Originally Posted by
finch204
I did a ride last Wednesday with the front suspension fork locked. I have 38c tires on my Roam. They were not filled up to max psi. I rode over rough pavement and I could feel the bumps, more than I wanted to. With the front fork unlocked, I would just roll through and keep pedaling. I don't know why, but the suspension fork on my Roam doesn't seem to get in the way. I'm as fast on my Roam as I am on a Trek FX, with the benefit that I'm not sore after my rides with the Roam. As suggested, it is best to test ride bikes with both a rigid and suspension fork.
This.
There are people who just HATE low end suspension forks and nothing you say will convince them they have any value.
But I'm with you. I love my low end suspension fork on my Crosstrail. LOVE IT. It makes for such a smother more comfortable ride absorbing the dings and dents of roads. And when I want to cross the occasional rocky/bumping grass field, that suspension fork earns it's money. It's a calm enjoyable experience, not a bone jarring mess. (And I've done many of these same paths with rigid forks and hate it. So I'm not just biased towards suspension. I've done it both ways.)
On a hard packed rail trail or a long stretch of good pavement that's fairly flat I'll lock out the suspension and be happy that way too.
But I like having options. And the suspension fork is not THAT much heavier. Some people describe low end suspension forks like they are made of solid lead. They are a little heavier. And the difference in weight is within what I like to call the "I have or I have not popped today" range. Meaning the weight differential is less than other 'variables' on the bike.
Short version of this is that if you like your suspension fork, you're not nuts. And you're not wrong. And the ride improvement is not in your imagination. It's real.
If you hate suspension forks, you've also not wrong....but neither are the people who like them.