Results 1 to 32 of 32
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13

    5 Spot / Z1 FR head angle

    It's pourig down rain here in the PNW. I finally got around to actualy measuring the
    head angle on my spot. I dropped a plumb bob from the top of a fork leg and
    held a level across the bottom to form a triangle. I know a lot of folks on this board have
    the same setup so thougtht I'd share.....and the answer is...... 67.25. I never hear
    angles called out as fractions so I 'spose I'll call it 67 degrees.

    btw, I got motivated because the angle looked really similar to my gaint faith with a 888 up
    front and that just didn't seem reasonable. The faith measured 64.5. Hmm. looks
    can be decieving.

  2. #2
    No, that's not phonetic
    Reputation: tscheezy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    14,313
    "Z1 FR" can be anything from 130-150mm. Want to narrow that down?

    When I measure HA I use a relatively accurate carpenter's angle finder and measure one direction and then spin the bike 180 to face the opposite way and average the two results to take any slope or irregularities in the floor into account. Barny's Spot with an extended Pike came in at 68.75 degrees.
    My video techniques can be found in this thread.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,884
    Quote Originally Posted by tscheezy
    "Z1 FR" can be anything from 130-150mm. Want to narrow that down?

    When I measure HA I use a relatively accurate carpenter's angle finder and measure one direction and then spin the bike 180 to face the opposite way and average the two results to take any slope or irregularities in the floor into account. Barny's Spot with an extended Pike came in at 68.75 degrees.
    ...I just finished installing a 06 Z1 Light ETA on the Spot. I was surprised to note that in 130mm mode, there is nearly .25" more exposed stanchion than my 04/ 05 130mm Z1 FR. Somehow, the net setup is nearly identical.

    Specs listed A-C at 518.5 mm (2006). Guess I need a cheap angle finder


  4. #4
    Just another FOC'er
    Reputation: .Danno.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,222

    68 degree HA on mine...

    I just checked the angle with a 518mm A-C Z1 FR (130mm travel). I did two averaged measurements with the bike flipped 180 to cancel out my garage floor slant - which ended up being 1 degree.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13

    true that

    Quote Originally Posted by tscheezy
    "Z1 FR" can be anything from 130-150mm. Want to narrow that down?

    When I measure HA I use a relatively accurate carpenter's angle finder and measure one direction and then spin the bike 180 to face the opposite way and average the two results to take any slope or irregularities in the floor into account. Barny's Spot with an extended Pike came in at 68.75 degrees.
    good point. Mine is a 2004 130mm. A pretty tall fork compared to other 5 inch forks
    that year. A carpenters tool would be much faster and easier than string, level and calculator.
    I can say, regardless of the exact angle, it's an incredibly fine ride.

  6. #6
    Lay off the Levers
    Reputation: Bikezilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    10,128
    Quote Originally Posted by jncarpenter
    ...I just finished installing a 06 Z1 Light ETA on the Spot. I was surprised to note that in 130mm mode, there is nearly .25" more exposed stanchion than my 04/ 05 130mm Z1 FR.
    My franken fork (Z1chassis TST & TAS rods) also has 7mm(~.28") more stanchion exposed in 130mode than my 130mm '03 Z1 ETA did.
    Z1AM: 141mm
    '03 Z1: 134mm

    I'll have to remove the fender and wheel to get a decent A2C measurement though.
    I've been thinking about getting an angle finder myself but figured I'd only use it once or twice, but I thought that about that caliper, and I use it all the time.
    Faster is better, even when it's not.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    25

    measuring headangle

    To measure HA, I take a photo of the bike (not too close or you'll get distortion).
    Then I import it into coreldraw and measure the angle.

  8. #8
    Just another FOC'er
    Reputation: .Danno.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,222
    Quote Originally Posted by xcspeed
    To measure HA, I take a photo of the bike (not too close or you'll get distortion).
    Then I import it into coreldraw and measure the angle.
    Angle finder, less than $10, and works great! I've tried the digital photo route, but find the angle finder is way more accurate, and a whole lot quicker.

    I've measured lots of bikes. One friend is sporting a 63 deg HA on a DH rig - plows over everything, but don't try something silly like turning ;~)

  9. #9
    Lay off the Levers
    Reputation: Bikezilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    10,128
    What kind of angle finder did you get? Brand/location?
    Faster is better, even when it's not.

  10. #10
    Daniel the Dog
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    6,759

    My concern with a 518mm fork

    Quote Originally Posted by mtbikerboy
    It's pourig down rain here in the PNW. I finally got around to actualy measuring the
    head angle on my spot. I dropped a plumb bob from the top of a fork leg and
    held a level across the bottom to form a triangle. I know a lot of folks on this board have
    the same setup so thougtht I'd share.....and the answer is...... 67.25. I never hear
    angles called out as fractions so I 'spose I'll call it 67 degrees.

    btw, I got motivated because the angle looked really similar to my gaint faith with a 888 up
    front and that just didn't seem reasonable. The faith measured 64.5. Hmm. looks
    can be decieving.
    Another issue with a large fork on a frame is it lifts the bottom bracket up. Casey told me the Turner is designed around a 505mm fork. Does that mean people don't enjoy their 518mm forks? No. But, you would find yourself with a more sluggish riding bike that is more stable at speed. It would also be a more sluggish climber unless the ETA is activated. I would love to try my Spot with a 518mm fork at speed. Thinking about it.

    Jaybo

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,884
    ...angle finders, basement mathematics...Pshaw! It all seems so Black & White to me!
    Attached Images Attached Images


  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by jncarpenter
    ...angle finders, basement mathematics...Pshaw! It all seems so Black & White to me!
    yeah, really. Actually red and grey for me, but like i said, It was puring down rain here
    in the PNW and a needed a reason to hang with the spot. It's intersting info for future
    reference.

  13. #13
    MK_
    MK_ is offline
    carpe maņana
    Reputation: MK_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    7,258
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaybo
    Another issue with a large fork on a frame is it lifts the bottom bracket up. Casey told me the Turner is designed around a 505mm fork. Does that mean people don't enjoy their 518mm forks? No. But, you would find yourself with a more sluggish riding bike that is more stable at speed. It would also be a more sluggish climber unless the ETA is activated. I would love to try my Spot with a 518mm fork at speed. Thinking about it.

    Jaybo
    We're talking 13mm here, half of an inch. Bottom bracket heigh gets affected about 25% as much by the height of the fork, so we're talking 3-4mm higher. If the 5 Spot is designed for 505mm, then the original setup with 125mm 32mm Foxes was 10mm shorter than the design calls for, so it is just as much off the sweet spot as the too tall fork, and I wouldn't give up the feeling of a stiff fork for the sporty handling the Fox provides.

    _MK

    Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, first make sure that you are not just surrounded by a*holes

  14. #14
    Just another FOC'er
    Reputation: .Danno.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,222

    Angle finder

    Quote Originally Posted by Bikezilla
    What kind of angle finder did you get? Brand/location?
    BZ,

    Mine's a "Johnson Magnetic Angle Locator". The "Magnetic" part is that it has a mag strip on one side that allows you stick it to ferris metals (e.g. my Z150, ouch), the other side is a V groove that works really good against a fork stanchion. You can eyeball it to ~0.25 degrees.

    I got this one at Lowe's, but I've seen them (and others of the same ilk) in a lot of home improvement type stores.

    <img src="https://oldworlddistributors.com/images/pix_angle_locator.jpg">

  15. #15
    Just another FOC'er
    Reputation: .Danno.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,222
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaybo
    Another issue with a large fork on a frame is it lifts the bottom bracket up. Casey told me the Turner is designed around a 505mm fork. Does that mean people don't enjoy their 518mm forks? No. But, you would find yourself with a more sluggish riding bike that is more stable at speed. It would also be a more sluggish climber unless the ETA is activated. I would love to try my Spot with a 518mm fork at speed. Thinking about it.

    Jaybo
    I love the Spot's handling with the 518mm fork, but you're right about climbing because I'm all over ETA for that. A lot of the downs here in SoCal tend to be pretty steep, and a little slacker HA helps. I'm also used to slack bikes, so I run short stems and DH bars so I can get a lot of weight on the front to carve the turns.

  16. #16
    Daniel the Dog
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    6,759

    I never said I agreed....

    Quote Originally Posted by MK_
    We're talking 13mm here, half of an inch. Bottom bracket heigh gets affected about 25% as much by the height of the fork, so we're talking 3-4mm higher. If the 5 Spot is designed for 505mm, then the original setup with 125mm 32mm Foxes was 10mm shorter than the design calls for, so it is just as much off the sweet spot as the too tall fork, and I wouldn't give up the feeling of a stiff fork for the sporty handling the Fox provides.

    _MK
    Just what Casey at Turner told me when I called him. He did say it is personal preference. The 125mm Fox forks were 500mm I think. I think the 518mm forks just slow down the steering, raise the BB, and create a more stable bike. Nothing more or less....If you like it great, if not, great! I might give it a shot. I might just keep my Fox and throw a Pike or Marzocchi on for certain rides.

    Jaybo

    PS PNCarpenter, you look like a perfect candidate for a 6 Pack with that build.
    Last edited by Jaybo; 11-26-2005 at 07:09 PM.

  17. #17
    PSI
    PSI is offline
    I want that one
    Reputation: PSI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,036

    Climbing with 518 A2C

    Quote Originally Posted by .Danno.
    I love the Spot's handling with the 518mm fork, but you're right about climbing because I'm all over ETA for that. A lot of the downs here in SoCal tend to be pretty steep, and a little slacker HA helps. I'm also used to slack bikes, so I run short stems and DH bars so I can get a lot of weight on the front to carve the turns.
    There's one particular training loop near here (Nepoleon hill for you locals) that has one short uphill section, that to the best of my knowledge, only a few expert level xc racer types can climb. I consider myself a fair climber and I've tried clearing that section with my HT and old Superlight a billion times (both set to 80mm/71 HA) to no avail. Last week I took a crack at it with my 5 spot and made it on the second try. I have a Z1 SL 130 (no ETA, only useless ECC) so it was fully extended at 518 A2C/68 HA.

    Obviously I congratgulate the frame's rear suspension (HL, but thats for a different thread) more than I do myself.

  18. #18
    Lay off the Levers
    Reputation: Bikezilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    10,128
    Tnx .Danno. That's the one I have to find. My local HD has a crappy one which barely eyeballs to 1 deg accurately, more like 2 degs. I'll check Sears.

    PSI it wasn't your HL that got you up that hill...it was the "Force"...diagram.
    Faster is better, even when it's not.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    256
    By putting the long fork on it therby totally destroying those hallowed angles that DT designed into the bike which it would appear on this forum are the most important parameters, now that TNT has replaced HP. (originally designed for 19.75 " or 202mm) Why not put a huge layback seatpost on it as well and call it a Turner Chopper!!

  20. #20
    ... I guess you won't be
    Reputation: jokermtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,940
    I ride a spot w/ an 04 Z1FR...and it definitely pushes in the front, when cornering hard, tight trails....if you don't have your weight up front! I have to constantly remind myself to "get up on the tank" in these situations....but, I believe it is a worthwhile trade off for the outstanding abilities to tackle sketchy terrain w/ the zoke out front padding one's way....until fox makes a 110 mm fork w/ marz damping, I'll stick with my chopper!

  21. #21
    DGC
    DGC is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DGC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,345
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaybo
    Just what Casey at Turner told me when I called him. He did say it is personal preference. The 125mm Fox forks were 500mm I think. I think the 518mm forks just slow down the steering, raise the BB, and create a more stable bike. Nothing more or less....If you like it great, if not, great! I might give it a shot. I might just keep my Fox and throw a Pike or Marzocchi on for certain rides.

    Jaybo

    PS PNCarpenter, you look like a perfect candidate for a 6 Pack with that build.

    How the head angle effects the ride depends on the rider. One who decends hard, steeps and aggressively will want the slacker angle and taller front end, If you are more aggressive all the time you overcome the slower steering at first then it becomes your best friend and a very welcome trait to the front end.
    Back in 2002 I really liked the Fox on the 5 Spot, now going faster harder on the same rides as then, it is not enough fork for me. I put up with the Fox til I just could not stand having enough fork on the front. I think for many their riding is still advancing and/or they are constantly trying harder stuff. Makes all the sense in the world to step up to a longer fork on the Spot for many of us, "maxle" sure helps the decision too....!!!!.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  22. #22
    not so super...
    Reputation: SSINGA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    11,464
    Quote Originally Posted by .Danno.
    BZ,

    Mine's a "Johnson Magnetic Angle Locator". The "Magnetic" part is that it has a mag strip on one side that allows you stick it to ferris metals (e.g. my Z150, ouch), the other side is a V groove that works really good against a fork stanchion. You can eyeball it to ~0.25 degrees.

    I got this one at Lowe's, but I've seen them (and others of the same ilk) in a lot of home improvement type stores.
    are you measuring the HA from the fork legs??

  23. #23
    Just another FOC'er
    Reputation: .Danno.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,222

    Stanchions

    Quote Originally Posted by SSINGA
    are you measuring the HA from the fork legs??
    I measure on the stanchions, wheel straight ahead and always average two measurements swapping the bike 180 degrees. I've only got one bike with less than 5" of travel and on that one I had to measure using the headtube because the angle finder is around 4.5" long.

    I think if you measured on the lowers you may get a little error due to bushing slop or because the castings aren't uniform thickness.

    BTW, I'm certainly assuming my stanchions are at the same angle as my steerer tube. On my DC forks that's kind of a given, and on the SC forks it certainly should be, unless the fork's been bent.


    ~danno

  24. #24
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    30,652
    Quote Originally Posted by .Danno.
    I measure on the stanchions
    You can't measure the stanchions or the lowers, there's offset built into forks, and often times the "angle" of the lowers or stanchions is completely different than the head tube angle.

    These differences are hard to see with the naked eye, but they exist. The only way to measure the angle is going to be with the headtube of the bike, hence why it's called headtube angle.

    You can see this fairly plainly with some forks when you take them out of the bike and just look at them, then you can see the steerer does not line up with the legs often times. On other forks, they either are parallel, or the differences are slight and can't be seen by the naked eye, although that doesn't mean they aren't there.

    Yes, most DC forks that I've owned were parallel with the steerer tube, but I can't say the same for the single crowns. They vary quite a bit.
    "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.

  25. #25
    Just another FOC'er
    Reputation: .Danno.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,222
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem
    You can't measure the stanchions or the lowers, there's offset built into forks, and often times the "angle" of the lowers or stanchions is completely different than the head tube angle.

    These differences are hard to see with the naked eye, but they exist. The only way to measure the angle is going to be with the headtube of the bike, hence why it's called headtube angle.

    You can see this fairly plainly with some forks when you take them out of the bike and just look at them, then you can see the steerer does not line up with the legs often times. On other forks, they either are parallel, or the differences are slight and can't be seen by the naked eye, although that doesn't mean they aren't there.

    Yes, most DC forks that I've owned were parallel with the steerer tube, but I can't say the same for the single crowns. They vary quite a bit.
    I actually have seen a difference on Fox forks, but not on Marz, and I thought it was a production problem. I have checked the steerer vs stanchion angles on my Z1 and Z150, and haven't been able to discern a difference. Maybe mine just happen to be straight. I doubt they are produced with an angle offset on purpose, ya think?

    The reason I'm saying my DC forks are parallel is that the upper and lower crowns have the same dimensions which would force zero angle offset.

    BTW, if SC forks had an angle offset I might get more information out of the stanchion angle than the HT angle, at least to tell me how well I'm going to plow over stuff. Cornering would be an entirely different can of worms.


    ~danno

  26. #26
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    30,652
    Quote Originally Posted by .Danno.
    The reason I'm saying my DC forks are parallel is that the upper and lower crowns have the same dimensions which would force zero angle offset.
    Yep, most DC forks can be adjusted up and down to change the HT angle somewhat IMO, as far as reasons why they are parallel. There's also the fact that different head tubes are different lengths, so the DC fork NEEDS to be able to slide up and down.
    "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.

  27. #27
    ~~~~~~~~
    Reputation: airwreck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,873
    [QUOTE=Jayem]You can't measure the stanchions or the lowers, there's offset built into forks, and often times the "angle" of the lowers or stanchions is completely different than the head tube angle.

    These differences are hard to see with the naked eye, but they exist. The only way to measure the angle is going to be with the headtube of the bike, hence why it's called headtube angle.[QUOTE]

    okay, I just measured a bunch of forks and bikes and you are right....for the mag 21.

  28. #28
    MK_
    MK_ is offline
    carpe maņana
    Reputation: MK_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    7,258
    Quote Originally Posted by airwreck
    okay, I just measured a bunch of forks and bikes and you are right....for the mag 21.
    Don't forget 32mm Foxes. They have a negative 1 degree angle, to improve the trail of the fork.

    _MK

    Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, first make sure that you are not just surrounded by a*holes

  29. #29
    Flyin Canine
    Reputation: shanedawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,272
    Quote Originally Posted by .Danno.
    BZ,

    Mine's a "Johnson Magnetic Angle Locator". The "Magnetic" part is that it has a mag strip on one side that allows you stick it to ferris metals (e.g. my Z150, ouch), the other side is a V groove that works really good against a fork stanchion. You can eyeball it to ~0.25 degrees.

    I got this one at Lowe's, but I've seen them (and others of the same ilk) in a lot of home improvement type stores.
    Hey Danno, hopefully you just provided the locations that the angle finder sits on nicely as a reference. If you actually try to measure the head angle of a bike using the fork stanchion you are going to get an incorrect number.

    edit: Just finished reading the rest of the thread and realized a bunch of others chimed in already on this one. You should always measure from the head tube. Only if everyone measures the same way can the comparisons be useful. If your headtube is to short for your gauge use a spacer but don't do it on the fork legs.
    Last edited by shanedawg; 12-01-2005 at 11:42 AM.

  30. #30
    Just another FOC'er
    Reputation: .Danno.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,222
    Quote Originally Posted by shanedawg
    Hey Danno, hopefully you just provided the locations that the angle finder sits on nicely as a reference. If you actually try to measure the head angle of a bike using the fork stanchion you are going to get an incorrect number.

    edit: Just finished reading the rest of the thread and realized a bunch of others chimed in already on this one. You should always measure from the head tube. Only if everyone measures the same way can the comparisons be useful. If your headtube is to short for your gauge use a spacer but don't do it on the fork legs.
    Yeah, thanks for the input. I learn something every day on this forum.

    All of mine happen to have no angle offset, so I've been using the stanchions because they're more easily accessible. I've seen guys at my LBS do the same thing, so I guess the offset angle can't be too well known.

    I'm curious as to which forks actually use an offset angle? I've got friends that have added about 5 degree rearward offset, but I don't think it was intentional

  31. #31
    ~~~~~~~~
    Reputation: airwreck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,873
    Quote Originally Posted by .Danno.
    I'm curious as to which forks actually use an offset angle? I've got friends that have added about 5 degree rearward offset, but I don't think it was intentional
    I haven't been able to find any with offset angles amongst my collection of RS, Marz and Fox forks, except for the mag 21 as stated previously. I've also compared fork leg and head tube measurements with manufacture specs and been consistent. All this has been for my personal reference so I would hesitate to claim any results as accurate, especially with factors like different size front and rear tires.

  32. #32
    MK_
    MK_ is offline
    carpe maņana
    Reputation: MK_'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    7,258
    Quote Originally Posted by airwreck
    I haven't been able to find any with offset angles amongst my collection of RS, Marz and Fox forks, except for the mag 21 as stated previously. I've also compared fork leg and head tube measurements with manufacture specs and been consistent. All this has been for my personal reference so I would hesitate to claim any results as accurate, especially with factors like different size front and rear tires.
    Do you remember a thread, from long time ago, dealing with fork trail? It was on Let's Talk About Shocks forum and I can't seem to be able to dig it up right now, but it discussed trail in large detail and there were pictures and writeups talking about the negative angle of the Foxes. I am quite positive I didn't imagine the thread. The Fox part might have been false, but it didnt' seem like it.

    _MK

    Before you diagnose yourself with depression or low self-esteem, first make sure that you are not just surrounded by a*holes

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.