To rigid or not to rigid?

To put rigid forks on my mtb or not? That is the question. The point is, I
have a pair of rigid forks that are probably around 3lbs lighter than the
cheapo sus forks that I have, and a) a lot of XC mtbiking involves going
_up_ hill, and peddaling a lighter weight uphill is easier than a heavier
one (especially if it has to be done repeatedly at the highest possible
speed over the period of about an hour) and b) I'm a fairly lightweight
person and 3lbs represents a higher percentage of bike+rider weight and
makes more difference to power to weight ratio for me than it would for a
lot of you lot - well, maybe something over 2% but hey, I'm talking about a
situation where every second counts! And c) my cheapo sus forks don't seem
to compress as much as they might for a heavier rider anyway - I guess they
have medium-weight elastomers in and even at the lightest pre-load setting
they still seem to skip over the smaller bumps a lot.

Still, the sus forks absorb the bigger hits I suppose. But are they worth
it for that? I suppose that in general, sus forks must offer more than just
comfort as people do race with them, but the question I have to ask myself
is, would _I_ be faster with _my_ rigids or _my_ sus forks? Are the sus
forks doing anything useful or just sapping energy? Hmm....

Rich

Richard Goodman wrote:

: Still, the sus forks absorb the bigger hits I suppose. But are they worth
: it for that? I suppose that in general, sus forks must offer more than just
: comfort as people do race with them, but the question I have to ask myself
: is, would _I_ be faster with _my_ rigids or _my_ sus forks? Are the sus
: forks doing anything useful or just sapping energy? Hmm....

Maybe. But you'd be faster still with some decent sus forks unless you
only ride very smooth stuff. There's good reasons why people race with
sus forks (quick going down, and more traction)

Arthur

--
Arthur Clune http://www.clune.org
"Technolibertarians make a philosophy out of a personality defect"
- Paulina Borsook

in message , Richard Goodman
') wrote:

To put rigid forks on my mtb or not? That is the question. The point
is, I have a pair of rigid forks that are probably around 3lbs lighter
than the cheapo sus forks that I have, and a) a lot of XC mtbiking
involves going _up_ hill, and peddaling a lighter weight uphill is
easier than a heavier one (especially if it has to be done repeatedly
at the highest possible speed over the period of about an hour) and b)
I'm a fairly lightweight person and 3lbs represents a higher
percentage of bike+rider weight and makes more difference to power to
weight ratio for me than it would for a lot of you lot - well, maybe
something over 2% but hey, I'm talking about a
situation where every second counts! And c) my cheapo sus forks don't
seem to compress as much as they might for a heavier rider anyway - I
guess they have medium-weight elastomers in and even at the lightest
pre-load setting they still seem to skip over the smaller bumps a lot.

I rode a rigid mountain bike for fifteen years, and went some very rough
places with it. It was OK. Indeed, although it was heavier than the
full suspension bikes I ride these days, and nothing like as capable,
it did have one advantage. It was a lot easier to carry - you just
slung it on your shoulder like a cyclocross bike, which you can't do
with most modern full suspension designs.

And crap suspension is probably worse than no suspension. And weight (as
you know) definitely does count.

So I would say go for it, but take your downhills a bit easy until you
get used to what it will do - and what it won't.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

...but have you *seen* the size of the world wide spider?

"Richard Goodman" wrote in message
...
but the question I have to ask myself
is, would _I_ be faster with _my_ rigids or _my_ sus forks? Are the sus
forks doing anything useful or just sapping energy? Hmm....

Only you can provide an answer to that.
Rigids are fine for smoother trails and/or shorter ride times but get very
tiring on longer rides which in itself can slow you down.
The absorbtion of bumps by a decent suss fork is supposed to be more
efficient.

Good suss forks should be better than rigids on rough surfaces but rigids
will be better than poor suss forks.

Me? I'd never ride rigids for more than an hour off-road, and I currently
have a fully rigid as well as a full susser.
--
Regards,
Pete

Richard Goodman wrote:
To put rigid forks on my mtb or not?

snip

Still, the sus forks absorb the bigger hits I suppose. But are they worth
it for that? I suppose that in general, sus forks must offer more than just
comfort as people do race with them, but the question I have to ask myself
is, would _I_ be faster with _my_ rigids or _my_ sus forks? Are the sus
forks doing anything useful or just sapping energy? Hmm....

With a rigid fork, if you hit anything beyond the suspension capacity of
the tyres then the bike and rider all have to go /up/. This loses you
energy and thus speed, as well as comfort, and anytime the front wheel
is off the ground you can't actually control the steering. Suspension
gives you more efficiency and control at any moderate sort of speed,
which not only makes it more fun but a lot safer too!

I think the question is not "should I replace my cheapo sus forks with
rigid" but "how much can I spend on good sus forks". Better ones will
lock out on the fly so you don't lose out further on climbs from pogoing
the bike.

The only reason I run a rigid is when I bought it in '97 sus forks cost
Real Money even for moderately okay ones, and I didn't have it. These
days I wouldn't dream of a new rigid MTB but my existing one doesn't get
enough use to justify spending the upgrade money on. But it's last big
trip I was left out of sight by a pal on a good hardtail (I could climb
as well, but anything that involved actual speed, not a chance). And
his wrists didn't feel they'd been attacked by a team of martial artists
afterwards.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

"Peter Clinch" wrote in message
...

With a rigid fork, if you hit anything beyond the suspension capacity of
the tyres then the bike and rider all have to go /up/. This loses you
energy and thus speed, as well as comfort, and anytime the front wheel
is off the ground you can't actually control the steering. Suspension
gives you more efficiency and control at any moderate sort of speed,
which not only makes it more fun but a lot safer too!

I think the question is not "should I replace my cheapo sus forks with
rigid" but "how much can I spend on good sus forks".

Thanks Pete, and others who responded. I was logically inclined to think
that might be the case, without having actually tried it, but, apart from
the strong temptation of losing a lot of weight without actually spending
any money, one thing still keeps leading me to wonder whether it is worth
trying. This is that cyclocrossers do it with rigid forks. Not only rigid
forks, but much narrower knobblies too...?

I dunno. Maybe I will and maybe I won't. My (very) modest race
activities, and even more modest abilities and ambitions mean that I am
disinclined to spend more than the whole bike is worth for a nice
lightweight sus fork! If I did it I don't think I could stop there - then
there'd have to be carbon bars and a carbon seatpost, then I might as well
get a new frame... It was only supposed to be for fun!

Rich

Richard Goodman wrote:

: trying. This is that cyclocrossers do it with rigid forks. Not only rigid
: forks, but much narrower knobblies too...?

Cyclocrossers do it......on much easier terrain. For short distances/times. And with
frequent bike changes.

So, it depends. If you stick to canal towpaths and easy bridleways then rigid will
be just as good.

Arthur

--
Arthur Clune http://www.clune.org
"Technolibertarians make a philosophy out of a personality defect"
- Paulina Borsook

in message m, Richard
Goodman ') wrote:

"Peter Clinch" wrote in message
...

I think the question is not "should I replace my cheapo sus forks
with rigid" but "how much can I spend on good sus forks".

Thanks Pete, and others who responded. I was logically inclined to
think that might be the case, without having actually tried it, but,
apart from the strong temptation of losing a lot of weight without
actually spending any money, one thing still keeps leading me to
wonder whether it is worth
trying. This is that cyclocrossers do it with rigid forks. Not only
rigid forks, but much narrower knobblies too...?

And they spend a lot of time carrying their bikes. They carry in places
a decent mountain bike would ride with ease. As, indeed, I used to with
my rigid before I saw the light and went full suss.

I dunno. Maybe I will and maybe I won't. My (very) modest race
activities, and even more modest abilities and ambitions mean that I
am disinclined to spend more than the whole bike is worth for a nice
lightweight sus fork! If I did it I don't think I could stop there -
then there'd have to be carbon bars and a carbon seatpost...

Yehbut, carbon bars don't improve the way the bike rides. The weight
saving is less than taking one fewer chewey bar in your back pocket.
They are mainly for pose value. Carbon seatposts ditto. New forks
and/or frame will make a significant difference to how your bike rides
and where it will go. And there are some real bargains on ebay, if you
don't like the price of new.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; When your hammer is C++, everything begins to look like a thumb.

"Simon Brooke" wrote in message
...
in message m,

This is that cyclocrossers do it with rigid forks. Not only
rigid forks, but much narrower knobblies too...?

And they spend a lot of time carrying their bikes. They carry in places
a decent mountain bike would ride with ease. As, indeed, I used to with
my rigid before I saw the light and went full suss.


Oh dear, oh well, I think I shall just have to defer to the greater wisdom
and experience of this group. I think I can feel some spending coming
on.... If wifey objects, I'll just have to blame urc . You made me do
it!

Rich

in message m, Richard
Goodman ') wrote:

"Simon Brooke" wrote in message
...
in message m,

This is that cyclocrossers do it with rigid forks. Not only
rigid forks, but much narrower knobblies too...?

And they spend a lot of time carrying their bikes. They carry in
places a decent mountain bike would ride with ease. As, indeed, I
used to with my rigid before I saw the light and went full suss.


Oh dear, oh well, I think I shall just have to defer to the greater
wisdom
and experience of this group. I think I can feel some spending
coming
on.... If wifey objects, I'll just have to blame urc . You made me
do it!

Hey! I didn't! If you read back upthread you'll see that I said you
would probably be better with good rigids than with cheap suss forks!
You would, however, have to carry your bike quite a lot, if you do
serious off-roading.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/