Z
Zog The Undeniable
Guest
Frank Tompson wrote:
> I've recently become the proud owner of a Thorn Raven Sport Tour. Overall,
> great bike.
>
> However, initially the steering was really wobbly. I thought it was just me,
> but eventually discovered the wrong forks had been fitted. Instead of a 47mm
> rake, a 42mm rake fork had been fitted. It was replaced immediately.
>
> With the 47mm rake fork it is more stable (phew!) by a factor of, say, 50%.
> (I understand that this goes against conventional logic which I can't
> explain!) However, how do I get to what I regard as real stability like my
> current Trek 7500FX. Ravens are supposed to 'run on rails'
Are you riding it laden or unladen? Is it sold as a load-carrier?
> The Raven comes with a number of height sizes, each of which includes a
> 'long' and a 'short' version. I opted for a short version because I like a
> fairly upright ride, but now wonder if I would be better off with a long
> version, and with a shorter handlebar stem. So the question is, would a
> shorter stem (with a longer frame) provide more stability? Grateful for any
> thoughts.
My Thorn Nomad also has very floppy steering. I *think* this is because
it's designed to be ridden fully loaded, and I never have any weight on
the front. I'm used to it now, but it was a surprise the first time I
got out of the saddle and the bike headed for the ditch.
> Also, I'm not entirely convinced by the Raven's 26" wheels. Any opinions?
I'm not convinced by the 26" wheels on my Nomad either. I know there's
very little difference in circumference, but the ride does seem worse on
our potholed, broken roads.
This is an interesting read:
http://www.precisiontandems.com/artbillwheelsize.htm
> I've recently become the proud owner of a Thorn Raven Sport Tour. Overall,
> great bike.
>
> However, initially the steering was really wobbly. I thought it was just me,
> but eventually discovered the wrong forks had been fitted. Instead of a 47mm
> rake, a 42mm rake fork had been fitted. It was replaced immediately.
>
> With the 47mm rake fork it is more stable (phew!) by a factor of, say, 50%.
> (I understand that this goes against conventional logic which I can't
> explain!) However, how do I get to what I regard as real stability like my
> current Trek 7500FX. Ravens are supposed to 'run on rails'
Are you riding it laden or unladen? Is it sold as a load-carrier?
> The Raven comes with a number of height sizes, each of which includes a
> 'long' and a 'short' version. I opted for a short version because I like a
> fairly upright ride, but now wonder if I would be better off with a long
> version, and with a shorter handlebar stem. So the question is, would a
> shorter stem (with a longer frame) provide more stability? Grateful for any
> thoughts.
My Thorn Nomad also has very floppy steering. I *think* this is because
it's designed to be ridden fully loaded, and I never have any weight on
the front. I'm used to it now, but it was a surprise the first time I
got out of the saddle and the bike headed for the ditch.
> Also, I'm not entirely convinced by the Raven's 26" wheels. Any opinions?
I'm not convinced by the 26" wheels on my Nomad either. I know there's
very little difference in circumference, but the ride does seem worse on
our potholed, broken roads.
This is an interesting read:
http://www.precisiontandems.com/artbillwheelsize.htm
