# Any Tarmac owners swapped to aftermarket fork?



## feeex (Dec 6, 2011)

Just wondered?

Would love to see some photographs................


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

Guess my question would be, why would you want to? The fork is an integral part of ride and handling performance and carefully engineered in terms of stiffness and rake to work with the geometry of the frame. Plus...newer frames have 1 3/8" lower bearing diameter and don't know of a single aftermarket fork that will work.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

roadworthy said:


> Guess my question would be, why would you want to? The fork is an integral part of ride and handling performance and carefully engineered in terms of stiffness and rake to work with the geometry of the frame. Plus...newer frames have 1 3/8" lower bearing diameter and don't know of a single aftermarket fork that will work.


While I agree that (at present) the newer frames with tapered head tubes severely limit aftermarket options, there are some good aftermarket products for frames ~3 years and older having straight 1 1/8" HT's. 

Enve offers a couple of very nice forks that I'd consider if/ when replacing my '08 Tarmac Comps OE fork. The Spec fork weighs 454g's (cut), measures ~370mm's axle to crown race and has a 45mm rake. The Enve Road 2.0 can match those specs and weighs ~350g's. At ~$400 they aren't cheap, but IME they're at least as good as the OE fork and weigh less. 

And there are other brands/ models (Ritchey to name one) as well.


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

PJ352 said:


> While I agree that (at present) the newer frames with tapered head tubes severely limit aftermarket options, there are some good aftermarket products for frames ~3 years and older having straight 1 1/8" HT's.
> 
> Enve offers a couple of very nice forks that I'd consider if/ when replacing my '08 Tarmac Comps OE fork. The Spec fork weighs 454g's (cut), measures ~370mm's axle to crown race and has a 45mm rake. The Enve Road 2.0 can match those specs and weighs ~350g's. At ~$400 they aren't cheap, but IME they're at least as good as the OE fork and weigh less.
> 
> And there are other brands/ models (Ritchey to name one) as well.


Yup..there are many aftermarket options for 1 1/8" forks which will fit the earlier bikes. But...depends if you want to play engineer. The resonant frequency of a given frameset is a function of both frame and fork respective stiffnesses which are arrived at based upon copious testing, computer modeling and trial and error. Its a system and carefully engineered. Have I changed forks on other bikes...many. I just just defer to Specialized engineers and wouldn't want to change the balance of stiffness between frame and fork for Tarmac or Roubaix which makes these bikes what they are. YMMV.


----------



## DonDenver (May 30, 2007)

roadworthy said:


> Yup..there are many aftermarket options for 1 1/8" forks which will fit the earlier bikes. But...depends if you want to play engineer. The resonant frequency of a given frameset is a function of both frame and fork respective stiffnesses which are arrived at based upon copious testing, computer modeling and trial and error. Its a system and carefully engineered. Have I changed forks on other bikes...many. I just just defer to Specialized engineers and wouldn't want to change the balance of stiffness between frame and fork for Tarmac or Roubaix which makes these bikes what they are. YMMV.


With you on ^this^. But with that said, I've given up trying to understand why anything built with purposeful balance somehow is attempted to be "bettered" by the owner. It does make for some interesting frankenoutcomes along with hilarious comments about how the OEM should have "considered" the alterations that would have made the bike *better*


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

DonDenver said:


> With you on ^this^. But with that said, I've given up trying to understand why anything built with purposeful balance somehow is attempted to be "bettered" by the owner. It does make for some interesting frankenoutcomes along with hilarious comments about how the OEM should have "considered" the alterations that would have made the bike *better*


No doubt there are those who like to experiment, but oftentimes there are other reasons for swaps. Crashes, OEM parts unavailable, cost....

That aside, you're assuming the OEM's fork is superior to aftermarket. IME as long as some key specs are considered (thus retaining the frames intended ride/ handling characteristics), I don't share the viewpoints that manufacturer's have some inside edge that make their frame/ fork combos the best by default. If they did, next years fork wouldn't be 'better' (as they claim). Then, if you believe they are, the competitors would be as well - or they'd no longer be competitive.

I would bet that (similar to what's been done in years past with frames) in a 'blind' test, replacing an OE Spec fork with a well designed/ manufactured fork like the Enve Road 2.0 would yield some surprising feedback from many cyclists.


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

PJ352 said:


> No doubt there are those who like to experiment, but oftentimes there are other reasons for swaps. Crashes, OEM parts unavailable, cost....
> 
> That aside, you're assuming the OEM's fork is superior to aftermarket. IME as long as some key specs are considered (thus retaining the frames intended ride/ handling characteristics), I don't share the viewpoints that manufacturer's have some inside edge that make their frame/ fork combos the best by default. If they did, next years fork wouldn't be 'better' (as they claim). Then, if you believe they are, the competitors would be as well - or they'd no longer be competitive.
> 
> I would bet that (similar to what's been done in years past with frames) in a 'blind' test, replacing an OE Spec fork with a well designed/ manufactured fork like the Enve Road 2.0 would yield some surprising feedback from many cyclists.


Opinions are what make the world go round. If you believe an aftermarket fork will deliver as good if not better than the fork developed for the frame, than by all means support the aftermarket. I am sure they will appreciate your businss.


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

DonDenver said:


> With you on ^this^. But with that said, I've given up trying to understand why anything built with purposeful balance somehow is attempted to be "bettered" by the owner. It does make for some interesting frankenoutcomes along with hilarious comments about how the OEM should have "considered" the alterations that would have made the bike *better*


Blind squirrels do find an errant acorn once in a while so there is always hope. 
Most important attribute of a fork besides rake? Stiffness. How many different fork stiffnesses do you think Specialized tests by varying the lay up prior to production release? Probably 10 different stiffnesses for a given frame design...so the bike exhibits the overall feel and control they want. Now...an owner can also perform their own testing...its just gets expensive after a while.  I've been down that road in fact. I prefer to have Specialized do it which we pay for btw.


----------



## PlatyPius (Feb 1, 2009)

My whole problem with this topic is that he only wants to see pictures. No comments on how differently/better it might ride with Fork X, just pictures.

Odd.


----------



## RkFast (Dec 11, 2004)

It just seems like of all the upgrades to get, especially on a new bike, a fork is pretty low on the list in terms of ROI.

Perhaps he was talking more about older Tarmacs?


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

PlatyPius said:


> My whole problem with this topic is that he only wants to see pictures. No comments on how differently/better it might ride with Fork X, just pictures.
> 
> Odd.


Is it really hard to understand? Discussion related to why there aren't any pictures. Most owners don't change the fork. Further, the fork on the new Roubaix SL3 and Tarmac SL4 is proprietary to Specialized..with unique lower bearing diameter and countersunk into the head tube for increased stiffness. There are no aftermarket forks availabe for the newer bikes. That means no pictures...lol.


----------



## feeex (Dec 6, 2011)

Thanks for the responses guys. Especially Platypius who seemed to be the only person who actually read my original post.

I wasn't asking for chapter and verse on why people shouldn't change forks, I just wanted to see some pictures.

And to be honest, I absolutely do not agree that aftermarket will never be as good as OEM. Look at most bike reviews and there will be a comment along the lines of 'swap the standard Specialized tyres/saddle/crank and the bike improves dramatically'

Whilst I could understand you saying that components on a Venge for example shouldn't be swapped because Specialized pour their hearts and souls into development of it, I would suggest that every other bike in their range is built to a price point. If it wasn't, they would all come with DuraAce or SRAM/Campag equivalent groupsets because we all know they offer significant advantages over Tiagra shifters or the no name brakes that came on some Tarmacs.............

Aftermarket components exist for a reason. And I'm sure as hell it isn't just because blind/stupid cyclists upgrade components on looks alone.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

roadworthy said:


> *Blind squirrels* do find an errant acorn once in a while so there is always hope.
> Most important attribute of a fork besides rake? Stiffness. How many different fork stiffnesses do you think Specialized tests by varying the lay up prior to production release? Probably 10 different stiffnesses for a given frame design...so the bike exhibits the overall feel and control they want. Now...an owner can also perform their own testing...its just gets expensive after a while.  I've been down that road in fact. I prefer to have Specialized do it which we pay for btw.


Apropos comment, RW. 

Re: the remainder of this post, your opinions and conjecture, but I'll play along. Just how does any of the R & D/ testing you outline differ from the aftermarkets methods? OE manufacturers only have to concern themselves with their frame/ forks, where the aftermarket has to satisfy a much broader cross section of the market. IMO/E the top brands have a pretty good track record doing so. 

If you do a search on bicycle fork recalls, you'll find that the end results of all that R & D done by the OE manufacturers doesn't always yield good results, because Specialized (gasp! It's true!), Giant, Cervelo, Felt... all have had fork recalls. Cervelo sung the praises of their Wolf forks prior to their recall, subsequently going with 3T Funda Pro and the Easton EC90 SLX. Felt replaced theirs with Enve (formerly Edge), Easton and/or 3T - _all aftermarket forks._

Notably, no recalls thus far from Easton or Enve (previously Edge). On balance, Ritchey's WCS UD ('09) model and back in '07 Reynolds UL's had a recall issued.


----------



## DonDenver (May 30, 2007)

feeex said:


> I wasn't asking for chapter and verse on why people shouldn't change forks, I just wanted to see some pictures.
> 
> .


It's a forum and we'll give you whatever we like...


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

DonDenver said:


> It's a forum and we'll give you whatever we like...


Exactly. Lest we forget...

*forum* - an assembly, meeting place, television program, etc., for the discussion of questions of public interest. 

I'm not seeing any qualifier as to scope or depth of the discussion. That said, (IMHO) of late, there seems to be an increased tendency for some members to state opinions as edicts, with opposing 'arguments' met with condescending, intolerant responses. Lends little to the posters objectivity/ credibility. Again, IMHO.


----------



## feeex (Dec 6, 2011)

DonDenver said:


> It's a forum and we'll give you whatever we like...


Well if you ask me, Whitney Houston was the worlds most talented female vocalist of our time.


----------



## feeex (Dec 6, 2011)

PJ352 said:


> Exactly. Lest we forget...
> 
> *forum* - an assembly, meeting place, television program, etc., for the discussion of questions of public interest.
> 
> I'm not seeing any qualifier as to scope or depth of the discussion. That said, (IMHO) of late, there seems to be an increased tendency for some members to state opinions as edicts, with opposing 'arguments' met with condescending, intolerant responses. Lends little to the posters objectivity/ credibility. Again, IMHO.


Surely relevance should play a part in peoples responses?

I repeat, I asked for photographs, not chapter and verse on the merits of swapping components for aftermarket equivalents.

But nevertheless, thanks for the responses.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

feeex said:


> *Surely relevance should play a part in peoples responses?*
> 
> I repeat, I asked for photographs, not chapter and verse on the merits of swapping components for aftermarket equivalents.
> 
> But nevertheless, thanks for the responses.


I never said otherwise. Where we break is in your (apparent) narrow scope of what's acceptable (given the topic) to post in your thread. 

Going back to my previous post, this being a public forum, I'm of the opinion that what is posted is for all to see, now and in the future. Sure, you started the thread and can (to a point) direct it, but anyone stifling discussion is (IMO) doing a disservice to others, because members might learn and be better able to form their own opinions after being exposed to opposing viewpoints. 

BTW, my comments weren't specific to you, any one poster or this (Spec) forum in general. They were simply my observation of a trend that I view less than positively. 

/pj


----------



## roadworthy (Nov 11, 2011)

I wonder where all the pics of aftermarket forks are?
Appears as those most Specialized owners have good sense after all.
OP...maybe ask for some pics of bikes with a banana seat...kidding...lol.


----------



## IJBcape (May 27, 2011)

Technical FAQ: Replacement forks with tapered steerers


----------



## IJBcape (May 27, 2011)

Chris King InSet

So you can use king inset headset with 1.5 bottom cup and the 1.5" > 1 1 /8" race.

Also, you want to explore different rake, trail, stack, you could try one of the other Tarmac forks. I just saw one uncut on ebay. So say you have a 58 frame and toe overlap from big feet, you could throw on the 45mm rake fork and get some room without compromising much of the Specialized feel, engineering, etc.


----------



## IJBcape (May 27, 2011)

Or...


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

IJBcape said:


> Chris King InSet
> 
> So you can use king inset headset with 1.5 bottom cup and the 1.5" > 1 1 /8" race.
> 
> Also, you want to explore different rake, trail, stack, you could try one of the other Tarmac forks. I just saw one uncut on ebay. So say you have a 58 frame and toe overlap from big feet, you could throw on the 45mm rake fork and get some room without compromising much of the Specialized feel, engineering, etc.


I could be mistaken, but the way I understand that Devolution base plate is that it essentially downsizes a 1.5" lower HT to accept a straight 1 1/8" steerer. If correct, it's only an option for _some_ newer Tarmacs, because upper end models use 1 3/8" lower bearings. Also, it could be argued that it negates any benefit an OS lower bearing assembly provides.

Considering that at any speeds above ~4 MPH, toe overlap is a non-issue, I don't subscribe to changing a bikes geo for that reason, but agree that there are several valid reasons for changing fork rake. As one example, I had a custom geo bike built modeled after my Tarmac's. Stock fork rake is 45mm's, but I opted for an Enve 2.0 Road with 43mm's of rake (changed trail from 56 to 58) and IMO the bike handled very well. It should be noted that swapping out 23c for 25c tires results in half that change, so hardly noteworthy.

Lastly, it's interesting that Enve is now offering tapered forks. With time, I think that'll prove to be a wise move on their part.


----------

