Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 58
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,277

    Upset it's shocking how many forking people get these terms confused.

    Everyone, please. Forks and shocks are both pieces of suspension.

    A fork is always on the front of your bike because it is a suspension component connected with legs --or one leg, for a Lefty-- to a wheel. It looks like a fork, again except for a Lefty. The wheel is directly mounted to the fork.

    A shock is a device that connects the frame to a wheel via one or more linkages, and the linkages attach to the frame. This is true for the rear of a bicycle or for your car. The wheel is not directly mounted to a shock.

    Saying a rear shock or front fork is not only unnecessary, it's stupid. On a normal bicycle, there is one shock and one fork, and they are located in the rear and in the front of the bicycle, respectively.

    Calling a fork a shock, or a shock a fork, is also incorrect. Both forks and shocks contain springs, which may be of a variety of materials/types*, and usually but not always a damper. The spring carries the weight of the rider and bicycle. The damper, if present, absorbs energy from the spring so that its natural oscillation (movement up and down) is slowed, or damped. This is a very desirable feature for suspension but not technically required.

    *Springs may be elastomers, air, coiled metal, or leaf / arched metal.


    PLEASE use the correct terminology and encourage others to do so.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ride the biscuit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    836
    time to take a deep breath and step away from the internet

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    631
    Yes, yes, yes. You are gonna get flamed for this, as many people no longer see the need to explain things with proper terminology. Or take the time to learn a bit on their own. Those are usually the same people asking me to diagnose their broken bikes.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    294
    In these situations I like to remind people that the purpose of language is communication. If you are not using the correct terminology, you will fail to effectively communicate your problem, question, complaint, or whatever. Please try to use the proper terminology and try not get defensive if someone corrects you. They are trying to help you.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,277
    Quote Originally Posted by Scotth72 View Post
    many people no longer see the need to explain things with proper terminology.
    shock and fork is pretty easy if people just take one moment to think, "which one of these looks like a (two-tined pickle) fork?"

    my favorite example of this, though, was when a friend was trying to reassemble something on his car that he shouldn't have attempted to fix in the first place. he was confused about "how this bolt attached through this thing into the other bolt."

    that's right, a bolt is a bolt, and a nut is also a bolt.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,660
    This really bothers you this much?
    2013 Transition TransAM 29er
    2011 Yeti 303R DH
    2012 Banshee Spitfire V1.5

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,277
    Quote Originally Posted by VTSession View Post
    This really bothers you this much?
    I typed the first post in one shot, no edits, in 5 minutes. So, yes, it does bother me enough to spend 5 minutes. Obviously many people already know this, but I'm hoping that they will help others use the right terminology. It wasn't just a rant, I was foolishly hoping to see less talk of 'front shocks' and the like.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kubikeman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    532
    Okay Mr. Smarty Pants. Explain this one to me then...

    it's shocking how many forking people get these terms confused.-p4pb10115912.jpg
    The cake is a lie.

  9. #9
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    19,001
    A Lefty is not a fork, it's a strut.

    A shock consists of a spring and a damper. A fork is usually a shock, except for if it's only a spring. A rear shock is not a fork.

    Thank you for playing this week's edition of "technical correct".
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: reformed roadie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,423
    This reminds me of Shiggy getting his panties in a bunch from the miss-use of the terms "thru-axle" and "thru-bolt".

  11. #11
    re member
    Reputation: net wurker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    6,832
    ^^ New Turner design??? ^^
    Quote Originally Posted by My Avatar
    WOOF!
    My videos on Vimeo

  12. #12
    Your Best Friend
    Reputation: Silentfoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,811

    Re: it's shocking how many forking people get these terms confused.

    This has been discussed before but the one that irks me is "fully rigid". Wtf is fully rigid? If it isn't rigid it is either a hard tail, soft tail or full suspension. No need to put "fully" in front of rigid.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,446
    The content of this thread is hereby rejected.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BaeckerX1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,215
    Fully rigid is a saying used by the people that ride them to make themselves sound cooler/more awesome/better/more manly than the rest of us mere mortals. Here it is in practice:

    "What, you need full suspension for that? I just rode the **** outta that rock garden on my fully rigid bike!"

    Just because I can, doesn't mean I want to.

    Now just to mess with Colin, I'm going to change out the oil on my front spring tonight.
    Gotta get up to get down.
    LMB

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,179
    What about straight blade forks?

    Curved ridged forks may provide minimal suspension but for most people front suspension means a suspension fork (e.g. Rock Shox). Before mechanical suspension became common a frame had a rear triangle, a main triangle, and a fork. When suspension came along it became necessary to differentiate the two by referring to them as either a fork, or suspension fork, so to me saying a bike has a fork does not mean it has front suspension.

    Front suspension/ rear suspension makes more sense to me.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MSU Alum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,029
    I'm pretty sure there's a government agency involved in this nomenclature (from two different Latin names, both of which mean "name"...or, name name)...."Fully rigid", "front fork", "rear shock" are all generated by the folks at "The department of redundancy department".

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Fix the Spade's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,339
    Quote Originally Posted by kubikeman View Post
    Okay Mr. Smarty Pants. Explain this one to me then...
    Austrians, no further explanation is needed.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,277
    Quote Originally Posted by kubikeman View Post
    Okay Mr. Smarty Pants. Explain this one to me then...

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	p4pb10115912.jpg 
Views:	369 
Size:	232.7 KB 
ID:	835084
    I specifically said on a normal bike, fully expecting awesome pics like this one.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    A Lefty is not a fork, it's a strut.
    Yes it is. But I think we're all ok calling a Lefty a fork.

    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    Front suspension/ rear suspension makes more sense to me.
    I am 100% fine with front / rear suspension. That works just fine and is technically correct.

    Quote Originally Posted by MSU Alum View Post
    "Fully rigid", "front fork", "rear shock" are all generated by the folks at "The department of redundancy department".
    No doubt.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,446
    Quote Originally Posted by ColinL View Post

    Yes it is. But I think we're all ok calling a Lefty a fork.

    Ok, now you will have to better define when technically incorrect terminology is ok, and when its not.

  20. #20
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    47,857
    Quote Originally Posted by reformed roadie View Post
    This reminds me of Shiggy getting his panties in a bunch from the miss-use of the terms "thru-axle" and "thru-bolt".
    Just try to use that through bolt skewer in your through axle frame or fork.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  21. #21
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    47,857
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    A Lefty is not a fork, it's a strut.

    A shock consists of a spring and a damper. A fork is usually a shock, except for if it's only a spring. A rear shock is not a fork.

    Thank you for playing this week's edition of "technical correct".
    But a fork can also be rigid. Irks me when somebody says "I want to put a fork on my bike" when they really want a suspension fork.

    Be clear. Without a fork--rigid or suspension--nothing connects the front wheel to the frame.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,277
    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    Ok, now you will have to better define when technically incorrect terminology is ok, and when its not.
    Cannondale calls it a fork. That's good enough for me, how about you?

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,446
    Quote Originally Posted by ColinL View Post
    Cannondale calls it a fork. That's good enough for me, how about you?
    Sorry, but rules are rules.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    251
    If someone does not take the time to understand the terminology, they wont be able to understand what I'm telling them is wrong with their 'thing', and I wont explain it in laymen terms. If I have to explain a word into a definition, or a defining conversation, I'm going to charge more.
    Observe, report.

  25. #25
    usually cranky
    Reputation: b-kul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    9,927
    is a rock shox a good front shock?

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Shocking Wife
    By Bdabike in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-23-2013, 05:15 PM
  2. Forking Around
    By mvwmvw in forum Singlespeed
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-05-2013, 10:50 AM
  3. shocking prophet
    By broomhandle in forum Cannondale
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-24-2012, 12:52 AM
  4. Shocking Service..
    By EFMax in forum Shocks and Suspension
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-26-2012, 11:54 PM
  5. forking around
    By clipt in forum Beginner's Corner
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-16-2012, 07:14 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •