Dubbayoo

Precisely why so many steel forks are still made from it; even after much better steels came out. Unless you're restoring a classic bike I see no advantage to sticking with a steel fork over CF.

pathdoc

I just replaced the 531 fork on my old Bob Jackson with a Kinesis carbon fork and the difference is impressive. The bike handles small bumps without stuttering like it used to.

dy123

I prefer steel forks because they are pretty and I enjoy using something handmade rather then something that pops out of a ”waffle iron” in Asia. Do they both work? Yes. Do you have a choice? Yes. Just ride what you like. It all works. I ride both.

There is a lot of armchair engineering and B.S. going both ways. That can get pretty dangerous when people start making Black and White statements. There is a lot of Grey in product design.

BTW – most steel forks are not more than carbon fiber. Check websites. Vanilla, Waterford, Pereira, Landshark steel forks: $200 - $350. Reynolds carbon forks: $350 - $450. True Temper carbon forks: $350 - $500.

* Funny thing is I've never had anyone stop me and say "Wow that's a nice carbon fiber fork", but they have with the steel.

HAMMER MAN

[QUOTE=DocRay]

Rivendell and Waterford will sell steel turds to anyone who's buying. Folks like Rivendell and Waterford have zero technical training and no idea of finite element analysis, design and testing, and no R&D.


I believe your wrong with concerns to Waterford and yes I own one so I may be somewhat bias

I have been riding road bikes since 1978 the majority steel with some aluminum, {cannondale,colnago}
and two C.F. frames Trek Madones and I have used the oldest to the newst equipment.

I am quite sure I dont have the pedigree building or workmanship knowledge that you may have but my wateford 200 lugged silver brazed with Henery James lugs and droopouts is one of the finest class lugged type constructed frames which in my mind represents beautiful aresian work man ship

Mark is a class welder.
Are there other steel frames better, yes probably but the good ones are the ones that are still around

mezza

My forks are made out of spaghetti, which is much tastier Steel and Carbon Fibre.

531Aussie

exactly right, BUT, they are usually too flexy, making them handle 'crapper', especially when descending and cornering at high speed, and mashing out of the saddle. Some of the old Columbus MAX forks were stiffer, but they were total bricks, pushing 850g! Don't get me wrong, they are pleasant to ride, my as far as being 'race ready', most of them don't compare to a good carbong fork.

I'm an 80s guy as much as anyone, and I'm a little anti-carbon when it comes to spending $4000+ on a frame that won't do much more (or be much lighter) than a $600 alu one, but some of the carbon forks I have are amazing. One of my old 531 bikes had speed wobbles that magically disappeared after 15 years when I put a cheap-ass carbon fork on it.

I disliked the flex of my 531 forks so much that I've actually put threaded aluminium forks (steel steerers) on my two 531 bikes

jfmckenna

^ One of the things I like about the steel fork steeds that I have is that they ARE flexy. I think that people today are all ate up about stiffness and that a little flex is a good thing. And to say that carbon forks are stronger than steel is just well..... . OK maybe in testing they are very strong and DocRay don't get me wrong I know they are strong and trust them BUT for example one fender bender crash when the front wheel gets warped and then rolls through the fork the rim will scour the fork and render it worthless. That will not happen with steel. Does that make carbon worthless? NO. But does it make carbon slightly disposable? YES. Would I race on anything other than carbon? NO. My cyclocross rig currently uses steel but I could go either way... And LOL if only I could keep up with the Pro's who race RS cross bikes I'd be thrilled! Opinions are well..... you know.

Phantoj

Here's an off-topic diversion for all you physics-weenies:

Compare a steel fork to an aluminum design with the same tubing outer diameter or the fork legs. The aluminum design has increased wall thickness to have equivalent bending strength. Which is stiffer?

Steel: 4130 cro-mo
Aluminum: 6061-T6



On topic - one common complaint against carbon forks (and frames!) is poor alignment.

Further on-topic - carbon forks actually flex quite a bit. The only analysis I've seen is Damon Rinard's (and it's kind of outdated):



Read the text at: https://sheldonbrown.com/rinard/rinard_forktest.html

chzman

my forks are made out of iced cream... while you can't ride it 11.5 months of the year, it would compliment your spaghetti nicely


this thread is still alive?!?

Hocam

Actually, the folks down at Columbus, Reynolds, and Dedacci (sp?) do crap tons of finite element analysis in developing the dimensions of the tubing that goes into those forks as well as testing for all the alloys of steel used. Just because the frame builders don't doesn't mean they're not designed. Frame builders take proven materials and put them together as pieces of art.

Think of it this way, you can buy the same carbon fork for a 50 cm frame as you can for a 62 cm frame just by cutting the steerer tube. Do you really think they take the same loads? With steel you can pick the wall thickness of the tubing, lugs, steerer tube ect. and the manufacturer.

However, carbon forks are lighter, stiffer and better than steel forks, but there's nothing horrible with steel. I actually wish my steel fork was a little stiffer for climbing but it's not a big deal. I do appreciate the polished stainless steel crown and paint job though....

onkey

mmmmm steel


Shot with NIKON D200 at 2007-06-25

dutret

forks especially carbon ones have come a long way in the past decade and comparing steel to Al with the same tube diameter is just silly.

dy123

Gosh I wonder how this guy feels about carbon? Current rider, current million dollar manufacturer, or does he not count?

Like I said before, ride what ever you like, but when taking about different products (carbon vs. steel) let's be fair. Carbon like anything does fail.

2007 Tour of Flanders - Rider: Henrich Haussler

chzman

i think he hears a stampede nearby...

Dubbayoo

fallin on cobbles has to suck major....no slide at all.

Phantoj

Got something more up-to-date? Something that shows that modern carbon forks are much stiffer than the old ones?

Steel and aluminum forks for road bikes have similar tube diameters. So it's not silly at all.

Moochers_Dad

dutret

No but it is common knowledge. A common complaint about many older cf bikes and forks was that they were flexy. Manufactures redesigned them and now they are stiffer.

Really I seem to remember plenty of OS aluminum fork tubes. Not that it really matters since noone is advocating aluminum here.

fireworks

Alright, I'm looking for a bike. Here's the problem I'm having. Most bikes for sale today have carbon forks, probably for marketing reasons. I'm talking at the $1000ish price point here; my budget.

Take a look at these descriptions.

"Carbon fiber unicrown with cromo steerer, forged dropouts". https://www.jamisbikes.com/canada/bik.../codacomp.html

"Bianchi carbon, alloy steerer, fender eyelets" https://www.bianchiusa.com/07_strada.html

"Bontrager Satellite Plus, carbon" https://www2.trekbikes.com/bikes/bike...d=1341000&f=26

"Synapse S.A.V.E. Ultra All-Conditions" https://www.cannondale.com/bikes/07/c...odel-7HR8.html

The first two forks are made by...er..wait....

The second two at least identify the fork make and model, but it means _zero_ to me. I have no problem buying a nameless steel fork because production of a steel fork is much less "high tech" than a CF one.

Bascially, how do you know if you are getting a _good_ CF fork? Yes, I know CF failures are rare but they do happen. I seriously doubt that I'd ever use a bike to that extent anyways (as you may tell by my choices) but to me this falls under the motorcycling axiom, "you dress for the fall not the ride". Not exactly the same thing, but hopefully the idea is clear.

I want the odds in my favour. The first two descriptions don't inspire confidence. At least by identifying the make and model a baseline comparison can be made.

urbanknight

^ I wouldn't get the Bianchi. Some of their models use a "Bianchi" carbon fork, and sometimes that has a taller crown than standard forks. When and if your fork breaks, cracks, or get lacerated by spokes (like mine) getting a replacement fork that won't change the geometry to a time trial setup is nearly impossible, and Bianchi doesn't seem to like answering their emails, even if I fully expect to PAY for the replacement fork.