Mark W Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 im not champ, maybe you mean chap.... again when did i say thats these forks are so every one? apart from just then< all i have done is point out what i see as good points of these forks now can we get back on track? I was talking to Ali, not you. I didn't say you'd said that they're suitable, as I quoted before - someone else did. I was replying to them, then you came along (a familiar situation it seems). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ali C Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 f**k me Dave......really? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave33 Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 This shit's getting really old now... your ment to be a senior member? so why post pointless shit like that? now please can we get back on track Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkeyseemonkeydo Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 your ment to be a senior member? so why post pointless shit like that? I'd have said that it was accurate, concise and summed up the last 3 or 4 pages of this god damned thread pretty well to be fair. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave33 Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 I'd have said that it was accurate, concise and summed up the last 3 or 4 pages of this god damned thread pretty well to be fair. is there some body holding a gun to your head making you read it ? didnt think so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ali C Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 pretty sure you are the most argumentative person I have ever seen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Vandart Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 Really? I think he argues a valid point just doesn't communicate it very well. I think there are some worse on here. Maggie alloy forks snap due to fatigue I will almost guaranty that. Fatigue, as many involved in this vommit will be aware, is dude to cyclic loadings (stress) as fatigue damage is cumulative every time the material is subject to this loading it gets worse until failure. As fatigue is made up of predictable elements and random elements which could explain the different life spans of the same (but different) forks but I would be betting on the use being the determiner. For instance: Jack Carthy is shit hot, I would say that probably is because he rides ALOT (there's that word again) his number of cycles is going to be very high very quickly. He is also pretty big so his actual loading magnitude is going to be pretty high. Fatigue is directly related to the stress range so Jacks Alloy forks are never going to last long whether he bashes them or not NO MATTER WHAT MAKE OR DESIGN I am a shit rider. I don't ride ALOT relatively speaking I am not very big My stress range load will be small because of this I have never snapped a set of forks but I regularly bash f**k out of them. Maggie forks are subjected to higher loading cycles because with discs some of the 'Flex' is taken up by the wheels, they are effectively acting as a cyclic dampener i think, I could be wrong. Moving to these Carbon forks. The simple fact of the matter is, these forks snapped at the steerer tube because that is the weakest link in the system. Having seen a set in real life today, I believe that I would have put in insert down the tube almost, if not all the way, seems foolish not too. I also would have laid the carbon up diagonally as well as perpendicular to the axis, I am not sure if the tube is a stock tube bonded into the fork leg part but it looked that way, I apologise if I got it wrong. also having seen a picture of a failed set, they appear to have snapped below the top bearing which I found very weird, leading me to conclude there was an existent fault in the tube at that point. On the point of the wording on Tarty bikes. I would not refer to the stack height if I were wording it, I would refer to the top and bottom headset bearing faces as it it clearly this dimension that is important and less ambiguous. I would even go as far as to say that as a result of this weird design and need for 135mm 'total stack' these forks are not fit for purpose in these circumstances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ali C Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 I don't even know what Dave is arguing any more. I think that he thinks that we are saying the forks are no good? There was a comment made that just because Jack is a (junior) world champion that these forks are proven to be the best out there. I think Dave thinks that we are aiming a lot of comments at him when were were actually replying to the other chap. All I and others are saying is that just because Jack is good doesn't mean they are fit for everyone. They rule out everyone who ride front disc for a start. If someone rides comps to a high level, has front magura, wants a light bike and has the money to buy them, then yeah, these forks will be a good choice. If someone rides street or natural and falls off and generally scrapes the bike about, then I wouldn't recommend these forks. I wouldn't want to use them for the type of riding I do either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark W Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 these forks are not fit for purpose in these circumstances. It's a miracle no-one's been killed so far then, isn't it? Fun fact: Jack Carthy didn't break any of his RockMan forks at the 4-bolt mounts. You can also consider this point as being a slight nod to something you missed from your post regarding how/why 4-bolt forks almost always break at the 4-bolt mounts, and why they break much faster than disc forks tend to... EDIT: I almost literally can't wait to see how massively taken out of context or miscontrued this post is going to be, judging from people's efforts on previous things I've said here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0zzy Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 i love the way that you two think your clever-er then two engineers, its boring. dave has said valid points but just because he says them you get all arsey, you all run an inspired and recomend them to every one, is that really fit for purpose? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark W Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 Classic. At what point do you think I've disagreed with Dave about anything, out of interest? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ali C Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 why does this always happen? I don't think I'm anything, I've never said I'm smarter than anyone, I've said the try-alls are good, I've not mentioned Inspired in any of this topc, WTF are you on about? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Leech Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 Cant be doing with the argument side of this thread, but there have been a fair fews comments made about how carbon hates scrapes and marks. Carbon is a lot less susceptible to chips and scratches than people think, yes, i'd agree that large gouges would create an area where certain stresses would cause a fracture, but if koxx have done the lay up right, it shouldn't be a problem. Looking at a cross section of a fork lay up, the main structure is actually visible as a thick, single wall, showing that the varied layers of fabric have almost been fused by the resin (not too sure what the appropriate wording is for that), so a minor chip or scratch, in most cases, would be very much superficial to the forks structural integrity (obviously more factors would come into play, like position, depth and probably angle in this case). They are also extremely repairable, as long as you get to them in time, simply a bit of wet and dry and some super glue will sort any small chip (an epoxy resin (araldite or similar) would be a better option if it's not a quick fix whilst out nd about), which is something people dont think about when looking at carbon, it is only held together by a resin at the end of the day (also a bit more complicated than that, but you get the jist ) and will more than likely of had an epoxy gel coat applied to obtain the polished finish, which will be very susceptible to chipping and scratching, but is not a factor in the structure of the fork. I would definately give them a try if the price was lower, actually making myself a set atm, along with other bits and bobs. Moving to these Carbon forks. The simple fact of the matter is, these forks snapped at the steerer tube because that is the weakest link in the system. Having seen a set in real life today, I believe that I would have put in insert down the tube almost, if not all the way, seems foolish not too. I also would have laid the carbon up diagonally as well as perpendicular to the axis, I am not sure if the tube is a stock tube bonded into the fork leg part but it looked that way, I apologise if I got it wrong. also having seen a picture of a failed set, they appear to have snapped below the top bearing which I found very weird, leading me to conclude there was an existent fault in the tube at that point. They will be, the lay up will more than likely go 0,+60,-60,0, most likely repeated several times at certain points (crown mainly) . I couldn't find that, would you be able to reply with it? May be able to explain it if you'd like . Cheers, Josh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0zzy Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 why do you keep trying to make out that he is wrong then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark W Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 Because he keeps implying that I'm saying something I'm not, despite me trying to clear it up repeatedly. He appears to be implying that I think they're not good forks. I haven't said that. He appears to be implying that I don't think they're stronger than aluminium forks. I haven't said that. He appears to be implying that because I've said that I don't think they're suitable for everyone that that relates in some way to Jack using them, and how they've held up for him. I haven't said that. The list goes on, but I really can't be f**ked with this any more as there's pretty much no point to it. While we're talking about implications, if you want to make your previous statement more accurate then you'd probably be better off to changing it to "you all run trialtech and recomend them to every one, is that really fit for purpose?" in that I'd say that that was more relevant to the majority of calls, Q&A questions and e-mails I have to deal with on a daily basis about "Which part should I get?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ali C Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 Dave seems to miss or ignore a lot of points we make and miss interpret other points. That's why I said I am not sure what points he is trying to make because they seem to be a lot of the ones I have made already or agree with. He just seems to put them across in an arrogant way which seems to annoy most people who don't ride with him regularly. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkeyseemonkeydo Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 ALOT (there's that word again) You do know that's not actually a word don't you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ali C Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 You do know that's not actually a word don't you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark W Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 You f**ker! You totally snaked me on that, although I know Matt's used it in a post before so I think he snaked us both? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkeyseemonkeydo Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 Jack Carthy Oh, my God! That is so unfair! This is like, well harassment! If you like, fancy Jack why don't you just say so? God, this is exactly like the time Miss Rennig, who everyone knows is a total lesbian, made Candice Burton stay behind after PE, started telling her off for gobbing on Sunita Geschwani's hair. But everyone knows she only made her stay late because she wanted to get off with her, cuz when she was telling her off her legs were wide open and Candice reckons she could see her spider. Edit: Touché. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Vandart Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 I'm not trying to get up anyones nose by the way, I'm not sure my post has anything to do with Daves posts either except that I think there are some more argumentative peoples on here. Where did Jack (Carthy) break his rockman forks? Also, Mark in your post: You can also consider this point as being a slight nod to something you missed from your post regarding how/why 4-bolt forks almost always break at the 4-bolt mounts, and why they break much faster than disc forks tend to... Are you referring to the weld being a stress riser? Fatigue and 'stress risers' are directly relatable when in an item fails at a 'stress riser' due to fatigue (lolz) but that is what happens, the dislocations start at the riser (weld) If yer not then I am puzzled and would be happy to assimilate your imput on the matter of why forks snap at the mounts. When I say 'not fit for purpose' I mean that if Koxx don't have enough faith in their forks to carry a trials rider through his adventures then I would say they are road forks with maggie mounts and not forks to be used to get over a section of rocks subjecting them to some pretty big forces.. by the way I think all this may be moot as most peoples will probs put their own inserts in where they need to and also having seen these forks for real I would say that in the real world they are extremely fit for purpose. Note: I am aware that the words 'probs, imput and relatable are not real words in terms of the listed approved words in a the english literature but you get my drift? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greetings Posted January 16, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 7 pages? Really? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Vandart Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 (edited) Yeah, trials forum is an epic in the making. You happy with yer forks dude? I think they are mint, however if I had some I would make a bigger front axle that sticks further into the, very wide drop, outs to avoid problems there. Edited January 16, 2012 by Matt Vandart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark W Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 When I say 'not fit for purpose' I mean that if Koxx don't have enough faith in their forks to carry a trials rider through his adventures... ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greetings Posted January 16, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 You happy with yer forks dude? Well they certainly look good leaning against the wall Going to call Tarty tomorrow and inquire about this stack height now that I know what I'm dealing with. This thread has gone to lead a life of its own... 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.