what's next week? Taichung?The nerd rage will be strong here next week
what's next week? Taichung?The nerd rage will be strong here next week
I went back and looked at some Ohlins/Marzocchi moto forks and you're right, the lower crown is huge, and the steerer is not a rod but a metal pipe about an inch thick or so. Still not tapered, but also not carbon.The torsional stiffness (in the vertical fore-aft plane) of the lower crown in an inverted fork is one of the biggest factors in the overall torsional stiffness of the fork (note how huge moto lower crowns are), but when weight is also a big deal, it makes sense to have the most efficient strength/stiffness to weight ratio. A larger steerer tube interface helps to optimise this in a few ways:
1. By giving the crown much greater purchase on the steerer
2. By shortening the length of the crown between the steerer tube and the upper tube surfaces
3. By allowing the crown to have a larger polar moment of inertia for a given weight, particularly at the critical junction between steerer and crown, where profile/tyre clearance are a concern.
Given that it's offered in a 1.125 configuration anyway, I think the tapered steerer option is a smart move. Whether or not it makes a huge difference, only the people with the real world numbers can tell you, but there is no argument about it being a more structurally efficient design than a straight 1.125.
Jan Brandse : How will you fix the top crown since there are no pinch bolts on it?No crown/steer tube bolts ? Dafuq?
No stanchion bolts either. Maybe a slide-in steerer that torques everything together (like a lefty)? Sounds like a new "standard" for head tube sizes...No crown/steer tube bolts ? Dafuq?
We do not have a target price range just yet, but we are working on getting all of this figured out over the next couple of weeks.I may have missed it, but is there a target price released yet?
Also, what quantities are you planning on running, first year? Currious how many you project on moving.
Most definitely not carbon uppers on the Emerald.Wow 5 posts and no one has said anything about the carbon torsion bridge. Maybe because the photo hides what it actually is? I can't wait for the blown minds when they release of picture of that.
Also, evidently that is a mistake saying that the uppers are carbon I believe. I think they will be aluminum.
No pictures- no beleiveMost definitely not carbon uppers on the Emerald.
I wish I could get a couple pics out to you guys. I think that the boys are going to do a pretty good job of getting some good pictures out as the fork is being assembled..No pictures- no beleive
Go on ronnie.. sneak us a couple of spyshots.. we wont tell .. promise !!
You use a heat gun to adjust the fork height in the crowns.I just want a pic of the spring preloading the shim stack. I want to know the coil thickness and angle of the coils so I can calculate whether this is a worthwhile product. Love the superglue-on crowns even lighter than ti bolts.
I was wondering how long it was going to be until someone busted out the Halson Inversion. I was going to post it if no one else didI went back and looked at some Ohlins/Marzocchi moto forks and you're right, the lower crown is huge, and the steerer is not a rod but a metal pipe about an inch thick or so. Still not tapered, but also not carbon.
I just hope it comes in rasta.
I was thinking they might incorporate a split tapered shim on a shelf on the fork legs, like my pro ms paint drawing shown, obviously the top clamp would come down on a step on the leg or something, who knows. Probably wouldn't be any lighter, might be stiffer.No stanchion bolts either. Maybe a slide-in steerer that torques everything together (like a lefty)? Sounds like a new "standard" for head tube sizes...
I would think a good through axle, like Foes' 30mm or manitou's hex axle, would sufficiently link both sliders together better than a carbon, foot and a half long bridge...but I suppose we'll see. I'm pretty sure that's exactly how the bridge on the halson worked, linking both sliders together to prevent torsional flex in the land before through axles.I was wondering how long it was going to be until someone busted out the Halson Inversion. I was going to post it if no one else did
It was already leaked that this fork will be shim-less. Shimz are sooooo last season.wow we're north of 300 posts and i haven't had to speculate about shimzz
the halson used a brace bolted through slots in the uppers. kinda jinky, yes. i almost bought one of these back in the day. ended up with a mountain cycles suspenders - an inverted fork w/ no such stiffening contrivances (and thus flexed quite a bit laterally).I'm pretty sure that's exactly how the bridge on the halson worked, linking both sliders together to prevent torsional flex in the land before through axles.
yeah that's what I thought. too bad you didn't have one inthe halson used a brace bolted through slots in the uppers. kinda jinky, yes. i almost bought one of these back in the day. ended up with a mountain cycles suspenders - an inverted fork w/ no such stiffening contrivances (and thus flexed quite a bit laterally).
e-flexJesus what with the SHOP job at least make the legs straight.
Let the e-engineering begin.Here it is allegedly
View attachment 112484
Circles are round, lathes do round, they don't do hex, hex=$Let the e-engineering begin.
I am not sure whether the above solution with that bridge (if it exists) would have any advantage compared to existing designs (ie. Dorado). I am wondering though why companies are not using stanctions with hexagonal (or any polygonal) shape a la Cannondale (might be patented, i need to check uspto).
The stanction should not be necessarily polygonal through the whole length, but only at the upper section, so that there is no need for special seals. This combined with a hexagonal and tapered axle might be a good solution if the dimensions are right.
I might be very wrong with with this concept, but here is some food for the brains.
Unfortunately, You're wrong.lathes do round, they don't do hex
This would not work as the 203mm of stanchion outside the chassis needs to be "swallowed" by the chassis at full travel. The bushing guiding the stanchion is just behind the seal, so comes into play 10 to 20mm into the travel.Let the e-engineering begin.
The stanction should not be necessarily polygonal through the whole length, but only at the upper section, so that there is no need for special seals.
Machining center =! lathe. Lathes go round and have stationary bits that do work. You can't call a horizontal machining center with a rotary table a lathe.Unfortunately, You're wrong.
He might mean that they hold a hex, which they do. It's how we make custom bolts, generally.Machining center =! lathe. Lathes go round and have stationary bits that do work. You can't call a horizontal machining center with a rotary table a lathe.
Semantics..
I do like the hex axle though and I'd like to see a torsional stiffness comparison.
Yep, I just had a bunch of pivot axles made on a lathe that have an internal hex shape.Ok let's call a 2axis cnc lathe a machining center than yes, You're right. Even though using some tricks You can actualy make a hex on typical non cnc lathe
Oh yes, you are right. I have not thought it through completely.This would not work as the 203mm of stanchion outside the chassis needs to be "swallowed" by the chassis at full travel. The bushing guiding the stanchion is just behind the seal, so comes into play 10 to 20mm into the travel.
Super slow broaching with the cross slide?? How did you do this exactly? I'm not a machinist, but it's always useful to know how this is done.Yep, I just had a bunch of pivot axles made on a lathe that have an internal hex shape.