[Fungolo]

First post, Hello

Ok-

I've left my HT in 32:18 for the last few weeks and am now convinced SS is for me. If possible though I'd like to properly convert the bike without the use of a tensioner.

I apologise if this has been asked a million times already, but can someone please help with the gear ratio maths? I've tried the ssConvert calculator but am still none the wiser

My chainstays are 16.75" (Kona Fire Mountain 2004) and I'd like to run as close to 2:1 as possible (I'm getting stronger).

It appears 32:16 requires a chainstay length of either 16.451" or 16.952" - too far out, yes?

A 32:17 combo comes in at 16.883" - is this close enough?

How far out is too far? Is it better to be too tight or a bit slack? Anything else?

Can any experienced SSers - or anyone who has converted a recent Kona - help? I would really rather not use a tensioner. You'll be doing a guy who is ITCHING to ditch the derailleurs a huge service .

Thanks, Matt

PS - If this goes well I'll save for a proper steel SS frame, but for the time being it's out of the question.

 

[Drevil]

An ENO eccentric hub is the first and obvious choice. Filing your frame (see pic below), filing your axle, or a ghost ring are other ways of getting around using a tensioner. You can also get a little more play with a half-link.

Terminaut's mod to a Merlin:

Have you checked out the FAQ yet?

 

[pacman]

First post, Hello

Ok-

I've left my HT in 32:18 for the last few weeks and am now convinced SS is for me. If possible though I'd like to properly convert the bike without the use of a tensioner.

I apologise if this has been asked a million times already, but can someone please help with the gear ratio maths? I've tried the ssConvert calculator but am still none the wiser

My chainstays are 16.75" (Kona Fire Mountain 2004) and I'd like to run as close to 2:1 as possible (I'm getting stronger).

It appears 32:16 requires a chainstay length of either 16.451" or 16.952" - too far out, yes?

A 32:17 combo comes in at 16.883" - is this close enough?

How far out is too far? Is it better to be too tight or a bit slack? Anything else?

Can any experienced SSers - or anyone who has converted a recent Kona - help? I would really rather not use a tensioner. You'll be doing a guy who is ITCHING to ditch the derailleurs a huge service .

Thanks, Matt

PS - If this goes well I'll save for a proper steel SS frame, but for the time being it's out of the question.

My calculator show 32:17 as 16.833. (can you check?) Your chain will dip 1.1"

You could use 33:17 with a chain stretched to 46.1". Chains do stretch.

(f-server, another try at posting this)

 

[kingfurby]

A tensioner just keeps the chain wrapped around the cog. It feels and functions much differently than a derailleur. You might as well use one in case your chain stretches after a few hundred miles. Don't fear the tensioner.

 

[Fungolo]

Thanks for your responses

I think I'll go with the tensioner after all though lol

Using one I can run the right gear combination - and even have the scope to alter it - I guess this is more important than the aesthetics. I'll worry about the looks if and when I come to buy a dedicated steel frame

Mind if I ask another question? I'm considering going the whole hog (and I like the idea of light bike, esp as I only weigh 150lbs) and putting on a rigid fork. The choice is a bit limited here in England though, so I'm basically looking at the Kona P2- it's the only one in my price range. I imagine being the same make as my bike it's a good match, but is it a decent fork? I won't be doing anything extreme on it, but would like to know it can handle the occasional 2' drop.

And one more, sorry: Does riding rigid limit what you can take on? I realise in comparison to a longer travel fork the answer is obviously 'yes', but I'm just tying to get an idea as to whether it's a worthwhile switch. As I said, I don't go big but I'd like to be able to ride reasonably hard XC as before..... I'm hoping the harshness will help me to improve as a rider, as I learn to take better lines etc.

Ok, thanks for your help, I look forward to reading any responses to these questions. I did read the FAQ btw, it was most helpful.

 

[azwxman]

Hasn't limited me

Since converting to my rigid SS I ride exactly the same trails I did on my FS. Maybe slower, maybe (slightly) less comfortably . But I haven't had to find new places to ride just because of my bike choice. And I definitely have more fun now. So I got that going for me.

 

[Mattman]

I'd keep trying to figure out..............-

I think I'll go with the tensioner after all though lol

...........how to do it without the tensioner. However, if your mind is made up and you will give up and get a tensioner, at least get a good one. http://www.rennendesigngroup.com/
Try these guys the one they make is real nice and worth the extra $.

The rigid vs suspended fork question is like asking what saddle feels best; you will get a wide range of strong opinions. Personally I have both, and in many ways I prefer the rigid for it's stiff, point and go steering. Riding rigid forces you to pick the best line and ride as smooth as you can. That said, I hardly ever ride rigid because I've seperated my shoulder one too many times and it just plain hurts me to do a ride of any length without a nice suspension fork.

 

[Guital2]

cant you get nearly any chain to fit with a half-link?

 

[single1x1]

kona forks are fine

I think I'll go with the tensioner after all though lol

Using one I can run the right gear combination - and even have the scope to alter it - I guess this is more important than the aesthetics. I'll worry about the looks if and when I come to buy a dedicated steel frame

Mind if I ask another question? I'm considering going the whole hog (and I like the idea of light bike, esp as I only weigh 150lbs) and putting on a rigid fork. The choice is a bit limited here in England though, so I'm basically looking at the Kona P2- it's the only one in my price range. I imagine being the same make as my bike it's a good match, but is it a decent fork? I won't be doing anything extreme on it, but would like to know it can handle the occasional 2' drop.

And one more, sorry: Does riding rigid limit what you can take on? I realise in comparison to a longer travel fork the answer is obviously 'yes', but I'm just tying to get an idea as to whether it's a worthwhile switch. As I said, I don't go big but I'd like to be able to ride reasonably hard XC as before..... I'm hoping the harshness will help me to improve as a rider, as I learn to take better lines etc.

Ok, thanks for your help, I look forward to reading any responses to these questions. I did read the FAQ btw, it was most helpful.

I have a 2003 unit, that I bought as a frame only. I was able to find a kona jump fork, a take off of a kona scab freeride bike for $25 at a bike swap. It's pretty light 2.4 pounds about and can take some good drops with no problem and fit big tires, a 2.5 nokian nbx fits fine, not sure if a 3.0 gazzi would fit though. I also run a disc up front and took off the canti mounts and repainted the area, can't even tell what it is missing. The cross country fork is lighter, just under 2 pounds, but I think it should be able to take some abuse also, I also think it's axle to crown height maybe a little bit shorter, so huge tires might not fit quite as well, and your front end handling might be a little bit quicker. The surly and dimension forks weigh about the same as the kona jump fork and are cheap also, but I like the straight leg look of the kona forks better

 

[pacman]

It doesn't work that way

cant you get nearly any chain to fit with a half-link?

No. Half-link = 1/2" of chain length ~= 1/4" difference in chainstay length.
1/4" chainstay is worth 2" of sag in the chain (can you say derail?)

 

[Fungolo]

You dudes know your stuff

Cheers. I'm pretty clear about what to do now. I'll post a couple of pics once I've built it up.

Can't wait can't wait can't wait

Matt