FORK FACEOFF:Easton EC90 .vs. Reynolds OuzoPro .vs. Alpha Q Sub3 .vs. Profile AC



puma

New Member
Jul 23, 2003
135
0
0
40
THE POLL: What fork do you like/think is best?
[based on whatever criterias you wish to make/use in casting your vote]

:D THANKS FOR VOTING :D

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

As far as my vote goes, I'm leaning towards the Profile AC.
 

BaCardi

New Member
Jul 6, 2003
638
0
0
Originally posted by puma
THE POLL: What fork do you like/think is best?
[based on whatever criterias you wish to make/use in casting your vote]

:D THANKS FOR VOTING :D

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

As far as my vote goes, I'm leaning towards the Profile AC.


Do a search on the Alpha Q. A couple guys got screwed by True Temper. Cracks near the crown and dropout and True Temper refused to replace the forks.
 

drewski

New Member
Oct 20, 2003
342
0
0
Originally posted by Cipher
The new Bontrager Triple X Lite should be considered as a player as well. (Used by Lance Armstrong and the USPS team in the 2003 Tour de France). Weighs in at 370 grams. (The first thing I would do is change the graphics though).

http://www.bontrager.com/forks/detail.asp?id=142&pt=15

wow 370g with an alloy steerer, but is use by LA & Co. the guiding light? isn't it all about sponsorship $$ and Trek owns Bontrager?
 

lokstah

New Member
Sep 30, 2003
2,164
0
0
Originally posted by drewski
isn't it all about sponsorship $$ and Trek owns Bontrager?
It's always pretty hard to seperate where sponsorship obligations begin and team preference ends. Though Bontrager stuff is quality, I suspect that (particularly where key components like wheelsets are concerned) Bonty isn't USPS's very first choice.

Obviously good enough, though.

Back to the forks... I'm not sure what to base my vote on. Aside from the odd complaint here or there, it's about price and graphics more than anything else. I dunno... the Easton? Reynolds is kind of classic too.
 

BaCardi

New Member
Jul 6, 2003
638
0
0
Originally posted by drewski
isn't it all about sponsorship $$ and Trek owns Bontrager?

Most of the time it is about sponsorship and which company offers the most $$ like you said. However, elite racers also want every advantage they can get and there is a line on what they will do for sponsorship $$. In Lance Armstrong's case, there were some companies that didn't stick around too long after it was anounced that he had cancer. When Armstrong made his comeback, he remembered the people that supported him and the ones that he felt abandoned his comeback efforts. Keith Bontrager has always been a friend of Lance and the decision to go with Bontrager stuff was as much loyalty as it was sponsorship $$. To this day, there are companies that Lance refuses to speak with about promos and sponsorship. Bontrager isn't one of them. I think Lance would probably do everything he could to help Bontrager.
 

msrw

New Member
Sep 13, 2003
84
0
0
I'd doubt that the choice of carbon fork, especially among the various high end models on the market, is going to have anything to do at all with one's results in a race--any race of any type.

What is more operative for riders who buy their own equipment would be how durable and rugged the fork is, and how well it handles. After all, they are ALL relatively light, relatively stiff and very similar in dimension. That being true, perhaps the question should be, which fork achieves the best combination of handling, durability and lightness?
 

Duckwah

New Member
Oct 30, 2002
755
0
0
you've missed what i consider to be the best looking fork on the market the Columbus Muscle!

I reckon they look awesome and they seem pretty stiff ( i just wish i could afford one)
 

BaCardi

New Member
Jul 6, 2003
638
0
0
Originally posted by Duckwah
you've missed what i consider to be the best looking fork on the market the Columbus Muscle!

I reckon they look awesome and they seem pretty stiff ( i just wish i could afford one)

Colombus Muscle fork. Is it shaped like that to actually make it stronger or is it just marketing?
 

lokstah

New Member
Sep 30, 2003
2,164
0
0
Anybody every ridden a crappy carbon fork? I know they're out there; that's not my point. Most of us have ridden a bike with an old, weak, cheap, or otherwise lousy steel or aluminum fork at some point, and most of us ride carbon forks now that we're happy with.

Anyone had the misfortune to ride on a carbon fork that had an unpleasant ride quality?
 

pudster

New Member
Aug 20, 2003
179
0
0
I really like the Columbus forks (Muscle, Super Muscle). They are so lite and ride soooo nice. I have a Alpha Q fork and it is very nice but we have had a lot of problems with this fork. Delaminations around the fork crown seat and what appear to be wierd looking folds in the carbon wrap under the clear coat. The other goofy thing about the Alpha Q is that you have to know exactly how long you want to make the steer. You can't cut the steer a little long and put spacers on and find out that you don't need as many spacers and re-cut the steer. On Reynolds and Columbus forks you can cut them long and put in spacers and adjust the spacer height to your needs and then cut the steer if you need to. The Alpha Q has a aluminum piece that you glue into the steer after you cut it to keep the steer from being crushed. It is kind of neat but a pain. I know that you can put spacers on top of the stem to set your stem height but I guess I am too anol(?) to have a bunch of spacers on top of my stem. On mine I did cut the steer after I had glued in the shim but I would never do that for a customer. It does offer a great ride and it is lite but so does the Reynolds and the Columbus. I always have a hard time buying stuff from companies that make all kinds of stuff and forks. It does not seem to be their specialty. Especially like a company like Bontrager that the only thing that I think of is mostly mountain bike stuff. I always feel that a company like Reynolds and Columbus that make tubing should be a little more advanced in their thinking. I am probably wrong but that is what I think.
 

KingB

New Member
Dec 23, 2003
58
0
0
Originally posted by BaCardi
Most of the time it is about sponsorship and which company offers the most $$ like you said. However, elite racers also want every advantage they can get and there is a line on what they will do for sponsorship $$. In Lance Armstrong's case, there were some companies that didn't stick around too long after it was anounced that he had cancer. When Armstrong made his comeback, he remembered the people that supported him and the ones that he felt abandoned his comeback efforts. Keith Bontrager has always been a friend of Lance and the decision to go with Bontrager stuff was as much loyalty as it was sponsorship $$. To this day, there are companies that Lance refuses to speak with about promos and sponsorship. Bontrager isn't one of them. I think Lance would probably do everything he could to help Bontrager.

Doesn't Lance have a lot of input into how his equipment is made? (ie: Bontrager wouldn't make a Triple X fork without Lance being happy with it) I realize that what may be good for one racer may be difficult for production (warranty issues etc..), but I have read where Lance had a large amount of input on his Madone 5.9. Could it be the same with the Bontrager stuff?
 

Deanster

New Member
Jan 14, 2004
33
0
0
Reynolds Ouzo pro because my seat stays on my Ti bike are Reynolds carbon. The others are also very good. Have ridden them all on friends' bikes at one time or another.
In reference to the Columbus Muscle I will be riding a Dean Super Vader with Muscle stays (both chain and seat) and a muscle fork with DA 04 gruppo this week. I'll give feedback when I come back from the ride.