Old 11-13-12, 07:59 PM
  #6  
corvuscorvax
Gone.
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 509
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Morbo
So, I've got an old frame, but I really like it. It's a Litespeed (titanium) hard-tail. Most of the components are high-end. I really like the bomb-proof nature of a titanium hard-tail frame. BUT.....here's my problem- the head-tube angle is 71.5 (like I said, old school) and the bike was originally intended to use a 80mm travel fork. Well, I'm running 100mm now...and have no problems. In fact, I used to run 140mm Fox and that didn't seem to be much problem either. The reason that I'm even bothering with this is because I recently went to Utah and did some fairly technical riding with a buddy. The really steep and rocky descents....to put it mildly....scared the ($(@# out of me !! I felt like the bike wanted to endo too often. I could feel the back-end wanting to come up a bunch of times (and it did once). Meanwhile, my buddies were bombing right through those spots with their modern head-tube angles and 140mm or 160mm travel forks, seemingly without a thought or concern.
Last I checked, "modern" XC race frames (the few that are still made in 26") still have head tube angles around 71. Sounds like you have an XC race frame and wish it were an all-mountain frame. You are never going to make an XC frame into an all-mountain frame. It's not about "modern": the laws of physics didn't change in 2008, and your frame still handles exactly the way it always did. Either you like it, or you don't. It's like sleeping with a Slovak girl and wishing she were Ethiopian: no amount of dressing her up is going to do it. The nice thing with bikes is you can have two.

Last edited by corvuscorvax; 11-13-12 at 08:11 PM.
corvuscorvax is offline