety.
>
> I don't want to spend a fortune upgrading a decent, but not terribly
> expensive frame so I'm looking for a few used parts on ebay.
>
> I'll be getting a new Chris King headset, and I've already bought a good
> carbon handlebar. ...still need to find a good stem of the right length.
>
> Three questions:
>
> 1) what do I need to consider in regard to carbon forks for larger riders?
> brands to looks for and avoid? ...most current forks seem to claim that they
> have no weight limits, but I've read some comments that some aren't quite
> stiff enough for 200+ pound riders.
>
> 2) any special considerations for used carbon forks? ...other than to make
> sure that the steerer tube is long enough?
>
> 3) any special tricks or advice when installing the fork and/or new headset?
>
I weigh 235 and use a Ritchey Comp Carbon. I left the aluminum steerer
uncut to keep the bars kind of high - about 1" below the seat. This
required 65mm of spacers, whichh is a no-no with a carbon steerer
(most say max there is 20mm). I'm seeing one on ebay for $140 BIN.
http://preview.tinyurl.com/3yplyb
Be sure to spring the $17 or whatever for a star nut installer. I've
mounted them without the tool before, and it was such a pain getting
it to go in straight. Piece of cake with the tool. I was also able to
use the sleeve of the star nut tool as a slide hammer to mount the
crown race. Well-spent, that $17.
Like most have said, DO NOT BUY USED. It's just not worth it.
|
| | |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 07:36:57
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
Hank Wirtz wrote:
> On Sep 14, 8:38 pm, "Jeff" <n...@nothingX.com> wrote:
>> I have a 12 year old titanium road frame that was custom sized for me by a
>> small frame builder and still in decent shape. It has an older steel fork
>> that I would like to replace with a carbon one. The frame requires a 1"
>> steerer. I'm currently about 220 pounds and ride hard and long, but don't do
>> any real racing - but I do train with some fairly serious racers who really
>> push me.
>>
>> ...anyway, I've never ridden or installed one of the threadless headsets or
>> forks, but have installed one or two of the older threaded versions, have
>> the proper headset press, and have read the instructions for the threadless
>> variety.
>>
>> I don't want to spend a fortune upgrading a decent, but not terribly
>> expensive frame so I'm looking for a few used parts on ebay.
>>
>> I'll be getting a new Chris King headset, and I've already bought a good
>> carbon handlebar. ...still need to find a good stem of the right length.
>>
>> Three questions:
>>
>> 1) what do I need to consider in regard to carbon forks for larger riders?
>> brands to looks for and avoid? ...most current forks seem to claim that they
>> have no weight limits, but I've read some comments that some aren't quite
>> stiff enough for 200+ pound riders.
>>
>> 2) any special considerations for used carbon forks? ...other than to make
>> sure that the steerer tube is long enough?
>>
>> 3) any special tricks or advice when installing the fork and/or new headset?
>>
>
> I weigh 235 and use a Ritchey Comp Carbon. I left the aluminum steerer
> uncut to keep the bars kind of high - about 1" below the seat. This
> required 65mm of spacers, whichh is a no-no with a carbon steerer
actually, that's a no-no with aluminum steerers too. aluminum is more
susceptible to fatigue than carbon.
> (most say max there is 20mm). I'm seeing one on ebay for $140 BIN.
> http://preview.tinyurl.com/3yplyb
>
> Be sure to spring the $17 or whatever for a star nut installer. I've
> mounted them without the tool before, and it was such a pain getting
> it to go in straight. Piece of cake with the tool. I was also able to
> use the sleeve of the star nut tool as a slide hammer to mount the
> crown race. Well-spent, that $17.
>
> Like most have said, DO NOT BUY USED. It's just not worth it.
my look fork is used. i administered the squeeze test when i was buying
it at the bike swap, and when i got home, i bridged the fork ends,
dropouts to end of steerer, then stood on it. not a squeak. it's been
working fine for years and has survived a significant crash since, again
without problem.
bottom line, absolutely exercise full caution, but a blanket "do not
use" tag is ignorant. i wouldn't buy off ebay because you can't test,
but from craigslist or at a swap, where you can scratch and sniff, why not?
|
| | | |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 13:11:08
From: Jambo
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
"jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net > wrote in message
news:JMWdnf_40e8XonDbnZ2dnUVZ_qjinZ2d@speakeasy.net...
> Hank Wirtz wrote:
>> I weigh 235 and use a Ritchey Comp Carbon. I left the aluminum steerer
>> uncut to keep the bars kind of high - about 1" below the seat. This
>> required 65mm of spacers, whichh is a no-no with a carbon steerer
>
> actually, that's a no-no with aluminum steerers too. aluminum is more
> susceptible to fatigue than carbon.
Rubbish, beamboy. Have you looked up, and understood yet, anisotropy and CF
damage tolerance?
>> Like most have said, DO NOT BUY USED. It's just not worth it.
>
> my look fork is used. i administered the squeeze test when i was buying
> it at the bike swap, and when i got home, i bridged the fork ends,
> dropouts to end of steerer, then stood on it. not a squeak. it's been
> working fine for years and has survived a significant crash since, again
> without problem.
Typifies "beamboy science". Squeeze CF and if it doesn't talk to you,
telling you it's breaking, then it must be ok. The luck that beamboy has
had "for years" only served to reinforce his belief. Where's the science,
beamboy? Where's the "former metallurgist" thinking?
> bottom line, absolutely exercise full caution, but a blanket "do not use"
> tag is ignorant. i wouldn't buy off ebay because you can't test, but from
> craigslist or at a swap, where you can scratch and sniff, why not?
Ah, beamboy scientific rigor. "Scratch and sniff" pretty much describes it.
|
| |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 02:17:43
From:
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
On Sep 15, 12:08 pm, Lou Holtman <lholremovet...@planet.nl > wrote:
> frkry...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Sep 14, 11:38 pm, "Jeff" <n...@nothingX.com> wrote:
> >> I have a 12 year old titanium road frame that was custom sized for me by a
> >> small frame builder and still in decent shape. It has an older steel fork
> >> that I would like to replace with a carbon one.
>
> > Why???
>
> That is a relevant question.
>
> > Do you _really_ think it will make you faster??
>
> That is a irrelevant question. Why do people have to get faster when
> they buy something new?
Well, perhaps I misread his intent, but when he explained his riding,
he said "[I] ride hard and long, but don't do any real racing - but I
do train with some fairly serious racers who really push me."
It sure sounds like he wants the fork for speed. If so, it's not
going to work. If not - why does he want it?
- Frank Krygowski
|
| |
Date: 15 Sep 2007 16:27:52
From: andresmuro@aol.com
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
On Sep 14, 9:38 pm, "Jeff" <n...@nothingX.com > wrote:
> I have a 12 year old titanium road frame that was custom sized for me by a
> small frame builder and still in decent shape. It has an older steel fork
> that I would like to replace with a carbon one. The frame requires a 1"
> steerer. I'm currently about 220 pounds and ride hard and long, but don't do
> any real racing - but I do train with some fairly serious racers who really
> push me.
>
> ...anyway, I've never ridden or installed one of the threadless headsets or
> forks, but have installed one or two of the older threaded versions, have
> the proper headset press, and have read the instructions for the threadless
> variety.
>
> I don't want to spend a fortune upgrading a decent, but not terribly
> expensive frame so I'm looking for a few used parts on ebay.
>
> I'll be getting a new Chris King headset, and I've already bought a good
> carbon handlebar. ...still need to find a good stem of the right length.
>
> Three questions:
>
> 1) what do I need to consider in regard to carbon forks for larger riders?
> brands to looks for and avoid? ...most current forks seem to claim that they
> have no weight limits, but I've read some comments that some aren't quite
> stiff enough for 200+ pound riders.
>
> 2) any special considerations for used carbon forks? ...other than to make
> sure that the steerer tube is long enough?
>
> 3) any special tricks or advice when installing the fork and/or new headset?
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Jeff
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com
The lightest forks will weigh at under 400 grams with a carbon
steerer. the heaviest ones will be at around 550 grams with an
aluminum or steel steerer. The difference in price for the 150 grams
that you save will be about $200.00. You can get either a performance
or nashbar 1 inch carbon fork for about $80. They are great. I have a
ti bike with a one inch steerer and a nashbar carbon fork. I also have
a steel bike with a one inch steerer and a performance carbon fork.
Both of them work just fine.
You can't go wrong with either one of them.
Andres
|
| |
Date: 15 Sep 2007 14:06:48
From: David L. Johnson
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
Jeff wrote:
> 1) what do I need to consider in regard to carbon forks for larger
> riders? brands to looks for and avoid? ...
I am extremely pleased with my Wound-Up forks. Strongest fork of any
material. Mine are 1", with steel steerers, which I recommend. I weigh
less than you, but still, at 200 lbs, I don't want to mess with
something that could not handle the weight. Not terribly cheap at $350,
or so, but not outrageous.
most current forks seem to
> claim that they have no weight limits, but I've read some comments that
> some aren't quite stiff enough for 200+ pound riders.
I like s stiff fork, and most carbon forks are IMO not nearly stiff
enough, especially laterally. These are.
>
> 2) any special considerations for used carbon forks? ...other than to
> make sure that the steerer tube is long enough?
Some will claim you should never get one. One of mine is, and is
indistinguishable from the other one, except that I saved $300.
However, that is a dicey proposition in general. If you get one used,
be willing to throw it away if you find anything questionable.
>
> 3) any special tricks or advice when installing the fork and/or new
> headset?
It's straightforward. Keep a little extra length of steerer above where
you place the stem, so you can adjust it upwards if need be.
You will find it next to impossible to find a 1" stem. But lots of
1.125" stems come with a shim, or you can get them cheaply. I got shims
that were wider than the stem clamp, making even easier bar height
adjustments possible.
--
David L. Johnson
Become MicroSoft-free forever. Ask me how.
|
| |
Date: 15 Sep 2007 15:55:10
From:
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
On Sep 14, 11:38 pm, "Jeff" <n...@nothingX.com > wrote:
> I have a 12 year old titanium road frame that was custom sized for me by a
> small frame builder and still in decent shape. It has an older steel fork
> that I would like to replace with a carbon one.
Why???
Do you _really_ think it will make you faster??
- Frank Krygowski
|
| | |
Date: 15 Sep 2007 18:08:33
From: Lou Holtman
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sep 14, 11:38 pm, "Jeff" <n...@nothingX.com> wrote:
>> I have a 12 year old titanium road frame that was custom sized for me by a
>> small frame builder and still in decent shape. It has an older steel fork
>> that I would like to replace with a carbon one.
>
> Why???
That is a relevant question.
>
> Do you _really_ think it will make you faster??
That is a irrelevant question. Why do people have to get faster when
they buy something new?
Lou
--
Posted by news://news.nb.nu (http://www.nb.nu)
|
| |
Date: 15 Sep 2007 06:21:15
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
Jeff wrote:
> I have a 12 year old titanium road frame that was custom sized for me by
> a small frame builder and still in decent shape. It has an older steel
> fork that I would like to replace with a carbon one. The frame requires
> a 1" steerer. I'm currently about 220 pounds and ride hard and long, but
> don't do any real racing - but I do train with some fairly serious
> racers who really push me.
>
> ...anyway, I've never ridden or installed one of the threadless headsets
> or forks, but have installed one or two of the older threaded versions,
> have the proper headset press, and have read the instructions for the
> threadless variety.
>
> I don't want to spend a fortune upgrading a decent, but not terribly
> expensive frame so I'm looking for a few used parts on ebay.
>
> I'll be getting a new Chris King headset, and I've already bought a good
> carbon handlebar. ...still need to find a good stem of the right length.
>
> Three questions:
>
> 1) what do I need to consider in regard to carbon forks for larger
> riders? brands to looks for and avoid? ...most current forks seem to
> claim that they have no weight limits, but I've read some comments that
> some aren't quite stiff enough for 200+ pound riders.
>
> 2) any special considerations for used carbon forks? ...other than to
> make sure that the steerer tube is long enough?
>
> 3) any special tricks or advice when installing the fork and/or new
> headset?
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Jeff
>
>
in my experience, 1" carbon forks are best with a steel steerer - if you
can find one these days. carbon and aluminum steerers in that diameter
tend to be noticeably more flexible.
administer the "squeeze test" on the new fork before fitting it. if you
hear any noise, cracking, creaking, etc., return the fork as defective
and get your money back. i've had a couple of kestrels do this. not good.
|
| |
Date: 15 Sep 2007 05:45:01
From: Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
On Sep 14, 9:38 pm, "Jeff" <n...@nothingX.com > wrote:
> I have a 12 year old titanium road frame that was custom sized for me by a
> small frame builder and still in decent shape. It has an older steel fork
> that I would like to replace with a carbon one. The frame requires a 1"
> steerer. I'm currently about 220 pounds and ride hard and long, but don't do
> any real racing - but I do train with some fairly serious racers who really
> push me.
>
> ...anyway, I've never ridden or installed one of the threadless headsets or
> forks, but have installed one or two of the older threaded versions, have
> the proper headset press, and have read the instructions for the threadless
> variety.
>
> I don't want to spend a fortune upgrading a decent, but not terribly
> expensive frame so I'm looking for a few used parts on ebay.
>
> I'll be getting a new Chris King headset, and I've already bought a good
> carbon handlebar. ...still need to find a good stem of the right length.
>
> Three questions:
>
> 1) what do I need to consider in regard to carbon forks for larger riders?
> brands to looks for and avoid? ...most current forks seem to claim that they
> have no weight limits, but I've read some comments that some aren't quite
> stiff enough for 200+ pound riders.
Reynolds is a good choice BUT
>
> 2) any special considerations for used carbon forks? ...other than to make
> sure that the steerer tube is long enough?
I would not buy a used carbon anything. You don't know it's history
and breaking a fork really hurts.
>
> 3) any special tricks or advice when installing the fork and/or new headset?
Take a trip down to a decent LBS and get a primer.
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Jeff
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com
|
| |
Date: 15 Sep 2007 04:12:27
From: joseph.santaniello@gmail.com
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
On Sep 15, 5:38 am, "Jeff" <n...@nothingX.com > wrote:
> I have a 12 year old titanium road frame that was custom sized for me by a
> small frame builder and still in decent shape. It has an older steel fork
> that I would like to replace with a carbon one. The frame requires a 1"
> steerer. I'm currently about 220 pounds and ride hard and long, but don't do
> any real racing - but I do train with some fairly serious racers who really
> push me.
>
> ...anyway, I've never ridden or installed one of the threadless headsets or
> forks, but have installed one or two of the older threaded versions, have
> the proper headset press, and have read the instructions for the threadless
> variety.
>
> I don't want to spend a fortune upgrading a decent, but not terribly
> expensive frame so I'm looking for a few used parts on ebay.
>
> I'll be getting a new Chris King headset, and I've already bought a good
> carbon handlebar. ...still need to find a good stem of the right length.
>
> Three questions:
>
> 1) what do I need to consider in regard to carbon forks for larger riders?
> brands to looks for and avoid? ...most current forks seem to claim that they
> have no weight limits, but I've read some comments that some aren't quite
> stiff enough for 200+ pound riders.
>
> 2) any special considerations for used carbon forks? ...other than to make
> sure that the steerer tube is long enough?
>
> 3) any special tricks or advice when installing the fork and/or new headset?
>
> Thanks in advance
>
> Jeff
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com
I would avoid a used carbon fork. Who knows what it's been through. I
would avoid carbon bars at all costs. Particularly at your size. I've
seen 2 different carbon bars snap for riders much smaller. I'm 200+
and I've ridden bikes with cheap carbon forks and expensive ones, and
I can't say as I noticed any difference in terms of stiffness. I don't
think that really matters. If I were you, I go for a new fork and let
my wallet decide which one.
Joseph
|
| | |
Date: 15 Sep 2007 21:10:21
From: Jeff
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
So the next question is whether all forks will place the front of the bike
at the correct height for all frames (assuming they are made for 700c
tires). In other words, can some forks place the front of the bike lower or
higher than other forks?
Jeff
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
| | | |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 14:26:41
From: A Muzi
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
Jeff wrote:
> So the next question is whether all forks will place the front of the
> bike at the correct height for all frames (assuming they are made for
> 700c tires). In other words, can some forks place the front of the bike
> lower or higher than other forks?
Good question. Most modern race bikes force the geometry in small and
large sizes to be universally compatible with modern race forks. If it's
an older, hand made, touring or some other bike yes, do check both
clearance and rake first.
--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
|
| | | |
Date: 16 Sep 2007 07:36:40
From: jim beam
Subject: Re: New carbon fork install
|
Jeff wrote:
>
> So the next question is whether all forks will place the front of the
> bike at the correct height for all frames (assuming they are made for
> 700c tires). In other words, can some forks place the front of the bike
> lower or higher than other forks?
>
> Jeff
>
>
sure they can. but the probability of it being enough to have a
noticeable impact is slim to zero. i've done this conversion and have
tried many forks - you'll notice more from things like lateral
flexibility of fork blades and flexy steer tubes than from differences
in the axle/fork crown distance.
|
|
