Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Yo Eddy fork - a brief history

Expand Messages
  • Kogswell Cycles
    I don t have any compunction about steeling ideas. It s a necessary part of life. But I do like to give credit where it is due. The strut fork that we re
    Message 1 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
      I don't have any compunction about steeling ideas.

      It's a necessary part of life.

      But I do like to give credit where it is due.

      The strut fork that we're producing has its origins in a design
      that was invention of Jeff Feddersen who came up with it while
      employed at Fat City. He and Chris Chance have a patent
      on the design:

      http://www.google.com/patents?id=_EgqAAAAEBAJ&dq=D326249

      Jeff is a clever guy who went on to start SRP, the company
      that was famous for it's titanium fasteners.

      One of the more interesting things about the design is that
      because the fork blades were not bent, they could be heat
      treated. (Fork blades are generally not hardened past
      normal levels).

      The other part of the story of that fork is the name, Yo Eddy.
      Fat City employee Mike Papaconstantine was a graffiti
      artist and he came up with a character named Yo Eddy.
      The shop rats at Fat City liked the character and started
      their own underground t-shirt movement that only later
      picked up by the marketing type and applied to everything
      from bikes to grease.

      There's more to the story, things like big piles of laser
      cut struts that are still in use today. And the fact that
      the Yo Eddy fork (and frame) came into being because
      of the Specialized Extreme S 2.5" tire (tires driving
      fork design - not a new situation).

      But I wanted you all to know that there were a couple
      of real people who did some original work that came
      together to form a product whose allure has lasted
      over time.

      Thank you Jeff. Thank you Mike.

      We're all better off because of you.




      Matthew
    • Kogswell Cycles
      stealing sorry M
      Message 2 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
        stealing

        sorry

        M
      • alex wetmore
        ... I missed something. What is the goal of your new fork design? Are you unhappy with the current forks? Is this for a MTB, or a future P/R? alex
        Message 3 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
          On Thu, 17 Apr 2008, Kogswell Cycles wrote:
          > The strut fork that we're producing has its origins in a design
          > that was invention of Jeff Feddersen who came up with it while
          > employed at Fat City. He and Chris Chance have a patent
          > on the design:
          >
          > http://www.google.com/patents?id=_EgqAAAAEBAJ&dq=D326249

          I missed something. What is the goal of your new fork design?
          Are you unhappy with the current forks? Is this for a MTB, or
          a future P/R?

          alex
        • Bill Connell
          ... Crown issues? There are a couple of wider crown designs around (Pacenti, Brown) if it s a tire clearance problem. It s hard to think this sort of
          Message 4 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
            On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 11:23 AM, alex wetmore <alex@...> wrote:
            > On Thu, 17 Apr 2008, Kogswell Cycles wrote:
            > > The strut fork that we're producing has its origins in a design
            > > that was invention of Jeff Feddersen who came up with it while
            > > employed at Fat City. He and Chris Chance have a patent
            > > on the design:
            > >
            > > http://www.google.com/patents?id=_EgqAAAAEBAJ&dq=D326249
            >
            > I missed something. What is the goal of your new fork design?
            > Are you unhappy with the current forks? Is this for a MTB, or
            > a future P/R?

            Crown issues? There are a couple of wider crown designs around
            (Pacenti, Brown) if it's a tire clearance problem. It's hard to think
            this sort of multi-piece fork would be faster/cheaper to produce,
            though it does look cool.

            --
            Bill Connell
            St. Paul, MN
          • Kogswell Cycles
            ... We work with a shop that specializes in fork production (and now rack production too). They have strut forks down to a science. Keep in mind that they ll
            Message 5 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
              On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 11:30 AM, Bill Connell <bconnell@...> wrote:

              > Crown issues? There are a couple of wider crown designs around
              > (Pacenti, Brown) if it's a tire clearance problem. It's hard to think
              > this sort of multi-piece fork would be faster/cheaper to produce,
              > though it does look cool.

              We work with a shop that specializes in fork production
              (and now rack production too).

              They have strut forks down to a science.

              Keep in mind that they'll be welded.

              MG
            • lanceorama@aol.com
              Imitation is the
              Message 6 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
                <<I don't have any compunction about steeling ideas.

                It's a necessary part of life.

                But I do like to give credit where it is due.>>
                 
                 
                Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery? I very recently had this feeling from the other side when regulars at our brewpub opened up a place in a neighboring town. Far enough away to not be real competition, but their menu is about 50% ours.
                 
                They are nice folks and thanked us for all the help that we've given them.
                 
                Lance




                Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at AOL Autos.
              • Murray Love
                ... I believe it s a P/R fork. Matthew posted a picture of the concept to the group on Jan 17--the Yo Eddy strut design with tapered and curved blades rather
                Message 7 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
                  On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 9:23 AM, alex wetmore <alex@...> wrote:
                  On Thu, 17 Apr 2008, Kogswell Cycles wrote:
                  > The strut fork that we're producing has its origins in a design
                  > that was invention of Jeff Feddersen who came up with it while
                  > employed at Fat City.  He and Chris Chance have a patent
                  > on the design:
                  >
                  >    http://www.google.com/patents?id=_EgqAAAAEBAJ&dq=D326249

                  I missed something.  What is the goal of your new fork design?
                  Are you unhappy with the current forks?  Is this for a MTB, or
                  a future P/R?


                  I believe it's a P/R fork.  Matthew posted a picture of the concept to the group on Jan 17--the Yo Eddy strut design with tapered and curved blades rather than huge oversized pipes.  I'm not sure what the exact goal is, but I'd think it provides a solid platform at the top of each blade for mounting front racks, while perhaps being cheaper to fabricate.  Dunno.

                  Murray
                • Zachariah Mully
                  ... Doubtful that a YO style fork is cheaper than the current unicrown fork. Four welds vs at least six welds plus machining time for YO fork. I love the look
                  Message 8 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
                    On Thu, 2008-04-17 at 09:57 -0700, Murray Love wrote:

                    > I believe it's a P/R fork. Matthew posted a picture of the concept to
                    > the group on Jan 17--the Yo Eddy strut design with tapered and curved
                    > blades rather than huge oversized pipes. I'm not sure what the exact
                    > goal is, but I'd think it provides a solid platform at the top of each
                    > blade for mounting front racks, while perhaps being cheaper to
                    > fabricate. Dunno.

                    Doubtful that a YO style fork is cheaper than the current unicrown fork.
                    Four welds vs at least six welds plus machining time for YO fork. I love
                    the look and the potential tire clearance with a YO though.

                    Then again, I'd love a 64cm P/R but those are still unobtainium at the
                    moment ;)

                    Z
                  • Murray Love
                    On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 10:01 AM, Zachariah Mully ... Ah, but the current P/R fork is brazed. So there s four pieces (steerer, crown,
                    Message 9 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
                      On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 10:01 AM, Zachariah Mully <zmully@...> wrote:
                      On Thu, 2008-04-17 at 09:57 -0700, Murray Love wrote:

                      > I believe it's a P/R fork.  Matthew posted a picture of the concept to
                      > the group on Jan 17--the Yo Eddy strut design with tapered and curved
                      > blades rather than huge oversized pipes.  I'm not sure what the exact
                      > goal is, but I'd think it provides a solid platform at the top of each
                      > blade for mounting front racks, while perhaps being cheaper to
                      > fabricate.  Dunno.

                      Doubtful that a YO style fork is cheaper than the current unicrown fork.
                      Four welds vs at least six welds plus machining time for YO fork. I love
                      the look and the potential tire clearance with a YO though.

                      Then again, I'd love a 64cm P/R but those are still unobtainium at the
                      moment ;)

                      Z


                      Ah, but the current P/R fork is brazed.  So there's four pieces (steerer, crown, 2 x blades) and three brazing operations (steerer to crown, 2 x blades to crown).  With the YO-style fork, there are five pieces (steerer, 2x struts. 2 x blades) and four welding operations (2 x struts to steerer, 2 x blades to struts).  Since I think welding is faster and I know it's easier to automate, the YO fork may well come out ahead in the joining process.

                      BUT, the struts need to be mitered accurately, and the blades need to be finished at the top (unlike on a flat crown).  Plus, it seems you'd need a pretty accurate jig for welding up the YO-style fork, since it seems it would be very easy to end up with serious misalignments when the blades are hanging off the end of two struts.  So, I don't know.

                      Murray
                    • Zachariah Mully
                      ... Ah, my bad, I had myself convinced that the P/R fork was unicrown. ... I d definitely be interested to hear what Matthew finds out from his Taiwanese
                      Message 10 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
                        On Thu, 2008-04-17 at 10:11 -0700, Murray Love wrote:




                        > Ah, but the current P/R fork is brazed. So there's four pieces
                        > (steerer, crown, 2 x blades) and three brazing operations (steerer to
                        > crown, 2 x blades to crown). With the YO-style fork, there are five
                        > pieces (steerer, 2x struts. 2 x blades) and four welding operations (2
                        > x struts to steerer, 2 x blades to struts). Since I think welding is
                        > faster and I know it's easier to automate, the YO fork may well come
                        > out ahead in the joining process.

                        Ah, my bad, I had myself convinced that the P/R fork was unicrown.

                        > BUT, the struts need to be mitered accurately, and the blades need to
                        > be finished at the top (unlike on a flat crown). Plus, it seems you'd
                        > need a pretty accurate jig for welding up the YO-style fork, since it
                        > seems it would be very easy to end up with serious misalignments when
                        > the blades are hanging off the end of two struts. So, I don't know.

                        I'd definitely be interested to hear what Matthew finds out from his
                        Taiwanese contacts about this if he ever pursues it. I'm always curious
                        about what methods are truly cheaper when it comes to mass production.
                        Bunny at Chumby did a couple of interesting blog posts about Chinese
                        electronics production. It's was cheaper for them to pay someone to
                        place parts on the circuit boards, and faster often, than to use a
                        machine to do it.

                        Z
                      • Chris Lowe
                        On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 9:12 AM, Kogswell Cycles ... First, repeat after me: Talent borrows, genius steals (thank Wilde for that)
                        Message 11 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
                          On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 9:12 AM, Kogswell Cycles <kogswellcycles@...> wrote:
                          I don't have any compunction about steeling ideas.

                          It's a necessary part of life.

                          But I do like to give credit where it is due.

                          The strut fork that we're producing has its origins in a design
                          that was invention of Jeff Feddersen who came up with it while
                          employed at Fat City.  He and Chris Chance have a patent
                          on the design:

                             http://www.google.com/patents?id=_EgqAAAAEBAJ&dq=D326249

                          Jeff is a clever guy who went on to start SRP, the company
                          that was famous for it's titanium fasteners.

                          One of the more interesting things about the design is that
                          because the fork blades were not bent, they could be heat
                          treated.  (Fork blades are generally not hardened past
                          normal levels).

                          The other part of the story of that fork is the name, Yo Eddy.
                          Fat City employee Mike Papaconstantine was a graffiti
                          artist and he came up with a character named Yo Eddy.
                          The shop rats at Fat City liked the character and started
                          their own underground t-shirt movement that only later
                          picked up by the marketing type and applied to everything
                          from bikes to grease.

                          There's more to the story, things like big piles of laser
                          cut struts that are still in use today.  And the fact that
                          the Yo Eddy fork (and frame) came into being because
                          of the Specialized Extreme S 2.5" tire (tires driving
                          fork design - not a new situation).

                          But I wanted you all to know that there were a couple
                          of real people who did some original work that came
                          together to form a product whose allure has lasted
                          over time.

                          Thank you Jeff.  Thank you Mike.

                          We're all better off because of you.




                          Matthew

                          First, repeat after me: "Talent borrows, genius steals" (thank Wilde for that)

                          Second, SWEET! The Yo fork was hands-down the finest riding rigid fork ever! It was better than any unicrown and also better than the flat crown B'Stone used on their last generation of MB-1 frames. It rode great over the rough stuff and did well under hard braking (unlike the B-Stone fork!) People might dismiss it because it's welded and - gasp - has straight legs. Phooey on them. This fork has more thought behind it that the majority of pretty flat crown forks out there and it shows in the ride.

                          Chris Lowe
                        • John McMurry
                          ... Huh, that s interesting (recent BQ article in mind). Where do you suppose this fork flexes to account for such a nice ride? John McMurry Burlington, VT
                          Message 12 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
                            --- In KOG@yahoogroups.com, "Chris Lowe" <cyclocrossmechanic@...> wrote:

                            > The Yo fork was hands-down the finest riding rigid fork ever!

                            Huh, that's interesting (recent BQ article in mind).

                            Where do you suppose this fork flexes to account for such a nice ride?

                            John McMurry
                            Burlington, VT
                          • Murray Love
                            On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 10:33 AM, Chris Lowe ... I think the Kogswell version has curved blades--at least the concept Matthew
                            Message 13 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
                              On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 10:33 AM, Chris Lowe <cyclocrossmechanic@...> wrote:


                              On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 9:12 AM, Kogswell Cycles <kogswellcycles@...> wrote:
                              I don't have any compunction about steeling ideas.

                              It's a necessary part of life.

                              But I do like to give credit where it is due.

                              The strut fork that we're producing has its origins in a design
                              that was invention of Jeff Feddersen who came up with it while
                              employed at Fat City.  He and Chris Chance have a patent
                              on the design:

                                 http://www.google.com/patents?id=_EgqAAAAEBAJ&dq=D326249

                              Jeff is a clever guy who went on to start SRP, the company
                              that was famous for it's titanium fasteners.

                              One of the more interesting things about the design is that
                              because the fork blades were not bent, they could be heat
                              treated.  (Fork blades are generally not hardened past
                              normal levels).

                              The other part of the story of that fork is the name, Yo Eddy.
                              Fat City employee Mike Papaconstantine was a graffiti
                              artist and he came up with a character named Yo Eddy.
                              The shop rats at Fat City liked the character and started
                              their own underground t-shirt movement that only later
                              picked up by the marketing type and applied to everything
                              from bikes to grease.

                              There's more to the story, things like big piles of laser
                              cut struts that are still in use today.  And the fact that
                              the Yo Eddy fork (and frame) came into being because
                              of the Specialized Extreme S 2.5" tire (tires driving
                              fork design - not a new situation).

                              But I wanted you all to know that there were a couple
                              of real people who did some original work that came
                              together to form a product whose allure has lasted
                              over time.

                              Thank you Jeff.  Thank you Mike.

                              We're all better off because of you.




                              Matthew

                              First, repeat after me: "Talent borrows, genius steals" (thank Wilde for that)

                              Second, SWEET! The Yo fork was hands-down the finest riding rigid fork ever! It was better than any unicrown and also better than the flat crown B'Stone used on their last generation of MB-1 frames. It rode great over the rough stuff and did well under hard braking (unlike the B-Stone fork!) People might dismiss it because it's welded and - gasp - has straight legs. Phooey on them. This fork has more thought behind it that the majority of pretty flat crown forks out there and it shows in the ride.

                              Chris Lowe
                              __

                              I think the Kogswell version has curved blades--at least the concept Matthew posted on Jan 17 did.  As for welded: <shrug>.

                              But what made the original YO such a great-riding fork?  Perhaps the fact that the blades are cantilevered out on relatively thin-wall struts (allowing some flex in both the rotational and linear directions) as opposed to the thicker walls required in the upper bends of unicrowns? 

                              Murray


                            • Chris Lowe
                              On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 10:41 AM, John McMurry ... For starters, who says more flex yields a better ride?? If that were the case we d
                              Message 14 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
                                On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 10:41 AM, John McMurry <johnjmcmurry@...> wrote:
                                --- In KOG@yahoogroups.com, "Chris Lowe" <cyclocrossmechanic@...> wrote:

                                > The Yo fork was hands-down the finest riding rigid fork ever!

                                Huh, that's interesting (recent BQ article in mind).

                                Where do you suppose this fork flexes to account for such a nice ride?

                                John McMurry
                                Burlington, VT


                                For starters, who says more flex yields a better ride?? If that were the case we'd all be on Vitus alloy forks! Second, the BQ article covered road bikes, not MTBs. The two are very different. Keep in mind on a MTB you've got 2" wide tires running at a low pressure. You don't really need the fork to absorb the small bumps the way you do on a road bike.You do however need a fork that can withstand much greater braking forces. The problem with the B'Stone MTB fork is that it flexed too much which made hard braking and cornering a bit unnerving at times. The Yo fork was great because it went where you pointed it and held steady under all conditions. It wasn't needlessly heavy and had just the right amount of give. The genius in the fork was the butting and reinforcing. Those little elliptical bits on the back of the legs are there for a reason. Like a good frame, many of the genius details are not visible to the naked eye.

                                Chris Lowe


                              • John McMurry
                                ... Not me. I was just asking where you thought it flexed. I assumed the fork flexes at least a little on account of it being such a fine riding fork. No?
                                Message 15 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
                                  --- In KOG@yahoogroups.com, "Chris Lowe" <cyclocrossmechanic@...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 10:41 AM, John McMurry <johnjmcmurry@...>
                                  > wrote:
                                  >
                                  > > --- In KOG@yahoogroups.com, "Chris Lowe" <cyclocrossmechanic@> wrote:
                                  > >
                                  > > > The Yo fork was hands-down the finest riding rigid fork ever!
                                  > >
                                  > > Huh, that's interesting (recent BQ article in mind).
                                  > >
                                  > > Where do you suppose this fork flexes to account for such a nice
                                  > > ride?
                                  > >
                                  > >
                                  > For starters, who says more flex yields a better ride??

                                  Not me. I was just asking where you thought it flexed.

                                  I assumed the fork flexes at least a little on account of it being
                                  such a fine riding fork. No?

                                  John McMurry
                                  Burlington, VT
                                • Murray Love
                                  On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 11:31 AM, Chris Lowe ... Chris, perhaps you should have defined finest riding a little more
                                  Message 16 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
                                    On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 11:31 AM, Chris Lowe <cyclocrossmechanic@...> wrote:


                                    On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 10:41 AM, John McMurry <johnjmcmurry@...> wrote:
                                    --- In KOG@yahoogroups.com, "Chris Lowe" <cyclocrossmechanic@...> wrote:

                                    > The Yo fork was hands-down the finest riding rigid fork ever!

                                    Huh, that's interesting (recent BQ article in mind).

                                    Where do you suppose this fork flexes to account for such a nice ride?

                                    John McMurry
                                    Burlington, VT


                                    For starters, who says more flex yields a better ride?? If that were the case we'd all be on Vitus alloy forks! Second, the BQ article covered road bikes, not MTBs. The two are very different. Keep in mind on a MTB you've got 2" wide tires running at a low pressure. You don't really need the fork to absorb the small bumps the way you do on a road bike.You do however need a fork that can withstand much greater braking forces. The problem with the B'Stone MTB fork is that it flexed too much which made hard braking and cornering a bit unnerving at times. The Yo fork was great because it went where you pointed it and held steady under all conditions. It wasn't needlessly heavy and had just the right amount of give. The genius in the fork was the butting and reinforcing. Those little elliptical bits on the back of the legs are there for a reason. Like a good frame, many of the genius details are not visible to the naked eye.

                                    Chris Lowe


                                    Chris, perhaps you should have defined "finest riding" a little more rigorously.  "It was great over the rough stuff" could be taken to imply some desirable flex characteristics (especially since MTBs went en masse to suspension forks shortly thereafter).  And this isn't an MTB fork we're discussing here:  it's a roadish fork.  So the fact that the YO fork is purportedly the "finest riding [MTB] rigid fork ever" doesn't necessarily carry over to this application.

                                    I don't really care about the strut fork either way; I am interested in the engineering issues at hand, like its actual merits compared to a brazed fork. 

                                    - Is it easier or less expensive to manufacture?
                                    - What, exactly, makes it a better riding fork (The Fork is [apparently] the Frame, remember)? 
                                    - If it was, indeed, the "finest riding" rigid MTB fork out there, why should we assume it would do equally well for P/R applications?


                                    I mean, sure.  It's a great opportunity to poke the brazed fork-crown lovers in the eye, if that's what you're into.  But I'm less interested in being a heretical gadfly than in figuring out what's better about this fork.

                                    Murray
                                  • Kogswell Cycles
                                    On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 1:31 PM, Chris Lowe ... You never fail to amaze me with your encyclopedic knowledge of this stuff. According to my source, those little
                                    Message 17 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
                                      On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 1:31 PM, Chris Lowe
                                      <cyclocrossmechanic@...> wrote:

                                      > For starters, who says more flex yields a better ride?? If that were the
                                      > case we'd all be on Vitus alloy forks! Second, the BQ article covered road
                                      > bikes, not MTBs. The two are very different. Keep in mind on a MTB you've
                                      > got 2" wide tires running at a low pressure. You don't really need the fork
                                      > to absorb the small bumps the way you do on a road bike.You do however need
                                      > a fork that can withstand much greater braking forces. The problem with the
                                      > B'Stone MTB fork is that it flexed too much which made hard braking and
                                      > cornering a bit unnerving at times. The Yo fork was great because it went
                                      > where you pointed it and held steady under all conditions. It wasn't
                                      > needlessly heavy and had just the right amount of give. The genius in the
                                      > fork was the butting and reinforcing. Those little elliptical bits on the
                                      > back of the legs are there for a reason.

                                      You never fail to amaze me with your encyclopedic
                                      knowledge of this stuff.

                                      According to my source, those little bits were added
                                      after the forks started to fail at that spot. They we
                                      silver (think heat treated) brazed on.

                                      > Like a good frame, many of the
                                      > genius details are not visible to the naked eye.

                                      There's a lot going on under the paint.

                                      MG
                                    • Kogswell Cycles
                                      ... The reason for making a welded fork at three: - I wanted more fender clearance, but the available crowns are unattractive - I wanted to bring down the cost
                                      Message 18 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
                                        On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 1:50 PM, Murray Love <murray.love@...> wrote:

                                        > I mean, sure. It's a great opportunity to poke the brazed fork-crown lovers
                                        > in the eye, if that's what you're into. But I'm less interested in being a
                                        > heretical gadfly than in figuring out what's better about this fork.

                                        The reason for making a welded fork at three:

                                        - I wanted more fender clearance, but the available crowns
                                        are unattractive

                                        - I wanted to bring down the cost of production in order to
                                        offer a fork AND rack for only a small premium over the
                                        cost of just a fork

                                        - I want to play around with the dimensions of the top of
                                        the fork, and crowns don't allow that

                                        It's just a happy coincidence that it makes a fork that
                                        rides better. (That's a joke for those who are unsure.)

                                        Matthew
                                      • Bill Connell
                                        On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 1:31 PM, Chris Lowe ... Right... this is all interesting, but unless Kogswell is building a mountain bike, aren t we talking about road
                                        Message 19 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
                                          On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 1:31 PM, Chris Lowe
                                          <cyclocrossmechanic@...> wrote:
                                          > For starters, who says more flex yields a better ride?? If that were the
                                          > case we'd all be on Vitus alloy forks! Second, the BQ article covered road
                                          > bikes, not MTBs. The two are very different. Keep in mind on a MTB you've
                                          > got 2" wide tires running at a low pressure. You don't really need the fork
                                          > to absorb the small bumps the way you do on a road bike.You do however need
                                          > a fork that can withstand much greater braking forces. The problem with the
                                          > B'Stone MTB fork is that it flexed too much which made hard braking and
                                          > cornering a bit unnerving at times. The Yo fork was great because it went
                                          > where you pointed it and held steady under all conditions. It wasn't
                                          > needlessly heavy and had just the right amount of give. The genius in the
                                          > fork was the butting and reinforcing. Those little elliptical bits on the
                                          > back of the legs are there for a reason. Like a good frame, many of the
                                          > genius details are not visible to the naked eye.


                                          Right... this is all interesting, but unless Kogswell is building a
                                          mountain bike, aren't we talking about road forks here? Less flex is
                                          good for MTB riding, but Matthew has made a strong point of optimizing
                                          the fork with lightweight blades - to the point of questioning using
                                          cantilevers because it took away from the desired fork blade butting.
                                          Unless there's a problem with the PR forks not being strong enough for
                                          heavy loads, it seems like flex is precisely the issue.

                                          --
                                          Bill Connell
                                          St. Paul, MN
                                        • Kogswell Cycles
                                          ... Um, yeah. One does have to balance load carrying and flex. I want two forks. One that works for loads and one flexes like mad. And since I get to call
                                          Message 20 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
                                            On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 2:13 PM, Bill Connell <bconnell@...> wrote:

                                            > Right... this is all interesting, but unless Kogswell is building a
                                            > mountain bike, aren't we talking about road forks here? Less flex is
                                            > good for MTB riding, but Matthew has made a strong point of optimizing
                                            > the fork with lightweight blades - to the point of questioning using
                                            > cantilevers because it took away from the desired fork blade butting.
                                            > Unless there's a problem with the PR forks not being strong enough for
                                            > heavy loads, it seems like flex is precisely the issue.

                                            Um, yeah.

                                            One does have to balance load carrying and flex.

                                            I want two forks. One that works for loads and
                                            one flexes like mad. And since I get to call the
                                            shots, I will have both.

                                            The P/R is a work in progress. Or is it progress
                                            at work?

                                            :)

                                            MG
                                            Kogswell Cycles
                                            The fork IS the frame, now more than ever
                                          • Steve Palincsar
                                            ... The fork flex article in the current BQ makes that point very clearly. ... Maybe more a matter of getting some more flexibility in design (as well as in
                                            Message 21 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
                                              Murray Love wrote:
                                              >
                                              >
                                              > On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 11:31 AM, Chris Lowe
                                              > <cyclocrossmechanic@... <mailto:cyclocrossmechanic@...>>
                                              > wrote:
                                              >
                                              >
                                              > For starters, who says more flex yields a better ride??
                                              >

                                              The fork flex article in the current BQ makes that point very clearly.


                                              > If that were the case we'd all be on Vitus alloy forks! Second,
                                              > the BQ article covered road bikes, not MTBs. The two are very
                                              > different. Keep in mind on a MTB you've got 2" wide tires running
                                              > at a low pressure. You don't really need the fork to absorb the
                                              > small bumps the way you do on a road bike.You do however need a
                                              > fork that can withstand much greater braking forces. The problem
                                              > with the B'Stone MTB fork is that it flexed too much which made
                                              > hard braking and cornering a bit unnerving at times. The Yo fork
                                              > was great because it went where you pointed it and held steady
                                              > under all conditions. It wasn't needlessly heavy and had just the
                                              > right amount of give. The genius in the fork was the butting and
                                              > reinforcing. Those little elliptical bits on the back of the legs
                                              > are there for a reason. Like a good frame, many of the genius
                                              > details are not visible to the naked eye.
                                              >
                                              > Chris Lowe
                                              >
                                              >
                                              > Chris, perhaps you should have defined "finest riding" a little more
                                              > rigorously. "It was great over the rough stuff" could be taken to
                                              > imply some desirable flex characteristics (especially since MTBs went
                                              > en masse to suspension forks shortly thereafter). And this isn't an
                                              > MTB fork we're discussing here: it's a roadish fork. So the fact
                                              > that the YO fork is purportedly the "finest riding [MTB] rigid fork
                                              > ever" doesn't necessarily carry over to this application.
                                              >
                                              > I don't really care about the strut fork either way; I am interested
                                              > in the engineering issues at hand, like its actual merits compared to
                                              > a brazed fork.
                                              >
                                              > - Is it easier or less expensive to manufacture?
                                              > - What, exactly, makes it a better riding fork (The Fork is
                                              > [apparently] the Frame, remember)?
                                              > - If it was, indeed, the "finest riding" rigid MTB fork out there, why
                                              > should we assume it would do equally well for P/R applications?
                                              >
                                              >
                                              > I mean, sure. It's a great opportunity to poke the brazed fork-crown
                                              > lovers in the eye, if that's what you're into. But I'm less
                                              > interested in being a heretical gadfly than in figuring out what's
                                              > better about this fork.

                                              Maybe more a matter of getting some more flexibility in design (as well
                                              as in road behavior)?
                                            • Jim Gourgoutis
                                              Hopefully it won t do this... http://www.flickr.com/photos/bikecentric/2317314810/
                                              Message 22 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
                                              • Chris Lowe
                                                ... Can t answer the manufacturing question. Also can t tell you exactly what makes a better riding fork because how a fork rides is controlled by factors
                                                Message 23 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
                                                  On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 11:50 AM, Murray Love <murray.love@...> wrote:

                                                  Chris, perhaps you should have defined "finest riding" a little more rigorously.  "It was great over the rough stuff" could be taken to imply some desirable flex characteristics (especially since MTBs went en masse to suspension forks shortly thereafter).  And this isn't an MTB fork we're discussing here:  it's a roadish fork.  So the fact that the YO fork is purportedly the "finest riding [MTB] rigid fork ever" doesn't necessarily carry over to this application.

                                                  I don't really care about the strut fork either way; I am interested in the engineering issues at hand, like its actual merits compared to a brazed fork. 

                                                  - Is it easier or less expensive to manufacture?
                                                  - What, exactly, makes it a better riding fork (The Fork is [apparently] the Frame, remember)? 
                                                  - If it was, indeed, the "finest riding" rigid MTB fork out there, why should we assume it would do equally well for P/R applications?


                                                  I mean, sure.  It's a great opportunity to poke the brazed fork-crown lovers in the eye, if that's what you're into.  But I'm less interested in being a heretical gadfly than in figuring out what's better about this fork.

                                                  Murray

                                                  Can't answer the manufacturing question. Also can't tell you exactly what makes a better riding fork because how a fork rides is controlled by factors outside the fork (namely the rider and where/how they're riding). I do know that I rode a lot of rigid MTB forks ranging from simple unicrown models to the lovely B'Stone model. The Yo Eddy fork was hands-down the best. It didn't shudder the way the B'Stone fork did. It felt lighter and more precise than the Answer/Yeti fork. Basically it did the one thing all perfect bike parts should do: disappear. When you're out riding you don't even know the part is there because it's working so flawlessly that it simply becomes an extension of your body. That's what made it great. As for aesthetics, when it first came out I thought it was pretty ugly and almost didn't use it! At the time I thought it was a lame attempt at a poor man's crown.

                                                  Chris Lowe
                                                • Kogswell Cycles
                                                  On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 3:49 PM, Chris Lowe ... I really should write out the whole story. It s pretty amazing. I tend to think that these thing are cut and
                                                  Message 24 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
                                                    On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 3:49 PM, Chris Lowe
                                                    <cyclocrossmechanic@...> wrote:

                                                    > Can't answer the manufacturing question. Also can't tell you exactly what
                                                    > makes a better riding fork because how a fork rides is controlled by factors
                                                    > outside the fork (namely the rider and where/how they're riding). I do know
                                                    > that I rode a lot of rigid MTB forks ranging from simple unicrown models to
                                                    > the lovely B'Stone model. The Yo Eddy fork was hands-down the best. It
                                                    > didn't shudder the way the B'Stone fork did. It felt lighter and more
                                                    > precise than the Answer/Yeti fork. Basically it did the one thing all
                                                    > perfect bike parts should do: disappear. When you're out riding you don't
                                                    > even know the part is there because it's working so flawlessly that it
                                                    > simply becomes an extension of your body. That's what made it great. As for
                                                    > aesthetics, when it first came out I thought it was pretty ugly and almost
                                                    > didn't use it! At the time I thought it was a lame attempt at a poor man's
                                                    > crown.

                                                    I really should write out the whole story.

                                                    It's pretty amazing.

                                                    I tend to think that these thing are cut and dried.

                                                    But in the case of this fork, it was anything but that.

                                                    Such a juicy story.

                                                    A juicy fork story.

                                                    It made my day.

                                                    Matthew
                                                  • Murray Love
                                                    On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 1:49 PM, Chris Lowe ... I always thought the Bridgestone MTBs with their quick steering were designed
                                                    Message 25 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
                                                      On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 1:49 PM, Chris Lowe <cyclocrossmechanic@...> wrote:


                                                      On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 11:50 AM, Murray Love <murray.love@...> wrote:

                                                      Chris, perhaps you should have defined "finest riding" a little more rigorously.  "It was great over the rough stuff" could be taken to imply some desirable flex characteristics (especially since MTBs went en masse to suspension forks shortly thereafter).  And this isn't an MTB fork we're discussing here:  it's a roadish fork.  So the fact that the YO fork is purportedly the "finest riding [MTB] rigid fork ever" doesn't necessarily carry over to this application.

                                                      I don't really care about the strut fork either way; I am interested in the engineering issues at hand, like its actual merits compared to a brazed fork. 

                                                      - Is it easier or less expensive to manufacture?
                                                      - What, exactly, makes it a better riding fork (The Fork is [apparently] the Frame, remember)? 
                                                      - If it was, indeed, the "finest riding" rigid MTB fork out there, why should we assume it would do equally well for P/R applications?


                                                      I mean, sure.  It's a great opportunity to poke the brazed fork-crown lovers in the eye, if that's what you're into.  But I'm less interested in being a heretical gadfly than in figuring out what's better about this fork.

                                                      Murray

                                                      Can't answer the manufacturing question. Also can't tell you exactly what makes a better riding fork because how a fork rides is controlled by factors outside the fork (namely the rider and where/how they're riding). I do know that I rode a lot of rigid MTB forks ranging from simple unicrown models to the lovely B'Stone model. The Yo Eddy fork was hands-down the best. It didn't shudder the way the B'Stone fork did. It felt lighter and more precise than the Answer/Yeti fork. Basically it did the one thing all perfect bike parts should do: disappear. When you're out riding you don't even know the part is there because it's working so flawlessly that it simply becomes an extension of your body. That's what made it great. As for aesthetics, when it first came out I thought it was pretty ugly and almost didn't use it! At the time I thought it was a lame attempt at a poor man's crown.

                                                      Chris Lowe


                                                      I always thought the Bridgestone MTBs with their quick steering were designed mainly for the Marin County trails Grant Petersen spent most of his riding time on.  They were considerably more unforgiving of attention lapses on the root-bound, rocky, often-wet trails we get up around here.  I never tried the biplane fork on our trails, but I'd conjecture that its flexibility might be a positive detriment in our conditions.

                                                      Thanks for the clarification on the Yo-style fork.  We sold Concorde MTBs in the early 90s that came with that type of fork, but I never tried one.  It does sound like a pretty rigid fork, which might be all to the good on technical singletrack:  when your wheel gets lodged between a root and a rock, you want to be able to wrench it out of there, not watch it flex uselessly while you topple. 

                                                      Since almost all of the flex characteristics are specified by the blade, it's probably pretty straightforward to design a strut-style fork with an adequate amount of give for road conditions.  However, it probably wouldn't bear much resemblance, ride-wise, to the Yo Eddy MTB fork of yore.

                                                      Murray
                                                      Victoria, BC
                                                    • Chris Lowe
                                                      ... I still lived in the Phoenix area during that era. We had a nice mix of technical trails (though free of trees and thus roots!) as well as plenty of really
                                                      Message 26 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
                                                        On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 2:23 PM, Murray Love <murray.love@...> wrote:

                                                        I always thought the Bridgestone MTBs with their quick steering were designed mainly for the Marin County trails Grant Petersen spent most of his riding time on.  They were considerably more unforgiving of attention lapses on the root-bound, rocky, often-wet trails we get up around here.  I never tried the biplane fork on our trails, but I'd conjecture that its flexibility might be a positive detriment in our conditions.

                                                        Thanks for the clarification on the Yo-style fork.  We sold Concorde MTBs in the early 90s that came with that type of fork, but I never tried one.  It does sound like a pretty rigid fork, which might be all to the good on technical singletrack:  when your wheel gets lodged between a root and a rock, you want to be able to wrench it out of there, not watch it flex uselessly while you topple. 

                                                        Since almost all of the flex characteristics are specified by the blade, it's probably pretty straightforward to design a strut-style fork with an adequate amount of give for road conditions.  However, it probably wouldn't bear much resemblance, ride-wise, to the Yo Eddy MTB fork of yore.

                                                        Murray
                                                        Victoria, BC

                                                        I still lived in the Phoenix area during that era. We had a nice mix of technical trails (though free of trees and thus roots!) as well as plenty of really fast hard pack. I always liked the faster handling of the B'Stone bikes - for me they felt more like a road bike and less like a beach cruiser. I had an '87 MB-1 (the model with dropbars), a '93 MB-2 (with THE fork), and a '93 XO-1 (great bike until the fork got recalled AND the frame cracked!) My dream bike would probably have been the '93 MB-2 frame with a Yo Eddy fork and drop bars! Of course I could probably come pretty close to that with a P/R.

                                                        Chris Lowe


                                                      • Steve Palincsar
                                                        ... Isn t there a suspension fork of that name? Is this story about suspension forks? Or am I all wet? ... -- Steve Palincsar palincss@his.com Alexandria,
                                                        Message 27 of 28 , Apr 17, 2008
                                                          Kogswell Cycles wrote:

                                                          > I really should write out the whole story.
                                                          >
                                                          > It's pretty amazing.
                                                          >
                                                          > I tend to think that these thing are cut and dried.
                                                          >
                                                          > But in the case of this fork, it was anything but that.
                                                          >
                                                          > Such a juicy story.
                                                          >
                                                          > A juicy fork story.


                                                          Isn't there a suspension fork of that name? Is this story about
                                                          suspension forks? Or am I all wet?


                                                          >
                                                          > It made my day.



                                                          --
                                                          Steve Palincsar
                                                          palincss@...
                                                          Alexandria, VA, USA
                                                        • ridetherebybike
                                                          ... what ... factors ... do know ... models to ... don t ... As for ... almost ... man s ... 1)How do you isolate the crown design/engineering from the rest of
                                                          Message 28 of 28 , Apr 20, 2008
                                                            Chris Lowe wrote:
                                                            > Can't answer the manufacturing question. Also can't tell you exactly
                                                            what
                                                            > makes a better riding fork because how a fork rides is controlled by
                                                            factors
                                                            > outside the fork (namely the rider and where/how they're riding). I
                                                            do know
                                                            > that I rode a lot of rigid MTB forks ranging from simple unicrown
                                                            models to
                                                            > the lovely B'Stone model. The Yo Eddy fork was hands-down the best. It
                                                            > didn't shudder the way the B'Stone fork did. It felt lighter and more
                                                            > precise than the Answer/Yeti fork. Basically it did the one thing all
                                                            > perfect bike parts should do: disappear. When you're out riding you
                                                            don't
                                                            > even know the part is there because it's working so flawlessly that it
                                                            > simply becomes an extension of your body. That's what made it great.
                                                            As for
                                                            > aesthetics, when it first came out I thought it was pretty ugly and
                                                            almost
                                                            > didn't use it! At the time I thought it was a lame attempt at a poor
                                                            man's
                                                            > crown.


                                                            1)How do you isolate the crown design/engineering from the rest of the
                                                            fork as the factor which made it so good?

                                                            Or do you?

                                                            Were all blades and dropouts, rakes, and offsets able to be accounted for?

                                                            2) The Wojcik connection mentioned before on this list re: segmented fork


                                                            3) Babyheads!
                                                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.