Will this marriage work?
 

I'm looking for an inexpensive rigid fork to replace the kaput suspension fork on a '94 Specialized Hardrock mtb.

I see this ebay ad:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...m=190383356523

Guy is really stingy with info. I sent email asking specific questions.

The main question I want to ask here is if there is anything unique about a "tandem fork" that would render it inappropriate for an mtb?

If it's just a regular fork that happens to have been on a tandem, then all I need to worry about is steerer diam (1 1/8) steerer length (>15cm) and threaded portion (top 5 of those 15)----add 1 spray can of black paint and I'm in business, right?

Also I guess I should have 4-5 cm of rake, right?

there is one more factor. if your bike came with a suspension fork you need a 'rigid' fork that is designed for a "suspension ready" frameset. since the distance from the axle to the crownrace is longer on a suspension fork, alot of MTBs (esp the ones sold with susp forks) the geomentry was changed to correct for 3 to 5 in difference in stand over height.

you may want to measure your limp fork with your friends rigid ones. *giggle* and see if the one on Ebay will work

You will need a suspension corrected fork...

Did the '94 Hardrock originally come with a suspension or rigid fork? BikePedia just says "Hi-tensile steel" for the fork. A quick Google Images search shows a lot of bikes with rigid forks.

Is the current fork the original?

Original--they came with black rubber sleeve protectors in those days--that may be what you're seeing--it looks like a 2-tone rigid??

Thanks--I need to research

Thanks, have to look into this

OK, according to Sheldon: "Suspension corrected rigid forks mimic this geometry, they have longer blades to hold the head tube up to the same height a suspension fork would."

I understand this to mean that I should go measure the blade length of my present fork and make sure that the replacement has blades equal in length (or at least not several inches shorter). Correct?

To be more precise, it's the "axle to crown (A-C)" length you want. From the center of the hub's axle to where the headset crown sits at the bottom of the steerer tube.

Also, suspension forks compress a little just sitting on the bike; this is called sag. It's best to match the new fork's A-C to the old fork's A-C after accounting for (subtracting) the sag. As long as it is close, it's good enough. The handling will change slightly, but you'll get used to it (if you can even initially feel it).

The one I was looking at is out because the steerer is too short for the bike. Thanks for your help.

Is there some reason you want a rigid fork now? You can find used suspension forks pretty cheap, damn close to free once they are a decade old or so.

- Mark

No, I just thought rigid would be cheaper and used suspension forks would be kaput like mine,

The truth is that this is my workhorse bike that needs fenders and it grates on my soul to have the front fender zip-tied to a fork. The fork I have now is plenty rigid--if it had eyelets for fenders I would be happy with it.

There are a couple of ways around the zipties. One is to use a reflector clamp like these from Cateye. Measure your fork diameter and find the clamp that works. Relatively cheap and quite secure.

You can also use a shock fender. SKS Shockblade fenders are easy to mount and do a good job. They don't cover as well as a full fender but they will do the job and don't require stays.

Bikepedia does show that a 94 Hardrock was a nonsuspended bike. The 94 Rockhopper had a fork or perhaps the dealer put one on before you bought the bike. Not that it matters much. You probably don't need a suspension corrected fork because the forks from 94 had 80mm of less of travel and, often, suspension forks were added to unsuspended bikes anyway. A noncorrected fork will make the front end slightly steeper but I doubt you'd notice much.

OH, MY Screwup--my bike is a '94 Hardrock FS--I couldn't understand why all of you were saying it's non-suspension when Bikepedia clearly states that it has the shock fork that's on it now!

Thanks for the other tips--I'll check them out--

And I particularly like your thinking on water-based chain cleaning--since it agrees with my own!--haha

Now that you got me thinking along these lines, I'm pretty sure i can find p-clamps to fit--You know how you get an idea in your mind and just don't see alternatives--I got the idea in my mind long ago that I was going to dump the suspension and get a rigid fork and have been beating my head against the wall ever since--and here I already have a "rigid" fork and the only problem is properly securing the fenders, and that is easy--Thanks!

I agree that the difference between the length of a rigid fork and a 1994 suspension fork will be minimal... and in 1994, I'm sure a lot of companies were simply slapping short-travel forks on the standard frame without any alteration from the rigid fork geometry.

I would go ahead and put the rigid fork on. If it does not work as you want you can re-sell it, and last I checked, new rigid forks can be purchased from the LBS for ~$50

re: "Will this marriage work"

to quote Christopher Walken in The Wedding Crashers: "we make the best decision we can based on the information at hand" and hope for the best

http://images.allmoviephoto.com/2005...ashers_011.jpg

Problem solved--Jumped on my trusty steed, pedalled over to Ace Hardware on Kilani Avenue; where for only $6.81 I got 2 p-clamps, 2 screws, 4 washers and 2 nuts.

Put it all together and my Cascadia fenders are solid as a rock--looks kinda rakish, if I say so myself . . . Thanks, Guys!