Matt Vandart Posted June 17, 2010 Report Share Posted June 17, 2010 What are the advantages of putting the maggie mounts on the back of the fork legs please? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trials owns Posted June 17, 2010 Report Share Posted June 17, 2010 What are the advantages of putting the maggie mounts on the back of the fork legs please? saves weight, looks tidy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexxRogers Posted June 17, 2010 Report Share Posted June 17, 2010 When braking, the brake is forced into the forks, putting less stress on the threads, and also providing more braking power, I think, don't quote me. Alex. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirt jumper jake Posted June 17, 2010 Report Share Posted June 17, 2010 saves weight How the f**k does it save weight? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trials owns Posted June 17, 2010 Report Share Posted June 17, 2010 (edited) How the f**k does it save weight? not by much but if you wanted hydraulic on a vee frame u would have to use the evo adaptor but if you wanted a vee brake on 4 bolt then all you need is that small plate thing. every little helps! Edited June 17, 2010 by trials owns Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigAl Posted June 17, 2010 Report Share Posted June 17, 2010 lololol ^^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Dark Posted June 17, 2010 Report Share Posted June 17, 2010 Sh Trials owns... Increases the braking force dramatically...acts like a back brake so the slaves are being pushed into the frame instead of being pulled away. Massively more chance of them cracking though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dann2707 Posted June 17, 2010 Report Share Posted June 17, 2010 Saves weight?! FLOL! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mista-neos Posted June 17, 2010 Report Share Posted June 17, 2010 Crossovers snap when you foot-jam whip but yeh It seems like theres more power in the brake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Vandart Posted June 17, 2010 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2010 Alex, That is what I was thinking, however do you think A: the performance improvement is worth the risk of snappage. B: it reduces 'Chatter' and as such a quieter brake? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigjames Posted June 17, 2010 Report Share Posted June 17, 2010 As has been said increases the braking performance by forcing the pads onto the rim as the brake is applied. However I don't think it would make them crack any sooner, my Urbans with mounts on the front cracked in under a month. Rockman forks are your friend Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Vandart Posted June 17, 2010 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2010 Yes I used to have some rockman forks and they were good. I was suprised with the amount of flex even with the built in booster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Dark Posted June 17, 2010 Report Share Posted June 17, 2010 (edited) Alex, That is what I was thinking, however do you think A: the performance improvement is worth the risk of snappage. B: it reduces 'Chatter' and as such a quieter brake? A...not for poop, well setup front mount works adequately B, I found louder bake, but less chatter, bags more hold. As has been said increases the braking performance by forcing the pads onto the rim as the brake is applied. However I don't think it would make them crack any sooner, my Urbans with mounts on the front cracked in under a month. Rockman forks are your friend Yup it does...hm maybe craigy...It just seems like reverse go a lot sooner, I think you'll find that's the general concensus? Although I'm probably wrong heh. Edited June 17, 2010 by Alex Dark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Poyzer @ Onza Posted June 18, 2010 Report Share Posted June 18, 2010 The reason we went for back fitting mounts on the new Zoot Pro fork is that we wanted to produce only one fork rather a separate disk fork and Magura fork. When you use a disc brake the set up looks a lot neater if your redundant Magura mounts are on the back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkeyseemonkeydo Posted June 18, 2010 Report Share Posted June 18, 2010 not by much but if you wanted hydraulic on a vee frame u would have to use the evo adaptor but if you wanted a vee brake on 4 bolt then all you need is that small plate thing. every little helps! :facepalm: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris4stars Posted June 18, 2010 Report Share Posted June 18, 2010 dont want to put a spanner in the works.... surely there has been some reason 95% of brakes have been put on the front of the fork in all areas of biking (obviously before the discs became as popular). i remember pace forks (i think) having a rear mount but thats about it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark W Posted June 18, 2010 Report Share Posted June 18, 2010 I'd imagine that's partially 'cos they're a lot easier to set up if you've got the brake on the front of the leg? If you're trying to pump out hundreds of bikes a day I guess it'd speed things up slightly... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revolver Posted June 18, 2010 Report Share Posted June 18, 2010 surely there has been some reason 95% of brakes have been put on the front of the fork in all areas of biking (obviously before the discs became as popular). i remember pace forks (i think) having a rear mount but thats about it? If the whole mounts being under more stress thing is true, then its because on the front they're less likely to break... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greetings Posted June 18, 2010 Report Share Posted June 18, 2010 Well the idea years back when it sprouted was that visibility would better for comp use. Also, it increases the hold of the brake since the pistons are pushed into the fork legs when braking reducing flex slightly. And just a guess here, it could decrease fork snappage around maggie mounts? I mean if the fork flexes backwards most of the time, you don't want a stiff bit of aluminium welded in front of the fork. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Vandart Posted June 18, 2010 Author Report Share Posted June 18, 2010 Well the idea years back when it sprouted was that visibility would better for comp use. Also, it increases the hold of the brake since the pistons are pushed into the fork legs when braking reducing flex slightly. And just a guess here, it could decrease fork snappage around maggie mounts? I mean if the fork flexes backwards most of the time, you don't want a stiff bit of aluminium welded in front of the fork. I hadn't thought of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigjames Posted June 20, 2010 Report Share Posted June 20, 2010 Well the idea years back when it sprouted was that visibility would better for comp use. Also, it increases the hold of the brake since the pistons are pushed into the fork legs when braking reducing flex slightly. And just a guess here, it could decrease fork snappage around maggie mounts? I mean if the fork flexes backwards most of the time, you don't want a stiff bit of aluminium welded in front of the fork. That was my thought, the brake flexing outwards and away from the wheel surely would put more stress on the brake mounts, leading to them cracking faster? Where as reverse mount forks reduce this stress and should lead to the forks lasting longer? Certainly can't see my Rockman forks snapping any time soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.