93 kona fork question please

[PurpleFrog]

noo. never even gave a second thought to the fact it could be 1"!! this is supposedly a lava dome, anyone know if they are 1"?

Mine is! I believe they went 1 1/8 eventually, but I think a 93 will be an incher.

 

[Tallpaul]

Mine is! I believe they went 1 1/8 eventually, but I think a 93 will be an incher.

Your Lava Dome is very early, one of the first they made in '89 or '90. I think all Kona's were 1" at this point.

My 1992 Lava Dome is 1 1/8" and I'm pretty sure the 1991 was too, but they certainly were from '92 onwards.

 

[Anthony]

noo. never even gave a second thought to the fact it could be 1"!! this is supposedly a lava dome, anyone know if they are 1"?

Mine is! I believe they went 1 1/8 eventually, but I think a 93 will be an incher.

The 1993 catalogue says that the Lava Dome had a 1 1/8 headset. It was just the Fire Mountain and Hahanna that were still 1" that year.

 

[PurpleFrog]

Mine is! I believe they went 1 1/8 eventually, but I think a 93 will be an incher.

Your Lava Dome is very early, one of the first they made in '89 or '90. I think all Kona's were 1" at this point.

Brilliant! Thanks. I'd been told it was a 1993, so reading the above I begun to wonder if I'd got from just before the switch over. I'm really pleased to have an early. (For all I know later might have been better, but I love the bike as it is.)

 

[FluffyChicken]

MAG 21 and all forks pretty much of that era are 405mm +- ~5mm (Quadra are shorter, Manitou the same, PACE a touch longer.)


SIDE/
I believe there are a few suspension corrected types to talk about.
These short travel frames tended not to be corrected, some steepend the angle so they where 'racey' number for catalouges though in use they become too steep as the forks compress. A few altered the whole frame (top tube length etc) so they where correct when actually using the forks, though the short forks where designed around standard 'retro' frame of early 90's.
Not until 1995+ era and what is normally classed as suspension correction for the 60mm+ forks... of course frames are now corrected to a fork length range. That's why in 1995/6 the JudyXC was 50mm, and in 1997 it changed to 63mm ? The JudyXC in the first models still had to fit on to the early suspension fames.

If you really wanted to pull the frame geometry back to where the frame shold be at rest (i.e. when just sitting on the bike and the suspension is not in repeated compression) then you run a fat tyre at the back (retro 2.1 or 1.95) and thinner on the front (1.95 or 1.75 respectively) that drops the front slightly. (I ran mine like this for quite some time, until I just ran the same and didn't notice any difference apart from the exra wieght )
So overall you're pretty much back at square one.

so (using guesstimates here)
MAG 21's at 405mm
SAG on these would be say 5mm
Tire difference would be 3mm (it's cannot be much can it* maybe use a worn out front tire for better effect ?)
so you're down to 397mm
What are normal fork 390mm ?
7mm difference left to notice.
Hope that wasted some good reading time and made you loose the next For Sale bargain



*of course hindsite make you realise this


anyone notice how close MAG and SAG are :?

 

[lewis1641]

thanks for all the ionfo guys.

unfortunately i have to wait until friday evening before i can collect it now.

based on the above and assuming it is a keeper i think i will use my mag21 sl ti

 

[Anthony]

I'm sure that'd be fine - note that although the frame isn't 'suspension-adjusted', the catalogue pic does show it with the optional Quadra fork. Not all that much travel, but some.