Sir,

Approximately six weeks ago, I posted a question related to making a fork brace (see "fork specifications question"). After a couple of days with no reply, I stopped checking the post.....until today.

I'm puzzled. If you could design and manufacture a fork brace that displayed the appropriate amount of precision, would that not reduce fork strut friction and effectuate smoother, fork action? Yes, I have discovered that commercially available fork braces suck moose wang. That's why I designed and made my own. Thanks.

Brian.

I believe the reason he does not like fork braces is that the forks need to flex some to properly function.

I also believe that it can pass virbrations on into the frame where flex is not wanted.

Sir,

Approximately six weeks ago, I posted a question related to making a fork brace (see "fork specifications question"). After a couple of days with no reply, I stopped checking the post.....until today.

I'm puzzled. If you could design and manufacture a fork brace that displayed the appropriate amount of precision, would that not reduce fork strut friction and effectuate smoother, fork action? Yes, I have discovered that commercially available fork braces suck moose wang. That's why I designed and made my own. Thanks.

Brian.



The problem is that a motorcycle fork is a telescoping strut under a bending load. If you were to design the worst suspension system you would be hard pressed to beat that. What makes the problem even more complex is that there are two of the struts in parallel. They are tied together on one end by the triple clamps and at the the other by the axle. The Clamps on modern bikes are very soft and do not hold the alignment of the forks very well. The axle is also too small in diameter to hold proper alignment. This allows the forks to misalign them selves under braking and turning loads. With only .003-.005" clearence in the bushings, the slightest misalignment causes binding and stiction. If you try to hold the middle of the fork it will not reduce the flexing, it simply increases the binding. Factory race teams have tried to brace the clamps, and the axle areas, but all teams and engineers have stopped trying to brace the middle. It is a lost cause, we need a new suspension system or much larger tubes and clamping areas.

I understand, somewhat, the limitations of present, fork design. It just seems counter-intuitive that placing a theoretically well-made brace where the assembly is most vulnerable to misalignment would not reduce that misalignment. Please note I said "reduce", not "eliminate". Binding is a bad thing and misalignment will cause binding, yes? Wouldn't such a brace merely help the axle clamps and triple clamps keep the tubes aligned? I am not trying to argue, I just don't understand how you've reached your conclusion.

I understand, somewhat, the limitations of present, fork design. It just seems counter-intuitive that placing a theoretically well-made brace where the assembly is most vulnerable to misalignment would not reduce that misalignment. Please note I said "reduce", not "eliminate". Binding is a bad thing and misalignment will cause binding, yes? Wouldn't such a brace merely help the axle clamps and triple clamps keep the tubes aligned? I am not trying to argue, I just don't understand how you've reached your conclusion.



Your not putting the brace where the forks are most vulnerable to misalignment, your putting it where they are most vulnerable to binding. When the assembly twists, it's best to not try to hold them too rigid. This allows the twist to take place over a longer section of the fork and reduces the binding. Go ahead and try it, then when you front end chatters so bad your filling fall out, remove your brace and do a gew more laps. You'll see how I came to my conclusion. If fork braces were good for handling I would make a completetline of them in several colors, but they aren't, so I don't.