K2 / Proflex Riders Group

General => Tech Forum => Topic started by: Mr752 on January 18, 2008, 09:09:27 am

Title: Look Fournales v Crosslinks
Post by: Mr752 on January 18, 2008, 09:09:27 am: Has anybody out there ridden Look Fournales forks?
I know Colin said he had a pair, but with the similarity between them and the Girvin/Noleen Crosslinks wondered how they rode.
Recall someone saying this is how the Crosslink may have evolved if production hadnt ceased.
Found a pair new and boxed for UK£157, fancied them for the next project when the XP-8 is finished.
Title: Re: Look Fournales v Crosslinks
Post by: Lysander on January 18, 2008, 09:54:10 am: If ye find a pair the right stack size, then snap them up- I been lookin' for ages- most of the ones left seem to be small, less than 137mm stack.
If ye can get a pair for £157, get two- I'll give ye £170 for a set!!! ;)
Title: Re: Look Fournales v Crosslinks
Post by: Mr752 on January 18, 2008, 10:12:49 am: regarding the stack height cant you put spacers in like you would on the crosslink, it doesnt state what size they are on the website, I'll mail them and find out.
Title: Re: Look Fournales v Crosslinks
Post by: kiwi on January 18, 2008, 11:51:44 pm: they may have a stack height SMALLER you can actually fit on your bike so be careful...
Title: Re: Look Fournales v Crosslinks
Post by: Colin on January 21, 2008, 10:18:30 am: £157.50? What? This one?
(http://www.gedibikes.co.uk/images/27/main/100_0972.jpg)
It's a Small.

Yep, a small will only fit a headtube up to 137mm, which rules out all of our bikes doesn't it?

But note also, that the Small fork is fundamentally a different fork to the Medium and Large.

I enquired with Look/Fournales about modding a small to fit a 155mm Headtube but they say the parts are not interchgangeable. Now that I also have a Large Fournales I can see the difference, on the Large the bottom stanchion is flat, on the Small it is a different piece that protrudes probably to allow the same shock to fit. The top pivot arm is different as well. I think some other parts are different as well.

See photos:
Small
(http://www.cyklingonline.dk/teknik/images/fournales.jpg)

Med/Large
(http://www.lookcycle.fr/infos/images/infos/look_infos/3/look-fournales.GIF)

Also, interestingly, the steerer tube is in two pieces on the Fournales, upper and lower.

Of course the main attraction is the standard Disk mount on them. This is so tiny (see top photo) that I cannot imagine any concerns with modding a Crosslink in a similar fashion, I have seen Callum's postings re: his discussions with PRO~FLEX in the day, so maybe only OK for a Carbon Crosslink not Ally?

I haven't fitted mine to try them out so can't comment on the ride.

One day..................

Col.
Title: Re: Look Fournales v Crosslinks
Post by: signalMTB on January 21, 2008, 11:15:41 am: very sexy fork. my only wish is Crosslinks would have adopted the straight dropout as in the Look
Title: Re: Look Fournales v Crosslinks
Post by: kiwi on January 21, 2008, 05:02:06 pm: i think the x55 and x56 bikes have a very short headtube,even the way bigs...
Title: Re: Look Fournales v Crosslinks
Post by: Colin on January 22, 2008, 06:45:46 am: Quote from: kiwi on January 21, 2008, 05:02:06 pm
i think the x55 and x56 bikes have a very short headtube,even the way bigs...

Don't you think that I considered that? <GRIN>

Measured at 145mm on my Medium XP-X (856) with OEM Headset.

Oooh! Just thought, "I wonder if my old rigid Marin Pine Mountain has a shorter headtube"..................I was considering putting a pair of crosslinks on it................

Col.
Title: Re: Look Fournales v Crosslinks
Post by: kiwi on January 22, 2008, 02:14:45 pm: Quote from: Colin on January 22, 2008, 06:45:46 am
Quote from: kiwi on January 21, 2008, 05:02:06 pm
i think the x55 and x56 bikes have a very short headtube,even the way bigs...

Don't you think that I considered that? <GRIN>

Measured at 145mm on my Medium XP-X (856) with OEM Headset.

Oooh! Just thought, "I wonder if my old rigid Marin Pine Mountain has a shorter headtube"..................I was considering putting a pair of crosslinks on it................

Col.

i looked very carefully at the list of your bikes before i made that post...if i had any real conviction about it i would have measured the headtube on my own bike :P
Title: Re: Look Fournales v Crosslinks
Post by: Mr752 on January 22, 2008, 04:41:49 pm: They are the ones Colin!
Emailed the guy at Gedibikes, (called Ged would you believe) that was couple of days ago and no reply! You can obviously tell by that lower link that they are the small size.
What range does the large and medium sizes cover? I ride medium(18-19") could get away with a large at a push so it would be good to know if a set comes up for sale.
By the way,the guy on US Ebay selling the Crosslinks with smart shocks, exactly what planet is he on!!!!!!!!??????????
Title: Re: Look Fournales v Crosslinks
Post by: Lysander on January 23, 2008, 10:20:40 am: I contacted gedbikes a while ago- sadly they've none left.................. :(
Title: Re: Look Fournales v Crosslinks
Post by: xp8-er on February 15, 2008, 11:42:48 am: Hi there, I have ridden the fournales fork as they are on my bike at the momement and they are very good. Firstly the travel claimed is what you get and secondly it is cadillac smooth. On small stuff they are amazing and they gobble up the larger stuff without drama. The small bump sensitivity is poss due to a negative spring and a small elastomer mount which compresses slightly.

Brake dive is an issue if you do not get the air pressure correct but this is true for any fork. Seperate rebud/ compression damping would have been nice but hey ho. The weight is amazing and chaps at the local bike shop were impressed at how good an eleven year old bike can be!! : ;D :D.
Title: Re: Look Fournales v Crosslinks
Post by: shovelon on February 15, 2008, 05:13:55 pm: Very nice xp-8er. A mean looking machine.

With your Fournales and Risse, how much does your xp-8 weigh? (Opps, found it in the other post, 23.9 lbs)

So what upgrades are next?

Terry
Title: Re: Look Fournales v Crosslinks
Post by: xp8-er on February 17, 2008, 01:39:43 pm: The full current spec is xt chainset, xtr 8 speed casette, xt front deraileur ( the original one!! 8)) mavic crossmax st wheelset ceramic coating, continenal supersonic tubes, continental twister supersonic tyres, rithey wcs stem, ritchey wcs carbon bars and seatpost , titec foam grips , fizik gobi saddle with ti rails, carbon bottle cages ti screws of course, xtr rear mech with kcnc jockey wheels, xtr v brakes, ritchey pro v4 pedals , original xt shifters /brake levers , risse astro 5 rear shock , look/fouranales carbon fork ( and spare set of mavic crossmax xl wheels with skinny continental ultra gator skins for road work hence the ass up face down position. I have stupidly long legs :o maybe frog genetics at work.... ;). Just remembered the hope headset. It sounds expensive but i say God Bless ebay and all who ride because of her... ;(http://)

I dont have any plans for any more mods as the bike is solid but i admit the thought of a set of hope mini pro disc brakes is tempting..... ;D

I probably won't convert to discs though as the expense of conversion doesn't justify it, but if another xp8 frame came my way then......... ::)
Title: Re: Look Fournales v Crosslinks
Post by: shovelon on February 17, 2008, 03:47:55 pm: OMG, the more I look at your bike, the faster is seems. Man it just looks wicked fast. I really like how the black swingarm compliments the black fork. Soooo, the 8 means 2008 model? LOL;D ;D ;D

No way, don't do the disks, V brakes are way lighter. If you work the weights a bit, you could speed up sprints alot. I would think you could get it close to 20 lbs. Current race bikes only wish they could get that light.

Gosh you gotta love Proflexes.
Terry
Title: Re: Look Fournales v Crosslinks
Post by: Colin on February 18, 2008, 10:35:28 am: Quote from: xp8-er on February 15, 2008, 11:42:48 am
Hi there, I have ridden the fournales fork as they are on my bike at the momement and they are very good. Firstly the travel claimed is what you get and secondly it is cadillac smooth. On small stuff they are amazing and they gobble up the larger stuff without drama. The small bump sensitivity is poss due to a negative spring and a small elastomer mount which compresses slightly.

Brake dive is an issue if you do not get the air pressure correct but this is true for any fork. Seperate rebud/ compression damping would have been nice but hey ho. The weight is amazing and chaps at the local bike shop were impressed at how good an eleven year old bike can be!! : ;D :D.

Hmmmmmm........................so, looking at the photo of the XP-8, I'm pretty certain that those Fournales are SMALL's aren't they?

You say elsewhere that your XP-8 is a "way large" [sic] (WAY BIG). The headtube inc headset length on my Medium is 145mm which exceeds the maximum recommended headtube length for a small Fournales of 137mm.......................not by much though............

and a Way Big will have an even bigger headtube length I think? You sure you've got a a Way Big? it will be a 20" frame if it is.

They obviously fit, but maybe their geometry isn't perfect? As per, if you fit a pair of Crosslinks without getting the "critical measurement" correct..................

Do they work all OK? Any fitting probs? what is the headtube length on your XP-8?

But hey, they look great so maybe I'll reconsider fitting my SMALL's to my XP-X !!!!!

Col...............
Title: Re: Look Fournales v Crosslinks
Post by: xp8-er on February 18, 2008, 11:16:52 am: You are right about the small fournales fork not fitting a way large proflex as the headtube is beyond the range for
the small fork >:(, but the fournales fork i have is the fabled medium ;D ;D ;D. I tried to find a medium for ages and ebay was a no go and gedi bikes did not reply to my e-mails.....!

In the end i actually got my fork directly from fournales in france using franglais and google translation tools!!!. I don't know if they have any more though as they seemed suprised yet pleased at the request for a mtb fork. The downside was the price 440 euros :o :o however the fork is sooooo coool that as a piece of bike art its worth it!!

I see the fournales as the crosslink / vector that never happened so it felt right to blow that amount, more importantly i didn't tell the wife ;D

ps, you could fit a large or extra large fornales to a medium/ small proflex, but as the pictures on the gedi bikes website show it looks weird and i doubt the wisdom of using a 2 piece headtube being braced by an excess of spacers.

cheers steve
Title: Re: Look Fournales v Crosslinks
Post by: purple gerbil on February 19, 2008, 11:02:52 am: and here we have some more for sale..
and guess what? i have just measured my 862 16"(1992) including cane creek h/set & spacers.
***AND IT FITS BANG ON***
but i am tempted and skint as i just bought a new car..("$@%?+)=bugger.
so anyone with 92-93-94 bikes head for the tape measure!!

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Look-VTT-Fournales-Carbon-Kinetic-Shock-Fork-Size-Small_W0QQitemZ300199638896QQihZ020QQcategoryZ36135QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
Title: Re: Look Fournales v Crosslinks
Post by: Ziggy on February 22, 2008, 04:26:03 am: Anyone know what the diameter of the fournales legs are? & whether the disk-mounts are available separately? You can see where I'm going with this... ;)
Title: Re: Look Fournales v Crosslinks
Post by: kiwi on February 22, 2008, 02:32:37 pm: Quote from: Ziggy on February 22, 2008, 04:26:03 am
Anyone know what the diameter of the fournales legs are? & whether the disk-mounts are available separately? You can see where I'm going with this... ;)
dont forget the crosslink/vector are slightly D shaped
Title: Re: Look Fournales v Crosslinks
Post by: kiwi on February 22, 2008, 02:34:43 pm: i beleive all the x55 and x56 bikes had the same headtube....its only the x57 and later that went to the longer headtubes...??
Title: Re: Look Fournales v Crosslinks
Post by: Carbon_Angus on February 26, 2008, 12:32:09 pm: so these will not fit a way big WC frame head tube circa '98?

noleen made longer legs for the way big, too.