Drawbacks to front fork shocks
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2021
Posts: 6
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Drawbacks to front fork shocks
Is it true that front shocks work against you? By this I mean when you are really bearing down, pedaling hard is some of the energy put forth taken away by the compression of the shocks?
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: The banks of the River Charles
Posts: 2,029
Bikes: 2022 Salsa Beargrease, 2020 Seven Evergreen, 2019 Honey Allroads Ti, 2018 Seven Redsky XX, 2017 Trek Boon 7, 2014 Trek 520
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 696 Post(s)
Liked 910 Times
in
487 Posts
Yes. It is true.
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 4,077
Bikes: Velo Orange Piolet
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2228 Post(s)
Liked 2,011 Times
in
972 Posts
Yes, they suck away some pedalling energy. That's why some can be locked-out or adjusted while riding, so that inefficiency can be reduced when you don't need the suspension.
Likes For tyrion:
#4
Full Member
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Eastern Washington
Posts: 440
Bikes: 1978 Raleigh Competition-1974 Raleigh Folder-1983 Austro Daimler-198? Fuji Monterey-Surly LHT-Surly Karate Monkey-Surly Cross Check
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked 97 Times
in
54 Posts
I believe that this is true which is why the road racers are always looking for the most rigid frame possible so that all of their pedaling energy goes into moving them forward. However, I don't know how significant or marginal that loss of energy is.
I'm not opposed to suspension (either front or rear) and I believe it has its place in cycling but I believe that there are many (maybe even most) cyclists who purchase suspension when they don't actually need it. I think that the terrain needs to be pretty rough and/or technical to warrant suspension. IMO there are 2 other disadvantages to suspension that are more significant than the loss in energy:
I'm not opposed to suspension (either front or rear) and I believe it has its place in cycling but I believe that there are many (maybe even most) cyclists who purchase suspension when they don't actually need it. I think that the terrain needs to be pretty rough and/or technical to warrant suspension. IMO there are 2 other disadvantages to suspension that are more significant than the loss in energy:
- Cost. These days it seems like a suspension for of reasonable quality is going to cost at least $800 and maybe even more. So if you factor that into the cost of a complete bicycle, you're going to shell out quite a bit for your bike.
- Maintenance. This is one of the reasons why I got rid of my full suspension mountain bike and now ride a rigid frame. It seemed like I was getting my suspension serviced at least once per year and sometimes more. The bike shops in my area are all always backed up at least 3 weeks and sometimes even longer. So if I had to get my suspension serviced twice a year, my bike would be sitting idle at the shop for a total of 6 to 8 weeks. This was a bitter pill to swallow for a bike that cost me $2,600 back in 2011.
Likes For fettsvenska:
#5
Occam's Rotor
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 7,248
Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2366 Post(s)
Liked 2,331 Times
in
1,164 Posts
For paved (and unpaved) road bike riding, I've tried a Lauf fork, lock-out XC shocks, whatever it is that Canondale called their headshock, and a few other options. The only one I can recommend is Redshift's StopShox stem (and seatpost). They do the right thing, and without a huge weight penalty.
For more technical mountain biking, shocks can really help, and full-suspension can help with handling, not just protecting your rear end and back. (Standing up on the pedals on a hard-tail or road-bike going over bumps can significantly reduce their impact.)
For more technical mountain biking, shocks can really help, and full-suspension can help with handling, not just protecting your rear end and back. (Standing up on the pedals on a hard-tail or road-bike going over bumps can significantly reduce their impact.)
Last edited by Cyclist0108; 04-24-21 at 03:03 PM.
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Nor-Cal
Posts: 3,767
Bikes: lots
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1958 Post(s)
Liked 2,932 Times
in
1,489 Posts
I believe that this is true which is why the road racers are always looking for the most rigid frame possible so that all of their pedaling energy goes into moving them forward. However, I don't know how significant or marginal that loss of energy is.
I'm not opposed to suspension (either front or rear) and I believe it has its place in cycling but I believe that there are many (maybe even most) cyclists who purchase suspension when they don't actually need it. I think that the terrain needs to be pretty rough and/or technical to warrant suspension. IMO there are 2 other disadvantages to suspension that are more significant than the loss in energy:
I'm not opposed to suspension (either front or rear) and I believe it has its place in cycling but I believe that there are many (maybe even most) cyclists who purchase suspension when they don't actually need it. I think that the terrain needs to be pretty rough and/or technical to warrant suspension. IMO there are 2 other disadvantages to suspension that are more significant than the loss in energy:
- Cost. These days it seems like a suspension for of reasonable quality is going to cost at least $800 and maybe even more. So if you factor that into the cost of a complete bicycle, you're going to shell out quite a bit for your bike.
- Maintenance. This is one of the reasons why I got rid of my full suspension mountain bike and now ride a rigid frame. It seemed like I was getting my suspension serviced at least once per year and sometimes more. The bike shops in my area are all always backed up at least 3 weeks and sometimes even longer. So if I had to get my suspension serviced twice a year, my bike would be sitting idle at the shop for a total of 6 to 8 weeks. This was a bitter pill to swallow for a bike that cost me $2,600 back in 2011.
#7
Full Member
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Eastern Washington
Posts: 440
Bikes: 1978 Raleigh Competition-1974 Raleigh Folder-1983 Austro Daimler-198? Fuji Monterey-Surly LHT-Surly Karate Monkey-Surly Cross Check
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked 97 Times
in
54 Posts
That's great that your shop has appointments, but I've been to several different shops in the different locations where I've lived (Oregon, Washington, Minnesota) to have my bikes serviced and an appointment has never been suggested or offered as an option, not even a single time. Also, while the availability of appointments may reduce the inconvenience of maintenance it doesn't reduce the need or additional cost. Then to have a forum member such as yourself respond with "We have these things called 'appointments'..." feels somewhat condescending and gives me even more incentive to reduce the need for maintenance.
Likes For fettsvenska:
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: The banks of the River Charles
Posts: 2,029
Bikes: 2022 Salsa Beargrease, 2020 Seven Evergreen, 2019 Honey Allroads Ti, 2018 Seven Redsky XX, 2017 Trek Boon 7, 2014 Trek 520
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 696 Post(s)
Liked 910 Times
in
487 Posts
I believe that this is true which is why the road racers are always looking for the most rigid frame possible so that all of their pedaling energy goes into moving them forward. However, I don't know how significant or marginal that loss of energy is.
I'm not opposed to suspension (either front or rear) and I believe it has its place in cycling but I believe that there are many (maybe even most) cyclists who purchase suspension when they don't actually need it. I think that the terrain needs to be pretty rough and/or technical to warrant suspension. IMO there are 2 other disadvantages to suspension that are more significant than the loss in energy:
I'm not opposed to suspension (either front or rear) and I believe it has its place in cycling but I believe that there are many (maybe even most) cyclists who purchase suspension when they don't actually need it. I think that the terrain needs to be pretty rough and/or technical to warrant suspension. IMO there are 2 other disadvantages to suspension that are more significant than the loss in energy:
- Cost. These days it seems like a suspension for of reasonable quality is going to cost at least $800 and maybe even more. So if you factor that into the cost of a complete bicycle, you're going to shell out quite a bit for your bike.
- Maintenance. This is one of the reasons why I got rid of my full suspension mountain bike and now ride a rigid frame. It seemed like I was getting my suspension serviced at least once per year and sometimes more. The bike shops in my area are all always backed up at least 3 weeks and sometimes even longer. So if I had to get my suspension serviced twice a year, my bike would be sitting idle at the shop for a total of 6 to 8 weeks. This was a bitter pill to swallow for a bike that cost me $2,600 back in 2011.
Likes For Ghazmh:
#9
Advanced Slacker
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 6,210
Bikes: Soma Fog Cutter, Surly Wednesday, Canfielld Tilt
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2762 Post(s)
Liked 2,537 Times
in
1,433 Posts
But for actual mountain biking, the benefits (including being faster overall) far outweigh that drawback in most situations.
For pavement and gravel.... that's a different calculation.
It would help if you said what sort of riding and bike you are talking about to get a more meaningful answer.
Last edited by Kapusta; 04-24-21 at 06:44 PM.
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Mission Viejo
Posts: 5,806
Bikes: 1986 Cannondale SR400 (Flat bar commuter), 1988 Cannondale Criterium XTR, 1992 Serotta T-Max, 1995 Trek 970
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1944 Post(s)
Liked 2,164 Times
in
1,323 Posts
No.
John
John
#12
Full Member
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Lutz, FL
Posts: 416
Bikes: 2014 Fuji Traverse 1.3, 2020 Electra Cruiser 1, 1995 Giant CFM-4
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 124 Post(s)
Liked 51 Times
in
36 Posts
I have them but keep them locked out most of the time. I got my bike used for a deal and when I get another/new bike I'll go with carbon forks for my riding purposes and save the weight.
#13
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Mississauga/Toronto, Ontario canada
Posts: 8,721
Bikes: I have 3 singlespeed/fixed gear bikes
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4227 Post(s)
Liked 2,488 Times
in
1,286 Posts
The only form of cycling that would benefit from suspension is downhill mountain biking...You don't need suspension unless you're doing extreme downhill mountain biking.
Likes For wolfchild:
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Nor-Cal
Posts: 3,767
Bikes: lots
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1958 Post(s)
Liked 2,932 Times
in
1,489 Posts
#16
Advanced Slacker
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 6,210
Bikes: Soma Fog Cutter, Surly Wednesday, Canfielld Tilt
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2762 Post(s)
Liked 2,537 Times
in
1,433 Posts
Go watch a pro XC MTB race (a far cry from “extreme DH”) and tell me how many are not running front suspension.
Likes For Kapusta:
#17
With a mighty wind
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 2,594
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1088 Post(s)
Liked 862 Times
in
490 Posts
I don't think the lockout on your suspension fork is very strong.
It's mostly designed for cruising the road when the trail ends, usually at the start or end of the main ride. Hitting big bumps, catching air, and generally mountain biking will destroy that lockout. It might also damage other components in the process.
I ride a hardtail but a simple 120mm fork is an absolute game changer. I only ride cross country, in response to the goofball who thinks it's only for downhill.
It's mostly designed for cruising the road when the trail ends, usually at the start or end of the main ride. Hitting big bumps, catching air, and generally mountain biking will destroy that lockout. It might also damage other components in the process.
I ride a hardtail but a simple 120mm fork is an absolute game changer. I only ride cross country, in response to the goofball who thinks it's only for downhill.
#18
Full Member
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Lutz, FL
Posts: 416
Bikes: 2014 Fuji Traverse 1.3, 2020 Electra Cruiser 1, 1995 Giant CFM-4
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 124 Post(s)
Liked 51 Times
in
36 Posts
I don't do any serious off road stuff, mostly paved and hardpack FL trails. My Suntour SR NEX forks only have 63mm travel and aren't meant for serious offroad, just for some light trail duty and rough pavement. The lockout definitely handles that type of riding well when needed. Again, when I get another bike, I'll target one with carbon rigid forks for my riding purposes to save weight.
#19
Advanced Slacker
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 6,210
Bikes: Soma Fog Cutter, Surly Wednesday, Canfielld Tilt
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2762 Post(s)
Liked 2,537 Times
in
1,433 Posts
I believe that this is true which is why the road racers are always looking for the most rigid frame possible so that all of their pedaling energy goes into moving them forward. However, I don't know how significant or marginal that loss of energy is.
I'm not opposed to suspension (either front or rear) and I believe it has its place in cycling but I believe that there are many (maybe even most) cyclists who purchase suspension when they don't actually need it. I think that the terrain needs to be pretty rough and/or technical to warrant suspension. IMO there are 2 other disadvantages to suspension that are more significant than the loss in energy:
I'm not opposed to suspension (either front or rear) and I believe it has its place in cycling but I believe that there are many (maybe even most) cyclists who purchase suspension when they don't actually need it. I think that the terrain needs to be pretty rough and/or technical to warrant suspension. IMO there are 2 other disadvantages to suspension that are more significant than the loss in energy:
- Cost. These days it seems like a suspension for of reasonable quality is going to cost at least $800 and maybe even more. So if you factor that into the cost of a complete bicycle, you're going to shell out quite a bit for your bike.
- Maintenance. This is one of the reasons why I got rid of my full suspension mountain bike and now ride a rigid frame. It seemed like I was getting my suspension serviced at least once per year and sometimes more. The bike shops in my area are all always backed up at least 3 weeks and sometimes even longer. So if I had to get my suspension serviced twice a year, my bike would be sitting idle at the shop for a total of 6 to 8 weeks. This was a bitter pill to swallow for a bike that cost me $2,600 back in 2011.
While I agree that cost and maintenance are in fact the two potential downsides, I would like to clarify those points a little.
Cost: HIGH END forks start around $800, but there are many good, reliable, user serviceable forks for $500 or less. And for a lot of riders out there that don’t spend time fine tuning their fork, or who are not pushing the forks really hard, they would likely not even notice the difference in performance.
Maintenance: very fair point IF you do not do it yourself. But almost all decent forks are user serviceable, at least for the 1-2 per year routine maintenance. Changing the oil in the lowers on most decent forks is very simple.
Its really only when you get to full rebuild time that you might need to send it off (once every 3-5 years, if ever). But for many shocks, this is also totally doable at home. All of the Rock Shox forks I own (2005 Pike, 2007 Reba, 2013 Lyrik) are fairly easy to completely rebuild to a like-new state for about $70 in parts. The only two specialized tools I need are the right sized snap ring pliers, and for some newer style flangeless wiper seals I bought a $40 press tool. For the flanged wipers you just need a large socket.
The only thing that would be pretty hard for most folks would be if they needed to replace bushings, but with even 1x per year lower oil changed, that will likely never need to happen.
All that said, that is still a lot more money and maintenance than a rigid fork. And while larger tires are NOT the same thing as suspension, They have reduced the need for suspension for some kinds of riding. I have a FS mtb and a rigid fat bike. And I will say that the near maintenance-free nature of the latter makes it my first choice in the mud and slop season.
#20
Dirty Heathen
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: MC-778, 6250 fsw
Posts: 2,182
Bikes: 1997 Cannondale, 1976 Bridgestone, 1998 SoftRide, 1989 Klein, 1989 Black Lightning #0033
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 889 Post(s)
Liked 906 Times
in
534 Posts
You shouldn't be 'bearing down' on the bars anyway, proper climbing / out-of-saddle technique, you pull up/back on the bars, the front wheel should be trying to come off the ground if you're really honking on it.
Plus, like how most people have their tire pressure too high, they also typically have the suspension set too soft.
Are you seeking confirmation of bias, or actual information? BikeForums is primarily a road bike group, and Dirty Heathens (tm) like me don't conform to their truth.
Last edited by Ironfish653; 04-25-21 at 09:53 AM.
Likes For Ironfish653:
#21
Full Member
Join Date: Oct 2019
Location: Foothills of West Central Maine
Posts: 410
Bikes: 2007 Motobecane Fantom Cross Expert, 2020 Motobecane Omni Strada Pro Disc (700c gravel bike), 2021 Motobecane Elite Adventure with Bafang 500W rear hub drive
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 174 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 143 Times
in
94 Posts
Unstable feeling at ~45mph
I converted a bike with front shocks to a rear hub drive ebike. When cruising a lot at 18-23mph, the shocks seem to take the edge off, and when on potholed gravel at 10 mph they definitely help. I'm running them at maximum pre-load, as I didn't like the handling at high speed downhill on pavement when I tried a mid-level setting. If not on a heavy-ish ebike, I'd prefer plain old carbon front forks.
#22
Dirty Heathen
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: MC-778, 6250 fsw
Posts: 2,182
Bikes: 1997 Cannondale, 1976 Bridgestone, 1998 SoftRide, 1989 Klein, 1989 Black Lightning #0033
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 889 Post(s)
Liked 906 Times
in
534 Posts
Nope, for a lot of BikeForums, there are only three mountain bikes; full-jounce 29ers, department store Huffy's and the '85 Schwinn High Sierra. Suspension development started and ended with the Scott Unishock.
Likes For Ironfish653:
#23
Happy With My Bikes
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 2,186
Bikes: Hi-Ten bike boomers, a Trek Domane and some projects
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 884 Post(s)
Liked 2,307 Times
in
1,117 Posts
I have a bike with them and no lockout provision. While the bike is comfortable for the most part, and the gearing would suggest it should climb easily, it kills me to go uphill because everything seems to get eaten up by these shocks.
__________________
"It is the unknown around the corner that turns my wheels." -- Heinz Stücke
"It is the unknown around the corner that turns my wheels." -- Heinz Stücke
#24
Full Member
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Eastern Washington
Posts: 440
Bikes: 1978 Raleigh Competition-1974 Raleigh Folder-1983 Austro Daimler-198? Fuji Monterey-Surly LHT-Surly Karate Monkey-Surly Cross Check
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
Liked 97 Times
in
54 Posts
Sounds like you have made an informed decision, and I totally respect that.
While I agree that cost and maintenance are in fact the two potential downsides, I would like to clarify those points a little.
Cost: HIGH END forks start around $800, but there are many good, reliable, user serviceable forks for $500 or less. And for a lot of riders out there that don’t spend time fine tuning their fork, or who are not pushing the forks really hard, they would likely not even notice the difference in performance.
Maintenance: very fair point IF you do not do it yourself. But almost all decent forks are user serviceable, at least for the 1-2 per year routine maintenance. Changing the oil in the lowers on most decent forks is very simple.
Its really only when you get to full rebuild time that you might need to send it off (once every 3-5 years, if ever). But for many shocks, this is also totally doable at home. All of the Rock Shox forks I own (2005 Pike, 2007 Reba, 2013 Lyrik) are fairly easy to completely rebuild to a like-new state for about $70 in parts. The only two specialized tools I need are the right sized snap ring pliers, and for some newer style flangeless wiper seals I bought a $40 press tool. For the flanged wipers you just need a large socket.
The only thing that would be pretty hard for most folks would be if they needed to replace bushings, but with even 1x per year lower oil changed, that will likely never need to happen.
All that said, that is still a lot more money and maintenance than a rigid fork. And while larger tires are NOT the same thing as suspension, They have reduced the need for suspension for some kinds of riding. I have a FS mtb and a rigid fat bike. And I will say that the near maintenance-free nature of the latter makes it my first choice in the mud and slop season.
While I agree that cost and maintenance are in fact the two potential downsides, I would like to clarify those points a little.
Cost: HIGH END forks start around $800, but there are many good, reliable, user serviceable forks for $500 or less. And for a lot of riders out there that don’t spend time fine tuning their fork, or who are not pushing the forks really hard, they would likely not even notice the difference in performance.
Maintenance: very fair point IF you do not do it yourself. But almost all decent forks are user serviceable, at least for the 1-2 per year routine maintenance. Changing the oil in the lowers on most decent forks is very simple.
Its really only when you get to full rebuild time that you might need to send it off (once every 3-5 years, if ever). But for many shocks, this is also totally doable at home. All of the Rock Shox forks I own (2005 Pike, 2007 Reba, 2013 Lyrik) are fairly easy to completely rebuild to a like-new state for about $70 in parts. The only two specialized tools I need are the right sized snap ring pliers, and for some newer style flangeless wiper seals I bought a $40 press tool. For the flanged wipers you just need a large socket.
The only thing that would be pretty hard for most folks would be if they needed to replace bushings, but with even 1x per year lower oil changed, that will likely never need to happen.
All that said, that is still a lot more money and maintenance than a rigid fork. And while larger tires are NOT the same thing as suspension, They have reduced the need for suspension for some kinds of riding. I have a FS mtb and a rigid fat bike. And I will say that the near maintenance-free nature of the latter makes it my first choice in the mud and slop season.
Likes For fettsvenska:
#25
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Bastrop Texas
Posts: 4,479
Bikes: Univega, Peu P6, Peu PR-10, Ted Williams, Peu UO-8, Peu UO-18 Mixte, Peu Dolomites
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 966 Post(s)
Liked 1,629 Times
in
1,045 Posts
I remember those long curved forks on the Motobecane Touring Bikes... Wow, what a comfortable bicycle.
I don't think I would want shocks on my touring bike.
I don't think I would want shocks on my touring bike.
__________________
No matter where you're at... There you are... Δf:=f(1/2)-f(-1/2)
No matter where you're at... There you are... Δf:=f(1/2)-f(-1/2)