...how to solve a very first world (steel) bike problem...

General cycling advice ( NOT technical ! )
Slowtwitch
Posts: 744
Joined: 25 Oct 2021, 11:35pm

Re: ...how to solve a very first world (steel) bike problem...

Post by Slowtwitch »

I have a 953 Rourke which initially had a steel fork, I never liked the ride until someone suggested a carbon fork swap out. I fitted a Time straight fork, with carbon steerer and the bike was transformed!

Also like the above advice tyre pressure plays a big part in ride comfort, 85psi to my mind is going to rattle your teeth over the distance. For me tyre width /brand has never made much improvement, I currently ride 28mm Schwalbe folders, but I've not noticed any difference between them and the 25mm Contis mentioned above.

I always ride my front tyre at a lower pressure than the rear (it bears a lot less weight and is not geared) so my typical set up is 65/80 front and rear, and I've experimented with 60psi also which is slightly more comfortable but theres a trade off in response at the front end. This has been my set up for years now. A good carbon fork will take a tremendous amount of road buzz out of the equation. The secret is : don't buy cheap.
nomm
Posts: 414
Joined: 13 Oct 2015, 8:39pm

Re: ...how to solve a very first world (steel) bike problem...

Post by nomm »

Slowtwitch wrote: 27 Oct 2021, 3:20am I have a 953 Rourke which initially had a steel fork, I never liked the ride until someone suggested a carbon fork swap out. I fitted a Time straight fork, with carbon steerer and the bike was transformed!

Also like the above advice tyre pressure plays a big part in ride comfort, 85psi to my mind is going to rattle your teeth over the distance. For me tyre width /brand has never made much improvement, I currently ride 28mm Schwalbe folders, but I've not noticed any difference between them and the 25mm Contis mentioned above.

I always ride my front tyre at a lower pressure than the rear (it bears a lot less weight and is not geared) so my typical set up is 65/80 front and rear, and I've experimented with 60psi also which is slightly more comfortable but theres a trade off in response at the front end. This has been my set up for years now. A good carbon fork will take a tremendous amount of road buzz out of the equation. The secret is : don't buy cheap.
I did seriously investigate this as an option - there did not appear to be a carbon fork on the market that would be suitable

I will push the 4 seasons down the psi range to see what is the right balance

I just assumed an 853 fork would be as comfy as carbon
keyboardmonkey
Posts: 1120
Joined: 1 Dec 2009, 5:05pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: ...how to solve a very first world (steel) bike problem...

Post by keyboardmonkey »

nomm wrote: 27 Oct 2021, 7:25am … I will push the 4 seasons down the psi range to see what is the right balance

I just assumed an 853 fork would be as comfy as carbon
I have a Reynolds 853 frame and I run Conti 4 Seasons 100 rear and 90 front.

I noted at the beginning of this thread that you have a 853 *fork*. When I was reading around this topic I found frequent mention that Reynolds suggest a 631 fork should be paired with a frame having the main tubes of 853.

I’m not entirely sure how I would measure ‘butteriness’, but I understand that an 853 fork is perhaps too stiff.

I have a 531 fork on my bike - I initially felt a teeny bit shortchanged, but I’m not complaining - and my bike is just lovely to ride. Something to think about? As you say, a suitable carbon fork might be tricky to source; a 531 fork less so.
Jamesh
Posts: 2963
Joined: 2 Jan 2017, 5:56pm

Re: ...how to solve a very first world (steel) bike problem...

Post by Jamesh »

531 Colin your man on this

But I think the 631 forks tapered earlier giving a softer ride.

Should be loads if carbon forks around on the bay etc.

Cheers James
martinn
Posts: 421
Joined: 1 Dec 2012, 8:20pm

Re: ...how to solve a very first world (steel) bike problem...

Post by martinn »

The availability of carbon forks depends on what exactly you want
If you want a straight 1 1/8, with mudguard eyelets, QR axle, rim brakes (Deep drop) and clearance for at least 25mm tyres, thats a single monocoque design, Then the pickings are slim and getting slimmer...in fact I have just looked and cannot find a single one that fits all these criteria. There are a few that have an alloy steerer, but even then there are not many.

Martin
User avatar
531colin
Posts: 16037
Joined: 4 Dec 2009, 6:56pm
Location: North Yorkshire

Re: ...how to solve a very first world (steel) bike problem...

Post by 531colin »

Slowtwitch wrote: 27 Oct 2021, 3:20am I have a 953 Rourke which initially had a steel fork, ...............
A good carbon fork will take a tremendous amount of road buzz out of the equation...........
A bit of a sweeping statement.
I assume the Rourke originally had an inch and eighth steel steerer?
If so, then that is the beginning and the end of your problem with a harsh front end. A desperately unfashionable inch steel steerer is so much more comfortable if you are going to put 60psi in your front tyre.
The majority of full carbon forks now come with inch and a half/inch and an eighth tapered steerer; this is again a fashion imperative for (pretend) racing bikes, but is less forgiving than a straight inch and eighth carbon steerer.
nomm
Posts: 414
Joined: 13 Oct 2015, 8:39pm

Re: ...how to solve a very first world (steel) bike problem...

Post by nomm »

martinn wrote: 27 Oct 2021, 11:11am The availability of carbon forks depends on what exactly you want
If you want a straight 1 1/8, with mudguard eyelets, QR axle, rim brakes (Deep drop) and clearance for at least 25mm tyres, thats a single monocoque design, Then the pickings are slim and getting slimmer...in fact I have just looked and cannot find a single one that fits all these criteria. There are a few that have an alloy steerer, but even then there are not many.

Martin
yes and I would want 28mm

...maybe I could get a new fork forged by argos :lol: and flog the 853
Post Reply