As long as the tire fits in the lowers without rubbing the casting, one could probably use some plastic or aluminum spacers to limit the travel somehow, a la the Maverick forks. That's my guess. That thing has so much travel that even if one limited the stroke to prevent the tire from contacting the crown he'd still have one heck of a stiff and pretty light 29er fork with five or so inches of travel. It's still way too expensive IMO, even it can be rigged to fit a 29er.
Nah....someone didn't make a huge off-center front hub just to add length and tire clearance to an existing fork. That would be too smart, and an outrage that I hadn't come up with it first.
I say Photoshop!
As long as the tire fits in the lowers without rubbing the casting, one could probably use some plastic or aluminum spacers to limit the travel somehow, a la the Maverick forks. That's my guess. That thing has so much travel that even if one limited the stroke to prevent the tire from contacting the crown he'd still have one heck of a stiff and pretty light 29er fork with five or so inches of travel. It's still way too expensive IMO, even it can be rigged to fit a 29er.
If the tire fits in the stock arch you should not need to reduce the travel of the fork.
mtbtires.com
The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common
Hard to say. It is not clear how much the alignment change is.
This system would let the hub designer to change the fork rake.
I am wondering about the rotor mounting with the offset axle. Larger bolt circle diameter?
MC does know how to get the buzz started!
You're probably right about the larger bolt circle diameter. That appears to be a Hope rotor and I recall that their "Bug Un" hubs require a large BCD 5 bolt rotor? Hmmm..
VERY interesting. It's still puzzling in terms of how this system is keeping the hub from slipping.
Wouldn't some multi-part rotors allow to be taken apart and the outer, actual rotor, to be bolted directly to the hub?
Someone really wanted to use a Fox fork for what they don't plan to ever make one...
Looks to me like the axle is well over an inch off-center. Probably room for the same tire size as without the 29" conversion, 2.5-2.6?
Semi offtopic : if the new White Brother MAC system is what we expect it to be, what reason are we left with to want a Fox? Just for sponsorships sake? This is from someone who never rode one, thus doesn't understand the hype :-)
Very interesting! Would need a new caliper mount.
How is the hub center prevented from turning?
I am guessing that the axle is solid in the eccentric, not loose, so that when you tighten the thru-axle clamps it effectively locks the eccentric in whatever position it's in. That'd scare me though, you'd think it would slip.
Splined is a great idea, but I'm wondering how the axle is secured in the dropout without slipping. Maybe there is a key that fits in the clamping slot?
I am guessing that the axle is solid in the eccentric, not loose, so that when you tighten the thru-axle clamps it effectively locks the eccentric in whatever position it's in. That'd scare me though, you'd think it would slip.
Though you still need to remove the axle to remove the wheel from the fork.
mtbtires.com
The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common
You're probably right about the larger bolt circle diameter. That appears to be a Hope rotor and I recall that their "Bug Un" hubs require a large BCD 5 bolt rotor? Hmmm..
VERY interesting. It's still puzzling in terms of how this system is keeping the hub from slipping.
B
Looks like there is room in an Avid 203 rotor to cut out the center and drill new holes.
mtbtires.com
The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common
What about interference with the DT on bottom-out?
Depends on the frame.
But if the tire is going to hit the DT it does not matter what fork is on the bike. The fork crown is in the same place no matter the amount of travel or what size wheel it was designed for.
mtbtires.com
The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common