Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 34
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    150

    Carver Bikes 29er carbon fork - wow!

    Just picked up a Carver Bikes carbon fork for my SIR 9. Today was my second ride on it. Dang!!!!!!!! What an improvement over suspension forks. Felt like I was defying gravity while climbing.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MMcG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    9,216
    Nice price on those puppies too!

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    189
    The forks look a lot like Exotics, White Bros Rock solids and Nukeproofs. I think all those forks are the basically the same but with different stickers? Are the carvers also the same fork?

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    150
    Quote Originally Posted by Tricone
    The forks look a lot like Exotics, White Bros Rock solids and Nukeproofs. I think all those forks are the basically the same but with different stickers? Are the carvers also the same fork?
    When I asked about it, the guys at Carver said it is basically the same fork as White Bros Rock Solid.

    I'm still so stoked about how much fun yesterday's ride was I don't even care it's pouring rain right now. It was really a blast to ride rooty, ledgy tech and rock gardens with it, and I immediately noticed the lack of slop from not having a suspension fork.

  5. #5
    aka baycat
    Reputation: Ryan G.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    8,479

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dscarbs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    463
    LOOKS VERY NICE.. .I was considering a steel fork for my MCR, but this has me thinking... Is it really 465 mm crown to axle? That would be 5mm shorter then the Niner steel fork.... Does it really quicken up the ride too much with that, or are you good? Is there something I am missing.?

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    87
    why are all carbon forks basically the same design? (except Niner, and a few others)

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    4,673
    Quote Originally Posted by ssm-gd3
    why are all carbon forks basically the same design? (except Niner, and a few others)
    Simplicity. I'm surprised that someone hasn't taken this design and just put a carbon steerer tube on it. It should shave off a bit more weight, perhaps enough to make it comparable to the Niner.

  9. #9
    metrotuned WoS
    Reputation: metrotuned's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,730
    carbon forks:

    Pace
    Niner
    White Bros
    Ritchey

    Those are the basic four designs of carbon forks, with the Niner the only full carbon fiber top to bottom. The Pace UK is magnesium dropout and the crown is hollow and I believe the first to really produce a unique strong carbon fork - to this day it has not been copied and was subsequently bought out by DT Swiss although Pace UK still maintains their site and was recently selling RC31's in 420 and 440mm lengths!... thirdly, the White Bros and its many many knock off copies re-branding including shimano pro, nuke proof, lynskey, carver, saso, exotic, etc. are all the same (can someone prove they're not rebranded stickers/paint on the exact fork coming from a single factory) - some newer renditions have post mount, older IS and even older IS/v brake. Fourth, Ritchey was cloned by Trigon, and the marketing says monocoque construction including the brake tabs which would mean it competes with the newer Niner fork. However, I've never seen a Ritchey fork in person or even online in images besides the factory image in their marketing.
    #willofthesun and author of the most viewed MTBR thread: Platform Pedal Shootout

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    340
    On One

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dscarbs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    463
    is there a max rotor size on that fork?

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    150
    Quote Originally Posted by Dscarbs
    Is it really 465 mm crown to axle? That would be 5mm shorter then the Niner steel fork....
    if 0.196 inches scares you, you can add a 5mm spacer, or get a Cane Creek S3 Plus HS - bottom race has extra 5mm of stack height.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dscarbs
    Does it really quicken up the ride too much with that, or are you good?
    How can you quicken up a ride "too much"? I like to climb fast. An object in motion likes to stay in motion.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MMcG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    9,216
    Quote Originally Posted by Schmucker
    Simplicity. I'm surprised that someone hasn't taken this design and just put a carbon steerer tube on it. It should shave off a bit more weight, perhaps enough to make it comparable to the Niner.
    I think someone has - google Exotic Rigid Carbon Forks - I don't think the carbon steerer tube model has proven too reliable for off road use though (at least not in this iteration of a carbon fiber fork). I may be wrong.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dscarbs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    463
    Quote Originally Posted by Scharny
    if 0.196 inches scares you, you can add a 5mm spacer, or get a Cane Creek S3 Plus HS - bottom race has extra 5mm of stack height.

    How can you quicken up a ride "too much"? I like to climb fast. An object in motion likes to stay in motion.
    ahh, you must ride different trails than me... Slower steering is desired when you are traveling at 40 mph.... helps avoid getting out of control... agreed in tight single track that is good, but not no wide open downhills....thus the question posed...

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    150
    Quote Originally Posted by Dscarbs
    ahh, you must ride different trails than me... Slower steering is desired when you are traveling at 40 mph.... helps avoid getting out of control... agreed in tight single track that is good, but not no wide open downhills....thus the question posed...
    It's all about what you're used to. When I switched over to wider, stiffer skis this winter, it took a few days to get used to them, but eventually I adapted and was able to reap the benefits of quicker and more powerful gear. That said, there is no such thing as a magic bullet. I don't think I'd want to do a 2,000 ft downhill on a rigid fork, carbon or steel.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dscarbs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    463
    yeah, but quicker handling doesnt equate neccesarily to increased performance on on mountain bike past a certain point, I just slows you down overall.... Anyone with real world experience with the different fork lengths?

  17. #17
    nothing to see here
    Reputation: Stevob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,109
    Quote Originally Posted by Dscarbs
    is there a max rotor size on that fork?
    There's no max rotor size for the OnOne carbon fork. AFAIK, it's the only one with that claim. The rest are restricted to 160mm discs.

    WRT the design, it is obviously the cheapest to manufacture. Straight carbon tubes onto stock crowns, with just the dropouts needing to be designed (easily copied) from scratch.
    I see hills.

    I want to climb them.

  18. #18
    Off the back...
    Reputation: pinkrobe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,957
    Quote Originally Posted by Dscarbs
    yeah, but quicker handling doesnt equate neccesarily to increased performance on on mountain bike past a certain point, I just slows you down overall.... Anyone with real world experience with the different fork lengths?
    I have two of the Exotic carbon forks - one is for a 29 and the other 26, both suspension corrected for 100mm [or something along those lines]. I rode the long fork most of last summer on my Misfit diSSent. It handled great on the descents, not quite as well on the climbs. I went to a flat bar and yanked a couple of spacers out from under the stem - much better. Still, when riding really fast and easy stuff, it felt a little sloppy. I swapped in the shorter fork and it tightened up the handling significantly at speed, and made for point-and-shoot steering.

    I have gone back to the long fork for dirt use. It's more forgiving on rough terrain, and with the lower bar height I'm still well-balanced. The short fork would be great for flatter, faster terrain, but that's not what I ride.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dscarbs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    463
    still liking the Carver fork on your SIR?

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nspace's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    2,032
    Quote Originally Posted by MMcG
    I think someone has - google Exotic Rigid Carbon Forks - I don't think the carbon steerer tube model has proven too reliable for off road use though (at least not in this iteration of a carbon fiber fork). I may be wrong.
    DT Swiss is releasing the new XR rigid fork (an evolution of the Pace fork) which is magnesium dropouts, and carbon legs, crown and steerer. I'm happy there will be a full carbon fork (segmented style), from a reputable company soon

    Also happy that they finally decided to get back to work on the rigid fork after never releasing one following the acquisition of Pace's forks.


  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    150
    Quote Originally Posted by Dscarbs
    still liking the Carver fork on your SIR?
    Hell
    .
    .
    .
    Yes.


    So simple. So light. Purdy too.
    "Gone are the days we stopped to decide where we should go. We just ride." - Robert Hunter

  22. #22
    metrotuned WoS
    Reputation: metrotuned's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,730
    nspace: I looked at that DT Swiss fork and it's clearly still based off the Pace RC31 forks with the mag or titanium crown/dropout/steerer tube. It appears this is vaporware as the crown has the same square CNC like shape, yet rounded from being wrapped in carbon. Also notice that the carbon on the steerer is different than the gloss of the crown, which would make it appear as its bonded, not monocoque like the other MTB rigid Niner carbon fork. I do like the segmented design, classic, it's just not what I was expecting from DT/Pace this late in the game when road and MTB forks are fully molded as one piece.

    Delamination and glue bond loosening sucks.
    #willofthesun and author of the most viewed MTBR thread: Platform Pedal Shootout

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    150
    Follow up on fork, after using on and off for most of a season:

    The one drawback (for me) on this particular fork is its rake, or lack thereof. It is so steep that is actually tightens the head-tube angle on my SIR9 frame, which at 72 degrees is already PLENTY steep for the tight, gnarly, rooty, rocky singletrack we have here in Vermont. I would say it's pretty twitchy. Definitely had some spectacular wipeouts while riding it, yet on same trails riding with a locked-out REBA was a breeze. All in all, though, still glad I got it.
    "Gone are the days we stopped to decide where we should go. We just ride." - Robert Hunter

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: arphaxhad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    393

    Only supermodels allowed

    200 pound rider limit?

    What, I have to cut off a leg to ride a carbon fork?

    Good ol' reliable steel..

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: SeaBass_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    1,408
    [QUOTE=arphaxhad]200 pound rider limit?QUOTE]

    I was dismayed when i read that as well.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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