5" Travel on Crosslink EXP's?

[kiwi]

i thought another problem was the lower axle actually hittingthe front wheel

[Frankd3000]

That's a problem? I always thought that tires were the oldest form of suspension? [smiley=disbelief.gif] Okay, that sucked, sorry.

That's why i'd go with new legs, too.

Marry it? Nah, my CAR'S would never let me hear the end of it. [smiley=laughing.gif]

[proflex252]

@ frankd3000: The rake and the wheelbase are a little bit longer, of course.

But that doesn't matter much, as I did not add the same amount on each link. And I think the steering is a little too nervous anyway. So a little more rake and a bit flatter angle is good for the behaviour of the bike on the trail. At least I like it if it is not that nervous.

Some german bike magazins that time had the opinion as well that the original angle was a little too steep. So I didn't hesitate to change a bit on the geometry.

And at the moment I have a psylo race fork in my frame which provides 122 mm of travel and so about the same angle and rake as I have with my longer links. It offers a calm, not nervous ride. And I like that. It's perfect for marathons or to cross the alps, but might be not perfect for cc races. But I don't go racing, so who cares.

By the way: no one can tell me it's a proper solution if you have 90mm of travel an the rear and 67mm on the front. That was, what I meassured on my bike as it was new. This is a disbalance from the front to the rear. Now it's got 115mm on the rear and 122mm of travel on the front, which is no disbalance. And it really works good.

At all: Have nice rides with your bikes however they are.

[Frankd3000]

Nervous? That's a very interesting way of putting it.

I'm still un-decided on the whole "unbalanced" thing. I've not ridden a similar travel-equipped bike, so I don't have any input on that.

Thanks for yours, though. Good food for thought.