Fork sag and recommended travel for frames?

Dannyleigh

Hello,

I am wondering, if when a manufacturer states a certain amount of travel for a frame, does this number take into account sag?

For example, if a frame is designed for 130mm forks, if you put 140mm forks on it, surely you'd expect at least 10mm - 20mm sag anyway, meeting the recommendation?

Thanks.

Dan.

supersonic

Usually means the full extended amount, not taking sag into consideration.

xtreem

Actually paying attention on fork length, axle to crown is the most important part.

Some facts:

For example you have a RS Tora 302 with an A2C of 509mm at 130mm of travel.
You can put 44 ATA from 2009 with A2C of 507mm at 140mm of travel.
This means that you can put a 140mm travel fork without messing out the geomery,
if not you're actually lowering the front end by 2mm.

Also the RST Gila 100mm on a Trek 4300 is 20mm higher than my Dart 2.
This means that you can put a 130mm Tora on it with only 15mm of raised front end.

Also putting an Argyle on a bike with Dart doesn't mean that you get the same hight.
Even at the same travel the Argyle is 20mm higher than the Darts. (491mm vs 471mm)

supersonic

But that may have nothing to do with warranty. Most warranties specifically mention travel. Though you are of course correct about the geomtery aspect side of things.

xtreem

Correct about the warranty, which is a bit silly/funny.