Lemme do some quick math, assuming swapping 180mm fork for 170mm to offset some distance, and swapping 27.5" wheel for 29". We are lifting front wheel axis by 1.5" (38mm) and subtracting 10mm from ”fork length" (labeled A in Fox's user specifications).
38mm - sin(64°)*10mm = 29mm
Next, by what angle is the wheelbase lifted relative to rear wheel.
M size frame wheelbase = 1238mm
tan⁻¹(29mm / 1238mm) = 1.34°
Rotating 434mm chainstay by 1.34°
tan(1.34°) * 434mm = 10.15mm (this is how much the BB drop grows assuming this simplified calculation)
So the BB height grow of 10mm is IMHO insignificant. Clash specs -12mm BB drop, Meta SX specs -1.5mm, so by mulleting the Clash you get same BB drop as Meta SX. However, rotating the wheelbase by 1.34° also means slacking the HTA, resulting in 62.66 and that might be too slack? Thoughts?
Oct. 3, 2022, 4:06 a.m. - Dušan Maliarik
Lemme do some quick math, assuming swapping 180mm fork for 170mm to offset some distance, and swapping 27.5" wheel for 29". We are lifting front wheel axis by 1.5" (38mm) and subtracting 10mm from ”fork length" (labeled A in Fox's user specifications). 38mm - sin(64°)*10mm = 29mm Next, by what angle is the wheelbase lifted relative to rear wheel. M size frame wheelbase = 1238mm tan⁻¹(29mm / 1238mm) = 1.34° Rotating 434mm chainstay by 1.34° tan(1.34°) * 434mm = 10.15mm (this is how much the BB drop grows assuming this simplified calculation) So the BB height grow of 10mm is IMHO insignificant. Clash specs -12mm BB drop, Meta SX specs -1.5mm, so by mulleting the Clash you get same BB drop as Meta SX. However, rotating the wheelbase by 1.34° also means slacking the HTA, resulting in 62.66 and that might be too slack? Thoughts?