Well since you are getting no loce I will give you my .02 which is worth that much. I have raced cross for the past few years and love it BUT I am not tech expert and do with what our sponsor shop knuckleheads go with.

As far as the fork I thing Carbon and Alu would be the way to go. I ride a K2 but don't have a carbon fork. I want to put a Winnwood on it. http://www.speedgoat.com/...at=160&brand=287

I like a little rake to the fork. I raced a friends bike that had a straight fork and the foot/wheel overlap wasn't really to my liking. The course had a couple of really tight turns and I wasn't used to it. I suppose if I rode it more that would be a problem.

Kurt

CROSS RULZ!

1. Carbon is lighter and soaks up the absorption better, aluminum is cheaper. Personally, I'd go with the carbon, but if you're short on cash, the aluminum one should be just fine. Carbon really shows its worth on long rides, not usually the case with cross.

2. Depends on the fork on the bike currently. If you start messing around with the rake/trail by switching out forks, you will affect the handling of the bike. If you're happy with the current set-up, stick with the same type of fork. Search velonews technical articles on relevant discussions of fork rake/trail by Zinn. Too much to go into details here.

Chris

---

--
"I do not hurt on the bike, I punish."

What kind of frame is it? What was the OEM fork? Contact the manufacturer and see what they recommend, or at least the the rake/trail specs.

Carbon vs. AL? How much money do you want to spend?

The bike is a Ridley Crosswind. The fork is beink relaced becasue there's some sort of structural issue with the front fork -- when you brake, the fork shimmies and shudders back and forth 3-4". Thought it was the brakes at first, but 2 different shops confirmed it was the fork. Since I'm not the originally owner (nor is my buddy, I believe), taking it back to the store or approaching isn't an option. Fork is the Python -- carbon, with carbon steered tube.

Definitely going for a carbon fork, as I'll be using it in the city, too. The question is steerer-tube -- it seems that theres a huge jumb in price between carbon forks with carbon steerer tubes, and carbon forks with aluminum steerer tubes.

Can anyone tell me if this fork is raked or not, and by how much? Sorry to be an idiot, but I'm a bit new to forks, etc.

http://ridley-bikes.com/lang/en/crosswind.asp

Thanks, as always.

Contact Ridley directly. It might even be a warranty issue. They will know for sure, what the specs are, and could probably recommend a different (less expensive) option also.

The local distributor was incredibly unhelpful (understandably, since I had no receipt). I think HQ is in Belgium?

1. I have seen many more failures of carbon/aluminum or carbon/steel forks than I have of all carbon forks. Especially with cross forks, failures seem to occur at the bond between fork/steerer, and dissimilar materials present significant opportunity for galvanic corrosion and other probems to arise at this critical area.

2.The Ridley fork is very good. You will need to spend 3 hundred dollars or so to replace it with a comparable product (EG: Alpha Q, Reynolds, Easton.) A Winwood or similar POS is a significant downgrade. Most (read almost all..) bike shops have absolutely no idea how to set up canti brakes with road levers. Despite what your LBS is saying, I doubt very much that the problem is with your fork. What type of brakes do you have on the bike?

3. All forks have rake. Straight-blade forks get rake by joining with the steer tube at an angle. Curved blade forks curve away from the steer tube to get rake. Rake is, essentially, the difference between where the dropout on the fork is, and where it would be if the fork leg continued in a straight line from the steer tube.





.

---

Tech writer/support on this here site. FIST school instructor and certified bike fitter. Formerly at Diamondback Bikes, LeMond Fitness, FSA, TiCycles, etc.
Coaching and bike fit - http://source-e.net/ Cyclocross blog - https://crosssports.net/ BJJ instruction - https://ballardbjj.com/

Thanks for the insight.

Actually, my buddy had the same problems with the fork, too. When I got the fram/fork, it was rebuilt up with totally different brakes and pads. The brakes are Avid Shorty 6's.

This issue seemed to be consistant with this fork....the local Ridley dealer (who work on a lot of Cross bikes) had the same problems, and actually would put the fork on one down from the Python.

I could understand them not replacing the fork under warranty without a receipt, but they should let you buy a direct replacement, or at least give you the specs. That's really poor customer service otherwise. Try emailing/calling Ridley HQ, and mention the poor service you received locally.

It's the Avids. 100%. They suck. You need to replace your brakes, not your fork.

I teach cross clinics to several hundred people a year, and have seen literally every brake setup on the market, and IMHOP, the Avids are hands-down the worst. They are nearly impossible to set up well, and are more likely to cause the problem you are describing than anything else I have seen.

- to put it another way, when I read your post, my first thought was "... gee... I bet he has Avids on that bike..."



If you want Hi-leverage brakes, replace them with the Shimanos, otherwise, put on a set of Spooky or Empella brakes, or Maybe the Paul's (although they have too many moving parts for my taste, they are very nicely made.)







.

---

Tech writer/support on this here site. FIST school instructor and certified bike fitter. Formerly at Diamondback Bikes, LeMond Fitness, FSA, TiCycles, etc.
Coaching and bike fit - http://source-e.net/ Cyclocross blog - https://crosssports.net/ BJJ instruction - https://ballardbjj.com/

[reply]It's the Avids. 100%. They suck. You need to replace your brakes, not your fork.

I teach cross clinics to several hundred people a year, and have seen literally every brake setup on the market, and IMHOP, the Avids are hands-down the worst. They are nearly impossible to set up well, and are more likely to cause the problem you are describing than anything else I have seen.

- to put it another way, when I read your post, my first thought was "... gee... I bet he has Avids on that bike..."



If you want Hi-leverage brakes, replace them with the Shimanos, otherwise, put on a set of Spooky or Empella brakes, or Maybe the Paul's (although they have too many moving parts for my taste, they are very nicely made.) [/reply]

I'll second this, try different brakes first. Or at least put some significant toe-in on the Avids to see if that helps. If it does help, that's your answer, and you should just replace the Avids, which are just not good brakes. Unless there's damage to that fork, it should be fine.

One question: How much do you weigh?

---

Jim Manton / ERO Sports

Frogglegs, those are the best cantis to get for Cross bikes.

---

"How bad can it be?" - SimpleS

Hmmm, I surprised it was the Avids.

I'm about 205/210. Will weight affect this?

Uhhhhmmmm....

"Froglegs" = Empella

(and I personally prefer Spooky, mostly because Harrie is a really great guy...)



Empella, Spooky, and Pauls brakes are all "low-leverage" designs, and as such are designed to maximize pad/rim clearance at the expense of braking power. The majority of lever travel is used up simply closing the pad/rim gap, and so modulation is also sacrificed. This makes these systems particularly good for traditional cross racing, as ultimate braking power is rarely a factor (how often do you actually stop in a cross race?) and mud clearance is, potentially, very important.

These brake designs are not as powerful, nor do they modulate as well as a brake like the new Shimano, Cane Creek, 4ZA (or the Avid, if it was any good.) It's a simple matter of priorities; serious mud clearance = less modulation and power. More power & better modulation = less mud clearance.

I race (primarily) in the Northwest, so for me the choice is clear - I use Spooky and Empella calipers (2 bikes with Spooky, 1 with Empella.) I have them set up for max pad clearance, and they work great. This wouldn't be a particularly great setup for someone in Southern California, though, to say nothing of someone who wanted a city-bike setup. Why put less-powerful, poorly modulating brakes on a bike that actually needs to stop quickly?

So, I kind-of agree. For a traditional conditions, race-specific cross bike, Empella "Froglegs" or Spooky are the best... but that really isn't what most people in the US are using these bikes for...





.

---

Tech writer/support on this here site. FIST school instructor and certified bike fitter. Formerly at Diamondback Bikes, LeMond Fitness, FSA, TiCycles, etc.
Coaching and bike fit - http://source-e.net/ Cyclocross blog - https://crosssports.net/ BJJ instruction - https://ballardbjj.com/

"I'm about 205/210. Will weight affect this?"



Yeah, weight is a factor.

With a really light-weight fork, like the 4ZA, a guy your weight can flex it pretty easily during braking. When you combine this with a flimsy,floppy brake like the Avid, you get problems.

The problem with the Avid brake is that it simply isn't very rigid. All those fitments and parts combined with poor manufacturing tolerances result in a product that wiggles when you use it. That wiggle turns in to brake shimmy, which starts the fork oscillating, and suddenly you have a really bad brake-pulse.

After all this talk of brakes, you may actually be pushing the realistic weight limit for a fork as light as the one you have; that is a very light fork, and over 2 bills, you can probably flex it enough to cause braking problems.

You definitely need to throw the Avids away - no question. But, if after you do this, you still have problems, a guy your weight may want to invest in a more heavy-duty fork.

For your particular application, If you have to get a carbon fork, look at the wound-up or Empella forks; these are a little beefier than most of the carbon products out there, which are really designed for light-weight racing. With that said, I would actually recommend a good steel fork, like the Steelman, Kelly, or maybe IRD; the extra mass, as compared to the carbon offerings, will probably help you.





.

---

Tech writer/support on this here site. FIST school instructor and certified bike fitter. Formerly at Diamondback Bikes, LeMond Fitness, FSA, TiCycles, etc.
Coaching and bike fit - http://source-e.net/ Cyclocross blog - https://crosssports.net/ BJJ instruction - https://ballardbjj.com/

While I'd agree that brakes can help. My experience in the NW is that most "shimmy" is a function of forks lacking adequate stiffness.

Here's what I'd do (particularly since you are starting with a nice frame):

1. Replace the fork with an AlphaQ CCX all-carbon fork--It's light and stiff and won't fail.

2. Get better cantis--I prefer Paul's (use the CCX on the front and the touring on the rear to prevent your heel from clipping the canti and tearing off the post during dismounts). The Froglegs are also very good, but take greater force from the levers (I have smaller hands so I prefer the ease of the Paul's).

Regardless of which cantis you choose, you need to accept that cantis take extra work. Plan on adjusting them with relative frequency to maintain good braking quality.

Cheers,

Jonathan C. Puskas

www.wenzelcoaching.com

www.halffastvelo.com

---

http://wattieink.com/elite-team/
Raising funds to help wounded veterans and racing RAAM 2013 with http://team4mil.org/
"If you are gonna charge... CHARGE HARD!"

Hi Jonathan,

I have 3 of the Alpha Q forks, and have ridden the 4ZA fork on the Ridley - it's not that far off.

The Spar Select guys were actually racing the Alpha forks while Ridley worked on their own carbon offering, and they designed their fork around the performance of the Alpha Q as a baseline.

Neither one of these forks is particularly fantastic for someone over 200 lbs - and I wouldn't want to spend 400$ for a fork that is only slightly better than what I already have...







.

---

Tech writer/support on this here site. FIST school instructor and certified bike fitter. Formerly at Diamondback Bikes, LeMond Fitness, FSA, TiCycles, etc.
Coaching and bike fit - http://source-e.net/ Cyclocross blog - https://crosssports.net/ BJJ instruction - https://ballardbjj.com/

You might want to try the new Ritchey WCS then...

If an AlphaQ or a WCS isn't stiff enough, then you are probably out of luck and should just ride what you've got. Seriously, those are pretty good forks.

Forks I'd recommend AGAINST (due to flex):

1. Winwood

2. Redline

3. Sibex Titanium

I understand your point though...I'm 145 lbs. so my experience may differ from yours.

Good luck,

Puskas

---

http://wattieink.com/elite-team/
Raising funds to help wounded veterans and racing RAAM 2013 with http://team4mil.org/
"If you are gonna charge... CHARGE HARD!"

So, I kind-of agree. For a traditional conditions, race-specific cross bike, Empella "Froglegs" or Spooky are the best... but that really isn't what most people in the US are using these bikes for...

===============================================================================

Traditional conditions were where my recommendation was for. So what are most people in the US using Cross bikes for?

I didn't realise that Empella made Frogleggs, I have only heard them called that, thanks for the info.

---

"How bad can it be?" - SimpleS