Comparison of Auminium, Steel and Carbon forks?

On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:23:53 -0700 (PDT), blackhead <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Are there any impartial tests that have been done on Auminium, Steel
and Carbon forks? Some people say carbon absorbs vibration better than
steel and Aluminium, others say it makes little difference... etc etc

The differences of design, materials quality and manufacture are greater than
the differences in the materials themselves. Even in weight there is an
intersection between the three. I've got bikes with all three and they've all
got something going for them.

Really depends on what you're doing with the bike and which forks you're
choosing from.

Hobbes@spnb&s.com said:

On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:23:53 -0700 (PDT), blackhead <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Are there any impartial tests that have been done on Auminium, Steel
and Carbon forks? Some people say carbon absorbs vibration better than
steel and Aluminium, others say it makes little difference... etc etc

The differences of design, materials quality and manufacture are greater than
the differences in the materials themselves.  Even in weight there is an
intersection between the three. I've got bikes with all three and they've all
got something going for them.

Really depends on what you're doing with the bike and which forks you're
choosing from.

So do Carbon forks really absorb vibration significantly better than
Aluminium, so giving a better ride?

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 04:41:11 -0700 (PDT), blackhead <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Hobbes@spnb&s.com said:

On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:23:53 -0700 (PDT), blackhead <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Are there any impartial tests that have been done on Auminium, Steel
and Carbon forks? Some people say carbon absorbs vibration better than
steel and Aluminium, others say it makes little difference... etc etc

The differences of design, materials quality and manufacture are greater than
the differences in the materials themselves.  Even in weight there is an
intersection between the three. I've got bikes with all three and they've all
got something going for them.

Really depends on what you're doing with the bike and which forks you're
choosing from.

So do Carbon forks really absorb vibration significantly better than
Aluminium, so giving a better ride?

They definitely vibrate differently. I don't know that it is less. I do know
that with stupid small tires pumped up stupid hard they are noticeably less
annoying on buzzy road surfaces. I also notice that I don't notice it that much.
The only reason I own carbon forks at all is because I found them at a
ridiculously low price while building up a bike. I'm sure if I'd spent $350 on
the damn things I'd be telling you all about how much better they are.

blackhead said:

Hobbes@spnb&s.com said:

On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:23:53 -0700 (PDT), blackhead <[email hidden]>
wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Are there any impartial tests that have been done on Auminium, Steel
and Carbon forks? Some people say carbon absorbs vibration better than
steel and Aluminium, others say it makes little difference... etc etc

Quoted message said:

The differences of design, materials quality and manufacture are greater than
the differences in the materials themselves. Even in weight there is an
intersection between the three. I've got bikes with all three and they've all
got something going for them.

Quoted message said:

Really depends on what you're doing with the bike and which forks you're
choosing from.

So do Carbon forks really absorb vibration significantly better than
Aluminium, so giving a better ride?

It does if you think it does (see: "the placebo effect"😉.

Aluminum sucks for forks. Youll rattle out your teeth. Steel gives
the plushest ride but with heavier weight than carbon. Carbon absorbs
shock well . I have all three and the best thing I did on my cross
bike was swap the aluminu fork for a carbon one. My two favorite
rides are a Lemondsteel with carbon fork and a Bianchi steel/steel

blackhead said:

Hobbes@spnb&s.com said:

On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:23:53 -0700 (PDT), blackhead <[email hidden]>
wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Are there any impartial tests that have been done on Auminium, Steel
and Carbon forks? Some people say carbon absorbs vibration better than
steel and Aluminium, others say it makes little difference... etc etc

Quoted message said:

The differences of design, materials quality and manufacture are greaterthan
the differences in the materials themselves.  Even in weight there is an
intersection between the three. I've got bikes with all three and they've all
got something going for them.

Quoted message said:

Really depends on what you're doing with the bike and which forks you're
choosing from.

So do Carbon forks really absorb vibration significantly better than
Aluminium, so giving a better ride?

Dans le message de
news:[email hidden],
[email hidden] <[email hidden]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :

Quoted message said:

Aluminum sucks for forks. Youll rattle out your teeth. Steel gives
the plushest ride but with heavier weight than carbon. Carbon absorbs
shock well . I have all three and the best thing I did on my cross
bike was swap the aluminu fork for a carbon one. My two favorite
rides are a Lemondsteel with carbon fork and a Bianchi steel/steel

How many points for a mid-thread troll?

Hobbes@spnb&s.com said:

On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:23:53 -0700 (PDT), blackhead <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Are there any impartial tests that have been done on Auminium, Steel
and Carbon forks? Some people say carbon absorbs vibration better than
steel and Aluminium, others say it makes little difference... etc etc

The differences of design, materials quality and manufacture are greater than
the differences in the materials themselves. Even in weight there is an
intersection between the three. I've got bikes with all three and they've all
got something going for them.

Really depends on what you're doing with the bike and which forks you're
choosing from.

Did you read the OP's question?

agcou said:

Hobbes@spnb&s.com said:

On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:23:53 -0700 (PDT), blackhead <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Are there any impartial tests that have been done on Auminium, Steel
and Carbon forks? Some people say carbon absorbs vibration better than
steel and Aluminium, others say it makes little difference... etc etc

The differences of design, materials quality and manufacture are greater than
the differences in the materials themselves. Even in weight there is an
intersection between the three. I've got bikes with all three and they've all
got something going for them.

Really depends on what you're doing with the bike and which forks you're
choosing from.

Did you read the OP's question?

careful now, r.b.t regulars are here to shoot the [censored], not commit
heretical acts of reality checking such as you have just done.

blackhead said:

Are there any impartial tests that have been done on Auminium, Steel
and Carbon forks? Some people say carbon absorbs vibration better than
steel and Aluminium, others say it makes little difference... etc etc

the best "impartial" test you can do is ride them yourself and compare.
not something some people with mere opinions are prone to do.

Sandy said:

Dans le message denews:[email hidden],
[email hidden] <[email hidden]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :

Quoted message said:

Aluminum sucks for forks.  Youll rattle out your teeth.  Steel gives
the plushest ride but with heavier weight than carbon.  Carbon absorbs
shock well .  I have all three and the best thing I did on my cross
bike was swap the aluminu fork for a carbon one.  My two favorite
rides are a Lemondsteel with carbon fork and a Bianchi steel/steel

How many points for a mid-thread troll?

6.2 I had some aluminum forks on a 90s Cannondale that were about as
stiff as a pogo stick. -- Jay Beattie.

Dans le message de
news:[email hidden],
Jay Beattie <[email hidden]> a réfléchi, et puis a déclaré :

Quoted message said:

Sandy said:

Dans le message
denews:[email hidden],
[email hidden] <[email hidden]> a réfléchi, et puis a
déclaré :

Quoted message said:

Aluminum sucks for forks. Youll rattle out your teeth. Steel gives
the plushest ride but with heavier weight than carbon. Carbon
absorbs shock well . I have all three and the best thing I did on
my cross bike was swap the aluminu fork for a carbon one. My two
favorite rides are a Lemondsteel with carbon fork and a Bianchi
steel/steel

How many points for a mid-thread troll?

6.2 I had some aluminum forks on a 90s Cannondale that were about as
stiff as a pogo stick. -- Jay Beattie.

You didn't miss the celeste part, right?

quote='Ozark Bicycle'On Apr 18 said:

Hobbes@spnb&s.com said:

On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:23:53 -0700 (PDT), blackhead <[email hidden]>
wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Are there any impartial tests that have been done on Auminium, Steel
and Carbon forks? Some people say carbon absorbs vibration better than
steel and Aluminium, others say it makes little difference... etc etc

Quoted message said:

The differences of design, materials quality and manufacture are greater than
the differences in the materials themselves. Even in weight there is an
intersection between the three. I've got bikes with all three and they've all
got something going for them.

Quoted message said:

Really depends on what you're doing with the bike and which forks you're
choosing from.

So do Carbon forks really absorb vibration significantly better than
Aluminium, so giving a better ride?

It does if you think it does (see: "the placebo effect"😉.[/QUOTE]

Even if you don't think it does, carbon forks, in general absorb more vibration than aluminium.

agcou said:

Hobbes@spnb&s.com said:

On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:23:53 -0700 (PDT), blackhead <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Are there any impartial tests that have been done on Auminium, Steel
and Carbon forks? Some people say carbon absorbs vibration better than
steel and Aluminium, others say it makes little difference... etc etc

The differences of design, materials quality and manufacture are greater than
the differences in the materials themselves. Even in weight there is an
intersection between the three. I've got bikes with all three and they've all
got something going for them.

Really depends on what you're doing with the bike and which forks you're
choosing from.

Did you read the OP's question?

Yeah, there are no impartial tests that establish the relative characteristics
of forks made from different materials. Such a test would have to hold all other
variables constant in a way that simply isn't possible.

On 4/19/2008 6:31 AM Hobbes@spnb&s.com said:

agcou said:

Hobbes@spnb&s.com said:

On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:23:53 -0700 (PDT), blackhead <[email hidden]>
wrote:

> Are there any impartial tests that have been done on Auminium, Steel
> and Carbon forks? Some people say carbon absorbs vibration better than
> steel and Aluminium, others say it makes little difference... etc etc
The differences of design, materials quality and manufacture are greater than
the differences in the materials themselves. Even in weight there is an
intersection between the three. I've got bikes with all three and they've all
got something going for them.

Really depends on what you're doing with the bike and which forks you're
choosing from.

Did you read the OP's question?

Yeah, there are no impartial tests that establish the relative characteristics
of forks made from different materials. Such a test would have to hold all other
variables constant in a way that simply isn't possible.

How come? Not arguing, just curious. Seems (to me, not a mechanical
engineer nor wrench) that one could get three forks with same geometry,
tilt at proper head tube angle, clamp dropouts to shaker table, add mass
loading from above, hang some accelerometers on the stem and let 'er rip.
Just to see, y'know?

--
Mike "Rocket J Squirrel"

Mike Rocket J Squirrel said:

On 4/19/2008 6:31 AM Hobbes@spnb&s.com said:

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 13:58:51 -0800, agcou <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 19:55:23 -0400, Hobbes@spnb&s.com wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:23:53 -0700 (PDT), blackhead <[email hidden]>
> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> Are there any impartial tests that have been done on Auminium, Steel
>> and Carbon forks? Some people say carbon absorbs vibration better than
>> steel and Aluminium, others say it makes little difference... etc etc
> The differences of design, materials quality and manufacture are greater than
> the differences in the materials themselves. Even in weight there is an
> intersection between the three. I've got bikes with all three and they've all
> got something going for them.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Really depends on what you're doing with the bike and which forks you're
> choosing from.
Did you read the OP's question?

Quoted message said:

Yeah, there are no impartial tests that establish the relative characteristics
of forks made from different materials. Such a test would have to hold all other
variables constant in a way that simply isn't possible.

How come? Not arguing, just curious. Seems (to me, not a mechanical
engineer nor wrench) that one could get three forks with same geometry,
tilt at proper head tube angle, clamp dropouts to shaker table, add mass
loading from above, hang some accelerometers on the stem and let 'er rip.
Just to see, y'know?

--
Mike "Rocket J Squirrel"

That won't tell you much about the materials though. You could do the
same test with three carbon forks with the same geometry and get
vastly different results.

Hobbes@spnb&s.com said:

agcou said:

Hobbes@spnb&s.com said:

On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:23:53 -0700 (PDT), blackhead <[email hidden]>
wrote:

> Are there any impartial tests that have been done on Auminium, Steel
> and Carbon forks? Some people say carbon absorbs vibration better than
> steel and Aluminium, others say it makes little difference... etc etc
The differences of design, materials quality and manufacture are greater than
the differences in the materials themselves. Even in weight there is an
intersection between the three. I've got bikes with all three and they've all
got something going for them.

Really depends on what you're doing with the bike and which forks you're
choosing from.

Did you read the OP's question?

Yeah, there are no impartial tests that establish the relative characteristics
of forks made from different materials. Such a test would have to hold all other
variables constant in a way that simply isn't possible.

what's hard to hold constant about a transducer attached to one end of a
fork, with a known vibratory input at the other end?

On 4/19/2008 6:57 AM said:

Mike Rocket J Squirrel said:

On 4/19/2008 6:31 AM Hobbes@spnb&s.com said:

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 13:58:51 -0800, agcou <[email hidden]> wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 19:55:23 -0400, Hobbes@spnb&s.com wrote:
>> On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:23:53 -0700 (PDT), blackhead <[email hidden]>
>> wrote:
>>> Are there any impartial tests that have been done on Auminium, Steel
>>> and Carbon forks? Some people say carbon absorbs vibration better than
>>> steel and Aluminium, others say it makes little difference... etc etc
>> The differences of design, materials quality and manufacture are greater than
>> the differences in the materials themselves. Even in weight there is an
>> intersection between the three. I've got bikes with all three and they've all
>> got something going for them.
>> Really depends on what you're doing with the bike and which forks you're
>> choosing from.
> Did you read the OP's question?
Yeah, there are no impartial tests that establish the relative characteristics
of forks made from different materials. Such a test would have to hold all other
variables constant in a way that simply isn't possible.

How come? Not arguing, just curious. Seems (to me, not a mechanical
engineer nor wrench) that one could get three forks with same geometry,
tilt at proper head tube angle, clamp dropouts to shaker table, add mass
loading from above, hang some accelerometers on the stem and let 'er rip.
Just to see, y'know?

--
Mike "Rocket J Squirrel"

That won't tell you much about the materials though. You could do the
same test with three carbon forks with the same geometry and get
vastly different results.

I assume we're not saying that quality control is so poor that three forks
of the same brand/model would not measure the same. More like small
changes in fork shapes, cross-sections, etc., have a bigger influence on
vibration transmission than the the material itself. So the chances of
finding three forks of different materials which are built sufficiently
similar that those other factors will not contribute to the results is
slim to none.
--
Mike "Rocket J Squirrel"

Quoted message said:

Mike Rocket J Squirrel said:

On 4/19/2008 6:31 AM Hobbes@spnb&s.com said:

On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 13:58:51 -0800, agcou <[email hidden]> wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 19:55:23 -0400, Hobbes@spnb&s.com wrote:
>> On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:23:53 -0700 (PDT), blackhead <[email hidden]>
>> wrote:
>>> Are there any impartial tests that have been done on Auminium, Steel
>>> and Carbon forks? Some people say carbon absorbs vibration better than
>>> steel and Aluminium, others say it makes little difference... etc etc
>> The differences of design, materials quality and manufacture are greater than
>> the differences in the materials themselves. Even in weight there is an
>> intersection between the three. I've got bikes with all three and they've all
>> got something going for them.
>> Really depends on what you're doing with the bike and which forks you're
>> choosing from.
> Did you read the OP's question?
Yeah, there are no impartial tests that establish the relative characteristics
of forks made from different materials. Such a test would have to hold all other
variables constant in a way that simply isn't possible.

How come? Not arguing, just curious. Seems (to me, not a mechanical
engineer nor wrench) that one could get three forks with same geometry,
tilt at proper head tube angle, clamp dropouts to shaker table, add mass
loading from above, hang some accelerometers on the stem and let 'er rip.
Just to see, y'know?

--
Mike "Rocket J Squirrel"

That won't tell you much about the materials though. You could do the
same test with three carbon forks with the same geometry and get
vastly different results.

"vastly"??? ok big guy, you need to go ahead and define your
understanding of "vastly" now.

blackhead said:

Hobbes@spnb&s.com said:

On Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:23:53 -0700 (PDT), blackhead <[email hidden]>
wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Are there any impartial tests that have been done on Auminium, Steel
and Carbon forks? Some people say carbon absorbs vibration better than
steel and Aluminium, others say it makes little difference... etc etc

Quoted message said:

The differences of design, materials quality and manufacture are greaterthan
the differences in the materials themselves.  Even in weight there is an
intersection between the three. I've got bikes with all three and they've all
got something going for them.

Quoted message said:

Really depends on what you're doing with the bike and which forks you're
choosing from.

So do Carbon forks really absorb vibration significantly better than
Aluminium, so giving a better ride?

I have riden all three and I can't really say that I know the
difference. Nowadays, there are mostly carbon forks and can be had for
as little as $70.00. Since they seem to ride fine I use them. They
seem to be made a lot lighter than steel forks and they tolerate my
200 pounds w/o problem. So, I think that they are fine for what they
do. Regarding shock absoption, etc. I wouldn't be able to tell the
difference or ride quality, I wouldn't be able to tell the differece.

Andres