Rigid forks on a full sus frame

[mattbrown]

why not...

 

[orange71]

if it's a unified rear triangle design (e.g. Orange X1) you might get away with it

but to answer your question 'why not'?

Why?

 

[mattbrown]

just popped into my head, I have strange thoughts now and again :?: :idea:

 

[FMJ]

The crew from one of the local shops used to ride Cameron FS' (Pro Floater knock off) with rigid forks and flex stems BITD. Said it was because of the vague feeling/cornering from flex in all the current suspension forks. They all drank the Kool Aid for several seasons, then disappeared (along with Cameron).

 

[Tad]

I seem to recall that maaaaany moons ago a very early sus bike had rear sus with a rigid fork the logic being you could lift the front wheel over obstacles.

 

[Barneyballbags]

One of the first Cannondale full sus offerings had a rigid fork and a flexstem.

 

[elite504]

Very original Klein Mantra wa MC2 strata with URT

 

[Pickle]

Why?

It would only make sense if the bike had a Flexstem as per early Proflex and Cannondale.

 

[P20]

The original mantra design was a rigid fork, but they knew it wouldn't be accepted by the buying public. They fitted a short 63mm fork on a frame with 6" rear travel as a compromise.
There have been various mantras with rigid forks on here, the design allowed the forks to 'push up' the front end around the pivot and down on the shock

 

[fingers]

On a URT is fine. Otherwise no.