Carbon Forks - How much Comfort? VS Cheap actual suspension.

[itaa]

I have 2 cheap front suspension bikes ( they are there cheapest junk suspensions there are...)
However, they are miles better in comfort than a bike I have access to which has no front suspension.

I hear people talking about the carbon forks and that they provide vibration damping and all that stuff...
all my suspension usage comes to maybe 5-10mm usage? So even the cheapest junk is really nice bonus in the way the bike feels and that's all I need.

How does a Carbon fork on a Decent bike Compares to something like this for only very small actual suspension usage?
Will the crap suspension still give better ''results'' VS a non suspension carbon fork?

 

[Tangoup51]

Well a carbon fork can be made stiff or forgiving as can the type of bike its mounted on, but no matter where you go or look the cheapest nasty front suspension will always remain the same - only bothering to do anything when it encounters a severe enough bump. (and even then, half arsed)

But carbon forks are often more varied and designed to suit the specific bike, not just a generic one-size-fits-all like cheap mtb suspension.

For example, cyclocross bikes come with cross-country designed forks, thick, rigid, tapered designs appear.
.. but you might find something alot less rigid and thick on a more relaxed road style bike.

 

[Jody]

Will the crap suspension still give better ''results'' VS a non suspension carbon fork?

Depends what you want to achieve. A cheap for with only 5-10mm of travel is going to do very little other than take the sting out of big hits. It won't have any compliance over small bumps.and is more of a placebo. It may offer a little comfort but will come with a massive weight penalty. At a guess it's probably 2kg+. You might aswell run rigid forks and save the weight.

 

[Drago]

A stiff carbon fork is no more forgiving than an equally stiff or alloy one.

 

[jowwy]

I run full carbon forks on my MTB as i didnt require heavy suspension for the rides i wanted to do..............

 

[MontyVeda]

If you're on the road most of the time, get rigid forks and some padded gloves.

 

[Milkfloat]

Have you just tried using less pressure in your tyres?

 

[Randy Butternubs]

Suspension is good at absorbing big hits but it cant react fast enough to smooth out rough roads - wide tyres at lower pressure are better for that.

My dad owns a Moulton which has a little bit of suspension front and rear. Apparently the designer intended the tyres to be pumped up hard, so I put them up to ~100psi and had a go on it. I found it soaked up potholes and speedbumps beautifully but it was pretty tooth-rattling riding down rough, poor condition roads.

My point is that I've found having wide, lower pressure tyres but no suspension to be more comfortable than having it the other way around for road use. Did your non-suspension bike also have narrower tyres? If so that might be the real reason for the comfort difference.

 

[SkipdiverJohn]

I run full carbon forks on my MTB as i didnt require heavy suspension for the rides i wanted to do..............

I've always taken the view that for suspension to be effective & durable in service, it has to be well engineered - and there isn't enough money in the build budget of a cheap bike to be able to incorporate decent quality suspension. Most of the bikes I see with suspension, are exactly the types that should NOT be fitted with suspension - typically cheapo £100-200 MTB's. Those same bikes in a full rigid format I would regard merely as budget bikes, but the fitting of poor quality suspension parts turns them into BSO's - and a BSO is something to avoid owning.
I ride on terrible quality tarmac roads full of broken-up patches & potholes plus a lot of gravel and rooty woods tracks and my bikes with fully rigid steel frames cope fine. No-one needs bike suspension of any kind unless they are doing hardcore MTB'ing at speed. It is mostly fitted to cheap bikes purely as a sales gimmick and should be regarded as a couple of pounds of extra ballast you are better off without having.

 

[jowwy]

I've always taken the view that for suspension to be effective & durable in service, it has to be well engineered - and there isn't enough money in the build budget of a cheap bike to be able to incorporate decent quality suspension. Most of the bikes I see with suspension, are exactly the types that should NOT be fitted with suspension - typically cheapo £100-200 MTB's. Those same bikes in a full rigid format I would regard merely as budget bikes, but the fitting of poor quality suspension parts turns them into BSO's - and a BSO is something to avoid owning.
I ride on terrible quality tarmac roads full of broken-up patches & potholes plus a lot of gravel and rooty woods tracks and my bikes with fully rigid steel frames cope fine. No-one needs bike suspension of any kind unless they are doing hardcore MTB'ing at speed. It is mostly fitted to cheap bikes purely as a sales gimmick and should be regarded as a couple of pounds of extra ballast you are better off without having.

My fully rigid mtb is as far from a bso as you could imagine.......bso's dont come with carbon forks and 1x di2 electric shifting