You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
To my simple, untrained eye the geometry of the current Solaris and the last Solaris Max frame are very similar for a sagged 120mm fork.
The first table is the last gen Solaris the second the current:
The current version is advertised as being able to run a 100mm fork but the previous version is advised as needing a 120mm minimum.
Based on the above I can see no reason as to why the previous version wouldn’t work* with a 100mm fork.
What am I missing about why makes the latest version different?
All help in addressing my confusion would be very welcomed.
*I appreciate you could stick a 100mm fork on the previous generation and you don’t need a table to tell you that but I am curious as to what I’m missing as to why it might not be recommended
Stack is a 11mm higher on current version? So longer fork would increase that even more. But i still think thats no reason to not put a 120 fork on it. Plus thats the cotic table isnt it? In which case they also think 120 or even 130 works fine.
But as an owner of a number of cotics my answer would simply be to ask them directly.
Just for clarity I’d be looking at putting a 100mm fork on the previous Solaris Max.
Happy to ask Cotic - I just wanted to see if I was obviously missing something simple.
I just chucked that into the calculator on www.bike-stats.de, using an assumption of a 100mm fork being 511 a-c unsagged, and 486 a-c sagged 25%. This is large frame, 2021 Solaris MAX. Can't imagine that being a problem...
Thank you A11y.
Looking at the Cotic geometry table for the current model with a 100mm fork the figures look remarkedly similar (which was my hope):
If I understand it ( which of course I may not! ) the BB on the newest model would be 10mm lower than the earlier version with a 100mm fork.
Putting a longer fork on would lead to increase stresses and there may be strength improvements even if the geometry is similar.
But putting a shorter fork on than recommended wouldn't result in higher forces or stresses.
Worth asking if the minimum fork length is a recommendation or if there's something else going on.
Worth asking if the minimum fork length is a recommendation or if there's something else going on.
The geometry suggests that there is nothing else going on but I will ask Cotic - as above I was trying to weed out me missing something super obvious!
Just for clarity I’d be looking at putting a 100mm fork on the previous Solaris Max.
Sorry totally misunderstood your post.
My first thought was 'will the BB be too low?' but the chart suggests the current model has a 10mm lower BB. Whatever the reason was for not recommending a 100mm fork previously, I suspect opinions at Cotic have moved on
Thank you for the responses so far 😊
Drat and blast …
It would seem that there was a further model in between my version and the current version.
This is the geometry chart for mine:
The seat angle is not as steep but the BB drop is the same.
So I’m guessing that a steeper ST may be moar betterer but the HT is shorter reducing stack … further reduced (compared with the 2023 model) due to a shorter (10mm) HT.
if you want to go halfway, you can add a 100mm fork and a thick crown race like the 10-ish mm https://reverse-components.com/en/products/05%C2%B0-angle-spacer-tapered-forks or the new +5 ones by superstar https://www.superstarcomponents.com/products/headset-crownrace?variant=54595692331393
If I understand it ( which of course I may not! ) the BB on the newest model would be 10mm lower than the earlier version with a 100mm fork.
A guess .. There is an EN standards minimum for lean angle (ie inside pedal contacts the ground at a greater lean angle than the min specified) so it may be that the BB gets low enough to be at or too close to that limit. Most bikes are built in a way that exceeds the limit and we don't corner inside foot down anyway, and tyres, crank Q-factor and pedal shape affect it. Anyway, there's a safe minimum to fork length that a brand could recommend but you may be happy with riding it set up with a shorter fork.
@kelvin - I believe it is a 2 from the list above as I think that was the only window the BRG frame was available.
Just had a quick check... yes BRG frames are that version. As is the frame I have (with 130mm forks).
Can't see why you couldn't run a 100mm fork. Is this for "almost a gravel bike" use? Drop Cy an email to be sure.
As for why the 100mm option came back on the geom tables... it's because the Solaris has a lighter tubeset and lost 140mm capability (as the BFe covers that).
Thank you Kelvin.
Thanks again to those that contributed to the above.
Earlier this month a deal popped up on a new 110mm SiD with remote lockout.
I took the plunge and cobbled back together my Solaris Max. A mix of build kit from Enve to Sunrace.
First ride out on it was yesterday and whilst it’s not the 100mm I originally envisaged it changed the bike into somewhat of a rocket ship.
I’d previously tried the frame with a 130mm Fox 34 and a 120mm Pike. The 110mm SiD didn’t make the bike feel “odd” in anyway other way. I’d be keen to try a 100mm airshaft but they are (IMHO) silly money.
On the SiD front the fork was new but OEM I think it’s a 2024 fork from deciphering the serial number. Despite its relative newness I decided to strip it down and give it a lower leg service. Glad I did as it didn’t have much in the way of oil in the lowers but the foam rings weren’t dry.
I really like the firm feeling of the fork and the complete lockout which is handy for riding around here.
I go nowhere near full travel so it was more like a rigid fork that takes the sting out of bigger hits. I’m not unhappy with this being a fan of rigid bikes. It’s certainly nowhere near as plush as the Pike or 34!
Anyhoo a photo (as that’s what you really want):
Or not …
I think I have that same SID in 120mm travel on my Ritchey Hardtail if it's the 'Select' model? I rarely use more than half travel, it sits nice and high but just takes the edge off everything in normal trail/bridleway riding but with some in reserve. I like that the lockout still has a smidge of travel/give so even locked out it doesn't get knocked off line too easily.
The bike looks great too 👍
Sweet ride 👍
What size are those tyres though? Rear looks very close to the seat tube.
They are 2.6” tyres on 35(?)mm rims.
The photo makes it look a lot tighter than it actually is.
Maybe 12-15mm
Looks ace 😀
They are 2.6” tyres on 35(?)mm rims.
The photo makes it look a lot tighter than it actually is.
Maybe 12-15mm
Righto, I've got back on an XC hardtail this year and I'm currently on 2.25in rear 2.4in front.
Do you find the 2.6s still fast (as well as more comfy obvs)?
I would say the trade off - slightly less speed and slightly more grip is worth it to me.