[xbrian]

Opinions much appreciated here...

I want to put a steel fork on my MCR, and wonder if the 22mm shorter (than the niner fork)axle to crown on the Salsa fork would make my bike handle a lot differently. I'm thinking it might be a little twitchy-er.

I'm currently running a Reba at 100mm (with more sag) and have gotten used to it.

The big thing here is that the Salsa fork seems pretty nice, for 100 bucks less than the niner. Do i spend or do I save?

Thanks!
brw

 

[Rainman]

The Niner fork [Reynolds steel] is currently not available, but will be soon I hear.

So then, if you can't wait a few weeks, get the Salsa.

The difference in handling between the two will be minimal...most riders won't even notice it.

R.

 

[Manicmtbr]

I just switched from a Niner Reynolds rigid fork to a Salsa fork 2 weeks ago and I prefer the Salsa fork. It steers a bit faster, and the biggest benefit for me was more of a drop from saddle to handlebars than with the Niner fork. Many folks run the carbon forks (465 axle to crown) and like the way the Niners handle with these forks too.

 

[EddyKilowatt]

Many folks run the carbon forks (465 axle to crown) and like the way the Niners handle with these forks too.

Bonty Switchblade (carbon) on an EMD here... no problem.

A squish fork starts off already sagged an inch... to 465 or so. As soon as you head downhill or touch the brake it sags another inch... or much more. The handling can't be too sensitive to A-C or squish bikes would be unrideable.

What I still want to know is why Niner spec'd their rigid fork at 490? It's pretty much unique in being that tall... and pretty different from the installed-and-operating dimensions of any 80 or 100mm travel fork that I know of.

Eddy