Cromo vs Carbon

Steven Martin
Steven Martin Posts: 280
edited September 2007 in Workshop
Okay, you don't see that very often as a topic title, but am building up an everyday bike and was going to stick a carbon cross fork on as a matter of course, but as the bike will be running 28C tyres should I save £40 and just stick the normal cromaly (sp.) fork on. 200 or 300 weight saving and better comfort struck me as the reason to go carbon, but am I being excessive? Would the steel be better for kicking around on?

Cheers

Steven

Comments

  • nick hanson
    nick hanson Posts: 1,655
    Carbon is more comfortable than Alloy,but there's nowt wrong with Chromo forks,& if you are running such wide tyres,i doubt you'd notice the extra weight of the forks.
    so many cols,so little time!
  • aracer
    aracer Posts: 1,649
    Depends how fussed you really are about extra weight on a bike that you're presumably not too worried about going fast on. If you're interested in extra comfort then put a 32 section tyre on - will make far more difference than a carbon fork.
  • jumbolugs
    jumbolugs Posts: 181
    In my experience a carbon fork is no more comfortable than a steel one (Cro-Mo or otherwise). I have no experience of aluminium (aka alloy) forks.
  • acorn_user
    acorn_user Posts: 1,137
    Steel (cromo) forks are supposed to be good for comfort. Of course, this can depend on design. Richard Sachs has a piece on his website extolling plate crowns on his website. Alloy as in Aluminium forks often seem to be hard and unpleasant.

    For day to day riding, cromo steel is great. You can lose a few 100g with carbon, but you might actually worsen the handling (that depends on your frame design).

    The poster has a point with 32c tyres too. More air = more comfort. Schwalbe Marathons are nice :)
  • Diogenes
    Diogenes Posts: 1,628
    Personally I would not bother with Carbon forks on a steel runabout. I have stuck with steel for my tourer with steel forks, very comfortable especially with the 28 tyres.

    My Alu bike is a different matter, alu forks are very harsh so carbon forks match the lightweight of the frame and give comfort.

    Also, for a runabout, steel have the advantage of taking more abuse.

    D :D
  • Mr Bumble
    Mr Bumble Posts: 572
    I say Cro-mo over carbon. Not only do they take more abuse, but shouldyou crash you don't have to replace the fork. Carbon can hid crash damage and it is a safe precaution to replace after a heavy fall even when there may be no immediately visible damage.

    Both my round town fixie and racing bike have crmo forks and both weigh less than 9kg for 61cm frames.
  • mekonta
    mekonta Posts: 58
    My commuting/winter bike has steel forks and for the riding I do on it they're absolutely fine. Only time I'm not so happy is under really heavy breaking in the wet when sometimes they shudder a bit, which isn't the greatest feeling in the world. But overall...steel's fine!

Categories