Old 09-24-21, 08:00 AM
  #22  
Litespud
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Chapel Hill NC
Posts: 1,683

Bikes: 2000 Litespeed Vortex Chorus 10, 1995 DeBernardi Cromor S/S

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 645 Post(s)
Liked 797 Times in 446 Posts
Originally Posted by JBerto
Hi!

I've a bike with a steel fork (2016 Trek FX 7.1), and to lower weight I'm thinking of replacing the steel fork with a carbon one (the carbon fork of the Trek FX 7.4, with is 100% compatible).

The problem is that I can't find online the weight of my steel fork, and neither the weight of the carbon fork of the Trek FX 7.4

I have asked trek customer service, but they have not been able to tell me that info.

So the question is:
Let's suppose that the steel fork was of excellent quality, and of low weight to be made of steel, and that the carbon one was not so good and of high weight to be made of carbon (to put us at worst!), do you think that there would still be a noticeable weight difference, that would make the replacement worthwhile?

What do you think? Would be a "low quality" carbon fork, still be way lighter than a "high quality" steel fork?
I replaced a Gunnar steel fork with an NOS Reynolds Ouzo Pro full carbon. The Ouzo is a high-quality fork that was at the cutting edge of lightness in its day, the Gunnar is made by Waterford, and is also excellent quality, although I don’t imagine that weight savings were a primary concern. With both steerers cut to length, the weight difference was exactly one pound (450g). No real difference on the bike in terms of weight (except in my head), although the CF reduced road buzz somewhat. I did the swap because the bike was originally spec’d with an Ouzo Pro, but I “garage doored” the original and replaced it with the Gunnar. I was perfectly happy until I came across the NOS uncut Ouzo for a killer price (~$130) and I couldn’t resist. The Gunnar is wrapped up in my spares box

Last edited by Litespud; 09-24-21 at 08:13 AM.
Litespud is offline  
Likes For Litespud: