I don't really know anything about bike geometry, but I used http://yojimg.net/bike/web_tools/trailcalc.php to do some calculations of trail for some bikes. For comparison, I used a tire width of 45mm. These are all 700c wheel bikes.
56 surly lht (700c): 70mm 19 marin muirwoods 29er: 66mm 54 hunqapillar: 64mm 56 sam hillborne: 62mm 55 joe appaloosa: 57mm As I said, I really don't know what I'm doing here, but this still seems interesting to me. I'm wondering if the joe appaloosa having lower trail than the others is in anyway related to it having longer chainstays. Or is this just a general move in the direction of lower trail? Another variable here would be expected tire size. I've done all my calculations with the same tire size, but clearly these bikes are designed with different size tires in mind. On Thursday, November 5, 2015 at 4:15:05 PM UTC-10, Tony DeFilippo wrote: > > I looked into this when I wrecked my Saluki fork... I discussed it with > Rob at OAC and Chris Bishop of Bishop Bikes... They both felt like the > HT/ST angles weren't ideal for a LT fork. Not sure if it was more of an > excess of caution or an understanding that it wasn't a good call. My frame > is a 60cm 650b. > > Anyway I went with a Riv/Waterford oem replacement... Which has been fine. > The bike handles as well as ever. > > I'm still low trail curious but not upset i didn't experiment with the > Saluki. > > Tony > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
