Major toe overlap problems...Help!- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 21 of 21
  1. #1
    gnar, brah
    Reputation: Andrewpalooza's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,861

    Major toe overlap problems...Help!

    I have been riding a 18" Haro Mary SS for well over a year now, and have been pretty happy with the ride. Toe overlap has always been an annoyance, but never really stopped me from enjoying the ride. Recently I broke the stock rigid fork, and replaced it with a Redline Monocog Flight fork, and rode it for the first time in a few months since the fork was first broken. (I use the 29er for trails, but spend most of my time dirt jumping or riding downhill/bike park)

    The first ride was terrible. I was riding rugged, technical, twisty singletrack, and the toe overlap was bringing me to a screeching, terrifying halt in tight corners and nasty rock gardens. Luckily no crashes, but a few really close calls. I'm honestly thinking about selling the bike and abandoning the whole 29er concept for the first time since I bought the bike. It was a game killer. No flow, no rhythm, no FUN!

    Just a few setup notes:
    180mm cranks (long...but they are stock. seems a bad spec choice by Haro)
    2.2 Kenda Nevegal tires (they are as big and as knobby as a Maxxis 2.5)
    Platform pedals and 5.10 shoes (not gonna change this, sorry. Mandatory for shredding)

    I am gonna try some 175mm cranks, and some 2.1 Maxxis Ignitors, and hopefully this will help. But my real question is if the Redline fork has a different offset or rake or whatever (not familiar with the 29er nuances...) than the stock Haro fork? I also have access to a GT Peace '9er fork that I can swap if the geometry of these forks are different. Any insight would be greatly appreciated!
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Trestle Bike Park

  2. #2
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Andrewpalooza
    I have been riding a 18" Haro Mary SS for well over a year now, and have been pretty happy with the ride. Toe overlap has always been an annoyance, but never really stopped me from enjoying the ride. Recently I broke the stock rigid fork, and replaced it with a Redline Monocog Flight fork, and rode it for the first time in a few months since the fork was first broken. (I use the 29er for trails, but spend most of my time dirt jumping or riding downhill/bike park)

    The first ride was terrible. I was riding rugged, technical, twisty singletrack, and the toe overlap was bringing me to a screeching, terrifying halt in tight corners and nasty rock gardens. Luckily no crashes, but a few really close calls. I'm honestly thinking about selling the bike and abandoning the whole 29er concept for the first time since I bought the bike. It was a game killer. No flow, no rhythm, no FUN!

    Just a few setup notes:
    180mm cranks (long...but they are stock. seems a bad spec choice by Haro)
    2.2 Kenda Nevegal tires (they are as big and as knobby as a Maxxis 2.5)
    Platform pedals and 5.10 shoes (not gonna change this, sorry. Mandatory for shredding)

    I am gonna try some 175mm cranks, and some 2.1 Maxxis Ignitors, and hopefully this will help. But my real question is if the Redline fork has a different offset or rake or whatever (not familiar with the 29er nuances...) than the stock Haro fork? I also have access to a GT Peace '9er fork that I can swap if the geometry of these forks are different. Any insight would be greatly appreciated!
    You do not bend/kink the down tube when you broke the fork, did you? Hard to tell but it looks like there is a dent in the pic. That would account for the increase in toe overlap.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  3. #3
    AZ
    AZ is offline
    banned
    Reputation: AZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    19,198
    Yeah I agree with Shiggy , definatly looks bent .

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: fiddlr40's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    299
    As well as the possibility of a bent frame, the Mary has a 72 head angle and Monocog has a 71 head angle, so the fork offset is going to be different and could account for the increased overlap. Also, no need to give up on 29ers - 29er's can be designed without toe overlap. I wear a size 14 shoe and I have no toe overlap on my Air9.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mike Brown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    3,294
    WiIlling to bet offset is different. Almost all companies list fork offset on the geometry spec charts on their websites. Should be very simple for you to figure out for yourself.

  6. #6
    Peace & Love
    Reputation: FoShizzle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    17,281
    sux...i would get smaller shoes

  7. #7
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike Brown
    WiIlling to bet offset is different. Almost all companies list fork offset on the geometry spec charts on their websites. Should be very simple for you to figure out for yourself.
    The Redline fork should have more offset and less overlap.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    41
    I agree with shiggy your frame looks bent. I only have toe overlap on my monocog when running pedals and im standing on them with the middle of my foot. but ball of my feet on the pedals or clipped in Im good.

  9. #9
    gnar, brah
    Reputation: Andrewpalooza's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,861
    I have looked at the frame pretty closely and I don't see any noticeable kink or bend, luckily. The kink in the photo is where the gusset meets the downtube.

    I looked at both companies websites, but only Redline lists the offset: 1.85".
    Trestle Bike Park

  10. #10
    Kosher Princess
    Reputation: Natalie Portman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    747
    Quote Originally Posted by FoShizzle
    sux...i would get smaller shoes
    ...or smaller feet.

    <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/H_FYM2Y4AR4&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/H_FYM2Y4AR4&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

  11. #11
    gnar, brah
    Reputation: Andrewpalooza's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,861
    Frame is not bent. Just looked at it up close and from just about every angle. I've bent cro-moly dirt jump frames before in that spot before.

    GT lists the offset for their fork at 1.8". All of this is kinda confusing to me honestly...I have checked around a few websites and 1.85" (the Redline Flight fork) seems to be a fairly large offset. More offset = more toe clearance?
    Trestle Bike Park

  12. #12
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Andrewpalooza
    Frame is not bent. Just looked at it up close and from just about every angle. I've bent cro-moly dirt jump frames before in that spot before.

    GT lists the offset for their fork at 1.8". All of this is kinda confusing to me honestly...I have checked around a few websites and 1.85" (the Redline Flight fork) seems to be a fairly large offset. More offset = more toe clearance?
    New or used fork? If used, it may be bent.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: D.F.L.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,840
    A lot of folks who ride with flat pedals place their arch over the pedal spindle. This puts your foot further forward than a clipless shoe would, exaggerating (or creating) the overlap issue.

    Older, steep HA designs could get pretty tight. Maybe you could look for another, more modern, frameset. Seeking out a higher-offset fork may help, but it'll lighten the steering and will make things more twitchy.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MMcG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    9,592
    You might even want to consider going to 170mm cranks on that frame. Depending on where you ride - it'll give you more rock/log/trail obstacle clearance and help with the toe overlap issue as well.

  15. #15
    gnar, brah
    Reputation: Andrewpalooza's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,861
    Quote Originally Posted by D.F.L.
    A lot of folks who ride with flat pedals place their arch over the pedal spindle. This puts your foot further forward than a clipless shoe would, exaggerating (or creating) the overlap issue.
    That's a big part of the issue I think. I am used to that foot position from downhilling, which allows the whole shoe to kinda wrap around the pedal. If I focus on riding more on the balls of my feet, it helps. Still have problems with major toe buzzing, but it doesn't actually stop the front wheel. Seriously, I am doing foot jams out there, flatland style.

    Anyone have some 170mm cranks they wouldn't mind trading for a set of 180 Stylo SS cranks?
    Trestle Bike Park

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    394
    I have noticed that some folks out on the asphalt trails utilize a very effective technique of angling their toes out while pedaling with the heels of their shoes. The foot angle has to be just right to keep the toes out of the tire's way. Probably takes a lot of practice. This method seems to work best if you have never lubed your chain and the squeaking lets everyone know that a badasz heelrider is coming through.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    41

    If you look at pictures from Haro's website then the OP's bike there is something up. His pedals stick out way too far. Even though the pedalisnt in the same position if you continue the arc it doesnt stick out as far as his. I think the angle of the reline fork is way different than th estock mary fork.

  18. #18
    gnar, brah
    Reputation: Andrewpalooza's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,861
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy
    New or used fork? If used, it may be bent.
    Fork is used, but it looks minty fresh. Still has most of the paint on the dropouts. Unless the frame and fork are both minutely tweaked so it isn't noticeable to the naked eye, I don't see any material failures resulting in the overlap.
    Trestle Bike Park

  19. #19
    gnar, brah
    Reputation: Andrewpalooza's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,861
    I've used the precious search function, and read the threads, but I am still confused....

    Does more fork rake equal more or less toe clearance? Intuitively, I would say MORE, but I got confused reading the threads. Mary has a 72* HA if that makes a difference, as it seems to be a more "old school" 29er geometry.
    Trestle Bike Park

  20. #20
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Andrewpalooza
    I've used the precious search function, and read the threads, but I am still confused....

    Does more fork rake equal more or less toe clearance? Intuitively, I would say MORE, but I got confused reading the threads. Mary has a 72* HA if that makes a difference, as it seems to be a more "old school" 29er geometry.
    I already addressed that
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy
    The Redline fork should have more offset and less overlap.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    4,667
    If everything is not bent and in good shape you could try rotating the EBB to the back and removing a full link if you can or use a half link to keep the cranks back a little bit more.

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
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.