Steep HA w/ low BB?- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 13 of 13
  1. #1
    banned
    Reputation: eauxgod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    821

    Steep HA w/ low BB?

    I am looking for a 6" FS to go with my long A to C 160mm fork (Vengeance HLR) so I thought I would ask around to help narrow the field. Any 170 AM frames or is that moving into heavy FR stuff?

  2. #2
    Wēk Ss
    Reputation: IAmHolland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    3,208
    Why would you want a steep HA?

    I don't know of any 170 AM bikes, that's into the FR category, you'll find lots in that area. The Canfield "the One" frame in AM config is 6.5". It doesn't meet your requirement of a steep HA though.

  3. #3
    banned
    Reputation: eauxgod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    821
    Quote Originally Posted by IAmHolland View Post
    Why would you want a steep HA?

    I don't know of any 170 AM bikes, that's into the FR category, you'll find lots in that area. The Canfield "the One" frame in AM config is 6.5". It doesn't meet your requirement of a steep HA though.

    After a tapered fork with a 560mm a to c is added it will not be steep anymore.

  4. #4
    Wēk Ss
    Reputation: IAmHolland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    3,208
    Quote Originally Posted by eauxgod View Post
    After a tapered fork with a 560mm a to c is added it will not be steep anymore.
    Eh, that's only 15mm over a Fox 36 160mm, less than 1 degree difference in HA. 160mm bikes can handle that just fine, like the Knolly Chilcotin, Mojo HD, etc.

  5. #5
    banned
    Reputation: eauxgod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    821
    Quote Originally Posted by IAmHolland View Post
    Eh, that's only 15mm over a Fox 36 160mm, less than 1 degree difference in HA. 160mm bikes can handle that just fine, like the Knolly Chilcotin, Mojo HD, etc.
    Also consider it's tapered, so it will require a EC lower headset which adds another 12mm bringing a 67.5 frame closer to 66 and the BB height up another third of an inch'r so.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: One Pivot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    9,561
    Any bike designed for a 160mm fork will be just fine.

  7. #7
    banned
    Reputation: eauxgod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    821
    I am not so much worried about the frame's ability to handle the fork but rather the fork further slackening a bike to the point of throwing the geo off...

  8. #8
    74 & 29 pilot
    Reputation: MTB Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    2,271
    Pivot Firebird. I use a 160mm fork on mine and looooooove it.

    MTBP
    MTBP
    "GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME DEATH!"
    Turn on the truth: http://www.ronpaulchannel.com/

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: One Pivot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    9,561
    Quote Originally Posted by eauxgod View Post
    I am not so much worried about the frame's ability to handle the fork but rather the fork further slackening a bike to the point of throwing the geo off...
    It wont, non issue completely.

  10. #10
    Te mortuo heres tibi sim?
    Reputation: scrublover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    8,847
    Quote Originally Posted by One Pivot View Post
    It wont, non issue completely.
    What he said. Most bikes with that much rear travel are intended to be run with forks in that travel range, and shouldn't mess with anything. It's a non-issue, unless you find yourself looking at older frames with that much travel, but still steep angles.


    The better question is: what is the head angle you are looking to achieve in the end? Define too steep/too slack for us? Tough to help if you don't give more info. Lots of variety out there.
    Florence Nightingale's Stormtrooper

  11. #11
    Mr. Knowitall
    Reputation: hssp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    852
    Quote Originally Posted by eauxgod View Post
    Also consider it's tapered, so it will require a EC lower headset which adds another 12mm bringing a 67.5 frame closer to 66 and the BB height up another third of an inch'r so.
    This depends on the frame. For example Yeti SB-66 has a ZS56 lower headset cup for tapered forks. Same with Mojo HD. Other bikes have standard EC49 lower headset cup.

  12. #12
    Wēk Ss
    Reputation: IAmHolland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    3,208
    Quote Originally Posted by One Pivot View Post
    It wont, non issue completely.
    +3, non issue

  13. #13
    banned
    Reputation: eauxgod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    821
    Quote Originally Posted by scrublover View Post
    The better question is: what is the head angle you are looking to achieve in the end?
    >/= 67 HA and <14" BB...so with 27mm added to a 68 frame the angle will drop to around 66.5. The problem is that most 6" AM frames are 66 to 67.5 with a 545 a2c....

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 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.