You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Yes, this has been done a few years ago, but that was before these forks were available in 29er length...
I've been fancying some of these forks for a while on my Inbred (Barry White 26er), as it really only gets used as a pub bike or for doing a lap of Rutland Water every now & again.
It's currently got a Reba U-Turn on it, that is always on the 115mm travel setting. This measures an a-c length of 495mm or so. Factor in 20% sag and we're looking at somewhere around 472mm.
Now - Carboncycles reckon the 44.5cm length is OK for a 26er and replicates a 100mm sus fork, while the 46.5cm length is for 29ers or replicates a 130mm sus fork on a 26er.
Until I measured it, I was erring towards the 44.5cm length, but I don't really want the front end any steeper than it currently is, so thinking that 46.5cm would be the way forward.
445mm would be almost 30mm lower than the current front end in it's sagged position, which I reckon would make it too steep.
Anyone fitted the '29er' 46.5cm fork to an Inbred? Or fitted the 44.5cm and found it too short?
Also, the current Reba is an IS caliper mount (180 rotor).
Is there any advantage to getting a PM mount instead on the carbon fork? PM mount would mean buying a new adaptor, rather than just swapping the current IS mount hardware directly over.
Ta in advance.
There's overlap amongst the lengths. There's also some 26" forks with a2c of 46.5cm there. I just got a pair of 49cm a2c forks for use with 650b.
I've got 44.5cm on my 26er, it made it slightly lower than the 120mm fork I had on there, but no problem at all for commuting on.
Cheers.
I'm not quite sure what you mean about overlap between the lengths?
As I understand it, there's 42.5, 44.5, 46.5 and 49.
For me, I reckon I can rule out the extremities. So it's just 44.5 or 46.5.
Any model variation around those a-c lengths is just things like brake mount type/colour/axle type etc.
Interesting that you found replacing a 120mm sus fork with a 44.5cm fork lowered it only a little bit.
I think I need to check my measurements again and also check how much sag I am running. The current numbers seem to suggest a 46.5cm fork will be nearer to the current geometry, although still a bit shorter than the current set-up.
I'm pretty certain my pace rc31 forks I had on my old inbred were 440mm and were sound
Although to confuse matters my old forks were 100mm travel rather than your 115mm ones
Re overlap, I just meant some of the A2C lengths are recommended for two or more wheel sizes, and the recommendations are not entirely consistent.
Re the 120mm sus fork and the 44.5cm fork, the difference was more than 'slightly' TBH, but the frame was meant for a 100mm fork in the first place so the shorter A2C wasn't bad.
For comparison:
I've got some 465's in good condition if you're interested.
sirromj
Member
Re overlap, I just meant some of the A2C lengths are recommended for two or more wheel sizes, and the recommendations are not entirely consistent.
Ah, ok. Cheers, I did think that's what you meant but wasn't sure. I wondered if I'd missed something.
Your pics are very useful, thanks. The rigid fork does look quite short - I think that's perhaps answered my question.
smokey_jo
Subscriber
I’ve got some 465’s in good condition if you’re interested.
Hi smokey_jo...I could well be.
Could you give me a bit more details - is it IS or PM mount? Presumably QR? And how much steerer? What price are you after?
I think the messaging thing on here works now, so could use that if you fancy?
Some pics would be useful...?
Sorry turns out they're 420mm a-c, 220mm steerer, qr and IS mount
Sorry turns out they’re 420mm a-c, 220mm steerer, qr and IS mount
No problem. Thanks for taking the time to check...
HA HA! My stupidity knows no bounds. My Reba has a lockout & the u-turn means I have virtually infinite adjustment between 85-115mm.
Shouldn't be too hard to precisely set-up the a-c length to precisely match 445 & 465mm to try both out before committing.