A Guide To Fork Swapping

2000 Fisher Tassajara

 In Monday's "Randomonium" post I asked you readers if you had any questions about fork swapping or technical questions about fork geometry. One of you did ask, so that results in today's subject: "A Guide To Fork Swapping". 

So, before we get started, let's get some definitions and terms down that I'll be using today. It is very important to note that a bicycle is a 'system'. It is not wise to think of a bicycle in terms of one of its parts, or to focus in solely on a particular facet of a bicycle's geometry. So, for instance, when we discuss forks, it is not a good thing to just focus on "offset", and to disregard that "offset" is but one of a few things that ultimately determines how a bicycle will handle. So, don't fall for the simplistic idea that changing a fork from one offset to another will magically cure your handling ills. Many media writers are guilty of perpetuating this myth.

So, following are the things that are important to consider about a fork for your bicycle:

Basic fork geometry terms visualized: From http://yojimg.net/bike/web_tools/trailcalc.php

 Fork Offset/Fork "Rake": These are interchangeable terms that define how far the wheel axle is placed ahead of the steering axis. More 'offset/rake' means that the axle sits further away in front of the steering axis. 

Steering Axis: This is an imaginary line which is traced through the centerline of the head tube, fork crown, and on down towards the ground. (See the blue hash marked line in the diagram above) Steering Axis angle is equal to the "Head Angle" of a bicycle. Designers adjust this to affect overall Fork Trail.

Fork Trail: This is the distance from a point on the ground where the steering axis intersects the ground plane to the center point of the tire's contact patch behind it. More "Trail" usually means slower/ more stable handling and vice-versa- Less "Trail" means a quicker, less stable bike. This measurement is typically expressed in millimeters.

Wheel Diameter: Wheel diameter is determined by the combination of tire and wheel rim diameter you choose. So, just saying "twenty-niner" isn't good enough. Similarly, the terms "26 inch", "700c", and "27.5"er/650B" are not sufficient for determining overall handling characteristics. Not if we are concerned with detail. Here we need an actual measurement of the wheel/tire combination's diameter, which- as you probably know- is a measurement from the ground, through the axle centerline, to the top of the tire. Essentially, in visual terms for our example above, you would extend that blue hash mark line from the ground plane past where it terminates with the rear wheel axle to the top of the diagram's 'tire'. 

The axle to crown measurement is the distance between the axle to the fork crown along the fork's 'leg'.

Axle to Crown: This determines overall fork 'length'. The distance is determined from the centerline of the wheel axle to the top of the fork crown, or you can think of this as the point where the steer tube exits the fork. 

Suspension Correction: Designers account for the longer length of a suspension fork, necessary to allow for a wheel to 'travel' in a suspension design, and translate that to their rigid fork design, So, if a suspension fork has, let's say, 80mm of travel, to keep the front end of a bicycle equipped with that fork the same in terms of head angle, stack height, and more, that designer makes the rigid fork a similar length to a suspension fork with a rider on board. 

With the weight of a rider, that suspension fork will sink into its travel a bit, and this is called "sag". That is also accounted for in the rigid fork design. So, let's take our 80mm travel fork in a 29'er size and measure that. It's going to come out, nominally, with an axle to crown of around 480mm. That's a bit more than 18"'s for you non-metric folk. Now, 80mm of travel equals about 3"'s. take that off the slightly more than 18" and you are left with around 15+ inches, doubled, equals 30+ inches, or in other words, more than enough to clear a 29" wheel safely with room to spare at full travel of the fork. 

Now let's say we don't want a suspension fork, but we want a rigid one that keeps our 29"er handling similar to what we know. Accounting for some rider induced "sag", while on the bike, our suspension fork really probably is more like 470mm or so in terms of axle to crown. So, our rigid fork needs to be that measurement to preserve the handling characteristics we know, all else remaining the same. This is what we mean when we say that a fork is "suspension corrected for_____ travel". In our example's case, the rigid fork would be suspension corrected for 80mm's of travel. 

Whew!

____________________________________________________________________________

Choosing A Fork:

So, let's say you want a new fork for that old bike you have in the garage. Let's say it is a clapped out old suspension fork on an older MTB that you have had for years, but now you have some ideas. Maybe you want to do some bikepacking, or maybe this will end up being your 'gravel bike', or like me, maybe you want to use that bike as a townie/urban errand rig. 

Well, you know that a suspension fork is too much money, hassle, and it isn't necessary. So what do you get? Well, here is a list of things you'll need to know:

• What is your steer tube size: One inch? Inch-and-an-eighth? Is that a threaded or threadless steer tube? It is probably a straight steer tube, and if so, a tapered steer tube fork, (like the one to the left here) won't work.
  
• Wheel size, (Probably 26 inch, but there are old 650B MTB's and old 29"ers out there nowadays)
• If you have suspension, what travel length does your fork have? Older bikes had 63mm, bikes from about 1998 on had 80mm, or even 100mm in 26"er flavors. Measure the axle to crown and see if you can compress the shock to assess what travel you might have. 
• Axle type: Most probably are quick release, but there may be a few instances of thru-axle bikes in this situation. 
• What is your suspension fork offset/rake? If it was a fork made before 2007 and a 26"er fork, it most assuredly is going to have the then industry-wide standard 38mm offset. But some newer bikes had longer offsets, so check specifications if you can find them. Measuring a fork offset can be done at home, but it gets tricky to be accurate. 

Now, with that information in hand, you can start looking for a suitable replacement fork. Here's an important thing to remember though- If you veer too far from your bicycle's original specifications, you will affect the way the bike handles. And I cannot tell you if you would or would not like that. Just realize that millimeters make a big difference. It may seem trivial to you that your fork has a 440m axle to crown and the replacement you want has 420mm axle to crown, but that matters. You will feel a difference. 

And in some cases you won't be able to replace your fork with an off-the-shelf option. Let's say that you have a 1" steer tube, threaded fork with 63mm of suspension travel, (Original Rock Shox forks, as an example). Well.....you may have to get a fork custom made to suit your desires. Options off the shelf will likely be, what in the industry are called, "replacement forks', and generally are the lowest common denominator in terms of fork options. 

Many 1990's MTB's with 1 1/8th steer tubes and 63mm travel forks can be converted to rigid using a Surly Troll fork, which - while a bit shorter than the stock forks, and have a bit more offset, seem to work a trick for a weight bearing, bikepacking set up. Plus they had canti OR disc brake tabs. Now if you can actually find one......

Sometimes you have to think outside the box. Take for example the Surly Ogre Fork, which is for rigid, non suspension corrected 29"ers. It has an axle to crown of 447mm. Since it is a disc fork, it could work for a 26" wheel. If your 26" suspension fork had 4"/100mm travel, that Ogre fork might work for you. 

Besides those things, you'll need to consider brake standard, brake levers, and if the forks are different lengths, one from the other, you'll need to consider how that affects your stem, bottom bracket height, and seat angle too. 

_______________________________________________________________________________

Hopefully that helps! But if you have anymore questions about forks, switching forks, or what have you, let me know. 

A Guide To Fork Swapping

2000 Fisher Tassajara

 In Monday's "Randomonium" post I asked you readers if you had any questions about fork swapping or technical questions about fork geometry. One of you did ask, so that results in today's subject: "A Guide To Fork Swapping". 

So, before we get started, let's get some definitions and terms down that I'll be using today. It is very important to note that a bicycle is a 'system'. It is not wise to think of a bicycle in terms of one of its parts, or to focus in solely on a particular facet of a bicycle's geometry. So, for instance, when we discuss forks, it is not a good thing to just focus on "offset", and to disregard that "offset" is but one of a few things that ultimately determines how a bicycle will handle. So, don't fall for the simplistic idea that changing a fork from one offset to another will magically cure your handling ills. Many media writers are guilty of perpetuating this myth.

So, following are the things that are important to consider about a fork for your bicycle:

Basic fork geometry terms visualized: From http://yojimg.net/bike/web_tools/trailcalc.php

 Fork Offset/Fork "Rake": These are interchangeable terms that define how far the wheel axle is placed ahead of the steering axis. More 'offset/rake' means that the axle sits further away in front of the steering axis. 

Steering Axis: This is an imaginary line which is traced through the centerline of the head tube, fork crown, and on down towards the ground. (See the blue hash marked line in the diagram above) Steering Axis angle is equal to the "Head Angle" of a bicycle. Designers adjust this to affect overall Fork Trail.

Fork Trail: This is the distance from a point on the ground where the steering axis intersects the ground plane to the center point of the tire's contact patch behind it. More "Trail" usually means slower/ more stable handling and vice-versa- Less "Trail" means a quicker, less stable bike. This measurement is typically expressed in millimeters.

Wheel Diameter: Wheel diameter is determined by the combination of tire and wheel rim diameter you choose. So, just saying "twenty-niner" isn't good enough. Similarly, the terms "26 inch", "700c", and "27.5"er/650B" are not sufficient for determining overall handling characteristics. Not if we are concerned with detail. Here we need an actual measurement of the wheel/tire combination's diameter, which- as you probably know- is a measurement from the ground, through the axle centerline, to the top of the tire. Essentially, in visual terms for our example above, you would extend that blue hash mark line from the ground plane past where it terminates with the rear wheel axle to the top of the diagram's 'tire'. 

The axle to crown measurement is the distance between the axle to the fork crown along the fork's 'leg'.

Axle to Crown: This determines overall fork 'length'. The distance is determined from the centerline of the wheel axle to the top of the fork crown, or you can think of this as the point where the steer tube exits the fork. 

Suspension Correction: Designers account for the longer length of a suspension fork, necessary to allow for a wheel to 'travel' in a suspension design, and translate that to their rigid fork design, So, if a suspension fork has, let's say, 80mm of travel, to keep the front end of a bicycle equipped with that fork the same in terms of head angle, stack height, and more, that designer makes the rigid fork a similar length to a suspension fork with a rider on board. 

With the weight of a rider, that suspension fork will sink into its travel a bit, and this is called "sag". That is also accounted for in the rigid fork design. So, let's take our 80mm travel fork in a 29'er size and measure that. It's going to come out, nominally, with an axle to crown of around 480mm. That's a bit more than 18"'s for you non-metric folk. Now, 80mm of travel equals about 3"'s. take that off the slightly more than 18" and you are left with around 15+ inches, doubled, equals 30+ inches, or in other words, more than enough to clear a 29" wheel safely with room to spare at full travel of the fork. 

Now let's say we don't want a suspension fork, but we want a rigid one that keeps our 29"er handling similar to what we know. Accounting for some rider induced "sag", while on the bike, our suspension fork really probably is more like 470mm or so in terms of axle to crown. So, our rigid fork needs to be that measurement to preserve the handling characteristics we know, all else remaining the same. This is what we mean when we say that a fork is "suspension corrected for_____ travel". In our example's case, the rigid fork would be suspension corrected for 80mm's of travel. 

Whew!

____________________________________________________________________________

Choosing A Fork:

So, let's say you want a new fork for that old bike you have in the garage. Let's say it is a clapped out old suspension fork on an older MTB that you have had for years, but now you have some ideas. Maybe you want to do some bikepacking, or maybe this will end up being your 'gravel bike', or like me, maybe you want to use that bike as a townie/urban errand rig. 

Well, you know that a suspension fork is too much money, hassle, and it isn't necessary. So what do you get? Well, here is a list of things you'll need to know:

• What is your steer tube size: One inch? Inch-and-an-eighth? Is that a threaded or threadless steer tube? It is probably a straight steer tube, and if so, a tapered steer tube fork, (like the one to the left here) won't work.
  
• Wheel size, (Probably 26 inch, but there are old 650B MTB's and old 29"ers out there nowadays)
• If you have suspension, what travel length does your fork have? Older bikes had 63mm, bikes from about 1998 on had 80mm, or even 100mm in 26"er flavors. Measure the axle to crown and see if you can compress the shock to assess what travel you might have. 
• Axle type: Most probably are quick release, but there may be a few instances of thru-axle bikes in this situation. 
• What is your suspension fork offset/rake? If it was a fork made before 2007 and a 26"er fork, it most assuredly is going to have the then industry-wide standard 38mm offset. But some newer bikes had longer offsets, so check specifications if you can find them. Measuring a fork offset can be done at home, but it gets tricky to be accurate. 

Now, with that information in hand, you can start looking for a suitable replacement fork. Here's an important thing to remember though- If you veer too far from your bicycle's original specifications, you will affect the way the bike handles. And I cannot tell you if you would or would not like that. Just realize that millimeters make a big difference. It may seem trivial to you that your fork has a 440m axle to crown and the replacement you want has 420mm axle to crown, but that matters. You will feel a difference. 

And in some cases you won't be able to replace your fork with an off-the-shelf option. Let's say that you have a 1" steer tube, threaded fork with 63mm of suspension travel, (Original Rock Shox forks, as an example). Well.....you may have to get a fork custom made to suit your desires. Options off the shelf will likely be, what in the industry are called, "replacement forks', and generally are the lowest common denominator in terms of fork options. 

Many 1990's MTB's with 1 1/8th steer tubes and 63mm travel forks can be converted to rigid using a Surly Troll fork, which - while a bit shorter than the stock forks, and have a bit more offset, seem to work a trick for a weight bearing, bikepacking set up. Plus they had canti OR disc brake tabs. Now if you can actually find one......

Sometimes you have to think outside the box. Take for example the Surly Ogre Fork, which is for rigid, non suspension corrected 29"ers. It has an axle to crown of 447mm. Since it is a disc fork, it could work for a 26" wheel. If your 26" suspension fork had 4"/100mm travel, that Ogre fork might work for you. 

Besides those things, you'll need to consider brake standard, brake levers, and if the forks are different lengths, one from the other, you'll need to consider how that affects your stem, bottom bracket height, and seat angle too. 

_______________________________________________________________________________

Hopefully that helps! But if you have anymore questions about forks, switching forks, or what have you, let me know. 

Spiffing Up The Blackbuck

Current state of the Blackbuck

Yawn........ another single speed on Guitar Ted Productions? Really?

Yes.

Long time readers all have seen this rare bird several times before. This is a 2006 OS Bikes Blackbuck, in case you did not know. I guess this is almost a "vintage" 29"er" now days! It's old enough a lot of people have probably never heard about "OS Bikes" and this single speed.

OS Bikes was a short-lived outside project of Mark Slate's. Mark is one of the founders of WTB, a Mountain Bike Hall of Fame member, and one of the true 'pioneers' of the modern mountain bike, and certainly a big part of why the first 29"er tire ever was made. So, to say that Mr. Slate was a highly influential man in cycling is no hyperbole. In fact, he still is pretty important at WTB, and still has a hand on what riders are doing with their MTB's and gravel bikes in the year 2020, more than 40+ years since he got started.

Mark's biggest influence was on tires and saddles, (he designed the saddle on this bike you see here) He was not particularly known for his design of bicycles, but this is one of his efforts. This particular Blackbuck comes from the first run of 500 bikes that were made. I purchased it as a frame/fork. The original rigid fork was super short, had a 51mm offset, and resulted in a ridiculous 74° head angle with a trail figure down into the upper 40's, as I recall. This resulted in a textbook example of "Twitchiness".

I tried it a couple of times but it was so nervous that I just didn't jive with it. So, I have tried a multitude of forks on this bike and finally arrived at what you see here as being the best thing I tried out of them all. That fork is a Bontrager Switchblade, a fork steeped in mystery and rumors. I'll maybe get around to writing about that fork and its history with me later sometime.

Ultra-modern bar standards- Ultra-old school 29"er vibes.

The OS Bikes name actually stands for "Of Spirit Bikes", and why a Blackbuck, well, I'm not sure. I'm betting there is a story there, I just am not sure I know what it is. Anyway, the point is that I really like the bike and my aim is to slowly bring this up to a coherent looking build versus the hodge-podge of anodized stuff I've hung off the bike in years past.

My first "spiff" was to jettison the tired Salsa Shaft seat post in favor of a Thompson lay back, which is what the build deserves from a class and era-correct viewpoint. The next spiff happened when Grannygear gifted me his White ENO front and rear hubs and the excellent White Industries freewheel. I paired all of that up with the aforementioned fork, which also features silver anodized bits, and the look is coming together well. Finally, I threw on a Bontrager 35mm bar clamp diameter stem with matching Bontrager handle bar.

I need to score some Paul Love Levers in silver, a silver 1 1/8th King head set, (or equivalent), and a silver seat collar. Finally, I have a first gen (silver, natch!) XTR 180mm crankset, courtesy of the same Grannygear, which will be paired with either a black ring or silver ring. OR- I will get a White Industries crankset in silver.

Maybe I should go all White Industries/Paul Components. Get the White Industries head set, crank set, and the Paul levers and brake calipers. Ditch the Thomson post for a Paul Components Tall and Handsome, maybe... Except those parts are priced beyond what the Gross National Product of several nations is. Yeah.......maybe not!

The point is, with some silver bottle cages, I would be all silver and black then, and the bike would finally look 'right', ya know? OR- I could just shut up and actually, ya know.......go ride some single track with it already! 

 Yeah. Going riding then........

Spiffing Up The Blackbuck

Current state of the Blackbuck

Yawn........ another single speed on Guitar Ted Productions? Really?

Yes.

Long time readers all have seen this rare bird several times before. This is a 2006 OS Bikes Blackbuck, in case you did not know. I guess this is almost a "vintage" 29"er" now days! It's old enough a lot of people have probably never heard about "OS Bikes" and this single speed.

OS Bikes was a short-lived outside project of Mark Slate's. Mark is one of the founders of WTB, a Mountain Bike Hall of Fame member, and one of the true 'pioneers' of the modern mountain bike, and certainly a big part of why the first 29"er tire ever was made. So, to say that Mr. Slate was a highly influential man in cycling is no hyperbole. In fact, he still is pretty important at WTB, and still has a hand on what riders are doing with their MTB's and gravel bikes in the year 2020, more than 40+ years since he got started.

Mark's biggest influence was on tires and saddles, (he designed the saddle on this bike you see here) He was not particularly known for his design of bicycles, but this is one of his efforts. This particular Blackbuck comes from the first run of 500 bikes that were made. I purchased it as a frame/fork. The original rigid fork was super short, had a 51mm offset, and resulted in a ridiculous 74° head angle with a trail figure down into the upper 40's, as I recall. This resulted in a textbook example of "Twitchiness".

I tried it a couple of times but it was so nervous that I just didn't jive with it. So, I have tried a multitude of forks on this bike and finally arrived at what you see here as being the best thing I tried out of them all. That fork is a Bontrager Switchblade, a fork steeped in mystery and rumors. I'll maybe get around to writing about that fork and its history with me later sometime.

Ultra-modern bar standards- Ultra-old school 29"er vibes.

The OS Bikes name actually stands for "Of Spirit Bikes", and why a Blackbuck, well, I'm not sure. I'm betting there is a story there, I just am not sure I know what it is. Anyway, the point is that I really like the bike and my aim is to slowly bring this up to a coherent looking build versus the hodge-podge of anodized stuff I've hung off the bike in years past.

My first "spiff" was to jettison the tired Salsa Shaft seat post in favor of a Thompson lay back, which is what the build deserves from a class and era-correct viewpoint. The next spiff happened when Grannygear gifted me his White ENO front and rear hubs and the excellent White Industries freewheel. I paired all of that up with the aforementioned fork, which also features silver anodized bits, and the look is coming together well. Finally, I threw on a Bontrager 35mm bar clamp diameter stem with matching Bontrager handle bar.

I need to score some Paul Love Levers in silver, a silver 1 1/8th King head set, (or equivalent), and a silver seat collar. Finally, I have a first gen (silver, natch!) XTR 180mm crankset, courtesy of the same Grannygear, which will be paired with either a black ring or silver ring. OR- I will get a White Industries crankset in silver.

Maybe I should go all White Industries/Paul Components. Get the White Industries head set, crank set, and the Paul levers and brake calipers. Ditch the Thomson post for a Paul Components Tall and Handsome, maybe... Except those parts are priced beyond what the Gross National Product of several nations is. Yeah.......maybe not!

The point is, with some silver bottle cages, I would be all silver and black then, and the bike would finally look 'right', ya know? OR- I could just shut up and actually, ya know.......go ride some single track with it already! 

 Yeah. Going riding then........

Friday News And Views

The new Niner "Steel Mountain Bike Fork".

Niner Announces Steel Fork, New Investor:

A couple of things came down the newswire this week concerning Niner Bikes. First off, we saw the introduction of their "Steel Mountain Bike Fork". Okay.......wait a minute.......

So, you mean to tell me that you can name a bicycle or part with a sensible, easily understood name that doesn't require some form of "inside knowledge" of some bizarre sport or niche band culture to understand the model name? Really?!!

Sorry, I just had to get that off my chest. Now, as for this fork........

The Steel Mountain Bike Fork uses Boost spacing , a tapered steer tube, and obviously, it has a through axle. Axle to crown measurement is 490mm and the offset is 51mm. It has mounting points for cages and racks and is rated to carry up to 45lbs. MSRP is $179.00. See more here.

Now what was I saying just yesterday about how straight steer tubes, quick releases, and axle spacing was going to change? Hmm.........

Next up in Niner news is that they were able to find an investment company to partner with which will now allow Niner to continue onward and have the cash to invest into R&D for future designs and products. Chris Sugai remains as head of Niner and all operations are to be continued as they are now. Good news and "good luck" to the Niner crew going forward.

Differences between through axle 142, Boost, and Super Boost hubs. Courtesy of Pivot Cycles.

 Your New Hub May Be Boost Or Super Sized!

Noticing a theme of ever changing component dimensions here lately? Well, it isn't going to end anytime soon, so best get used to it. Now the rumblings are that longer travel mountain bikes may all be going to an even wider than Boost rear hub, called "Super Boost".

This is really all a result of where we have been stuck in terms of over-lock dimensions for hubs for decades. Only recently has the "Pandora's Box" of hub width been opened and I believe the dust isn't going to settle on this for some time. Obviously fat bike hub width was the precursor to this madness and it showed that consumers are willing to entertain new ideas for bicycles based upon crank, hub, and drivetrain needs.

Way back when the decision was made to go from six to seven speeds, mountain bike manufacturers, and in particular, WTB, were calling for "symmetry" in rear wheels, which meant that the rear axle was going to have to be widened. WTB already was championing wider than 100mm front and 130mm rear hubs for mountain bikes based upon Charlie Cunningham's experimentation with hubs and wheel design. So, the concept of a wider hub has been there, it was just a matter of breaking that traditional thought regarding hubs that was holding everything back.

Now I don't for a minute think that this is staying on the mountain bike side. I believe that road will see an increase in hub widths in the coming years and going to through axles will be the way that the "tradition" is broken. Younger riders will be familiar with disc brakes, through axles, and hub widths won't matter at all to them if it makes the bike better handling and wheels stiffer.

 T.I.v14 Update:

The latest on Trans Iowa; Cues- So far I have two sectors covered in the formatting department with one to go. I should have the last sector formatted this weekend. That will get printed out into a final draft and that draft will be final checked in the field sometime in late March or early April. Weather will likely play a factor in when I get out to do that. It is interesting whenever I do formatting that I can visualize the course as I fill out the format. I also have found a few places where I deleted cues, added cues, or made some small changes based upon comments jotted down while we did recon last year. So, refining the cues is always something on my mind until I make the final commitment to print them in April.

I expect also to be sending out a communication to all participants starting this weekend. The e-mail will detail the schedule of events and lay out the procedure I plan to use for handing out cues the morning of the event. This will be very important, so be looking for that if you are in Trans Iowa coming into your inbox next week.

Number plates will begin to get worked up sometime in March or early April. I also have a plan in the works for some schwag for the racers that is in motion right now. I am getting assistance for that in an unlikely place which will be an interesting story to tell you all when I can. Stay tuned on that front.

That's all for this week. Keep the rubber side down and get out and ride folks!

Friday News And Views

The new Niner "Steel Mountain Bike Fork".

Niner Announces Steel Fork, New Investor:

A couple of things came down the newswire this week concerning Niner Bikes. First off, we saw the introduction of their "Steel Mountain Bike Fork". Okay.......wait a minute.......

So, you mean to tell me that you can name a bicycle or part with a sensible, easily understood name that doesn't require some form of "inside knowledge" of some bizarre sport or niche band culture to understand the model name? Really?!!

Sorry, I just had to get that off my chest. Now, as for this fork........

The Steel Mountain Bike Fork uses Boost spacing , a tapered steer tube, and obviously, it has a through axle. Axle to crown measurement is 490mm and the offset is 51mm. It has mounting points for cages and racks and is rated to carry up to 45lbs. MSRP is $179.00. See more here.

Now what was I saying just yesterday about how straight steer tubes, quick releases, and axle spacing was going to change? Hmm.........

Next up in Niner news is that they were able to find an investment company to partner with which will now allow Niner to continue onward and have the cash to invest into R&D for future designs and products. Chris Sugai remains as head of Niner and all operations are to be continued as they are now. Good news and "good luck" to the Niner crew going forward.

Differences between through axle 142, Boost, and Super Boost hubs. Courtesy of Pivot Cycles.

 Your New Hub May Be Boost Or Super Sized!

Noticing a theme of ever changing component dimensions here lately? Well, it isn't going to end anytime soon, so best get used to it. Now the rumblings are that longer travel mountain bikes may all be going to an even wider than Boost rear hub, called "Super Boost".

This is really all a result of where we have been stuck in terms of over-lock dimensions for hubs for decades. Only recently has the "Pandora's Box" of hub width been opened and I believe the dust isn't going to settle on this for some time. Obviously fat bike hub width was the precursor to this madness and it showed that consumers are willing to entertain new ideas for bicycles based upon crank, hub, and drivetrain needs.

Way back when the decision was made to go from six to seven speeds, mountain bike manufacturers, and in particular, WTB, were calling for "symmetry" in rear wheels, which meant that the rear axle was going to have to be widened. WTB already was championing wider than 100mm front and 130mm rear hubs for mountain bikes based upon Charlie Cunningham's experimentation with hubs and wheel design. So, the concept of a wider hub has been there, it was just a matter of breaking that traditional thought regarding hubs that was holding everything back.

Now I don't for a minute think that this is staying on the mountain bike side. I believe that road will see an increase in hub widths in the coming years and going to through axles will be the way that the "tradition" is broken. Younger riders will be familiar with disc brakes, through axles, and hub widths won't matter at all to them if it makes the bike better handling and wheels stiffer.

 T.I.v14 Update:

The latest on Trans Iowa; Cues- So far I have two sectors covered in the formatting department with one to go. I should have the last sector formatted this weekend. That will get printed out into a final draft and that draft will be final checked in the field sometime in late March or early April. Weather will likely play a factor in when I get out to do that. It is interesting whenever I do formatting that I can visualize the course as I fill out the format. I also have found a few places where I deleted cues, added cues, or made some small changes based upon comments jotted down while we did recon last year. So, refining the cues is always something on my mind until I make the final commitment to print them in April.

I expect also to be sending out a communication to all participants starting this weekend. The e-mail will detail the schedule of events and lay out the procedure I plan to use for handing out cues the morning of the event. This will be very important, so be looking for that if you are in Trans Iowa coming into your inbox next week.

Number plates will begin to get worked up sometime in March or early April. I also have a plan in the works for some schwag for the racers that is in motion right now. I am getting assistance for that in an unlikely place which will be an interesting story to tell you all when I can. Stay tuned on that front.

That's all for this week. Keep the rubber side down and get out and ride folks!

Forked

Original '06 Inbred fork (L) and Carbon Superlight fork from On One (R)

The tale of my old 2006 (it may actually have been an '05 model) On One Inbred 29"er continues. A brief recap in case you haven't been around here for long:

I purchased a close out On One Inbred 29"er frame and fork very early in 2006, (thus the possibility that it actually is an '05 model), and built it up as a single speed which I then used in the inaugural Dirty Kanza 200. Sometime later in 2006 I got an On One Carbon Superlight fork to mount on it and the steel fork was retired by myself, never to be used again by me. Fast forward to 2008 and I sold the frame with the original fork to a co-worker with the caveat that I had first dibs on buying it back should he ever want to get rid of it.

Meanwhile the Superlight fork made a few appearances on other bikes but was retired and eventually I sold that fork in either 2015 or early last year to another co-worker. Okay, so the original frame came back to me in May of last year, I believe it was, but with no fork. Then the original fork came back later in the year last November. So.......the old bike could be built up, right?

Actually, this brings us up to the story as it sits now. So, here is the latest.

Team Stoopid- First place 12hr Team category. We all rode rigid single speeds!

The Inbred is a special bicycle to me, not only for the DK 200 run I had on it, but also because I had used that bike for the only event I ever got a first place in. Well......it was a team event, but we came in first place. It was the 2007 Iowa 24hr Race held near Boone Iowa. I raced on a team which all used rigid single speed devices and we entered the 12 hr category. So, while it wasn't a well contested category, (we may have been the only team in the 12hr category, I am not sure), we still got first place. So, the Inbred had a special place in my heart.

Yes, I probably should never have sold it, but c'mon! We've all sold something we wish later we wouldn't have. Anyway, this is my "I shouldn't have....." and I got it and the fork back. Amazing, right?

It sure looked like I was going to be well on my way to putting the Inbred back together. However; in the years that the Inbred was with my co-worker, it led a life of hard use. The co-worker lent the bike to a brother who needed a mountain bike, then the fork was separated and sold off to someone in Colorado who rode it hard. Really hard. When the fork came back it was in rough shape. There was rust, there were plenty of scuffs, and a scratch that concerned me. Maybe it wasn't a scratch? I needed to investigate. I wasn't about to ride a fork that was compromised in any way. So, I took it to the deep looking scratch with Mother's Mag polish, hoping that it was only a deep scratch in the paint. However; upon further application of "elbow grease", it became apparent that it was something much more serious. It was a crack.

Ah! Forked!

This fork was no good.

That put me in somewhat of a pickle, since straight steer tube, 1 1/8th forks with long off sets and 470mm axle to crown heights are pretty scarce these days. Back in 2007 they were a dime a dozen, but ten years down the road they are antiques. A cursory search on the innergoogles brought up almost nothing, so I decided to shelve the project until I could bring myself to slap on a G2 offset Reba I happen to have which would have worked. I just didn't want to use any suspension fork because I never had used one on the old Inbred and I wasn't about to now.

The project was out of mind until last week when I noted that the coworker who had the On One Superlight fork was interested in selling the fork back to me. We made an agreement, and last Friday I got a hold of that fork and it is in excellent condition. This means that the Inbred project is back on again.

The ironic thing is that the Inbred was set up with the Carbon Superlight for the Iowa24hr team event I was in. So, it is a good deal that I was at least able to obtain that fork again. It preserves the geo/handling the Inbred was designed for, and obviously, it is lighter.

Stay tuned for more later on in the Spring......

Forked

Original '06 Inbred fork (L) and Carbon Superlight fork from On One (R)

The tale of my old 2006 (it may actually have been an '05 model) On One Inbred 29"er continues. A brief recap in case you haven't been around here for long:

I purchased a close out On One Inbred 29"er frame and fork very early in 2006, (thus the possibility that it actually is an '05 model), and built it up as a single speed which I then used in the inaugural Dirty Kanza 200. Sometime later in 2006 I got an On One Carbon Superlight fork to mount on it and the steel fork was retired by myself, never to be used again by me. Fast forward to 2008 and I sold the frame with the original fork to a co-worker with the caveat that I had first dibs on buying it back should he ever want to get rid of it.

Meanwhile the Superlight fork made a few appearances on other bikes but was retired and eventually I sold that fork in either 2015 or early last year to another co-worker. Okay, so the original frame came back to me in May of last year, I believe it was, but with no fork. Then the original fork came back later in the year last November. So.......the old bike could be built up, right?

Actually, this brings us up to the story as it sits now. So, here is the latest.

Team Stoopid- First place 12hr Team category. We all rode rigid single speeds!

The Inbred is a special bicycle to me, not only for the DK 200 run I had on it, but also because I had used that bike for the only event I ever got a first place in. Well......it was a team event, but we came in first place. It was the 2007 Iowa 24hr Race held near Boone Iowa. I raced on a team which all used rigid single speed devices and we entered the 12 hr category. So, while it wasn't a well contested category, (we may have been the only team in the 12hr category, I am not sure), we still got first place. So, the Inbred had a special place in my heart.

Yes, I probably should never have sold it, but c'mon! We've all sold something we wish later we wouldn't have. Anyway, this is my "I shouldn't have....." and I got it and the fork back. Amazing, right?

It sure looked like I was going to be well on my way to putting the Inbred back together. However; in the years that the Inbred was with my co-worker, it led a life of hard use. The co-worker lent the bike to a brother who needed a mountain bike, then the fork was separated and sold off to someone in Colorado who rode it hard. Really hard. When the fork came back it was in rough shape. There was rust, there were plenty of scuffs, and a scratch that concerned me. Maybe it wasn't a scratch? I needed to investigate. I wasn't about to ride a fork that was compromised in any way. So, I took it to the deep looking scratch with Mother's Mag polish, hoping that it was only a deep scratch in the paint. However; upon further application of "elbow grease", it became apparent that it was something much more serious. It was a crack.

Ah! Forked!

This fork was no good.

That put me in somewhat of a pickle, since straight steer tube, 1 1/8th forks with long off sets and 470mm axle to crown heights are pretty scarce these days. Back in 2007 they were a dime a dozen, but ten years down the road they are antiques. A cursory search on the innergoogles brought up almost nothing, so I decided to shelve the project until I could bring myself to slap on a G2 offset Reba I happen to have which would have worked. I just didn't want to use any suspension fork because I never had used one on the old Inbred and I wasn't about to now.

The project was out of mind until last week when I noted that the coworker who had the On One Superlight fork was interested in selling the fork back to me. We made an agreement, and last Friday I got a hold of that fork and it is in excellent condition. This means that the Inbred project is back on again.

The ironic thing is that the Inbred was set up with the Carbon Superlight for the Iowa24hr team event I was in. So, it is a good deal that I was at least able to obtain that fork again. It preserves the geo/handling the Inbred was designed for, and obviously, it is lighter.

Stay tuned for more later on in the Spring......

MRP Fat Fork vs On One Fatty Fork

The One One Carbon Fatty Fork

If you own one of the "first wave" fat bikes that have only an 1 1/8th compatible head tube, like I do, your fork options besides the stock fork that came with your rig, are limited. If you were like me, it was hard to find any good information on such forks, because most folks are all buzzing about "the next shiny object" and not some antiquated 1 1/8th steer tube fat bike fork option. Hopefully this will help correct that for someone out there......

So, before I get any further, here's my standard disclaimer, with an addendum...

 NOTE: Large doses of "my opinion" will be handed out in gloppy dollops today. You've been forewarned..... And: Both forks mentioned were purchased with my own money. I am not being bribed, nor paid for this post. 

(sigh!)...Okay then, with that outta the way, here's the way I see these choices for your fat bike. First up, the On One Carbon Fatty. This fork is, as the name implies, carbon fiber and surprisingly enough, so is the steer tube. It comes in black or white and has some ridiculous clear coated graphics. Price from On One direct is $248.46, give or take a bit depending upon currency exchange rates. 

Specs:

• 470mm Axle To Crown length
• 55mm offset
• 590 grams cut to fit a Large Mukluk
• Rear Standard Brake Mount
• 10mm QR axle only
• 135mm OD

Notes: The Fatty fork is pretty much a direct replacement for an Enabler fork. Similar axle to crown length, offset, and brake mounting standards mean you just install the fork, swap over the brake and stem, and you are ready to ride. Well, that is if you have a carbon steer tube plug to take the place of a star nut, which cannot be used "no how-no way" on a carbon steer tube. (Or at least, it shouldn't be.) The Carbon Fatty does have a bit of a protruding "shelf" at the crown race seat, but this is so it matches up with the larger bottom part of On One's fat bike head tube. Mukluk owners will have to just put up with the eyesore. Note: You could use this on a fat bike with a tapered steer tube fork by replacing the lower head set with an 1 1/8th compatible reducer. This means the fork will swap over to your next fat bike too.

MRP's Fat Fork

The next contender is MRP's Fat Fork which is quite a bit different than the On One fork and has more options available. The MRP fork is the evolution of the White Brother's SnoPack fork. With the change in name of the company, the fork was dubbed the "Fat Fork" going forward. This fork is available in aluminum or aluminum crown, steer tube, and drop outs with carbon fiber legs. Both versions have 34mm diameter legs. The fork is also offered in two axle to crown lengths, and one would work with Pugsleys at 450mm. MSRP is $449.00 for the carbon legged versions and $339.00 for the all-alloy ones. 

Specs:

• 468mm Axle to Crown length
• 43mm Offset
• 990 grams cut with star nut (Carbon is 910gm uncut)
• Front Standard, post style brake mount
• QR axle only
• 135mm OD

Notes: The Fat Fork transfers over well to a Mukluk, but the fly in this ointment will be the front brake standard that MRP uses. While I have seen a creative kludge to adapt a rear standard brake mount front hub to a front brake standard fork, it isn't easy, and it isn't commercially available. Most will be best served by swapping over to a more "modern" front standard hub. Yes.....a new wheel build. But look.....everything going forward is front brake standard, so why not? The other thing of note is the offset, which is shorter. This means more stability. Well......theoretically it does, and it probably will in practice. What does this mean for you? A "slower" handling bike. Maybe that's a good thing, maybe not. I like it for softer conditions. Note: This fork would also be swappable to another fat bike regardless of headset/head tube sizing with the correct head set. Front brake standard hubs are plentiful now as well. 

Comparisons: The On One fork seems to win on paper with its direct swap-ability, lighter weight, and lesser price. However; that is tempered somewhat since your hub choices are limited going forward and you need to deal with a carbon compatible pre-load plug to adjust your head set. (These can be a bit frustrating depending on the style, plus they cost more than star nuts do.) The MRP fork doesn't have hose guides, which is unforgivable in 2014. Both forks do not have any provisions for bottle cages or Anything Cages, which may be a negative for you. The MRP's price is 100 bucks more, and that's hard to swallow, but it does get you into the modern world when it comes to hub/brake standards, and it isn't carbon, which for some folks is all they will need to know to choose it. 

Okay, so how do they ride?  See Part 2 HERE.

MRP Fat Fork vs On One Fatty Fork

The One One Carbon Fatty Fork

If you own one of the "first wave" fat bikes that have only an 1 1/8th compatible head tube, like I do, your fork options besides the stock fork that came with your rig, are limited. If you were like me, it was hard to find any good information on such forks, because most folks are all buzzing about "the next shiny object" and not some antiquated 1 1/8th steer tube fat bike fork option. Hopefully this will help correct that for someone out there......

So, before I get any further, here's my standard disclaimer, with an addendum...

 NOTE: Large doses of "my opinion" will be handed out in gloppy dollops today. You've been forewarned..... And: Both forks mentioned were purchased with my own money. I am not being bribed, nor paid for this post. 

(sigh!)...Okay then, with that outta the way, here's the way I see these choices for your fat bike. First up, the On One Carbon Fatty. This fork is, as the name implies, carbon fiber and surprisingly enough, so is the steer tube. It comes in black or white and has some ridiculous clear coated graphics. Price from On One direct is $248.46, give or take a bit depending upon currency exchange rates. 

Specs:

• 470mm Axle To Crown length
• 55mm offset
• 590 grams cut to fit a Large Mukluk
• Rear Standard Brake Mount
• 10mm QR axle only
• 135mm OD

Notes: The Fatty fork is pretty much a direct replacement for an Enabler fork. Similar axle to crown length, offset, and brake mounting standards mean you just install the fork, swap over the brake and stem, and you are ready to ride. Well, that is if you have a carbon steer tube plug to take the place of a star nut, which cannot be used "no how-no way" on a carbon steer tube. (Or at least, it shouldn't be.) The Carbon Fatty does have a bit of a protruding "shelf" at the crown race seat, but this is so it matches up with the larger bottom part of On One's fat bike head tube. Mukluk owners will have to just put up with the eyesore. Note: You could use this on a fat bike with a tapered steer tube fork by replacing the lower head set with an 1 1/8th compatible reducer. This means the fork will swap over to your next fat bike too.

MRP's Fat Fork

The next contender is MRP's Fat Fork which is quite a bit different than the On One fork and has more options available. The MRP fork is the evolution of the White Brother's SnoPack fork. With the change in name of the company, the fork was dubbed the "Fat Fork" going forward. This fork is available in aluminum or aluminum crown, steer tube, and drop outs with carbon fiber legs. Both versions have 34mm diameter legs. The fork is also offered in two axle to crown lengths, and one would work with Pugsleys at 450mm. MSRP is $449.00 for the carbon legged versions and $339.00 for the all-alloy ones. 

Specs:

• 468mm Axle to Crown length
• 43mm Offset
• 990 grams cut with star nut (Carbon is 910gm uncut)
• Front Standard, post style brake mount
• QR axle only
• 135mm OD

Notes: The Fat Fork transfers over well to a Mukluk, but the fly in this ointment will be the front brake standard that MRP uses. While I have seen a creative kludge to adapt a rear standard brake mount front hub to a front brake standard fork, it isn't easy, and it isn't commercially available. Most will be best served by swapping over to a more "modern" front standard hub. Yes.....a new wheel build. But look.....everything going forward is front brake standard, so why not? The other thing of note is the offset, which is shorter. This means more stability. Well......theoretically it does, and it probably will in practice. What does this mean for you? A "slower" handling bike. Maybe that's a good thing, maybe not. I like it for softer conditions. Note: This fork would also be swappable to another fat bike regardless of headset/head tube sizing with the correct head set. Front brake standard hubs are plentiful now as well. 

Comparisons: The On One fork seems to win on paper with its direct swap-ability, lighter weight, and lesser price. However; that is tempered somewhat since your hub choices are limited going forward and you need to deal with a carbon compatible pre-load plug to adjust your head set. (These can be a bit frustrating depending on the style, plus they cost more than star nuts do.) The MRP fork doesn't have hose guides, which is unforgivable in 2014. Both forks do not have any provisions for bottle cages or Anything Cages, which may be a negative for you. The MRP's price is 100 bucks more, and that's hard to swallow, but it does get you into the modern world when it comes to hub/brake standards, and it isn't carbon, which for some folks is all they will need to know to choose it. 

Okay, so how do they ride?  See Part 2 HERE.

Forked: Part 2

The Snow Dog: Now with a higher carbon content!

About a week ago I posted here about my new On One Fatty fork for the Snow Dog. I've been cautiously riding it around a bit here for the past week, just trying to settle in the head set and mostly to get acquainted with the change. Big changes like adding a new fork like this to a bike I really was accustomed to kind of throws me for a loop sometimes. I guess it takes me a while to "warm up" to things while sometimes I can constantly change a bike and it never really seems to bother me. Whatever the reason, I just was very averse to jumping in the deep end with this fork until I got to know it better.

Well, I can say that yesterday was the first time I rode it and never really thought about it. It was becoming "normal" and the sensations of the bike were good. They never really were bad, per se', so that may be a bad choice of words, but I wasn't blown away by anything in particular either. In fact, I really cannot say anything is all that much different. It's all in my head, most likely. Obviously, the bike is somewhat lighter, but honestly- I cannot feel it when I ride the bike. The geometry must be very close to what it was with the Enabler, so there are no real quirks that I can sus out with how it steers or handles so far.

Fat bikes, in my opinion, seem to be very "wheel-centric" in every way. The wheels dominate the looks, the traction, the way the bike handles, and when it comes to weight, the wheels are the heaviest component by a much larger margin than they are on almost any other type of bicycle. It's all about those fat, ginormous, heavy wheels. Sure- you can nuance certain things about the fat bike by doing component swaps but the wheels are the biggest attribute and the biggest detriment to a bike like this.

That's why I feel that tubeless tires and rims, lighter rims, and lighter tires are well worth the money to upgrade to on these machines. The old maxim about how wheels are the best thing to upgrade on a bicycle? Times two on a fat bike. The difference on my switch from tubed Larry 3.8's to the Velocity Dually/tubeless Sterling set up was not just a little different, it was hugely different. Even when I initially set the Sterlings up tubeless on the Fatback wheels, the difference was so obvious it was laughable. That's why the fork is merely a slight to not noticeable change here. The wheels will make a bigger difference when I change them. It'll be good......

Forked: Part 2

The Snow Dog: Now with a higher carbon content!

About a week ago I posted here about my new On One Fatty fork for the Snow Dog. I've been cautiously riding it around a bit here for the past week, just trying to settle in the head set and mostly to get acquainted with the change. Big changes like adding a new fork like this to a bike I really was accustomed to kind of throws me for a loop sometimes. I guess it takes me a while to "warm up" to things while sometimes I can constantly change a bike and it never really seems to bother me. Whatever the reason, I just was very averse to jumping in the deep end with this fork until I got to know it better.

Well, I can say that yesterday was the first time I rode it and never really thought about it. It was becoming "normal" and the sensations of the bike were good. They never really were bad, per se', so that may be a bad choice of words, but I wasn't blown away by anything in particular either. In fact, I really cannot say anything is all that much different. It's all in my head, most likely. Obviously, the bike is somewhat lighter, but honestly- I cannot feel it when I ride the bike. The geometry must be very close to what it was with the Enabler, so there are no real quirks that I can sus out with how it steers or handles so far.

Fat bikes, in my opinion, seem to be very "wheel-centric" in every way. The wheels dominate the looks, the traction, the way the bike handles, and when it comes to weight, the wheels are the heaviest component by a much larger margin than they are on almost any other type of bicycle. It's all about those fat, ginormous, heavy wheels. Sure- you can nuance certain things about the fat bike by doing component swaps but the wheels are the biggest attribute and the biggest detriment to a bike like this.

That's why I feel that tubeless tires and rims, lighter rims, and lighter tires are well worth the money to upgrade to on these machines. The old maxim about how wheels are the best thing to upgrade on a bicycle? Times two on a fat bike. The difference on my switch from tubed Larry 3.8's to the Velocity Dually/tubeless Sterling set up was not just a little different, it was hugely different. Even when I initially set the Sterlings up tubeless on the Fatback wheels, the difference was so obvious it was laughable. That's why the fork is merely a slight to not noticeable change here. The wheels will make a bigger difference when I change them. It'll be good......

Experimental Vehicles

Experimental Rig #1

Number 1: Salsa Cycles Fargo Gen II w/Fox G2 100mm Fork-

This one was inspired by Ben Witt of Milltown Cycles who had told me that a G2 specific fork, (51mm offset) would work well on a Fargo. We spoke of this a few times, and I was aware that he was going to set his steel Gen II Fargo up with such a fork.

I had decided that my own Gen II Fargo would be my all-purpose drop bar mountain bike. The rigid fork was somewhat limiting though, and when I thought through the suspension fork idea submiitted to me via Ben, I realized I could try it out.

I have this G2 Fox 100mm Float fork from a 2008 Gary Fisher HiFi. It had been on my Trek Sawyer previously, but I figured I could set the Fargo up for a test run to see if I might indeed be as pleased as Ben was with his set up.

Conclusions: First of all, I don't get too hung up on "the numbers" game, so don't ask me about axle to crown, bottom bracket height, or any of that other nonsense. To me that wasn't as important at this point as the concept was: A Fargo with a suspension fork. If I liked it, I could discern the numbers later and work around things.

Well- I liked it. This fork won't do, though, since the steer tube is about a half an inch too short for my mind's comfort, and I am not too happy with the flex this particular fork exhibits. I will probably seek out a G2 Reba with a through axle, or a Fox G2 fork with a 15QR axle. The experiment showed me the bennies of going this route with regard to a real, trail worthy drop bar set up I can take anywhere. I may even do some bike packing off this platform as well. But this will go back to the rigid fork until then.

Experimental Rig #2

Trek Sawyer With On One Carbon Superlight Rigid Fork: 

Of course, the Sawyer needed to have a fork, after donating the squish to the Fargo experiment. I chose the On One Carbon Superlight rigid fork as the replacement.

The On One fork sports a shorter axle to crown measurement by 15mm over the original steel Sawyer fork. So, not a big deal there. However; the offset is 4mm less. Hmm- probably a wash as far as telling anything from the saddle when riding.

And that's pretty spot on. The wheel flop exhibited with the Fox sus fork is almost totally mitigated with the On One fork, and obviously, it is a lighter set up. I think as far as single speeding goes, this will be a great set up. This should be a fun bike as Fall comes on.

So, there ya go. One hypothesis proven, and another combination for the Sawyer that should be a winner and stay for a long time. I can't wait for Fall riding!

Experimental Vehicles

Experimental Rig #1

Number 1: Salsa Cycles Fargo Gen II w/Fox G2 100mm Fork-

This one was inspired by Ben Witt of Milltown Cycles who had told me that a G2 specific fork, (51mm offset) would work well on a Fargo. We spoke of this a few times, and I was aware that he was going to set his steel Gen II Fargo up with such a fork.

I had decided that my own Gen II Fargo would be my all-purpose drop bar mountain bike. The rigid fork was somewhat limiting though, and when I thought through the suspension fork idea submiitted to me via Ben, I realized I could try it out.

I have this G2 Fox 100mm Float fork from a 2008 Gary Fisher HiFi. It had been on my Trek Sawyer previously, but I figured I could set the Fargo up for a test run to see if I might indeed be as pleased as Ben was with his set up.

Conclusions: First of all, I don't get too hung up on "the numbers" game, so don't ask me about axle to crown, bottom bracket height, or any of that other nonsense. To me that wasn't as important at this point as the concept was: A Fargo with a suspension fork. If I liked it, I could discern the numbers later and work around things.

Well- I liked it. This fork won't do, though, since the steer tube is about a half an inch too short for my mind's comfort, and I am not too happy with the flex this particular fork exhibits. I will probably seek out a G2 Reba with a through axle, or a Fox G2 fork with a 15QR axle. The experiment showed me the bennies of going this route with regard to a real, trail worthy drop bar set up I can take anywhere. I may even do some bike packing off this platform as well. But this will go back to the rigid fork until then.

Experimental Rig #2

Trek Sawyer With On One Carbon Superlight Rigid Fork: 

Of course, the Sawyer needed to have a fork, after donating the squish to the Fargo experiment. I chose the On One Carbon Superlight rigid fork as the replacement.

The On One fork sports a shorter axle to crown measurement by 15mm over the original steel Sawyer fork. So, not a big deal there. However; the offset is 4mm less. Hmm- probably a wash as far as telling anything from the saddle when riding.

And that's pretty spot on. The wheel flop exhibited with the Fox sus fork is almost totally mitigated with the On One fork, and obviously, it is a lighter set up. I think as far as single speeding goes, this will be a great set up. This should be a fun bike as Fall comes on.

So, there ya go. One hypothesis proven, and another combination for the Sawyer that should be a winner and stay for a long time. I can't wait for Fall riding!