# MTB to Commuter conversion



## swimbikerun75 (Mar 25, 2002)

Taking the first step to making my mountain bike a simple commuter, I want to get rid of the non-functional, heavy as hell, vintage 1997 suspension fork and get a plain jane steel threadless rigid fork. Where would I find such a piece of equipment for cheap?

On a related note, how can I tell how narrow a tire my rims will allow? I've got 2.2" knobbies now, so of course I'm going to get those suckers as slick and narrow as I can with the existing Velocity rims.


----------



## slowrider (Mar 12, 2004)

Bike Nashbar sells a rigid fork for about sixty dollars. Check your LBS, maybe they have one cheap to sell and install. Where I live, you always see old hardtail rigid mountain bikes for sale, or getting thrown out. I put Performance 26x1.25 (Kevlar belt) tires on my old mountain bike. I thought they would be to small for my rims, but they fit perfect. I would buy the smaller tubes as well. 



swimbikerun75 said:


> Taking the first step to making my mountain bike a simple commuter, I want to get rid of the non-functional, heavy as hell, vintage 1997 suspension fork and get a plain jane steel threadless rigid fork. Where would I find such a piece of equipment for cheap?
> 
> On a related note, how can I tell how narrow a tire my rims will allow? I've got 2.2" knobbies now, so of course I'm going to get those suckers as slick and narrow as I can with the existing Velocity rims.


----------



## jeremyb (Jun 16, 2004)

heres are some links for the Tange for $39.99 and here for the Surly 1x1 for $58.00. 

Tange

Surly


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

swimbikerun75 said:


> Taking the first step to making my mountain bike a simple commuter, I want to get rid of the non-functional, heavy as hell, vintage 1997 suspension fork and get a plain jane steel threadless rigid fork. Where would I find such a piece of equipment for cheap?
> 
> On a related note, how can I tell how narrow a tire my rims will allow? I've got 2.2" knobbies now, so of course I'm going to get those suckers as slick and narrow as I can with the existing Velocity rims.


I have the Nashbar fork and it's very nice. It's suspension corrected, meaning the rake is adjusted so the bike rides and steers the same as with the boinger. It also has disc brake mounts. It's pretty heavy though, so you might not save any weight.


----------



## the_dude (Jun 25, 2004)

a little late to the party, but i hope the info is still useful. cheapest bet: lbs parts bin. most have a cheap old fork that they'll sell for cheap or give away. if you want new, i'd go with a kona p2, my personal favorite cheap fork. 

as for the tires, i have no idea how small a tire you can fit without knowing how wide your rim is. even then, i'm an idiot, so i still would'nt know. buuuut.....i'd say your tire choice would be entirely dependent on your type of commute. for shorter commutes in cities or on bad roads, i'd go with a fat slick or semi-slick. 

the_dude


----------



## ispoke (Feb 28, 2005)

*sus-corrected fork? / tire size info*

I'm considering the same conversion, and was planning to buy a Tange rigid fork, but then I checked the sizing. I notice most rigid "suspension corrected" forks measure about 410 - 413mm from axle to crown (Tange, Surly, Kona). That's about 16-1/4 inches. But when I took tape measure to my circa 1998 marzocchi "bomber z.3", this measurement was about 16-3/4". Meaning the rigid fork, even though corrected, would be about 1/2" shorter. Which effectively steepens the head and seat tube angles. Am I missing something?

I did a quick check of fork pre-load, and my skinny carcass doesn't compress that fork much more than 1/8". So the rigid fork would still be about 3/8" short. Perhaps the issue is with the suspension pre-load, which is effectively slackening head and seat tube angles. Maybe I'm just thinking too much about this???

by the way, matching tire to rim size is easy with Sheldon's conservative table here:
http://sheldonbrown.com/tire-sizing.html


----------



## StageHand (Dec 27, 2002)

ispoke said:


> I'm considering the same conversion, and was planning to buy a Tange rigid fork, but then I checked the sizing. I notice most rigid "suspension corrected" forks measure about 410 - 413mm from axle to crown (Tange, Surly, Kona). That's about 16-1/4 inches. But when I took tape measure to my circa 1998 marzocchi "bomber z.3", this measurement was about 16-3/4". Meaning the rigid fork, even though corrected, would be about 1/2" shorter. Which effectively steepens the head and seat tube angles. Am I missing something?
> 
> I did a quick check of fork pre-load, and my skinny carcass doesn't compress that fork much more than 1/8". So the rigid fork would still be about 3/8" short. Perhaps the issue is with the suspension pre-load, which is effectively slackening head and seat tube angles. Maybe I'm just thinking too much about this???
> 
> ...


 Go ahead and make the switch. If you have problems, a stem change will probably correct it, or just add a headset spacer. Not a huge difference to make up.


----------



## Steel_SSer (Jan 13, 2006)

I use the Surly fork on my aluminum hard tail. It's suspension corrected, steel and fairly inexpensive.

For tires, I've put over 1000 miles on my 1.5 inch wide IRC Metro's. Mine will take 100psi and I prefer the largeness vs. skinny for the roads which I ride (potholes, miscellaneous road debris, occasional dirt road, gravel, et cetera). 1.5inches = ~38mm. I know that might seem wide compared to typical 700c road tires, but I love 'em. I think IRC also makes this tire in a 1 inch version as well.

I'd recommend getting a road seat - the Selle Italia Flite is cheap and works well, IMO. Also, you'll probably spin out going down long steep hills - this will give you an opportunity to save up your energy for making it UP the next hill (a sort of single speed mentality).

Also, I'd recommend getting a SRAM power link which makes super-quick & easy removal and installation of your chain for cleaning & lubrication. This also makes it easier to clean the rest of your drivetrain. And you know what they say: a clean, well lubricated drivechain is a beautiful thing.


----------



## MikeBiker (Mar 9, 2003)

I use the Performance Forte City 26X1.5 tires on my converted MTB and have no complaints. I second the recommendation on using smaller tubes as I put the smaller tires on with the jumbo tubes that my huge MTB tires used and it was a real struggle to install. It was like trying to fit an elephant into a Yugo. Fun for the circus, but not enjoyable in real life.


----------



## ispoke (Feb 28, 2005)

*what about handling?*



OverStuffed said:


> Go ahead and make the switch. If you have problems, a stem change will probably correct it, or just add a headset spacer. Not a huge difference to make up.


I'm not worried about stem or spacer adjustments. I'm more concerned with the difference in handling that I might get when the front end is 1/2" lower and the head/seat angles are effectively steeper. But from what folks are saying here, apparently many have made the switch and not noticed anything unusual...(?)


----------



## Pigtire (May 26, 2004)

I converted my mtb into a full time commuter. Planning to get a rack soon so I can ditch my shoulder bag. For tires I am using IRC metro 1.5s and the work great on my WTB disc wheels. If you still need a rigid fork check your PM.


----------



## logbiter (Sep 14, 2005)

ispoke said:


> I'm not worried about stem or spacer adjustments. I'm more concerned with the difference in handling that I might get when the front end is 1/2" lower and the head/seat angles are effectively steeper. But from what folks are saying here, apparently many have made the switch and not noticed anything unusual...(?)


1/2" equates to ~0.5 degree change in head angle, which isn't very noticeable... and for road/commuting a shorter fork makes for a bit quicker handling which is fine in this case.

I ended up going with a non-suspension corrected tange fork for a ~'96 frame (designed for ~63mm travel fork) that works great around town.. although I did end up putting a fattie 2.35 schwalbe slick up front which soaks up the road buzz, and raised it back up a bit.


----------



## StageHand (Dec 27, 2002)

You will notice a couple of handling changes, mostly due to the loss of the suspension, not the loss of your 1/2 inch. The bigger thing to worry about is to make sure the bike will still fit you, but that's an easy fix.


----------



## ispoke (Feb 28, 2005)

*here i go with too much fork babble*




logbiter said:


> 1/2" equates to ~0.5 degree change in head angle, which isn't very noticeable... and for road/commuting a shorter fork makes for a bit quicker handling which is fine in this case...


Hmmm... I did some more research. The Tange rigid fork is 1/2" shorter than my existing sus-fork, and the IRD rigid fork is 1/2" longer. Seems like the shorter choice might be best. If I was heavy enough to compress/preload my sus-fork, it would probably sit 1/2" lower, which is probably what the frame designer anticipated.

Since all preload is currently dialed out of my sus-fork (adjuster cranked for stiffest setting), I guess you might say I'm riding the frame with an artificially shallow head angle that needs to be corrected anyway.


----------



## swimbikerun75 (Mar 25, 2002)

*Finnally Did It*

I owed Pigtire a photo after he hooked me up with his Tange fork that was collecting dust. my 1995 Gary Fisher Aquilo was collecting dust with knobbies and a blown 1996 Judy XC, but now it's looking like it might get more miles than the roadie.

It's not 100% done yet. Still plan to put a road saddle on, and I may end up getting some bulletproof tires, but I wanted to go cheap first to make sure I liked the ride.

I put on the fork and added 3/4" in spacers to put me a little more upright, and of course I can always lower it later by cutting or putting the spacers on the top. I also got the 1.5" Performance Forte City for $7 each.

If I find myself with a cargo need, I'll be going with the rack too. Fenders are low on my list in Phoenix, but still a possibility.


----------



## Pigtire (May 26, 2004)

Wow! I did not know it will look that good. Awesome built! Looks very old school. I would get a sturdy bike lock for that candy


----------



## Ridgetop (Mar 1, 2005)

Wow, came out really nice! Like the cranks.


----------



## Sledgehammer03 (Mar 7, 2006)

Nice Ride, always nice to save a bike from the scrap heap. 

I would just add tire liners to those $7 tires. Seems like there is glass everywhere. I put a set of liners in, $14, and not a flat since!


----------



## swimbikerun75 (Mar 25, 2002)

*Safe in my Office*

No plans to lock it outside anywhere, at least not for now. She's going to sit safely in my office untill I start using it for errands and such. Then I will for sure get a good lock.

Tire liners are coming soon too. Real soon.


----------



## emzed (Feb 28, 2006)

nice looking ride.
I recommend fenders - nice to have when you get caught with crappy weather. I run these: http://www.mec.ca/Products/product_...older_id=2534374302693141&bmUID=1145463022442 - cheap and effective.
As for tires - I use IRC Advantage Pro 2.0's on my crusier and their nice but my commuter has 1.25 City Slickers and they are much faster and no flats in a year of use. The slickers fit on mtb rims that originally had 2.3 knobbies


----------



## redclaybrigade (Jan 3, 2012)

*MTB to commuter*

Hey you all--my first post here. Since I can't make a new thread I had to find an old one I could jump on. My question is about a '93 Trek 930 I bought for cheap and want to use for commuting and rough touring. The Shockwave suspension fork must go. I read about suspension-corrected rigid forks, but to me it doesn't look as though this bike would need anything special to retain its basic ride. Is it only the more modern MTBs that seem to ride high on the front end, that the suspension-correction applies to? Will any old 26" rigid with the proper steerer length do for me? More information might be needed, but thanks for any help.


----------



## logbiter (Sep 14, 2005)

Measure the axle to crown height of the shockwave, subtract ~20mm and go for a fork that has a similar crown height. A non suspension corrected fork will be on the order of 390mm, while a 70-80mm suspension corrected rigid fork will be ~425mm. The shockwave has/had maybe 50mm travel.

You'll need a rigid fork with the *proper diameter steerer* (probably 1") and either threadless or threaded (what you've likely got) with length no shorter than what the shockwave is. The steerer length with threaded portion can be a bit longer, and either cut down or put a few spacers on it to make up the difference. Your local bike shop may or may not have a die to cut/chase threads on the steerer (none of the 4 shops in my town have ability to deal with cutting threaded steerers). 
I recently ordered a 1" threaded steerer fork from J&B importers through a LBS for about $30 (basic hi-tensile steel, ~395mm A-C length). It replaced a similar era dead RST fork on a diamondback for a commuter bike I fixed up for a friend on the cheap. Rather than cut it down & mess around with cleaning up the threads, I made up the 10-15mm difference with 1" threadless spacers in between the keyed washer & locknut.
A better quality fork like tange or dimension will run ~$50 and a nice one like salsa, IRD, etc more like ~$100. 



redclaybrigade said:


> Hey you all--my first post here. Since I can't make a new thread I had to find an old one I could jump on. My question is about a '93 Trek 930 I bought for cheap and want to use for commuting and rough touring. The Shockwave suspension fork must go. I read about suspension-corrected rigid forks, but to me it doesn't look as though this bike would need anything special to retain its basic ride. Is it only the more modern MTBs that seem to ride high on the front end, that the suspension-correction applies to? Will any old 26" rigid with the proper steerer length do for me? More information might be needed, but thanks for any help.


----------



## redclaybrigade (Jan 3, 2012)

Thanks, logbiter. The fork is actually a 1 1/8" threaded, which makes it harder to find a replacement, though they're out there. I suppose I could use a threadless headset instead in order to use the more commonly available threadless 1 1/8" fork. Too bad it looks as though I'll have to pay about as much for the fork as I paid for the bike, if I buy new. Lookin' out for a used fork I guess would be the way to go. But I'll use your good advice.


----------



## logbiter (Sep 14, 2005)

best bet would be to check with local bike shops for castoffs and recycled/coop bike place (or a school/university that has a place they put all those mangled bike rack bikes). 
Here's the J & B page for a new low end fork. 

After lots of checking on ebay (aka-patience), I picked up a decent (NOS trek) fork for a mid-90's trek (purple 930) with the proper 1 1/8" threaded specs for about $20 shipped. That went on my single speed commuter that had the front end trashed in a bike vs SUV in the crosswalk incident:mad2: Moral of that story, be careful who you lend your bike to. 

At least the frame, drivetrain & headset survived (said friend sans helmet was not injured:thumbsup... he was riding through the crosswalk at the same time a student in SUV talking on her phone turned through the intersection.


----------



## hitek (Mar 13, 2006)

when I got my 29er Mt Bike, I took my old Gary Fisher Mt bike with 26in wheels and turn it into a street/commuter ride.


----------



## redclaybrigade (Jan 3, 2012)

I was going to turn a Trek 930 into a commuter, but I might not now because the chainstays could be too short for my size 13s. I don't want to be bothered by heel strike on the panniers. MTBs look as though they have long stays, but that's due to the 26" wheels. My old tourer's stays are more than an inch longer than the Trek's. It looks to me as though some racks might set the bags farther back than the Blackburn does, even fully extended. They could possibly solve my problem. I'll have to look into it.


----------

