Retrobike Forum Index

It is currently Sun Dec 04, 2016 11:49 pm

* Login   * Register * Search  * FAQ



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 125 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 13  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 8:12 pm 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:08 am
Posts: 6840
Location: Nth Somerset, UK
daj wrote:


Thanks. Yup, that's what I thought.

The RC36 has a fork length of 430mm, so affectively 40mm longer than the RC35. However, I have just thrown everything together (admittedly with no headset, but that makes very little difference with a CK threadless) and parked it next to my 94 Zaskar and there is almost no difference between the two, so now I am officially confused.

I don't think I will worry about this until the frame is back, and as I'm already watching a few RC35's, I can always add a pair to the growing collection of parts :oops:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Mar 27, 2012 8:19 pm 
West Midlands AEC
West Midlands AEC
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 11:06 pm
Posts: 6266
Location: Stow on the Wold, Glos
Shame your not a little closer to come and play on mine, I was told with sag etc my fork should be fine (rc38 airforce 2) and agree you would think such a small amount would make a difference but its bad .... open bridal type riding its not so bad but any trails that need decent steering input its not nice at all , Ask AndyB he tried it up in the lakes and I think quite shocked by the way the handling just dropped away from you. :?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 6:34 pm 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:08 am
Posts: 6840
Location: Nth Somerset, UK
Well, you guys have got me seriously worried that I have bought completely the wrong forks, so I did a quick throw together.

Looking at the angle of the chainstays to the ground, they are very close to those of the DB tested by MBUK, including allowing for some droop of the forks once I'm onboard.

So, for now, I will continue with my parts collection, and we'll see how things progress.

EDIT:

Different photo
Image


Last edited by NeilM on Thu Mar 29, 2012 5:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Mar 28, 2012 7:00 pm 
West Midlands AEC
West Midlands AEC
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 11:06 pm
Posts: 6266
Location: Stow on the Wold, Glos
With correct fork for period 1992

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2012 7:45 am 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2011 12:46 pm
Posts: 962
Location: Montpellier, France
Neil - you and I can't be the only bikers on here: how about a picture of the Laverda? That way those of us who twist throttles to accelerate sometimes instead of pedalling can have a good lust at that.

And everyone else can imagine your DB in the same colour. :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2012 8:09 am 
Old School Grand Master
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 1:10 am
Posts: 4756
Location: Heathfield, East Sussex
Surely if CR says something is okay to fit to one of his own frames then who are we to question him?

It certainly looks perfectly alright to me, especially taking into account the correct amount of sag...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2012 1:27 pm 
Old School Grand Master
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 8:37 am
Posts: 3146
Location: Whiskey bent & hellbound!
Looking forward to seeing the finished build, it's a great project :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2012 1:47 pm 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:37 am
Posts: 256
Location: Holland
NeilM wrote:
Looking at the angle of the chainstays to the ground, they are very close to those of the DB tested by MBUK, including allowing for some droop of the forks once I'm onboard.Image


Compared to my DB the angles on yours appears a bit more "laid back" with the fork. I wouldn't worry though, it looks very rideable. Just try it out, shouldn't be too hard to flog the forks on here if the ride's not to your liking

Cheers, Giel


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 29, 2012 5:34 pm 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:08 am
Posts: 6840
Location: Nth Somerset, UK
It's very hard to compare one frame to another, as each is a custom build to a slightly different size, Look at the head tubes, and you will notice mine is much longer than some, although a similar size to the MBUK test bike.

I will have a chat with Chas about this before I complete the build.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 12, 2012 3:51 pm 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:08 am
Posts: 6840
Location: Nth Somerset, UK
A quick update just to say that the frame has arrived with Chas and they will be calling me soon to discuss what we do next.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 125 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 13  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bignick, chrisv40, Cookielad, james1985, raidan73 and 27 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

About Us

Follow Retrobike

Other cool stuff

All content © 2005-2015 Retrobike unless otherwise stated.
Cookies Policy.
bikedeals - the best bike deals in one place
FatCOGS - Fat Chance Owner's Group

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group