Custom frames with carbon forks (a question)...

[catulle]

I've noticed that many manufacturers of custom frames sell their product with carbon frames from other manufacturers. For instance, a custom titanium frame with a Reynolds or Look carbon fork or whichever the client ends up buying. Thus, my question is: Considering how important the fork is for the overall handling of the bicycle, shouldn't the manufacturer include the fork in his custom package?

What's the sense of going thru pains meassuring and fitting someone for a custom frame if any old fork would do at the end? Shouldn't the fork be part of the whole when it comes to custom frames? Actually, the question would apply to all frames, custom or not, because depending upon the fork many apects of the bicycle ride could change. It seems to me that just building a frame, and then sending the customer for a fork made from a third party for all or any frame could be disappointing. Is that practice a short-cut of sorts? Non?

[atmo]

whoa atmo

[Kevan]

with a fork like the Reynolds which is mass produced and has proven itself worthy and marketable. While there is a healthy population of steel fork lovers still around, the larger population of rider is “thinking” CF is the answer to weight and ride quality, let’s not fool ourselves. Keep in mind the folly this group shared when Serotta announced their own discontinuation of building steel forks. I’m guessing the cost/quality aspect makes these CF forks a shoe-in.

Now arguably, builders who are going to build a frame around a Reynolds fork (or other) might or should include paint options if that is part of your concern too.

Edit!

I will acknowledge there are buyers, educated consumers some call'm, who can see past the norm and will select steel as it addresses specific needs where that material remains surpreme.

[cpg]

Amen. And I don't use that word too often.

Curt

[Grant McLean]

.

[Grant McLean]

Thus, my question is: Considering how important the fork is for the overall handling of the bicycle, shouldn't the manufacturer include the fork in his custom package?

how much did atmo pay you to ask that question?



g

[davids]

I think it's an excellent subject. Clearly, some of the best framebuilders out there are choosing to equip their bikes with carbon forks. Serotta designs and sells their own (I'm nearly sure they're made elsewhere.) Pegoretti has equipped his frames with Ouzo Pros for years - The '04 catalog says, "All Pegoretti frames except the Luigino are equipped with Reynolds Ouzo Pro full carbon forks. These light and strong forks compliment the ride and handling of Pegoretti frames."

Is Kevan correct? Or is a more cynical point of view - They're fashionable and cheap - more appropriate? I tend to think that, just as with frame materials, there's more to the discussion than "steel vs. carbon". Fork gestalt, atmo.

[zeroking17]

I hate the frames that come with plastic spoons.

[Serpico]

https://www.whiskeycreekpress.com/store/images/large/DeadHorseCreek.jpg

[catulle]

Clarification: My point is not that there is something wrong with carbon forks, or that forks ought to be made of any particular material. My point is that every frame should have its own unique fork comforming a unit of purpose with the frame. The one fork suits all frames approach seems flawed to my common sense. The same would apply to the just about any fork would suit this frame concept.

[Grant McLean]

Clarification: ... The one fork suits all frames approach seems flawed to my common sense. The same would apply to the just about any fork would suit this frame concept.

It's not as if all bikes have the same fork.

Cannondale, Cervelo, Colnago, DeRosa, Pinarello, Trek, Specialized, Ridley, Scott, and many others use a proprietary fork.

Even within a brand, a Specialized Roubaix fork is totally different than a Tarmac
fork. But I hear wha'chu sayin'...

g

[1centaur]

Most people sneered at Pinarello for putting on a fork they said rode better.

Good framebuilders want to get riders into the right ballpark for their needs/desires. Any pretense at putting them into the right shoe box is just that, pretense, given myriad considerations of changing anatomy, position, use, weather, clothing, etc.. The fork makers out there seem to cover the bases pretty well on fork types (stiff, aero, light, flexy). I hope any good framebuilder has tested the standard forks and found one that fits his view of the right ballpark for his frame's tendencies. I hope that the same guy would accept a client preference for something else and comment on its effect on his frame's ride characteristics.

If a framebuilder had a custom fork produced for him in lot size, it would add nothing to the process of shoe-boxing since every rider would be different. Framebuilders can't realistically make one-off carbon forks since buyers find comfort in the proven ability of known brands not to face plant them. That leaves metal framebuilders who kinda must make metal forks as mass market options don't exist. They do, and I'll leave it to metal bike riders to comment on whether each fork is highly customized or really just bespoke ballparking.

[David Kirk]

I've noticed that many manufacturers of custom frames sell their product with carbon frames from other manufacturers. For instance, a custom titanium frame with a Reynolds or Look carbon fork or whichever the client ends up buying. Thus, my question is: Considering how important the fork is for the overall handling of the bicycle, shouldn't the manufacturer include the fork in his custom package?

What's the sense of going thru pains meassuring and fitting someone for a custom frame if any old fork would do at the end? Shouldn't the fork be part of the whole when it comes to custom frames? Actually, the question would apply to all frames, custom or not, because depending upon the fork many apects of the bicycle ride could change. It seems to me that just building a frame, and then sending the customer for a fork made from a third party for all or any frame could be disappointing. Is that practice a short-cut of sorts? Non?

yep whoa amen atmo

Dave

[Serotta_Andrew]

Serotta F3 Carbon Fork
With all of our custom bikes we can choose from a wide variety of tube sets to match a rider’s stiffness needs. With all this variability in how we build frames, we realized it was silly to offer only stock forks. Enter the F3: The first full carbon fork to come in 3 stiffness levels and multiple rakes to perfectly match our custom tube sets.

[atmo]

Serotta F3 Carbon Fork
With all of our custom bikes we can choose from a wide variety of tube sets to match a rider’s stiffness needs. With all this variability in how we build frames, we realized it was silly to offer only stock forks. Enter the F3: The first full carbon fork to come in 3 stiffness levels and multiple rakes to perfectly match our custom tube sets.
sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet atmo.
that is why i consider serotta cycles a
framebuilder and not a bike company.

[Ken Robb]

my guess is that if a standard fork is to be used a frame designer may have to make compromises elsewhere to optimize performance with such a fork whereas he would have no such compromise if he were also designing a custom fork for a specific frame.

Note: I'm not saying that a custom fork eliminates all compromise in designing a bike. I have ridden some wonderful bikes with custom and mass-produced forks. I can't help wondering how much better one of those good bikes w/stock forks could have been with a fork custom made just for them.

[zeroking17]

I believed this last year, and I still believe it: <snip> there is one criterion that immediately divides any potential list into "faves" and "not faves": Is the fork (preferably with a flat crown) made by the same builder who made the frame and, by implication, is the fork designed to work with that particular frame?

If a frame/fork combination does not pass this litmus test, well...no soup for you.

http://forums.thepaceline.net/showpost.php?p=163753&postcount=34

[pdxmech13]

whoa atmo

You can say that again.

[J.Greene]

It seems to me that just building a frame, and then sending the customer for a fork made from a third party for all or any frame could be disappointing. Is that practice a short-cut of sorts? Non?


When I built my first frame this issue was the most eye opening. I don't know how or why you'd build a frame without at least having the 3rd party fork in your hand before the geometry is decided on.

The race team I just joined sent out an order form for the team bike. It's an asian cookie cutter bike. Because the fork is constant in the differing sizes the geometry gets kinda nasty in the smaller sizes. No gestalt in that bike atmo.

JG

[atmo]

The race team I just joined sent out an order form for the team bike. It's an asian cookie cutter bike. Because the fork is constant in the differing sizes the geometry gets kinda nasty in the smaller sizes. No gestalt in that bike atmo.

JG
go to window and howard beale yourself atmo.

[David Kirk]

go to window and howard beale yourself atmo.

I'm as upset as all heck and I won't take it much longer.

Dave

[atmo]

I'm as upset as all heck and I won't take it much longer.

Dave
that's angst atmo?

[Fixed]

bro I don't know very much but...a lugged steel frame needs it's other half
..imho
cheers

[J.Greene]

go to window and howard beale yourself atmo.

Thanks, I feel better.

JG

[David Kirk]

that's angst atmo?

It's my new softer more in touch with my feminine side, PC compatible angst.


Time for Oprah!

Dave

[atmo]

It's my new softer more in touch with my feminine side, PC compatible angst.


Time for Oprah!

Dave
ovum rules atmo

[fiamme red]

that's angst atmo?http://www.amazon.com/Woody-Allen-Angst-Philosophical-Commentaries/dp/0786402075

[Fat Robert]

most fork makers make different rakes...ok, so a choice between 40, 43, and 45mm may not be ideal, but a couple of builders I've spoken to have no problem with that....

now, when a manufacturer uses a 43mm rake in every frame size, now that's wack

[dbrk]

Broken record comment (feel free to skip...as a matter of fact, always feel like that...)...I've said this a million times here.

Designing a bike as a whole doesn't work the frame around the limitations of fork rake and other design issues (like clearances, eyelets, or other choices) but I think it's also the case that certain kinds of bikes work just fine with the usual 40/43/44/45 rakes on carbon forks and that some of these forks have proven a fine choice for specific applications. On certain race bikes, particularly inside zones of sizing and design, I can't see why a carbon fork would be "inferior" (though in many other instances it offers liabilities and no advantages).

Yet it seems just as true that there is often no advantage to a carbon fork except aesthetically---odd thing to say, no?---in the case of a real OS ti looking/carbon-modern bike (like my Legend or HC SBti or Tournesol Z1) the carbon fork is part of the aesthetic gestalt; there are exceptions such as the recent 650B Tournesol which has nice fat titanium tubes and uses a custom steel fork. This provides a worthy exception (seeing as how there are only the "rules" we create...this bike is a fantastic ride, though I will return with more impressions after more than two rides...). We might have used a carbon fork for this "modern" looking 650B bike had there been one that matched our design criteria---and getting such a thing made returns to the Original Five Reasons why many many good ideas never get done (m-o-n-e...you can surmise the fifth reason).

Fork makers, as Interbike once again revealed, don't think outside the marketing boxes of the current sales trends nor do they have the means/care to make changes that are not cost effective...unless a company has the money and the clout to get things done. There would be, for example, many more types of parts "groups" (there are essentially just price point iterations of the same stuff) if Shimagnolo were market forced. Capitalism doesn't always produce the best results, obviously, though I'm not attempting to hijack this to the "virtues" of "free markets," etc. My "problem" with carbon forks has been their limited application designs, that is, clearances, eyelets, only coming in 700c, very few for 57mm brakes, etc., all matters easily addressed with a proper custom steel fork. I commend Serotta for going down the road of designing their own carbon forks. They have addressed the issues that suit their bikes admirably but the larger industry still has very few options regarding clearances, brake design, eyelets, and other details. Carbon forks, even under the best of circumstances, are not even close to be steel in terms of design versatility. I honestly doubt "the industry" will ever get it really right and yet there is nothing to complain about so long as Sachs, Goodrich, Kirk, Dario, Sacha, and the other great builders will answer these requests.

dbrk
who comes from the era when broken records were on turntables...

[catulle]

[QUOTE=dbrk
dbrk
who comes from the era when broke records were on turntables...[/QUOTE]

Yup. Too much of the music I hear now days sounds like a broken record. Am I old or what...? :eek:

[72gmc]

i'm still mad at my brother for scoring the direct drive turntable from dad's old rack system... he has all of my records now, broken and otherwise.

my new frame will have a steel fork made by the builder just for me.

[saab2000]

There is a great danger of losing sight of the forest for the trees here.

[chrisroph]

i'm still mad at my brother for scoring the direct drive turntable from dad's old rack system... he has all of my records now, broken and otherwise.

my new frame will have a steel fork made by the builder just for me.


Direct drive tables are long superceded by belt drives. Go find yourself a nice used rega planar 2 or 3, and get your records back.

I agree with fixed that a steel bike works best with a steel fork, although the F series rock as do the reynolds.

[davids]

Direct drive tables are long superceded by belt drives. Go find yourself a nice used rega planar 2 or 3, and get your records back.
Couldn't agree more. I bought a new AR 'table in '84 and never looked back. And when I replaced that excellent tt with a VPI Jr, I could easily hear the improvement from the next room.

As far as CF forks, they're either part of the gestalt or they're not. Gestalt trumps material, atmo.

[bcm119]

How many variables does a fork have, assuming a racing bike with short reach brakes and no eyelets? Blade stiffness, steerer stiffness, rake.. anything else? Just wondering.

[J.Greene]

How many variables does a fork have, assuming a racing bike with short reach brakes and no eyelets? Blade stiffness, steerer stiffness, rake.. anything else? Just wondering.

axle to crown race length

JG

[catulle]

axle to crown race length

JG


Would axle to crown race length be a factor depending upon the size of the frame? I mean, a longer fork for a larger frame?

[Grant McLean]

Would axle to crown race length be a factor depending upon the size of the frame? I mean, a longer fork for a larger frame?

It's mainly a factor of how much tire clearance you want, for either larger
tires or fender room.

g

[catulle]

It's mainly a factor of how much tire clearance you want, for either larger
tires or fender room.

g

Oh, thanks.

[J.Greene]

Would axle to crown race length be a factor depending upon the size of the frame? I mean, a longer fork for a larger frame?

I don't think so. The guys who do this for a living can explain it better than me. But think of it this way. Take the same frame and visulize it with two forks. One with more distance between the axle and crown race. That extra could even be in the size or shape of the fork crown. The effect is it pushes the bottom of the head tube higher, changing the steering geometry slightly. That is the gestalt, the frame builder knows all this and builds accordingly. I have several carbon forks that I don't ride and they are about 5mm different.

JG

[David Kirk]

There are a number of dimensions to a fork. Some are variable and some are fixed depending on the type of fork.

Span - this is in effect the length of the fork for the axle the the CRS (crown race seat of the headset). This can be hard to measure because it takes into consideration the fork rake. It's really the length of the fork as measured down the centerline of the steerer to a perpendicular line that bisects the axle. Most forks fall into a given range.........most lugged steel are 365mm, carbon 372mm....etc. Cross forks are longer for more tire room. Touring and Allroad forks are a bit longer to make room for a bigger tire and a fender and maybe a long reach brake. Keep in mind that a frame should be designed around a given fork span and that if a dramatic change of span is made for a given frame then the head angle will change (along with seat angle/setback, BB height etc...) and handling will be affected.

Rake - I think most out there understand what this is. It's the perpendicular distance from the steerer centerline to the centerline of the axle. Rake combines with other stuff (like head angle and wheel diameter) to give a certain amount of trail which is one of the more important things that will determine how the bike will steer and how stable it might be. Trail is only ONE of the things though and can't be looked at in isolation.

Steerer length - this is the only dimension that is directly affected by frame size.....or more accurately by head tube length. Longer head tubes require a longer steerer.

There are of course other things about a fork that are very important and can lead to the bike as a whole riding well or like crap. Poor alignment or a fork that is lame in torsional or lateral rigidity will make a good frame feel like poop. Some early carbon forks ( Profile) were really bad in this respect and made anything they were put on feel a bit like a Schwinn voyager. Not good.

Hey.....it's time to get back to work!

Dave

[catulle]

Hummm... Thank you, guys.