replacing fork with shorter one

[gsy971]

I have a frame and want to install a shorter A2C rigid fork.
I think the "correct" fork length for the frame is about 425mm or 42.5cm. From the manufacturer, the BB should be about 12 inches or 30.5cm.
When I installed my 425mm fork, the bike seemed a little "stretched" out. Realistically the frame may be a tad too big for me but not by much.
Although the top tube length is pretty spot on for my size, the TT is curved so I don't have much stand over.
I would like to swap the fork and get a rigid 390mm fork or a 405mm.
My question is if this will make a huge difference in riding or greatly disturb my bikes integrity. I am only using this for road and general goofing around.

By the way the bike is a cruiser type Merlin Newsboy frame imported as a custom and sold by Spicer bicycles. It was bought used and I really just eyeballed it that it would fit me. When I put the frame up against my '95 Trek 8700 bike the frame seemed comparable in size.

Any help would be greatly appreciated. Sorry no pictures right now

 

[mattr]

If you add a shorter fork, depending on the head and seat tube angles, and how you adjust the saddle (properly or not), it'll either stretch it out a bit more, or a lot more.

So you'll gain in stand over, upset the handling (might not be a big deal) and increase the reach.

 

[gsy971]

by stretched I kinda mean "looks" larger than expected. not necessarily too long. sorry for the confusion or the wrong use of terminology. It may also be just an illusion on my part. I have a 100mm stem and thinking about going down to 70mm although when I sat on my bike with pumped tires the reach felt comfortable.
I am a shorter guy 5'7" so I like my bike on the smaller side I guess more tight and compact, maybe it's the longer fork tubes that make it seemed stretched or the skinnier tires I have. regardless I still want to replace the fork. so it seems I should be okay with that. As I've read the handling like you said may not be a big deal and I know that the rider should or can adapt
I was just wondering if there will be any other issues I should consider with the bike (frame/fork/wheels) if reducing the fork length. I know the BB will sit lower. Again just using this as a commuter

Here is a link with a picture (hope it works) of the frame posted on MTBR. I also posted the same question on this post
http://forums.mtbr.com/vintage-retro-cl ... st12087273

 

[catf]

shorter forks are gonna make the handling more twitchy, but hard to predict how much. probably best bet is try it and see, should be ok. one other thing you might want to think about is rake/offset, can vary a bit fork to fork. you wouldnt wanna shorten the rake at the same time as the length.

 

[gsy971]

Not sure I completely understand rake/offset.
I currently have a pace rc31 fork 42.5cm fork on the bike now and am looking to replace with a 39cm or 40cm fork both with 42mm rake.
I don't know what the rake/offset is on the pace.

Again this bike is for road so not sure how much twitchiness I would feel. more so if off road though I assume.

 

[catf]

rc31 are 45mm rake, just somehting to bare in mind when you try it cos it adds to the change in wheelbase. thinking about it, shorter rake would make teh head angle a bit slacker (i think?), shorter forks makes it a bit steeper, might cancel out. actaully will be interesting to know if it does

other than the handling i cant see how there would be any issues, like there can be problems going for longer forks, stressing the head tube joints, but not going shorter.