Another rake question - enve vs easton on cIII?

[Eeberhar]

Sorry if this has been postd. Searched around a bit and I didnt find the info I am looking for.

Please point me to it if I missed it.

Question

I realize there are a lot of variables but looking for some reactions....

Current fork. 2014 easton ec90 sl 43 rake

Maybe try a enve 2015 road 2.0 45 mm fork

Dont ask why...I just have both.

Bike cIII 54 cm serotta

Thoughts?

[OtayBW]

For a given (say 73°) HT angle, you'll have a touch less trail. Still fairly neutral; maybe not enough of a difference to notice.

[Eeberhar]

Originally Posted by OtayBW

For a given (say 73°) HT angle, you'll have a touch less trail. Still fairly neutral; maybe not enough of a difference to notice.

I 'believe' the Head Tube angle is 72.5, would that mean less or more of a difference. thanks!

[tuscanyswe]

Originally Posted by Eeberhar

I 'believe' the Head Tube angle is 72.5, would that mean less or more of a difference. thanks!

Believe he was saying that the headtube angle can change depending on the different forks axle to crown (ac) measurements. This can also effect the trail of the fork so its not as easy as to just compare the 43 vs 45 rake when you are comparing one fork vs another modell.

That said, they are both road forks and the small difference in rake and the potential difference in axle to crown distance won't really be large enough to make a significant impact imo. The different ride from different fork stiffness and road feel of a certain fork is a bigger factor imo.

Had an easton ec90 sl on my moots with 43 rake, changed to an enve 41 rake after a crash. Then i changed to an enve 43 rake. Cant really say one fork was this and the other was that.. I know i liked my moots very much with my easton fork. I liked it very much with the enve forks too .)

[Eeberhar]

Originally Posted by tuscanyswe

Believe he was saying that the headtube angle can change depending on the different forks axle to crown (ac) measurements. This can also effect the trail of the fork so its not as easy as to just compare the 43 vs 45 rake when you are comparing one fork vs another modell.

That said, they are both road forks and the small difference in rake and the potential difference in axle to crown distance won't really be large enough to make a significant impact imo. The different ride from different fork stiffness and road feel of a certain fork is a bigger factor imo.

Had an easton ec90 sl on my moots with 43 rake, changed to an enve 41 rake after a crash. Then i changed to an enve 43 rake. Cant really say one fork was this and the other was that.. I know i liked my moots very much with my easton fork. I liked it very much with the enve forks too .)

Thanks ! - I assume you went to 41 for more 'stability', so the difference was negligible? What you said makes sense to me, so I like the CIII so I think I will like it either way: ) Both are really nice forks and I think trying the enve would be fun. The colours match well and thats important

[false_Aest]

IIRC,

The Easton EC90 has a A-C measurement around 365mm.
The Enve 2.0 is 367mm.

If I'm correct . . . .

Your HTA will change something like 1/10th degree. Your trail will be affected in the same way your trail would be affected if you pumped your tires up to 88psi instead of 90psi.

So minimal difference in terms of geometry and maybe you'll feel the trail difference. I doubt most people would.

But (as alluded to in another response) I found the Easton forks to be squirrley compared to Enve stuff. I think that'd be a bigger change than the 2mm of trail or the a-c change.
___

Afterthought: What was the original fork + what were its original a-c/rake? e.g. If it was an Ouzo the a-c was 372mm (IIRC). It'd be interesting to see what the bike was supposed to be vs what it's morphed into.

[Eeberhar]

Originally Posted by false_Aest

IIRC,

The Easton EC90 has a A-C measurement around 365mm.
The Enve 2.0 is 367mm.

If I'm correct . . . .

Your HTA will change something like 1/10th degree. Your trail will be affected in the same way your trail would be affected if you pumped your tires up to 88psi instead of 90psi.

So minimal difference in terms of geometry and maybe you'll feel the trail difference. I doubt most people would.

But (as alluded to in another response) I found the Easton forks to be squirrley compared to Enve stuff. I think that'd be a bigger change than the 2mm of trail or the a-c change.
___

Afterthought: What was the original fork + what were its original a-c/rake? e.g. If it was an Ouzo the a-c was 372mm (IIRC). It'd be interesting to see what the bike was supposed to be vs what it's morphed into.

That's good information, seems like I should give it a go - thanks

I bought it used (but in new condition, not even sure it was really built up before) a few years ago but without a fork.

I 'believe' it was 43 rake, Serotta 02 fork.

See page 23 of the catalogue.
http://forums.thepaceline.net/showthread.php?t=87420

[tuscanyswe]

Originally Posted by Eeberhar

Thanks ! - I assume you went to 41 for more 'stability', so the difference was negligible? What you said makes sense to me, so I like the CIII so I think I will like it either way: ) Both are really nice forks and I think trying the enve would be fun. The colours match well and thats important

Yes that is important !
What ever makes us gets on the bike is good in my book.

I went with 41 because i got a good deal on it, on this forum actually. It then turned out it had manufacturing issues as it had a steerer that was to wide so enve sent me e replacement and i then choose to go with the 43 because its what i always had. Before the fork arrived a mechanic had sanded down the fork steerer on the "bad fork" and i rode it for a week or 2 before the new fork arrived.