100mm susfork on a 80mm designed frame advice!?

In the minority I guess, but I tend to the "if it looks right/wrong it probably is" school of thought. This didn't look right - and it didn't ride it either. A 100mm bounce in a c. '92 Kili. It handles much better with a short P2. And altho' I want to build my other identical frame into a h'tail it will not have more than 80mm up-front!

HTail3.jpg
 
Forget the head angle, I doubt anyone here could really feel 1 deg in a blind test

But for every 1" longer the forks are it will raise the BB 1/2", sometmes this can be a good thing, But i've found this seems to be where some odd handling traits stem from
 
Oldave’s set up above is interesting. The fork is probably 8-9cm longer than the rigid fork the Kili was designed for, which explains why the bb drop is just about zero (design would be 3-3.5cm). As has been said, a zero bb drop would put off a lot of punters, but then again Chipps on STW would say bb drops are for wimps and real men don’t have one. OK, so personally I’m a wimp, but clearly a zero bb drop is not an impossibility.

I think the other point about Oldave’s design is that he has a longish stem and the bars appear to be pointing forwards if anything. If you’re going to reduce the head angle, in this case by about 5 degrees (it’s 0.6 of a degree per cm), you need to speed the steering back up by using either a shorter stem or swept bars or both. Oldave hasn’t done that. He also has his saddle way forward, so combining that with the grips position, his weight must be well forward and the whole thing is slowing the steering down like crazy.

Mention is made above of On-Ones, but Brant Richards now has his own brand called Ragley. His geometry gives a 67.5 degree head angle with a 140mm fork sagged 40mm, combining that with a short stem. What struck me about that is that folks come on here sometimes saying ‘can I put a 140mm fork on my 1994 Fire Mountain, as I like a bit of bounce?’ And they tend to be told in no uncertain terms that it wouldn’t be a good idea. But in fact a 140mm fork sagged 40mm on a 1994 Fire Mountain would give a head angle of just over 67 – i.e., very similar to the Ragley’s geometry. And it would be stupid to deny that Brant Richards knows what he’s doing.

I think the point is that with longer-travel forks, not only do you get more sag, but there’s also a bigger head angle change between the just-riding-along compression and the heavily-loaded compression, say in a sharp downhill corner. If you have your bike set up at 71 degrees in just-riding-along mode, the head angle is going to ramp up under hard cornering and the whole thing is going to get a bit tricky. That’s where the thinking behind the Ragley’s 67.5 degrees comes from, and combined with the sort stem you still have sharp handling.

My message to Doctor B is that 100mm will not cause a problem, but you might want to consider bringing your grips backwards a bit relative to the steerer axis. And remember that the position will be a bit higher and your weight will be a bit further back, leading to a more active riding style. It’s not either right or wrong, it’s just making a retro bike handle a bit more like a modern bike. Whether you prefer it is just a matter of personal taste.
 
"I think the other point about Oldave’s design is that he has a longish stem and the bars appear to be pointing forwards if anything. If you’re going to reduce the head angle, in this case by about 5 degrees (it’s 0.6 of a degree per cm), you need to speed the steering back up by using either a shorter stem or swept bars or both. Oldave hasn’t done that. He also has his saddle way forward, so combining that with the grips position, his weight must be well forward and the whole thing is slowing the steering down like crazy."

Mostly guilty! It would certainly have benfitted from a shorter stem. Which would also have allowed the saddle to sit further back - altho' it was pretty much OK in relation to the b/b I think. Guess really it just "looked" wrong!
 
It's the seat angle thats important for climbing steep stuff - as above, sticking long forks on slackens the head angle by a few degrees and it has the same effect on the seat angle. Ragleys and on-ones etc have modern slack head angles of 67-68deg, but the seat angles are the same old 73 deg - this is the "secret" to the modern design. Climbing is good and when the going gets "gnarl" and your suspension forks dive giving you a head angle of 71 deg again your seat angle will be 76 deg... which is fine because your not sitting on the saddle... your hanging on to the bike with your gravity dropper seatpost lowered giving it loads of "body english" :roll: :roll: :roll:
 
Back
Top