First of all, "track geometry" has changed a lot throughout the decades, to do a lot of things, including fads in bike production. More importantly, it also varies by event. A Sprint bike has the "tight track geometry" we're used to talking about here on the internet. It would probably be a pain to ride during the pursuit. A lot of performance track bikes currently being produced have more midrange geometry - parallel 73 angles, in that area.

Secondly, it sounds like you're unclear on what goes into steering your bike. Don Walker has an article called "the truth about track geometry." bunch of links here: http://nooneline.wordpress.com/2009/...e-angle-trail/ ... basically speaking, a low rake fork and a steep head tube angle balance each other out in order to achieve a decent trail measurement. trail is how far the contact patch of the wheel lags behind the steering axis (an imaginary line drawn from the headtube to the ground). If you lower a headtube angle from 75 to 72, it pushes the steering axis further forward, and in order to maintain a sensible trail measurement of around 60mm, you have to ADD fork rake. for steep headtube angles, you need a lowrake fork so that the bike will be stable.

Adding a low-rake fork to your IRO would result in a very high trail measurement, which will mean very slow handling. I know this from experience. I rode with a bianchi pista concept fork on my IRO for a bit, just cause I had it lying around. It did the opposite of changing the bike to track geometry.