Flexible fork AND disc brakes: one option

[William Lindsay]

For a 650B road bike, it seems generally accepted that you can run rim brakes and a nice flexible skinny bladed fork OR you can run a stiff(er) fork and disc brakes. If your riding demands the power of hydraulic discs, then you are forced into the stiff(er) fork choices, and maybe make up the difference with even wider tires like Horizons or the 48mm Compass offerings. 

I have a Niner RLT9, which I run Babyshoe pass tires on.  It was/is my first hydraulic disc brake road bike.  It has a carbon fork with rack attachment points, which I like.  I imagined it as road bike that would bleed into gravel and adventure touring.  Plans for a loaded tour this year did not materialize, and I instead focused on targeting some LONG mixed terrain brevets run by San Francisco Randonneurs.  As my training rides have included more and more trail riding, on par with the course(s) that I will face, I've become more and more dissatisfied with the extremely stiff carbon fork of my RLT9.  I considered running a 48mm front tire, which the fork could take, but the frame in back can't take a 48.  What I really wanted was a through axle disc brake fork with as much compliance as the skinniest tube french-bend forks out there. 

A few stars aligned and I was able to get something that was/is a lot more than that.  I have quite a bit more front end compliance than any flexible steel fork, and it takes disc brakes, and it's lighter than a steel fork.  I set up my Niner RLT9 with a Lauf Grit fork.  It's an all-carbon "suspension" fork that give 30mm of travel with a dozen carbon leaf springs.  It's super unconventional looking.  Roadies and crossers generally call it butt-ugly.  I'm drawn to traditional forms but I'm willing to remain open-minded to newer ideas (leaf spring suspension not being a new idea of course).  I rode it over Mount Tam last week and I honestly felt like I was cheating.  It feels like a normal bike on the road and scrubs an extra inch off every bump on the trails.  I hated losing the ability to run a front rack and handlebar bag, but I'm experimenting with bar-roll style bags and I've found plastic cases for my cue sheet and brevet card that fit in a jersey pocket.  My SP front dynamo works seamlessly on it, and I'm working on a custom lamp mount idea.  Anyway, it's not for everyone, and it may be "out there", but at least it is out there.

Bill Lindsay

El Cerrito, CA

[Steve Chan]

   As ugly as it looks (which I think it *is* ugly, and I'm no retrogrouch), if it works and it is lighter, you can't really argue with that.

   Its costs a lot of money though. I kind of wonder, if you're going to go with a custom steel disc fork, couldn't you spec one that could take a front tire that is closer to 3" and just put a really fat tire up front for when you're going on rutted/crappy surfaces? Having different tires for front and rear isn't common in the road bike world, but it happens in the MTB world, especially back when people ran 69ers.

   

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "650b" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to 650b+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to 65...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/650b.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[William Lindsay]

It is expensive.  That's what I meant by 'stars aligning'.  I was able to do a transaction that was more like a trade.  There's a vendor-customer relationship that is promoted in the Philippines, called "suki".  Loyal customers get treated extra nice by grateful vendors.  I try to funnel all my business to a few vendors and I am able to parlay that into "suki" deals from time to time.  This was one of them.  A custom fork would have probably been a more expensive option for me, in addition to being a lot heavier. 

My target event is a SFR 200k that includes ~90 miles of road and ~40 miles of trail.  I pre-rode the first third of the course, and even with this fork, I was walking sometimes, because it was so loose and rocky.  If there were a 3" tire that was still fast enough to cover that 90miles of road and still finish under the limit, that would be an option as well.  This fork is intended for up to 584x54mm tires, so I could kind of do both. 

Bill Lindsay
El Cerrito, CA

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to 650b+uns...@googlegroups.com.

[Justin Hughes]

The i40-50 rim, 3" tire and steel fork would add considerable weight to this equation and would not be something you'd want to put road miles on. This opposed to what Bill has going on now. 

Bill, I like it. It's a damn shame that frame won't take a 50mm tire, though. 

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to 650b+uns...@googlegroups.com.

[William Lindsay]

It is a damn shame that the aluminum Niner RLT9 won't take a 50mm tire.  FACT.  My eyes are on the horizon for the Black Mountain offering, and I'm also thinking a Soulcraft Treehorn frame built around this fork could be "the wave of the future, Dude". 

BL in EC

[Toby Whitfield]

Bill,

I saw your original post about that fork and looked at it at the time. It is very cool.

I also have thought that the natural fix is some kind of suspension, but the problem is that it makes you give up other things. Fenders, racks and aesthetics.

One solution that I think would work well in this context is the old Cannondale Headshock. I have one on my Cannondale cyclocross bike from the early 2000s, but it has cantis and the frame that it is on doesn't fit me very well - the top tube is too long, but I wasn't very smart about these things when I bought it, and one drawback of the design is that it requires proprietary stems and there is little range of adjustment.

The advantages of the Headshock are:

• You can use a really nice suspension cartridge, with metal/air springs and hydraulic shock absorber;
• The fork can be as rigid as required;
• You can use fenders;
• You can use a lowrider rack. I used mine to tour with using a lowrider and panniers.

It is not as light as Bill's solution, and requires the frame to be built for it. It also needs to have more thought put into the stem adjustment possibilities. Also, I don't see an easy solution for traditional handlebar bag racks.

I think this would be an ideal solution that could be used by custom builders to build enduro allroad bikes with disk brakes and wide tires, while still allowing fenders and racks.

My Headshock equipped Cannondale sits on my trainer in the basement mostly because it doesn't fit very well, but for the interval training I do indoors that doesn't matter much. And, I don't think I could sell it for much, so maybe that is its highest and best use for now. If it had disks I would consider a 650b conversion and working harder on finding a fit solution.

Toby Whitfield

Toronto, ON, Canada

[William Lindsay]

I agree with Toby that the Cannondale headshock is/was a horribly under-explored solution.  I'd love to play around with one.  I'd love to play around with a Cannondale Slate also, while we're at it.

Bill

[Kevin M]

I think for "spirited" trail riding on a non-suspension front end, a 42mm is definitely undersized. With that size you'll have the speed to get yourself into trouble quick if the trail gets rough and not necessarily enough cush to float through. I'm assuming you're running tubeless?

This looks like an excellent solution to your problem. And I think it looks rad.

I'm on the hunt for a 753 Niner RLT, which does have room for 48mm tires under the frame and fork.

[Chris Cullum]

On Sep 28, 2017 09:51, "Toby Whitfield" <toby.wh...@gmail.com> wrote:

Bill,

I saw your original post about that fork and looked at it at the time. It is very cool.

I also have thought that the natural fix is some kind of suspension, but the problem is that it makes you give up other things. Fenders, racks and aesthetics.

One solution that I think would work well in this context is the old Cannondale Headshock. I have one on my Cannondale cyclocross bike from the early 2000s, but it has cantis and the frame that it is on doesn't fit me very well - the top tube is too long, but I wasn't very smart about these things when I bought it, and one drawback of the design is that it requires proprietary stems and there is little range of adjustment.

The advantages of the Headshock are:

• You can use a really nice suspension cartridge, with metal/air springs and hydraulic shock absorber;
• The fork can be as rigid as required;
• You can use fenders;
• You can use a lowrider rack. I used mine to tour with using a lowrider and panniers.

It is not as light as Bill's solution, and requires the frame to be built for it. It also needs to have more thought put into the stem adjustment possibilities. Also, I don't see an easy solution for traditional handlebar bag racks.

I think this would be an ideal solution that could be used by custom builders to build enduro allroad bikes with disk brakes and wide tires, while still allowing fenders and racks.

I haven't really done any research into this but doesn't the new Roubaix Incorporate some sort of head tube/steerer/stem related suspension? This type could be an option potentially.

My Headshock equipped Cannondale sits on my trainer in the basement mostly because it doesn't fit very well, but for the interval training I do indoors that doesn't matter much. And, I don't think I could sell it for much, so maybe that is its highest and best use for now. If it had disks I would consider a 650b conversion and working harder on finding a fit solution.

Toby Whitfield

Toronto, ON, Canada

--

[Rick Johnson]

Some of you may recall I've been saying the same thing about the Headshok for quite some time now.

Now that the original Cannondale Headshok patents have pretty much expired it is being copied:

http://www.rstsuspension.com/en/forks/city-trekking-single-shock

Rick

Rick Johnson
Bend, Oregon

Every revolutionary idea seems to evoke three stages of reaction...
One, it's completely impossible. 
Two, it's possible, but it's not worth doing. 
Three, I said it was a good idea all along.

Arthur C. Clarke

[William Lindsay]

On Thursday, September 28, 2017 at 10:01:12 AM UTC-7, Kevin M wrote:

I think for "spirited" trail riding on a non-suspension front end, a 42mm is definitely undersized.

I don't disagree.  My approach is kind of like one would have on a cyclocross bike.  I'm not pretending this is a proper single track mountain bike.  I've been doing the same trails with my Rivendell Sam Hillborne on 622x38 Steilacoom tires, and that front end is MUCH more compliant than the rigid Niner Carbon fork with 584x42 tires. 

 

With that size you'll have the speed to get yourself into trouble quick if the trail gets rough and not necessarily enough cush to float through. I'm assuming you're running tubeless?

Yes and no.  In the picture, with Babyshoe Pass tires, that is a tubeless setup.  The trails were rough and loose enough that I decided I will bring a little more tire, and committed to do my next pre-ride on BG Rock and Roads.  At the end of the ride, returning on the road, I picked up a huge tack-shaped thing through the urban part of Marin, and the hole was big enough to not seal (Stans).  I did the very messy roadside swap to a tube, and that was gross.  When I got the bike in the stand I swapped to Rock and Roads with tubes.  If my next pre-ride goes well on those, I'll probably set them up tubeless.  If somebody would give me a pair, I'd love to run Pumpkin Ridge tubeless for this event, but I'm trying to limit my choices to my internal inventory, for now at least. 

 

This looks like an excellent solution to your problem. And I think it looks rad.

I'm on the hunt for a 753 Niner RLT, which does have room for 48mm tires under the frame and fork.

A steel RLT9 looks like a lovely bike. 

Bill

[satanas]

FWIW, on the Sequoia - which also has a very rigid carbon fork - switching from the stock 42mm Soretooth tyre to a Vee 8 in 1.95" (~47mm actual) made a huge difference to shock coming up the fork.

There are several new "gravel" tyres in the new Schwalbe catalog, in 30, 35, 40, 50, 54, 57, 60, & 70mm, plus others elsewhere, so one of these may help; I'm really pleased to see 50mm.

The Roubaix will only accommodate tyres up to ~30 or 32mm, but Specialized's new Deviant (or whatever it's really called) also has the front shock and will officially take 38-622 and 47-584; it'll probably accept bigger, but BB drop is 85mm(!). The carbon version has a BB386 BB shell, but the alu one is threaded; Igor has one of the latter. My local dealers haven't stocked any yet, but I'm curious to see one.

Later,
Stephen

[Chad Kirby]

Yes, the Roubaix and the Diverge both have Specialized's 'Future Shock' head tube/steerer suspension thingy with 18mm of travel. 

I've put 600+ miles on my recently acquired 2017 Roubaix, and I love it so far. The Roubaix easily clears Stampede Pass ultralights. 

Initially, I wished it had more clearance, but after riding it for a bit, I think it's just right. In terms of isolating me from road buzz and smoothing out Seattle's increasingly flawed pavement, the Roubaix (700x32) does a better job than both my Elephant NFE (650x42) and my Giant Anyroad (700x38). I think the Future-Shock-equipped Roubaix is a great go-fast road bike. Two thumbs up!

[Igor Belopolsky]

Lauf fork:

I rode a fat Lauf fork on a Ventana and it was a real treat. But it looks silly so here's some art shitting on it. Rubber bands. Fuck thats good.