Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ze_Zaskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    863

    29er rigid fork on a 26er bike?

    Hi everybody
    I want to raise the front of y bike, so I'm thinking about a longer fork. Did anyone ever tried a 29er fork on a 26er? Something like a 460mm axel to crown. Most modern xc forks are about this height, so will it be too high?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    230
    Yes. My friend is running a Vicious Cycles 29er fork on his Specialized hardtail. The geometry comes out perfect for him.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Fat Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,661
    It will depend greatly on your existing frame and what it was designed for. If you get the front end up too high you'll have chopper syndrome, if the front end is too low, it'll be sharp handling, but tippy. There's also the issue of brake stud location, assuming you're running rim brakes versus disc brakes... disc brakes will work best. Finally you'll want to consider trail & rake.

    FWIW, I'm running a 29" front wheel with a shortish 425 A-C on a bike designed for a 100mm travel fork with a 26" wheel. Steering is a little slow, but the big wheel makes for a smooth ride almost negating the need for suspension.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by Fat Bob
    but the big wheel makes for a smooth ride almost negating the need for suspension.
    I don't know if I have suffered a stroke or what, but my rigid 29er beats the living daylights out of me compared to my Specialized Enduro, from my experience I strongly disagree with the 29er mantra that the big wheel reduces the need for suspension at all, especially at high speed over sharp hits like rocks and roots. I've got my pressure down to 20 psi with 2.3 inch tires, riding a XXIX, as if a steel frame is going to lend much help to a root sticking up 4 inches at 20 mph. I don't mean to start an argument, only to help others understand that there are some benefits to a 29'er, but eliminating suspension is not one of them.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    820
    It might steer a little slow, but it oughta be fine. Better you should do that, than put too short a fork on it. Like Fat Bob said, 'the handling will be sharp, but tippy'. Heh...I found this out the hard way....It was a year ago today, and my shoulder's finally OK.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ze_Zaskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    863
    My fram is a 2002 Zaskar. I said 460mm, because I have a Manitou R7 that is about that height, and it used to look OK when it was on the bike. My current fork is a Gusset with 403mm.
    Something I don't understand is when they say that a rigid of 445mm=100mm susp. and a 465mm=120susp., the suspension forks are always much taller.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Fat Bob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,661
    Quote Originally Posted by fat guy
    I don't know if I have suffered a stroke or what, but my rigid 29er beats the living daylights out of me compared to my Specialized Enduro, from my experience I strongly disagree with the 29er mantra that the big wheel reduces the need for suspension at all, especially at high speed over sharp hits like rocks and roots. I've got my pressure down to 20 psi with 2.3 inch tires, riding a XXIX, as if a steel frame is going to lend much help to a root sticking up 4 inches at 20 mph. I don't mean to start an argument, only to help others understand that there are some benefits to a 29'er, but eliminating suspension is not one of them.
    FG....you're mostly right. My quote was that it almost negates the need for a squishy up front. I too went from a plush dual squish, and it did take me a while to adjust my riding style to fully rigid. Lowering tire pressure and learning how and where to be on the bike make a big differnece. A fully rigid SS isn't going to replace a purpose built dual squish race bike, but you can eliminate a front squish if you dedicate the time to learning how to ride it. One of the benefits of a rigid fork is you actually learn how to read the trail, something a lot of riders don't know how to do because of the suspension handicap, rigid gives a more precise line too, with a squishy you're never quite sure how much dive you'll have (lots of drops here in central TX) ... to me a squishy front fork on a SS is like an automatic gearbox in a sports car... defeats the purpose... again just my feeling. For the OP, this is going to be a knock around town bike, so what's the purpose of an expensive, heavy squishy fork that he'll likely leave locked out most of the time. Go with a good quality steel fork for 1/4 the price of a squishy fork with a lock out.



    Quote Originally Posted by Ze_Zaskar
    Something I don't understand is when they say that a rigid of 445mm=100mm susp. and a 465mm=120susp., the suspension forks are always much taller.
    Suspension forks sag so they will be "taller" when unweighted.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    121
    Quote Originally Posted by Ze_Zaskar
    Did anyone ever tried a 29er fork on a 26er? Something like a 460mm axel to crown. Most modern xc forks are about this height, so will it be too high?
    I've run an on-one carbon fork (470mm a-c, 47mm offset, i think) on an Evil Sovereign for a while--with a 26" front wheel. I'm leggy and wanted a higher front....the handling seemed fine on a variety of trails.

  9. #9
    Known Mountainbiker
    Reputation: cazloco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    874
    HTers with 100mm+ suspension corrected frames will often use 29er forks because the size is about the same (without sag). I ran a WB 29 rock solid (465mm)in the wet months and it was fine everywhere. Last year they came out with a 445mm and I gobbled that up since my frame is 80mm corrected. PERFECTO! Don't even have to re-level the saddle between forks.

    I'm speaking 26" wheels here, BTW.

    Caz
    I am a Mountain Biker therefore I am late

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ze_Zaskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    863
    Thanks for the help guys
    I'm looking for the Surly Karate Monkey and the Instigator. The Salsa Cromoto 26 looks cool to, but is only 425mm, so it might be too short.
    By the way, I'm talking about a 26'' front wheel.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    498
    new stem? no need for a 29er fork.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ze_Zaskar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    863
    I REALLY don't like those high angle stems. And I also would like to open the head tube angle.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    863
    I ran the instigator fork on my older 26 inch inbred and it rode very well but looked quite raked out.

  14. #14
    Rusting Steel
    Reputation: Johnny5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    118

    VC 438mm nonsuscorrected 29'er fork here.

    I'm running a Vicious Cycles NonSuspension Corrected Rigid 29'er fork on my 1x1. It is 438mm a/c with a 38mm rake, coming from the 413mm 45mm rake of the stock 1x1 fork I don't notice much difference other than it is much easier for me to loft the front wheel. (has more to do with ride weight distribution with the taller fork probably). Handling feels near identical despite the rake and trail changes (from 66mm trail to 73mm trail according to this)

    I'm running 26" wheels too. Although I've been toying with a 29'er up front sometimes, and that ride is really fun to.

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

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