Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > General Cycling Discussion
Reload this Page >

Weight difference between steel and carbon forks

Notices
General Cycling Discussion Have a cycling related question or comment that doesn't fit in one of the other specialty forums? Drop on in and post in here! When possible, please select the forum above that most fits your post!

Weight difference between steel and carbon forks

Old 09-23-21, 04:00 PM
  #1  
JBerto
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Posts: 18

Bikes: TREK FX 7.1

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 14 Times in 6 Posts
Weight difference between steel and carbon forks

Hi!

I've a bike with a steel fork (2016 Trek FX 7.1), and to lower weight I'm thinking of replacing the steel fork with a carbon one (the carbon fork of the Trek FX 7.4, with is 100% compatible).

The problem is that I can't find online the weight of my steel fork, and neither the weight of the carbon fork of the Trek FX 7.4

I have asked trek customer service, but they have not been able to tell me that info.

So the question is:
Let's suppose that the steel fork was of excellent quality, and of low weight to be made of steel, and that the carbon one was not so good and of high weight to be made of carbon (to put us at worst!), do you think that there would still be a noticeable weight difference, that would make the replacement worthwhile?

What do you think? Would be a "low quality" carbon fork, still be way lighter than a "high quality" steel fork?
JBerto is offline  
Old 09-23-21, 04:05 PM
  #2  
Rolla
Gyro Captain
 
Rolla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Posts: 1,300

Bikes: 4 Singlespeeds, 2 Gearies

Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 548 Post(s)
Liked 1,371 Times in 606 Posts


https://brainybiker.com/carbon-vs-st...-and-analysis/

Last edited by Rolla; 09-23-21 at 04:09 PM.
Rolla is offline  
Likes For Rolla:
Old 09-23-21, 04:29 PM
  #3  
JBerto
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Posts: 18

Bikes: TREK FX 7.1

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 14 Times in 6 Posts
Thanks Rolla !

OK, so (on average) it will reduce weight in about 500g... 🤔

Last edited by JBerto; 09-23-21 at 11:16 PM.
JBerto is offline  
Likes For JBerto:
Old 09-23-21, 04:47 PM
  #4  
unterhausen
Randomhead
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Happy Valley, Pennsylvania
Posts: 22,222
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked 1,806 Times in 1,289 Posts
That trek fork may be exceptionally heavy for a carbon fork. Do they list a weight?
unterhausen is offline  
Old 09-23-21, 04:59 PM
  #5  
JBerto
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Posts: 18

Bikes: TREK FX 7.1

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 14 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by unterhausen View Post
That trek fork may be exceptionally heavy for a carbon fork. Do they list a weight?
No unterhausen , they don't list the weight of the carbon fork (neither the steel fork to compare)...

I asked to the Trek customer service, but they say they don't have that info... 🤷🏼‍♂️

Last edited by JBerto; 09-23-21 at 11:17 PM.
JBerto is offline  
Old 09-23-21, 06:32 PM
  #6  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 13,509

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 143 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6539 Post(s)
Liked 1,649 Times in 906 Posts
Pretty sure the forks on my Worskwells were under 400 grams uncut .... 390 grams I think. Are these heavy-duty or disc forks?
Maelochs is offline  
Old 09-23-21, 06:53 PM
  #7  
Moisture
Drip, Drip.
 
Moisture's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Posts: 1,322
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 886 Post(s)
Liked 148 Times in 125 Posts
For whatever you are trying to achieve, I think its a complete waste of time and totally redundant, when you can easily make more of a difference than 500g with your own fitness and performance levels.
Moisture is offline  
Likes For Moisture:
Old 09-23-21, 08:05 PM
  #8  
Trakhak
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 2,890
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1006 Post(s)
Liked 831 Times in 478 Posts
Originally Posted by Moisture View Post
For whatever you are trying to achieve, I think its a complete waste of time and totally redundant, when you can easily make more of a difference than 500g with your own fitness and performance levels.
Those are not mutually exclusive choices, as has been pointed out to the many before you who have repeatedly dredged up the staggeringly obvious "Lose weight from your body instead! It's free!" argument.
Trakhak is offline  
Old 09-23-21, 08:17 PM
  #9  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 13,509

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 143 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6539 Post(s)
Liked 1,649 Times in 906 Posts
The bike in question: https://archive.trekbikes.com/us/en/...7_1_fx/details ?

You could save a pound by swapping the fork and you would still have a 26-28-pound bike with w low-level drive train and heavy wheels, designed for casual, comfortable low-speed riding around town..

You could save another pound by spending another $300-$400 and upgrading the drive train a few levels.

After all that money, I honestly doubt you would feel any difference in the bike's performance.

As @Rolla said, you could do a lot more to change the bike's responsiveness by investing $400-$500 in lighter wheels and tires.

After all that, you would end up with a bike almost as good as a new bike which would cost the same.

I would not put a penny into that Trek. I would ride it it and enjoy it as is, while saving up for a better bike more suited to the type of riding I actually do. If you actually do casual, low-speed riding around town, the bike is already perfect.
Maelochs is offline  
Old 09-23-21, 08:39 PM
  #10  
CAT7RDR
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Hacienda Hgts
Posts: 1,374

Bikes: 1999 Schwinn Peloton Ultegra 10, Kestrel RT-1000 Ultegra, Trek Marlin 6 Deore 29'er

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 516 Post(s)
Liked 1,058 Times in 565 Posts
If it was a mountain bike and the front shocks were in need of replacing I could see swapping to a steel fork on the cheap which is what I did on my 29'er.

Otherwise, save your duckets for a better bike if this one does not meet your specs.
CAT7RDR is offline  
Likes For CAT7RDR:
Old 09-23-21, 08:45 PM
  #11  
Rolla
Gyro Captain
 
Rolla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Posts: 1,300

Bikes: 4 Singlespeeds, 2 Gearies

Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 548 Post(s)
Liked 1,371 Times in 606 Posts
Originally Posted by Maelochs View Post
I would not put a penny into that Trek. I would ride it it and enjoy it as is, while saving up for a better bike more suited to the type of riding I actually do.
This is the best advice you've gotten so far. Take heed.
Rolla is offline  
Likes For Rolla:
Old 09-23-21, 09:24 PM
  #12  
mstateglfr 
Sunshine
 
mstateglfr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Des Moines, IA
Posts: 13,532

Bikes: '18 class built steel roadbike, '19 Fairlight Secan, '88 Schwinn Premis , Black Mountain Cycles Monstercross V4, '89 Novara Trionfo

Mentioned: 108 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6702 Post(s)
Liked 3,766 Times in 2,170 Posts
Originally Posted by JBerto View Post
What do you think? Would be a "low quality" carbon fork, still be way lighter than a "high quality" steel fork?
Your initial question is totally different from your hypothetical question.

To answer your hypothetical, a lower quality carbon fork for that bike would probably weigh 850g. A high quality steel fork for that bike would probably weigh 1100g.

A high quality steel road fork can weigh 750g, but your bike isn't designed for that style fork.


Now for reality-
Your fork is heavy. I have worked on countless fx1 bikes(over 100 of em) in all 4 sizes and the forks are at least 1250g.
mstateglfr is offline  
Old 09-23-21, 11:04 PM
  #13  
JBerto
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Posts: 18

Bikes: TREK FX 7.1

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 14 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by Maelochs View Post
You could save a pound by swapping the fork and you would still have a 26-28-pound bike with w low-level drive train and heavy wheels, designed for casual, comfortable low-speed riding around town..

You could save another pound by spending another $300-$400 and upgrading the drive train a few levels.

After all that money, I honestly doubt you would feel any difference in the bike's performance.

As @Rolla said, you could do a lot more to change the bike's responsiveness by investing $400-$500 in lighter wheels and tires.



After all that, you would end up with a bike almost as good as a new bike which would cost the same.

I would not put a penny into that Trek. I would ride it it and enjoy it as is, while saving up for a better bike more suited to the type of riding I actually do. If you actually do casual, low-speed riding around town, the bike is already perfect.
Thanks Maelochs !

Yes, I think you're right, but the truth is that since I already had the bike, and the size and frame geometry are PERFECT for me, I thought it would be better for me to change certain things to my liking than buy a new bike.
Anyway, I've already "update" parts of my bike, so now buying a new one is not an option

In fact, actually I've changed a lot of thing of my bike:

Now, I've in my bike:

Lghter wheels; Mavic Ksyrium S
Lighter tires: Pirelli's 700x28c
Lighter Front transmission: Shimano GRX 40T (1x)
Rear transmissión: Shimano Ultegra (11v)

So, for me, is a lot better bike now.

But, would love to keep "slimming" it, and I think the fork is where you can reduce more weight with less money... especially if we consider that the original fork is made of steel, not aluminum!

The problem is that I can't find info anywhere about the weight of the FX 7.4 carbon fork.

If mstateglfr is right (thanks mstateglfr too for that info!), then my steel fork must weight (at least) 1250 grams, but I can't find info about the weight of the FX 7.4 carbon fork... 😭

According to the table of Rolla , IF the steel fork of my FX 7.1 weight is 1250g, and supposing that carbon fork of the FX 7.4 weight a bit more than the heaviest of that list, lets say 650g, I would be saving (in the worst scenario), 650g, and will cost me around 200$

Anyway, what I don't understand is why Trek dosn't have the weight of their bike parts in his database for when a client call to his customers service (they have the measures, but not the weight)! 😡

Last edited by JBerto; 09-23-21 at 11:28 PM.
JBerto is offline  
Old 09-24-21, 12:10 AM
  #14  
Rolla
Gyro Captain
 
Rolla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Posts: 1,300

Bikes: 4 Singlespeeds, 2 Gearies

Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 548 Post(s)
Liked 1,371 Times in 606 Posts
Originally Posted by JBerto View Post
IF the steel fork of my FX 7.1 weight is 1250g, and supposing that carbon fork of the FX 7.4 weight a bit more than the heaviest of that list, lets say 650g, I would be saving (in the worst scenario), 650g

Yeah, I think it's pretty safe to assume you'll cut the weight of the steel fork about in half.

Originally Posted by JBerto View Post
what I don't understand is why Trek dosn't have the weight of their bike parts in his database for when a client call to his customers service (they have the measures, but not the weight)! 😡
I bet you're the first person to ask how much that fork weighs. It wouldn't be hard to take it off and weigh it yourself, btw.
Rolla is offline  
Likes For Rolla:
Old 09-24-21, 01:16 AM
  #15  
JBerto
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Posts: 18

Bikes: TREK FX 7.1

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 14 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by Rolla View Post
Yeah, I think it's pretty safe to assume you'll cut the weight of the steel fork about in half.



I bet you're the first person to ask how much that fork weighs. It wouldn't be hard to take it off and weigh it yourself, btw.
Yes, I'm almost sure that probably I've been one of the few that maybe have asked them the weight of a steel fork, cause usually who buy a bike like this doesn't care too much about weight (I didn't when I bought it!).

BUT, would be very easy for them to have that data (same way than Shimano does, for instance).

Now, I used more my bike for "aerobic training" and sport, not for commuting, and I'm beginning to care about weight, I've swap some components, etc...
JBerto is offline  
Old 09-24-21, 03:24 AM
  #16  
kitbiggz
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Posts: 12
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Light bikes nice.
kitbiggz is offline  
Likes For kitbiggz:
Old 09-24-21, 05:29 AM
  #17  
shelbyfv 
Senior Member
 
shelbyfv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: TN
Posts: 9,482
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2718 Post(s)
Liked 3,215 Times in 1,671 Posts
OP, you seem pretty invested in this project, regardless of the merits. I expect you'll have to order the fork through a Trek dealer. Maybe it's something that could be returned to Trek if the weight savings doesn't suit you. Or if it's only $200, just do it....
shelbyfv is offline  
Old 09-24-21, 06:35 AM
  #18  
wolfchild
Senior Member
 
wolfchild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Mississauga/Toronto, Ontario canada
Posts: 7,010

Bikes: I have 3 singlespeed/fixed gear bikes

Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2413 Post(s)
Liked 1,288 Times in 630 Posts
Originally Posted by JBerto View Post

Now, I used more my bike for "aerobic training" and sport, not for commuting, and I'm beginning to care about weight, I've swap some components, etc...
Lighter components and shaving off few grams of weight isn't going to improve your aerobic fitness. You're wasting your money.
wolfchild is offline  
Old 09-24-21, 06:38 AM
  #19  
Kapusta
Cyclochondriac
 
Kapusta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 4,850
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2108 Post(s)
Liked 1,570 Times in 881 Posts
Take off your fork and weigh it.

If you are buying a new CF fork, there is no reason to limit yourself to the Trek FX one. If you are going to bother doing this, get a nicer one that you know the weight of.
Kapusta is offline  
Likes For Kapusta:
Old 09-24-21, 06:52 AM
  #20  
friday1970
Senior Member
 
friday1970's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Brighton, Michigan
Posts: 617

Bikes: Optima Baron LR, '14 Nishiki Maricopa,'87 Trek 330 Elance, '89 Miyata 1400, '85 Peugeot PGN10, '04 Fuji Ace, '06 Giant Rincon, '95 Giant Allegre, '83 Trek 620, '86 Schwinn High Sierra

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 206 Post(s)
Liked 134 Times in 90 Posts
Just be aware that some carbon forks my actually result in less tire clearance than your steel fork. I see you're running 28's. Just be sure the new fork you buy has enough clearance for larger tires.

I did this with an old peugeot and a Nashbar 1" threaded fork, I found 28's would not work with my fork. Granted, I was using 25s and had no issues. But did test with a different wheel/tire and found a conti GP 4000 SII would not fit.
friday1970 is offline  
Old 09-24-21, 07:13 AM
  #21  
joesch
Senior Member
 
joesch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Hotel CA / DFW
Posts: 1,055

Bikes: 83 Colnago Super, 87 50th Daccordi, 79 & 87 Guerciotti's, 90s Colnago Master and Titanio, 96 Serotta Colorado TG, 95/05 Colnago C40/C50, 06 DbyLS TI, 08 Lemond Filmore FG SS, 12 Cervelo R3, 20/15 Surly Stragler & Steamroller

Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 331 Post(s)
Liked 264 Times in 187 Posts
Also consider it not soo much the weight diff but rather the feel and vibration diff.
Many love steel since its real and has more classic feel.
Others love carbon for the stiffness.
There is a reason why many of the steel / AL bike started using carbon forks and seat tubes.
Some frames even mixed carbon and steel, ie rear triangle carbon tubes.
joesch is offline  
Old 09-24-21, 08:00 AM
  #22  
Litespud
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Chapel Hill NC
Posts: 1,478

Bikes: 2000 Litespeed Vortex Chorus 10, 1995 DeBernardi Cromor S/S, Nashbar 3sp commuter

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 555 Post(s)
Liked 619 Times in 346 Posts
Originally Posted by JBerto View Post
Hi!

I've a bike with a steel fork (2016 Trek FX 7.1), and to lower weight I'm thinking of replacing the steel fork with a carbon one (the carbon fork of the Trek FX 7.4, with is 100% compatible).

The problem is that I can't find online the weight of my steel fork, and neither the weight of the carbon fork of the Trek FX 7.4

I have asked trek customer service, but they have not been able to tell me that info.

So the question is:
Let's suppose that the steel fork was of excellent quality, and of low weight to be made of steel, and that the carbon one was not so good and of high weight to be made of carbon (to put us at worst!), do you think that there would still be a noticeable weight difference, that would make the replacement worthwhile?

What do you think? Would be a "low quality" carbon fork, still be way lighter than a "high quality" steel fork?
I replaced a Gunnar steel fork with an NOS Reynolds Ouzo Pro full carbon. The Ouzo is a high-quality fork that was at the cutting edge of lightness in its day, the Gunnar is made by Waterford, and is also excellent quality, although I don’t imagine that weight savings were a primary concern. With both steerers cut to length, the weight difference was exactly one pound (450g). No real difference on the bike in terms of weight (except in my head), although the CF reduced road buzz somewhat. I did the swap because the bike was originally spec’d with an Ouzo Pro, but I “garage doored” the original and replaced it with the Gunnar. I was perfectly happy until I came across the NOS uncut Ouzo for a killer price (~$130) and I couldn’t resist. The Gunnar is wrapped up in my spares box

Last edited by Litespud; 09-24-21 at 08:13 AM.
Litespud is offline  
Likes For Litespud:
Old 09-24-21, 10:01 AM
  #23  
Phil_gretz
Zip tie Karen
 
Phil_gretz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Alexandria, VA
Posts: 6,991

Bikes: '13 Motobecane Fantom29 HT, '16 Motobecane Turino Pro Disc, '16 Motobecane Gran Premio Elite, '18 Velobuild VB-R-022, '21 Tsunami SNM-100

Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1446 Post(s)
Liked 1,506 Times in 795 Posts
Originally Posted by JBerto View Post
Yes, I'm almost sure that probably I've been one of the few that maybe have asked them the weight of a steel fork, cause usually who buy a bike like this doesn't care too much about weight (I didn't when I bought it!).

BUT, would be very easy for them to have that data (same way than Shimano does, for instance).

Now, I used more my bike for "aerobic training" and sport, not for commuting, and I'm beginning to care about weight, I've swap some components, etc...
What nobody has asked yet is how much you're willing to spend on this fork swap? Are you looking at a full carbon fork, or one with an aluminum steerer tube? Do you have the tools to cut the steerer tube and insert the needed star nut (or expander nut)? So, all-in, what do you expect to spend to save this 1 pound?
Phil_gretz is offline  
Old 09-24-21, 10:01 AM
  #24  
Flip Flop Rider
Senior Member
 
Flip Flop Rider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: South Carolina Upstate
Posts: 1,984

Bikes: 2010 Fuji Absolute 3.0 1994 Trek 850

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 712 Post(s)
Liked 490 Times in 279 Posts
carbon is lighter than steel
Flip Flop Rider is offline  
Old 09-24-21, 11:56 AM
  #25  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 13,509

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 143 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6539 Post(s)
Liked 1,649 Times in 906 Posts
If this is what you want to do, do it. There are a lot of ways to live, and no matter which ways you choose, a lot of people will say you are wrong. I wouldn't have started on the project, but apparently you are well into it and enjoying it---so why stop now? Get a lightweight fork with the tire clearance you need .....

One thing .... look at your brake options. Right now it looks like you have cantilever brakes, which are not common any more. You might have a hard time finding another fork, particularly in CF, with cantilever posts. The Trek fork probably will (I assume) but you might be better off going with modern dual-pivot front brakes.
Maelochs is offline  
Likes For Maelochs:

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.