Carbon or steel fork
10-27-13, 06:20 PM
#26
Bike Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: South of Raleigh, North of New Hill, East of Harris Lake, NC
Posts: 9,622
Bikes: Specialized Tarmac, Specialized Roubaix, Giant OCR-C, Specialized Stumpjumper FSR, Stumpjumper Comp, 88 & 92Nishiki Ariel, 87 Centurion Ironman, 92 Paramount, 84 Nishiki Medalist
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 68 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 37 Times
in
27 Posts
I've always bought my frames with a fork that was designed by the company to work with that frame.
If you want a softer ride, put on puffier tires. Btw, my bikes have carbon forks. Just sold a 78 Paramount with probably a pretty decent steel fork, and it didn't ride any better than my all carbon bike.
If you want a softer ride, put on puffier tires. Btw, my bikes have carbon forks. Just sold a 78 Paramount with probably a pretty decent steel fork, and it didn't ride any better than my all carbon bike.
BTW, If I could go with either and still have good handling, I'd go with carbon for pure shock absorption it is great.
__________________
Roccobike BF Official Thread Terminator
Roccobike BF Official Thread Terminator
10-28-13, 11:41 AM
#27
Dharma Dog
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,073
Bikes: Rodriguez Shiftless street fixie with S&S couplers, Kuwahara tandem, Trek carbon, Dolan track
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
The benefit of a steel fork is simple, in a severe crash where steel is forced beyond it's deformation point it will deform (read bend). Carbon fibre when forced beyond it's deformation point, will splinter. Of course the difference between a fork that bends and one that shatters, could be the difference between calling a driver a dumb*ss, and paying for a good chunk of your dentist's new Porsche....
Also, a carbon fork designed for disc brake use would be much heavier than a normal rim-brake fork. I've seen weights closer to 500-650 grams for disc brake forks, vs 300-350 for a light rim brake fork. The disc brake fork is one place where I would NOT file off those stupid lawyer tabs!
Luis
10-28-13, 02:09 PM
#28
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Toronto (again) Ontario, Canada
Posts: 6,931
Bikes: Old Bike: 1975 Raleigh Delta, New Bike: 2004 Norco Bushpilot
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
5 Posts
My own exerience with a carbon fork on a steel frame is that the frame will crumple before the carbon splinters. I once had my bike completely lock up the front wheel when a broken fender stay was caught by the front tire at around 25 kmh. The fork survived completely intact, but the steel frame was toast (so was my helmet, btw!). This was a steel frame, so there'd be stress risers at the end of the head lug below the downtube, or at the end of the front butted section of the downtube. Anyway, downtubes are not designed to absorb the force of a direct hit from the front, so would be more likely to give than a fork, especially one made of carbon fiber, which would usually be much stronger than one made of steel (for a given weight).
Also, a carbon fork designed for disc brake use would be much heavier than a normal rim-brake fork. I've seen weights closer to 500-650 grams for disc brake forks, vs 300-350 for a light rim brake fork. The disc brake fork is one place where I would NOT file off those stupid lawyer tabs!
Luis
Also, a carbon fork designed for disc brake use would be much heavier than a normal rim-brake fork. I've seen weights closer to 500-650 grams for disc brake forks, vs 300-350 for a light rim brake fork. The disc brake fork is one place where I would NOT file off those stupid lawyer tabs!
Luis
10-29-13, 01:14 AM
#29
The Left Coast, USA
I have both and switched different forks in and out. The thing about a carbon fork ... if it takes a hard whack with a side stress, maybe racked with other bikes or a fall over - you just don't know. Maybe you can spot a stress crack, maybe not. And, I don't think carbon rides any better than a good steel fork, it's just about saving a little weight.
Last edited by FrenchFit; 10-29-13 at 01:17 AM.
10-29-13, 09:20 AM
#30
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 712
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Wife rides a Ibis Spanky to and from work. Early 90's bike with a carbon fork. Still tickin. Kestrel Evoke has carbon fork, Bianchi Ti has carbon, Tandem also. Proteus has steel fork, 531 with a flat crown, mid 70's bike and rides real nice. No issues with any so far.
10-29-13, 09:51 AM
#31
Beicwyr Hapus
Thread Starter
As I said earlier, the reliability of carbon is not an issue for me. My current mountain bike, that is used off-road a lot and takes a fair bit of punishment, has 17 year old carbon suspension forks and they've not given me any worries (says he, pushing his luck).
10-30-13, 08:44 AM
#32
The Left Coast, USA
Wasn't a lot of that early stuff carbon wrap on aluminum? I haven't seen first gen carbon thru and thru on mountain bikes. Steerer tube aluminum?
10-30-13, 10:32 AM
#33
Beicwyr Hapus
Thread Starter
In many cases they were carbon wrap, but I believe that many of the Pace forks were full carbon legs, including my RC36 Evo fork. Steerer tubes were a choice of steel or aluminium. I'm no expert however, and someone more knowledgeable than I may know otherwise.
