Forks

[flydhest]

I'm in the market for a new fork for the Legend. Mavic, I seem to recall from the old phorum, you had talked about F2 v. O2 in a fairly controlled test. Care to recapitulate?

Anyone else? Oh, comments particularly welcome if you have ever been in the 200 pound neighborhood. I'm not there now (and hopefully won't be again) but I find that rider weight has a lot to do with people's takes on these things.

[mavic1010]

To the Econ Guru:

I had an ouzo pro on a legend and and F2 on a legend. Geometries were the same as were the components (including wheelset, skewers, tires, tubes, tire liner etc....). Tubing on the legends were slightly different as the newer legend with F2 had the new reynolds tubing, OS S-bend stays, while the older legend had OS tubing throughout (non-reynolds), but single-bend stays.

Okay...I felt the ouzo pro was way too twitchy for my liking. I didn't like the way it felt on the road. I also didn't like the steering. The f2 gave greater road feel, and i felt more confidant. Now, I must say that I have never descended with the ouzo pro, mainly cuz I was too scared. It felt so twitchy on the flats that I would have never descended with it. Now Serotta Bob agreed with my assessment of his Ouzo Pro, but it was on a calfee, and I believe his HA was more aggressive, which I'm sure played a part in his twitchiness.

Now to me, the best fork was the F1.....great road feel, great descender, better looks...I'm sad to see it go....

[Too Tall]

That bike deserves a sweet AlphaQ. Look at their web site for specs. Kelly B. will agree that this is appropriate for the bike as we talked about this recently.

Go for the orig AlphaQ, not the Subwhatevertheycallit.

Can I do the cutting? BYO fine tooth hacksaw blade thanks.

[flydhest]

2Tall,

Hmmm, I'll look into that. I thought I had looked at those and noticed a different rake than on the O2/Ouzo/F2. Maybe I'm wrong.

You serious about wanting to cut it? I'm still really happy with those pedals you sold me, so . . . I suppose I could indulge you. I keep telling myself that it's no different than cutting any other steerer tube, but I still cringe at carbon.

[dnovo]

Ah, our first disagreement! (But very polite.) I agree with the assessment of the Serotta F2 fork (not cheap, but excellent) but find the Alpha Q just so-so and the Sub Q 'twitchy' if I may coin a phrase.

I have a taste for the arcane, and with my 'fleet', have had the chance to sample a few that are actually quite nice, if not well known. Mizuno Shark (on my Pegoretti Fina Estampa and De Rosa King) is an outstanding fork. I am sad that Dario chose to replace it with an Ouzo Pro for the 2003 and 2004 models. The Deda Black Magic on my GGM (now gone and replaced by the BLE) is another excellent choice.

But the "Q's" are simply not my favorites.

One man's pleasure, another man's poison? ;) Dave N.

[davids]

I'm extremely happy with the Wound Up carbon on my Seven. It's stable, yet very precise. However, I don't have any meaningful basis to compare it with other forks.

I know that Tom Kellogg is also a fan: Spectrum Cycles Knowledge Base - Forks (http://www.spectrum-cycles.com/65.htm) . Interesting reading...

[Smiley]

I is a threaded fork , being removed from a 60 cm frame? interested call the Captain .

[mavic1010]

Smiley..flash me an email about the fork...mavic1010@bigfoot.com

[SBash]

OK, here is my take on forks. First let me say that I was a bike shop owner for many years and have built up many a road bike and tried several carbon forks. For those that weigh over 200lbs like myself I would recommend a fork with a steel or aluminum steerer such as a F1 ( if you can find one ), Wound up ( very stiff and strong ), Ouzo Comp, Kestrel EMS ( for those on a budget ). I personally had a bad experience on a Ouzo Pro ( Carbon steerer ) when riding down a steep hill with sharp turns at about 35 mph I could feel the fork give alot and very squirley in the turns and scared the **** out of me! The next day I dissassembled and checked the fork, headset, wheel, etc and everything checked out. So I replaced with a Reynolds Ouzo comp ( aluminum steerer ) on the same bike, re-tested down the same hill with no problem and felt very secure in the turns. Just to make sure the next day installed another ( new ) Reynolds Ouzo Pro ( carbon steerer ) on the same bike, road tested down the same hill and had the same bad experience, but was ready this time. The reynolds ouzo pro worked fine for me in all other riding situations, so I personally think it was my weight. Maybe for someone under 175 or so the fork would be awesome, but not for me. At 210lbs I will stay with steel or aluminum steerers on carbon forks or a good Steel fork. Remember this is my personal experience and observation. Now if I could only get down to 175lbs.

Thanks, SB

[Sandy]

SB,

Interesting and thought provoking for larger cyclists such as myself. I have the F1 fork on my CSi and the F2 fork on my new Serotta. The F1 fork has a 1 inch steel steerer tube whereas the F2 fork has a 1 1/8 inch carbon steerer. In a thread on the "previous" Serotta Forum, it was noted that for larger riders a carbon 1 inch steerer in was not really stiff enough, but a carbon 1/1/8 inch steerer was stiff enough.

I really liked the F1 fork and even asked Kelly at Serotta about building my Ottrott with a 1 inch HT and the F1 fork. He said that it could be done, but he thought that I should go with the F2, which I did (1 1/8"). I have only ridden the Ottrott about 240 miles, but did have it at 40 mph once thus far and found it to be very solid and stable.

I would certainly like to hear what Serotta and others say about this issue.



Sandy

[dbrk]

I very much like the Alpha Q but the rake is 4.4 in contrast to the likely 4.3cm rake on the Reynolds. Increasing rake obviously decreases trail but it's my bet that this 1mm makes no real difference in the way the bike will handle. Even give "the rule of the last 2%" (i.e., when things are 98% all the same, the real differences appear in the last 2%, btw, I made this up...), I think we are unlikely talking about coming out of the sweet spot for trail. I have used both versions of the Alpha Q, the regular one and the Sub3. I can't tell any difference in handling and weight never seems to make much impact on my experience. Still, dnovo says he is not so fond of the AlphaQ. Hmmm. This has been the more reliable, least scary fork I have ever used. I also like the Look HSC4 (on my VaMoots). What I don't like in a carbon fork is being scared by it (once in awhile the Colnagao Star fork gives me a rise in attention). I think that the Mizuno fork has also instilled great confidence. I have them on Pegorettis (Marcelo and Fina) as well as no my Carrera Giove.

dbrk
who picked the AlphaQ sub-3 for the Hampsten/Parlee Z1 and just about everything was available for the same price...so the pick was based on past positive experience.

[dnovo]

Douglas: As I said, one man's pleasure, another man's poison. I didn't have a bad experience with the Alpha, I simply prefer other forks. But we agree wholeheartedly on the Mizuno Sharks that we have on our Pegoretti Finas. I also REALLY like the Look fork, which I am using in its new lighter SL version on my new Look frames. (They lightened it a tad for 2004, but kept the same features and feel compared to the version I tried on last year's frameset.)

If you can read German (I get by) the new issue of TOUR ran a batch of the newest forks through their usual round of exhaustive lab tests. The Ouzo Pro did quite well, the new TIME Stiff did very well, and the Oval Concepts did quite poorly! Interesting study, in a magazine that can be found at Borders or B&N from time to time.

It would seem that there are more good forks than bad out there, with the real question perhaps whether some of the advantages -- primarily weight savings -- are worth the extra cost. This is particularly evident in the comment above that the Ouzo Pro and the sligthly heavier but notably less expensive Ouzo Comp which lacks the popular carbon steerer feel the same in use. I have both forks, the Pro on several including my BLE and the Comp on my Land Sharks, and I would be hard pressed to tell the difference in performance. Faced with this choice, the decision would be a no-brainer. Dave N.

[Too Tall]

You (all) make good points. I got my AlphaQ direct from Kew Lee and it has a Ti steerer w/ normal stiffness. Kew told me to go that route and ordering it extra stiff was not necessary. I've done about every crazy stunt you can imagine...at speed and the fork is solid and light.

Your point regarding a non carbon steerer might have been overlooked...good comment. I've wondered if a carbon steerer would have felt different on my bike? I do have another bike with a woundup fork. That (carbon) steerer has an aluminum insert... strong like moose!

Flyguy, all we need is some masking tape, a fresh fine tooth (32 tpi) hacksaw blade and a tape measure. I have a nice jig to cut the fork. Anytime chief. I do alot of mechanical work for friends.
Working on bikes is my meditation.

[jerk]

ok, here's the skinny....

the jerk thinks dario is supplying the u.s. importer gita with frames sans forks and gita is supplying the ouzos. dario makes his bikes per order sohe matches the ride height etc. etc. the jerk could be wrong about this but it's surprising considering his current relationship with columbus that he doesn't supply his bikes with muscles or super muscles....whatever, all the current crop of carbon forks seem fine although the jerk has found truetemper alphas way out of spec, not to mention the ride height is a little high if the frame isn't designed around it. the times are still nice and the pimp fork of the year is definatly the colnago star 1 1/8th if you can find one....of course the jerk laments the loss of custom raked forks....oh wait the jerk's ble will have a custom raked fork!!!!

the best carbon fork in terms of rigidity, ride quality, craftsmanship, and all other factors save weight (and who cares about weight outside of wheels) was/is the serotta f1. flawless in every way.

the jerk

[Dr. Doofus]

I'm no expert.


Its been years since I've ridden a steel fork, but as soon as I'm well enough to take the Merckx out, I'll get familiar with one again....

I never rode an F1, but the F2 on my CSi is much stiffer than the Ouzo Pro I ran on another bike.... The Carve on my Marinoni was unforgivingly stiff, and sent every vibration back up into the front end...it descended nicely, though....

[dnovo]

So how ARE the Muscle and Super Muscle? Seen them in catalogs, but never seen one on a bike or tried one. Any insights here, jerk? Anyone else? Dave N.

[victoryfactory]

I am about 190 and short (5'-8')so my head tube is short as well.
I've always suspected that the bad handling reports on carbon steerers come mostly from taller riders with big frames, I ride a 52cm frame an have had great results with the Ouzo Pro and 02, I found the F1 on my Atlanta to be much to harsh and replaced it with an Ouzo, big improvement, but then I don't do too much 40mph+ decsending on Long Island.

DBRK:
I thought that inceasing the rake would increase the trail by the same amount, no?

Victory Factory, it's snowing today in NY, Glad I got out yesterday,
he said smugly

[dbrk]

victoryfac,

Of course rake and trail are reciprocal measurements, so as you increase rake you decrease trail (and vice-versa, obviously). This is the obvious What of the matter, but what about the So What?

As you decrease trail the bike usually handles faster but this depends on the ht angle, cs length, and bb height. Everything really works together to create the feel. Some argue that on smaller frames a longer wheelbase offsets a higher bb (the Co-Motion folks, who know a thing or two) make this case. But a lower center of gravity creates more stability, in general. The simplest way to put rake, trail, and ht angle together is to go here:
http://www.asphaltmag.com/techie/trail/trailomatic.htm

The trail sweet spot is about 5.9cm. As trail drops, handling speed increases, meaning the bike turns more quickly. Increase trail, stability increases in turning but becomes slower. Soooo, on a race bike for crits, less trail would make it more responsive to leaning and countersteering. On a French bike fit, trail numbers increase as does overall wheelbase: front center is long to avoid the taboo (on French bikes this is taboo) TCO and chainstays are longlong. The jerk could explain the effect of lengthening or shortening the stem because that effects weight distribution and turning dramatically. But the key to the matter is to see things in gestalt terms, as a whole vision: if you mess with one number, you mess with everything.

dbrk

[dnovo]

Snowed last night here too, but like you, I feel better for having gotten out for a very long ride yesterday. Much better than the trainer this morning.

BTW, tried out the new 04 Assos Thermax gloves and Robo Plus cap and Balakava. I hate to sound like I am shilling for Assos, which I am not, but as expensive as their gear is, it works well and lasts, built with all the precision of a Swiss watch -- and one might say priced like one as well :)

The Thermax gloves lack the bulk which make some other winter gloves a problem when working the levers of a road bike, and kept my hands warm on the long, cold ride yesterday. As numb fingers -- and toes -- are the usual limiting factor on a cold winter ride, you may want to consider these gloves and the head gear as well. (Cbike has a full selection. Sarah, their main buyer, is very up on all Assos gear. You may want to speak to her. Sorry, starting to sound like I am their sales agent, but they have good prices and ship the same day. Honest people and long time bike shop with a real shop rather than just a Net business.)

Oh, my dealer got in his first order of the new Serotta/ASSOS Rubi winter jerseys. Very nice and, while priced like all other Assos gear, functional and nicely made. One word on this and the 'regular' Serotta/Assos jerseys, they run VERY small. I normally take an XLG in the Assos (their equiv. of XXL) but needed the TIR (XXXL) in the Rubi. You may want to try them on before you order or consider ordering a size larger than you would normally go, even in 'Euro' cut. Dave N.

[victoryfactory]

DBRK;

You are right, of course and judging by the complexity of this issue, I'm glad Kelly designed my new bike and not me...
My imput was "I want my Legend to be more stable and less "twitchy" he did the rest.
I found more info on this at: http://www.phred.org/~josh/bike/trail.html

Thanks
VF

[Howie]

I too am in the market for a new fork. I'm replacing the old Kinesis 2 on my Concours and, being 210 lbs, looking for something a bit more substantial. I dont care about weight, just looking for a solid fork that wont give me any worries. I put out the question to Reynolds about the Ouzo but havent heard back. I've got a reply from Serotta Todd saying the F2, but a few threads and my LBS say the carbon steerer may not be enough for my weight. Is it worth going with an O2 or looking elsewhere?
Howie

[Ozz]

Does anyone have insight into why builders don't/can't make steel forks with 1.125" steerers?

[dbrk]

A steel fork needs a fork crown and the steerer needs to fit the fork crown, so in order to build a 1 1/8th you would need a "new" fork crown and these cost mucho dinero (tooling, casting, design, quantity, yikes!) How much demand these days do we think there is for steel forks when we can all use a perfectly fine IKEA-made plug-in generic carbon fork? How was that for a neo-Luddite excoriation of the "advances" of current technology? Invoke the holiday spirit, I say, tell it like it is! I think even the ugly so-called unicrown steel forks that meant to eliminate a true crown require a 1" diameter, like the one on my otherwise excellent DeRosa Neo Pro. The much ballyhooed advantages of 1.125 are just that, more hoo than bally or, to put it another way, more non- than sense. No one ever talked about fork steerers not being "stiff" enough before the bicycle industry decided it was cheaper to go with threadless designs and to adopt standards that compel builders to build _to the fork_ rather than to the frame. In other words, even if there are a handful of rakes available, the frames are all built to the fork rakes available. This isn't a monumental issue but it's certainly backwards. At stake here is not what is better or stiffer or rides better. It's all dollars, very little sense.

The best riding forks are still handmade steel and the diameter makes no difference. If you are all about racing then you don't want a steel fork for the weight. But if you are just about riding then more plug-in parts makes a bike less original, less appealing to my eye. Sure, I use plug-in forks on modern bikes, 'cause I like all sorts of bikes (well, mostly, and if I don't like them then it's sure okay by me whatever anyone likes). One thing more: riding a steel fork on a lugged steel bike _never_ made any rider like the _vast_ majority of us any slower but it sure does make the bike more beautiful and more interesting in design. Carbon forks are cheaper to make, one less thing for a company to do, just another feature of "better" is whatever we can sell for less effort and trouble. None of this is new from me but I never apparently tire of saying it.

BTW, the jerk is correct that you must check the spec on the Alpha Qs because they can be wrong. Ask for such a thing. These forks ride fine. Unless a carbon fork really stinks I can't tell the difference. They are like driving a perfectly nice Toyota. Oh, what a feelin'...you can't even remember.

dbrk

[Too Tall]

Wax on

Tell more about spec.s out of whack.

I know that 374 is the claimed axel to crown measure for my fork and my Ti Legend was made to fit this.

[Len J]

I'd never use a wound up again.

Ugly IMO

Too stiff IMO

Did I mention Ugly?

To each their own

Len

[woolly]

When I ordered my custom fixie frame from him, I had Don Ferris (Anvil Bikeworks) also build a matching steel fork to go with it. 1.125" steel threadless steerer. So it would appear that builders CAN provide this. I guess I never game it much thought that some might not want to do this. Surly makes 1.125" steel forks for their Pacer & Crosscheck frames, but I think the Steamroller is still 1". Don't know what their new Long Haul Trucker will have.

BTW, I run a Columbus Muscle fork on both my Anvil Chisel (steel) and Habanero (Ti) frames. 15mm spacers under Salsa SUP threadless stems on each. Never had a problem with either one of them, and they do not appear to be flexy. I like 'em. Never tried the Super Muscle, though. Although most catalogs spec show these w/ a rake of 4.5, Don tells me that he measures every one that he provides with a frame, and that all have measured out to an actual rake of 4.3.

[weisan]

Fly, I'm interested in what you get in the end?

[Dekonick]

I find that at 180-190 lbs (depends on my diet :p ) I have no trouble with my present bike. 56 hors cat with 02 (ouzo pro re-labeled for Serotta? - I think it is)

Fastest descent I have made so far is 45-50mph (using Polar S510 with wireless speed sensor, 23mm 700c and generic 700c setting) on Frederick road @ Balt Co / Ho. Co line. Those of you who ride the area know its a nice descent that curves the entire length until you pretty much cross into historic Ellicott City. I found that I felt MUCH more control with the O2/ Hors C. than my usual ride (older steel Colorado CR with steel fork)

I also cant compare any other carbon forks as this is the only one I have used. I find the steel fork 'feels' nice too...but I couldnt find any to go with the H.C. so the O2 is what Richardsons bike mart suggested I get. I love it so far :D

[flydhest]

Fly, I'm interested in what you get in the end?
I ended up with an Alpha Q. It is a very good fork. It has good clearance for tires, as well.

I'm a happy camper.

[ericmurphy]

I have an F2 on my 58 cm Legend Ti with OS tubing. With about 400 miles on it so far, I'm astonished at how quickly the bike gets going really fast. Yesterday I got it up to 44 MPH on a curvy 0.9 mile downhill that's probably 7% or less, and I think I hit my max maybe 200 yards into the descent.

44 MPH on a Legend with an F2 fork doesn't even feel fast (at least in terms of the fear factor), and I'm a reasonably heavy rider (c. 185 pounds).

[vaxn8r]

44 MPH on a Legend with an F2 fork doesn't even feel fast (at least in terms of the fear factor), and I'm a reasonably heavy rider (c. 185 pounds).

How about 44MPH and fast approaching a paper napkin? Now that might give you reason to pause. :)

[Keith A]

flydhest -- A couple of questions about your Alpha Q:
o Which offset did you get? 42 or 44 (Serotta specs call for a 43)
o Curved or straight blades?
o Ti or Carbon Steerer?

[flydhest]

Keith,

44
Straight
Carbon

[Keith A]

Thanks for the info.

[ericmurphy]

How about 44MPH and fast approaching a paper napkin? Now that might give you reason to pause. :)

If that happens, I'm okay, because I'm not normally pedaling when I'm going that fast. :-)