I'd be more surprised to see Grant/Rivendell design any suspension corrected frame than I would be to see a disc equipped fully rigid Rivendell. Not that either are likely to happen but I think what would be given up is essentially everything a Rivendell bicycle represents in terms of handling and frame/fork being designed as a singular and cohesive unit. Ok, the Rosco Bubbes may have been designed around existing forks, but they were still designed individually and to work exclusively with each fork variation for a desired ride/handling. There are too many variables and options for aftermarket forks and Rivendell wouldn't be able to do anything but design compromises around all the possibilities and doing would be a huge contradiction, I think.
I also agree with what Philip mentioned regarding the "misproportioned" appearance of suspension correct forks in general. I have a Surly Big Dummy fork I bought to install on an older Rockhopper that had a stock short travel Manitou fork. I used the Manitou suspension fork to rebuild an even older full suspension Mongoose Amplifier II with a crusty old Rock Shox (Quadra [something] model) that needed replacing and decided to make the Rockhopper rigid. I have since blown the seals on that Manitou fork and the chainstay of the aluminum Amplifier eventually cracked as well. But back to the Big Dummy fork... with 425 axle to crown it split the difference between the other suspension corrected rigid fork options I was considering (some below 420mm and others 440+mm or 453mm) and is designed around 26" with canti/v-brake posts and disc tabs but is tall enough to actually clear a 29x2" tire with ease which actually looks much more proportioned between the blades... so much so that if I had a 29er QR disc wheel I'd have made the Rockhopper a 69er (26" in back, 29" up front) and removed the canti posts from the Dummy fork. A 26x2.35" tire just looks tiny with all that headspace in the fork. On Friday, June 15, 2018 at 10:56:05 AM UTC-4, tc wrote: > With the exciting news about a new Riv MTB in the works, I wonder what > would be given up by offering it with a suspension-corrected rigid fork to > allow those of us who prefer some squish in front to have that option? I > realize it's too late for that, but I can always hope for a "2.0" model :) > > And I'd like to stay away from justifying the need for me or anyone else > needing a suspension fork, and instead stick to the design principles > involved, and mostly the experience of those who've had bikes that were > offered with suspension corrected forks/frames and rode them with both > setups. For the type of riding you do/did, did the offset/trail/whatever > bug you to the point that you didn't like one version or the other? Did > you really appreciate the flexibility it gave you? Did you enjoy it both > ways, for different purposes? > > Tom > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
