#!markdown
How's this?
Ideally, I think fork travel should be at least 10% greater than rear travel.
Here's my rationale: Because a telescoping fork slides parallel with the head
tube, the vertical travel is only about 90% of the fork displacement.
So if ‘balanced’ is a goal, you’ll want to use a fork which claims 10% more
travel than your rear suspension (which is typically measured vertically).
This is not to say that longer forks on an existing bike won’t mess up your BB
height or your riding position, or that longer rear travel might be preferable
because your rear suspension kinematics have intrinsic anti-bob whereas your
fork does not… I've said too much already…
Sept. 30, 2016, 3:14 p.m. - Tim Lane
#!markdown How's this? Ideally, I think fork travel should be at least 10% greater than rear travel. Here's my rationale: Because a telescoping fork slides parallel with the head tube, the vertical travel is only about 90% of the fork displacement. So if ‘balanced’ is a goal, you’ll want to use a fork which claims 10% more travel than your rear suspension (which is typically measured vertically). This is not to say that longer forks on an existing bike won’t mess up your BB height or your riding position, or that longer rear travel might be preferable because your rear suspension kinematics have intrinsic anti-bob whereas your fork does not… I've said too much already…