Hmmmm, the plot thickens Watson .....
Or is it me who is Watson? Hmmmmm
I find this puzzling. The bike tested for the 1997 MBR had an F7 with an ahead system, which they introduced (1") for 1997. My 1996 C16R has a threaded F7. It seems very odd if they went backwards for the 7.2 fork or if they made any 7.2s that were non-standard.
but jussa's forks are 9.5's as per fitted to the e3's..not 7.2's?
although were the 97 e3's were threaded?
or maybe somewhere down the line the forks were just simply swappede..perhaps the old suspension ones failed and rigids were the replacement?
Ah, so you're Sherlock Holmes then? Hmmmm
Well Sherlock, you're right, and I wasn't looking carefully enough - the forks are in fact called F9s as fitted to 1997 E3s (were 1" threaded on E3s) and made of 'series 9.5' aluminium. And checking the catalogues, I find that in fact the 1998 catalogue has a Clockwork with a steel F7 fork made of 'series 7.2' cromoly, so not a different pattern. But I can't check that as I can't find any picture or magazine reference to a 98 Clockwork without a suspension fork. And the 1999 catalogue doesn't say anything about the Clockwork's rigid fork option, but I do remember that it was made out of aluminium that year - but this isn't a 1999 fork, because the 1999 edition had its brake bosses facing backwards like a Pace.
So after all that, maybe this is a retro-fitting (using the correct meaning of retro
), in which case it's a very authentic-looking repaint and re-stickering. Unless they made some C16Rs at some point with aluminium forks and a colour-keyed paint job?