Originally Posted by
aricc24
From what I understand (which is not much compared to most here likely) is that they use the alu forks to reduce weight without using carbon for cost savings, so itll reduce weight at entry line price. With that tho, comes a harsher, more stiff ride. So the alu will be lighter, but more stiff.
With the giant, I could then let out some air from the tires to reduce this, but then with the narrower tire and the weight from my fat self, I would be at an increased risk for flats, specifically on gravel trails.
With the Chromoly, its a different mix of steel, so they can use less of it and therefore reduce weight while keeping the same strength? So lighter weight, but also dampens the ride a bit. Id imagine you get a better ride than alu but a harsher ride than CF, while being lighter than tensteel and heavier than CF.
The Trek uses Ten Steel so Im assuming itll be heavier.
I think that's a good summary. Some here have said that chrome-moly feels more or less similar to carbon composite forks in terms of ride compliance -- or at least some chrome-moly forks do. I have one chrome-moly fork and a few high-tensile steel forks and I'd go with chrome-moly every single time. That fork is much softer and forgiving than the cheaper steel forks.