twocicle

Sounds like a lot fun and interesting times at the factory.

FWIW, I'm finding the 43mm fork offset (ENVE 1.5" tapered is available only with that offset) may have too much trail for my liking (looking for more carve from bike lean while cornering and less tendency to pull straight). Craig recommended moving up to a 50mm offset fork, but at least from ENVE that would mean using the straight 1.125" steerer and changing out our lower Chris King I7 headset for a I1. I phoned ENVE to inquire about getting a tapered with more offset, but nada. Their forks are made in China, and so no custom local builds.

A possible alternate fork I am investigating is the 46mm offset 3T Rigida tapered 1.125" / 1.5". I believe the axle to crown of that fork is 370mm (spot on says Mike Moore). I am trying to get more information from 3T about the various Rigida models (Pro, Team, Ltd). All forks pass the European CEN requirements, and have no weight restriction, but the models vary in weight by a range of over 100gms, so I would like to know from 3T what effects to anticipate from each. 46mm is not a big difference from a 43mm, but it's a step in the right direction, and it is the best I could find in a 1.5" tapered road fork w/caliper braking. For comparison, Ritterview has a 45mm fork with the 1.125" steer tube.

Calfee had a 50mm offset 1.125" straight steerer ENVE fork on hand, so it might be possible to test the diff on their demo bike. That would have been interesting to hear your thoughts about the diff. As you know, Whisky's thru axle also comes in a 49mm offset.

Looking forward to seeing your 142/X-12 setup. Nag them for build photos as it progresses.

waynesulak

Disappointing I thought they made all their products in the US.

akexpress 

I like your build specs. I just got a right hydraulic Di2 shifter and brake to convert our Calfee to that brake system on the rear only but will use a 203mm rotor as we only have the disc on the rear. As we have had a Ice tech rotor fail in the past I am really torn about trying one again in order to get the total system that shimano designed. With the ceramic pistons and finned pads it may work as designed on a tandem. Our bike is that color with shade shifting paint.

twocicle

Y, marketing does like to get maximum mileage out of their 100% US made rims. For other components, origin varies depending on type and model. Apparently on a factory tour, you may find a box shipment of 2.0 forks has landed. ENVE Composites Adds Road 2.0 Disc Brake Fork

plowhorse

Akexpress, can you post a picture of your bike. I want to see how your paint scheme looks. We are thinking about doing the Calfee badging in orange instead of the stock white decal. Also, not sure why Shimano limits their rotor size to 160, but that is why I'm only going to 180.

Twocicle, I understand your thoughts on the trail and I have been debating for a few weeks but in the end I would rather have a bike that tracked really well at high speeds. Nice thing is I can always change out the fork if the handling is too slow.

twocicle

Note that I mentioned Craig suggested the 50mm. I was hesitant, thinking that might be more than needed, but he responded and said for sure with the caveat(?) "at your skill level". So to me, it seems 43mm is on the wrong side of neutral. If you like high speed, you've got to be able to turn comfortably without resorting to overusing the brakes.

For comparison, our previous Santana Sovereign/Reynlolds Ouzo Pro fork @ 55mm offset, performed high speed cornering beautifully without feeling like it wanted to open up the apex and take me straight into a wall of rocks. I'm on a quest to find that natural carve feel again.

---
for reference, here is a past thread for the rake topic: https://www.bikeforums.net/tandem-cyc...enve-fork.html

waynesulak

+1 With 25-28 wide tires Santana's 55 rake (originally typed as trail in error) with standard 73 degree head tube feels right to me as well. 50mm is close but not quite as nice.

I personally do not believe in using single bike forks on a tandem but for those that want to do so Seven has forks made in many rakes. I don't see a weight limit mentioned but a call may reveal one. Available in short and medium reach brake models.

from:
Seven Cycles | Accessories | Components | 5E Carbon Fork - Medium Reach

Seven 5E Carbon Fork - Medium Reach

[HR][/HR] Product Data Sheet for the 5E Medium Reach Molded Carbon Fiber Fork

[TABLE="class: norm, width: 692"]
[TR]
[TH="width: 180"]Feature[/TH]
[TH]Advantage[/TH]
[TH]Benefit[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]First carbon fiber fork designed from the ground up by a custom bike manufacturer[/TD]
[TD]Developed by bike designers; fork is designed to match frame characteristics rather than designing frames to match pre-existing fork options[/TD]
[TD]The fork combines benefits of aerodynamics and handling precision, performance and comfort

Perfect match of fork to frame for best handling and performance.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]First carbon fiber fork designed to allow for extensive rake choices[/TD]
[TD]Fork is optimized to the frame, rather than vice versa. Allows fork handling to be integrated into the frame design.[/TD]
[TD]This fork sets a new standard for custom frame/fork tuning. Handling can now be perfectly optimized to each rider's needs.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]8 different rakes available[/TD]
[TD]

• Optimized trail
• Eliminates the need to compromise frame geometry based on rake constraints

[/TD]
[TD]Precise control over bicycle handling characteristics.[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Proprietary one-piece manufacturing process[/TD]
[TD]Fully integrated carbon steerer, crown and leg construction features 100 percent carbon throughout[/TD]
[TD]Unrivaled strength, very lightweight[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Wide fork crown[/TD]
[TD]High lateral rigidity without added weight

• More tire clearance
• No modification to the fender necessary

[/TD]
[TD]Precise handling

• Fits tire size up to 25c with fender
• Fits tire size up to 28c w/o fender
• Reduces build time; easier setup

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Wide blade[/TD]
[TD]More lateral rigidity without added weight[/TD]
[TD]

• Excellent cornering and descending performance
• More sure-footed, so you can attack the descents

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]47 mm deep blades, true aerodynamic shape[/TD]
[TD]Excellent aerodynamics while enhancing lateral rigidity[/TD]
[TD]Faster[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Optional integrated fender mount[/TD]
[TD]Fork specifically fabricated for your needs

Versatility[/TD]
[TD]Your choice:

• Fender mounts for fenders
• No mount if you don't want fenders

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Specifications

[TABLE="class: norm, width: 692"]
[TR]
[TD]Retail price[/TD]
[TD]$545[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Weight with full 350 mm steerer[/TD]
[TD]450 grams[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Steerer diameter[/TD]
[TD]1 1/8"[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Rakes available
[/TD]
[TD]36-58 mm, 3 mm increments[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Maximum tire size[/TD]
[TD]32mm[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Maximum tire size w/ fender[/TD]
[TD]28mm[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Integrated fender mount[/TD]
[TD]Yes, optional[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Fork Length[/TD]
[TD]383 mm[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Maximum spacer height[/TD]
[TD]3 cm[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Finish[/TD]
[TD]Gloss weave carbon[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Warranty[/TD]
[TD]1 Year[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

twocicle

Not to nit pick, but would the 55mm fork offset also result in 55mm trail when installed in a 73 degree HT, or was that a typo?? I'll let the math fall to those engineer types.

Also do not overlook the performance and safety difference between oversized tapered steer tube bottoms compared to straight 1.125" tubes. A 1.5" bottom is massive and allows for a very large bearing race.

waynesulak

Very much a typo. Thanks for for pointing it out.

waynesulak

Bigger is a stronger design but 1.125 has served many well and continues to do so. Those that are old enough to remember all the Santana bashing will recall the many people who claimed there was not need for Santana's 1.25" steerer over the then standard 1.125. Now that Enve and others make a wider size, the 1.125 is deficient.

akexpress 

Here is our Calfee in two different paint jobs with the same paint however they are different and they both look different in various lights and the lower half certainly changes color. Our bike has actually been painted 3 times and all were slightly different even with the same paint code. Calfee has had incredible customer service when we have needed it. The present paint (one on right) is much different in bright sunshine then it is showing in the evening subdued light I photographed it in tonight, The spinergy wheels are warranty replacements that will have the billboard decals removed very shortly as they detract from the bike.

plowhorse

I am not sure if you guys noticed I changed my rim choice from Enve SES 3.4 to Enve MTB 29 XC. I was wondering if anyone had thoughts that I may be limiting my tire size options using a 29'er rim ? According to Enve I can run a 23c or 25c but I have read in the past that might not be the case.

The reason I changed was the hole count on the SES 3.4, I just couldn't get comfortable with the idea of only 24 spokes.

JH

twocicle

That discussion may have been true for steel steer tubes, but I don't recall one in regards to full carbon steer tubes. Santana knocking was mostly about them introducing yet another proprietary spec (like 160mm spacing) with the straight tubed 1 1/4" steerer. A most troublesome part was the 1 1/4" upper which limited stem and headset choice, plus sourcing a road fork was pretty much restricted to Santana's versions. As more and more mtn and CX bikes were built with beefier front ends, the stem and headset sourcing problems became less of an issue. Current, widely available fork choices mostly provide a standard 1 1/8" upper and a variety of lower widths to suit the usage type.

We had something of a head to head comparison when moving from a 1 1/8 AlphaQ fork on a previous Calfee to the 1.5" tapered ENVE on the current one. Sure the blades also effect the feel, but FWIW, the difference in flex (or lack of on the ENVE) was enormous. Word has it that 3T forks have better vibration absorption.

That observation is completely in line with what I learned from riding two identically equipped Specialized Tarmac models, the SL3 and SL4 that had a different fork steerer & head tube spec. The SL3 was built with a too rigid 1.5" tapered fork front end, while the SL4 had been better tuned and uses a 1 3/8". Otherwise the forks are very near identical. The difference in ride quality between those two models is huge. They certainly proved that the 1 1/2" was overkill for a road single.

Having ridden all the above, I'm absolutely sold on full carbon forks with larger lower steer tubes and headset races to add both strength and performance. Oh yea, a higher safety margin too... if you're into that sort of thing :/ Also that there is now a much wider selection of tandem capable forks is a big plus.

twocicle

29 XC rim is 31mm deep x 24mm wide. Off the top, my unqualified preference would be to stick to a minimum of 45mm rim depth for the added strength. With the 28 spoke Classic 45(mm) or 65(mm), you lose 2mm (22mm width). Though I would prefer a 24mm width, I think the rim strength factor is more important in this case.

I guess I would pick up the phone and call ENVE to inquire about rim strength as the deciding factor... ie: how would the 29XC stand up under heavy loads, impacts, etc, compared to a Classic 45.

DubT

I absolutely agree with Brian, go as deep as you can, i would go 60+ on the front and 80+ on the rear. The deeper rim will be stronger!

plowhorse

My frame has started at the Calfee shop. I have made two changes to my specs.

Changed the fork rake from 43 to 49.

Made the hardest decision and switched from a disc specific wide rim xc 29 to a deeper with brake track rim the Enve Classic 45.

Thanks for the thoughtful feedback,
JH

Bad1

The 45 a good choice for up front it will save you from getting blown around on windy days Especially on fast descends, I'm running enve 45/65 combo, rear wheel not affected by Highwinds plus more aero & stronger build.

DubT

i think this is an excellent choice of wheels! What rear wheel spacing are you using?

Bad1

W.I. M15 with a 145 spacing & a 11 speed

merlinextraligh

We've got Zipp 808's (80mm deep). With the combined weight of a tandem team, and the longer wheelbase of a tandem, we haven't found the deep rims to be an issue even in fairly stiff winds.

DubT

Now you are talking. I totally agree! I recently talked to a guy who owned a high end bike shop and he always told people to go with as deep a wheel as they could afford. The HED3's are not a problem on our tandem. It is as you said the additional weight and the long wheelbase of a tandem, deep rims are not an issues yes, I know that I have a deeper wheel on the front but it is not a problem..

LastKraftWagen

[QUOTE=akexpress;16737102]I like your build specs. I just got a right hydraulic Di2 shifter and brake to convert our Calfee to that brake system on the rear only but will use a 203mm rotor as we only have the disc on the rear. As we have had a Ice tech rotor fail in the past I am really torn about trying one again in order to get the total system that shimano designed. With the ceramic pistons and finned pads it may work as designed on a tandem.

AKExpress, curious about your thoughts on this new disc setup. Also, a dumb question I can't find answers to, but where did you source a brake line that long? Which caliper will you use?

Planning a build (details soon) and I think I want the hydraulics (they seem to be spec'ed more on European offerings) but there doesn't seem to be many opinions on the setup here in the U.S.

akexpress 

[QUOTE=LastKraftWagen;16798128] The source for the long hydraulic hose is Jagwire pro hose. It is a kit to build any length you need and is 3000mm long. As the new road hydraulic system is basically XT mountain stuff the fittings all work. I am using the R785 caliper.

twocicle

... and at 3000mm (9.85ft) long, it should conveniently reach your BOB trailer too

LastKraftWagen

[QUOTE=akexpress;16799107]Thank you so much.

Followup question: If the road shifter hydraulic guts are essentially XT componentry, are the resivoir/valving/actuators adequate for use with a mountain V-brake type system like Magura? I originally asked when road hydraulics were first announced and was told "no way," but if the internals are indeed XT...