Niner Carbon Fork: Update

It seems that the Niner Bikes carbon fork is nearly ready to make it into the hands of trail riders out there. Niner will have a pre-order on the forks which are of a radical new design. The forks, which are carbon fiber in construction from drop outs to the steer tube, are very unique in appearance. The expected delivery on these forks is May 2009.

Niner carbon forkNiner carbon forkNiner carbon fork
The new fork will be available in 10 colorways.

The fork blades flow into the ster tube in a graceful arc, joining together just at the crown. This is for a reason, as the carbon fibers used in the forks construction can flow uninterupted by sharp bends, which carbon fiber doesn’t do. The fork blades themselves are a unique shape and allow the graphic treatment that is used to be very effective. All in all it is a very unique fork that should at least look pretty outstanding on Niner’s various hardtails. With the choice of 10 different colorways, Niner looks to be pretty serious about offering a match to every currently offered color on their hardtail line up.

Again, Niner Bikes will be taking pre-orders of the fork soon which should retail for $375.00 and expected delivery for pre-orders taken byMarch 31st is May 2009. See the newly revamped Niner website for more.

Update: 3/12/09- Niner has informed me that the fork will have a 240lb rider weight limit, a restriction to a 160mm rotor size, and only the black fork “might have” removeable logos running down the fork legs. All the other colorways will have all logos under the clear coat.

Advertisements

No Responses to “Niner Carbon Fork: Update”

  1. brandonecpt Says:

    I can’t wait to ride one, they look great!

  2. Ron Harris Says:

    I’m excited about these as well. I think the weight is supposed to be just over a pound. That’s a pound less than my Bontrager rigid. This would be a sick fork on Niner’s scandium singlespeed or a Fisher Superfly. Can’t wait to ride one!

  3. Carbon Fiber Bike Frame Says:

    I like the look of these – and especially if they really are only a pound!

  4. BOAB Says:

    So at one pound sure they look good, but do these things have a rider weight limit?

  5. dubjay Says:

    Anyone know if those Niner stickers can be removed easily? Or are they under some sort of clearcoat?

  6. Jared Says:

    You’re welcome for the tip GT. (:

  7. Cloxxki Says:

    Of course, I’m the only one why wants to know offset on these.
    They’re 470mm where for years Niner used 490mm for their steel forks, but now also seems to offer those in 470mm.
    Likely, the carbon will be 40mm then?

    51mm like G2, and I would have ordered one before replying. Hope they’ll soon offer a G2 compatible fork, for the rest of the world to obsess over. I’m sure this fork will be just great, and hard to beat over the coming years.

  8. John Says:

    I’m probably wrong but I thought the offset was going to be 45mm?

  9. Guitar Ted Says:

    Jared: Thanks! I should have e-mailed you back, but I will publicly apologize for not doing so right away here. Sorry! 🙂

    BOAB, dubjay: See my update to the post above. 😉

  10. Wish I Were Riding Says:

    160mm limit? Oh well, now I can save my money.

  11. Jared Says:

    No worries, I was being half-smart-assed, but really…thanks for the acknowledgement.

  12. Joel Says:

    Man, weight limits make me nervous. I am well under the weight limit, but just the fact that there is one does not instill the confidence I want in such a crucial component. Fork failure would be a problem. Personally, I would be happy for a quarter pound more weight and no weight limit. Ah, who I am kidding, I wouldn’t turn one down and dentist do great work now days.

  13. RC Says:

    So is the offset 45 or 52 or? or am I not understanding Cloxxki’s comment? And length? Thanks.

  14. Guitar Ted Says:

    RC: I believe the offset is actually 44mm and the axle to crown height is 470mm on all ’09 Niner forks now.

  15. jfk Says:

    Wanna say the offset is 46, not too far from G2.

  16. Cloxxki Says:

    Will new Niner frames then also be built around a shorter fork, or was the rigid fork always taller than the frame was built for?
    72 degree head tube andle and 46mm offset, that would be sooo 2004 🙂

    If hey don’t adjust the frames, and they were always built around a 490mm fork, and indeed the offset ends up being 46…you’ll have an interesting ride on technical trails aboard a new Niner and new fork 🙂
    It’s probably all different, but I’d like to know anyway.
    470mm and 46mm would actually make a nice fork for my Flight. Or a pre-G2 Fisher. And many other options that might work out, depending on a rider’s handling preferences.

  17. Guitar Ted Says:

    jfk:just researched the question on the offset. Chris Sugai states in mtbr.com’s Niner Virtual Booth piece that Niner has adopted a 44mm offset for all it’s rigid forks across the board. So, the offset should be 44mm with an axle to crown of 470mm.

  18. The Monkey Says:

    Offset is 46, A-C is 470.

  19. Guitar Ted Says:

    Update: Niner just sent out a new newsletter and states that the offset is 45mm. on the steel forks: http://www.ninerbikes.com/fly.aspx?layout=bikes&parts=true&taxid=120

    Sorry about the confusion here, but there seems to be several conflicting reports, even out of Niner’s own camp.

    The Monkey: Nice profile on the March newsletter! 😉

  20. Cloxxki Says:

    Thanks, you beat me to it, I was going to post that too.

    When they say that the new lower forks do work on existing frames, that means they feel OK with 73 degrees HTA and 45mm offset. I only wonder whether that’s not a bit off the optimal midline for bike handling.
    Riders all over the world seem to focus on “quickness”, implying that the optimum lies on one end of the spectrum, like it can never be quick enough.
    Frames themselves, are in terms of angles and fork height aligned with 95% of bike we’ve been seeing between the 2003 Karate Monkey. Apart from G2 Fishers, most brands still use those 73/72 angles and a ~470mm fork.

    So, NIner does make the move to longer offset now, complying to Fox’s non-G2 Fox forks (already a big step in the right direction IMO on the forks’ part. But, Niner keep the 72d HTA on all but the S size.
    Keeping BB’s the same height on all sizes, which kind of disappoints me, from a company that develops the new yardstick for rigid forks. But who am I to judge, without my own brand?

    Now that I’m at it, all sizes except the XL have a 4″ height range, totally the usual way about it. Then why go up to 6’8″ for the 21″ XL with 70mm BB drop which is the same as the bike to fit a 5’4″ rider? One of those 2 riders is getting a lesser fit than (s)he could.

    For those who have tried a NIner hardtail before with a given fork, looking to get a new Niner for the same fork, consider that the new frame will handle -brace yourself for the horror- slower. With a new fork, good luck getting a good one with less than 43-44mm offset, so that’ll be dandy.

  21. fatsdomino Says:

    a carbon uni crown mountain bike fork, no thanks. I like my teeth the way they are.

  22. Cloxxki Says:

    Very mature post.
    I can tell from your wordings that you must be a highly trained composites engineer, with expertise in the field of bicycles forks. The Niner folks are just trying a random idea on us, their testing bunnies. Right?

  23. Tim Says:

    Why build a 29er fork that can’t take a rotor larger than 160mm? Isn’t 180mm a defacto standard for front brakes on a 29″ wheel?

    160 on the rear wheel, perhaps. but IMHO, it doesn’t cut it on the front…

    Too bad, looked like a cool fork!

  24. Jared Says:

    Oh…my….god. Really? “Standard?” The 29″ world is anything but standard and a 160mm rotor does just fine for most (especially weight-conscious racer types who would be running a carbon fork). God, the criticism here is amazing. Talk about armchair engineers!

  25. Tim Says:

    Jared, I am not an armchair anything.

    Agreed, if the terrain is mostly flat/rolling, a 160mm should work if one is a lighter rider.

    But I would argue that for riders between 180lb & the 240lb weight limit, a 6″ rotor is not enough, especially on any sort of extended descent. I weigh 165lb, and I much prefer the 185 F & R where I ride, (N. Cal)

    FYI, I think the fork looks great.

  26. Jared Says:

    Dude, I’m 210 geared up and 160 is FINE. Good hell.

  27. Bill Says:

    Is it really necessary to begin or end a sentence with IMHO anymore? HOT Fork, it nice to see thinking outside the box.

  28. Oderus Says:

    I was looking forward to this fork and had money ready to hand over to my Niner rep, until…………6″ rotor max and 240lb weight limit. I have a couple of Niners and I run 7″ rotors front and back on both. 6″ just doesn’t cut it for me at 275lbs. Oh well, looks like I’m keeping my Bontrager fork.

  29. Cloxxki Says:

    A lightweight steel 160mm surely can be underdressed for the occasion . A well made heavier 160mm might cope better already.
    Then, brake makers have been making 160’s for a decade or more, and each year they claim improved power, heat chanelling, etc. Our 160’s of today would have made nice DH brakes a few years ago.

  30. professed Says:

    Seems to be a lot of panic here…

    I have been running a White rock solid “generic taiwanese” carbon pipe fork on my ’07 Niner SIR and it has a A-C of 465mm and a small 43mm or so offset. – Tim did a review of em in these pages a few years ago…

    Have to say it makes the SIR a bit twitchy on smaller tyres, especially 38mm slicks, but throw a 2.4 or 2.55 up front and run a 2.0, 2.1 or even 2.25 smaller bag on the back and all your geometry anxieties will be resolved.

    For those with older niner frames (i think things changed last year – Niner please advise here) the current fork with 470 A-C and 45,46mm (whatever it may be – bugger all in it) offset will feel and handle just fine.

    I promise ! 🙂

    And if it dont – do what I do, fiddle with tyre heights to sort out your issues.

    I wish i had some spare $ lying around as i would love one of these forks. The rock solids are definitely not their namesake under brakes – flex like two pieces of straw and im only 75Kg ( approx 165lbs) — and only use 160mm rotors….squeeze harder folks !

  31. Cloxxki Says:

    I find it odd that Niner rider don’t complain about BB height.
    70mm BB drop, and then often used with a 25mm shorter fork, that should nett around 80mm BB drop?
    When Fisher offered ~72-74mm BB drop frames, they were slammed over and over again for dangerously silly low BB’s. As a result they first went to 50mm, and now to 55mm if I have my facts straight.
    Such a fork might work, but is it to be wished for? Is there a need for such a quick bike? Are you going to slalom the mosquitos over the trail?

  32. Steve Says:

    As always, thanks for the input and response to this fork, we really appreciate the excitement and feedback that we get from these forums. Cloxxki, just to give you a little background into the BB height, if you’re refering to our SIR 9 and ONE 9 frames with 70mm BB height, this is at the very BOTTOM of the EBB stroke (the 6 o’clock position), the likelyhood of the EBB resting at the very bottom of the stroke is very unlikely, therefor the BB heights are usually higher than this. Also, one of the beautiful things about an EBB is that you can position it in either a high position or low position when tensioning the chain, depending on which way you rotate the cranks. So if you prefer a lower BB height, then rotate the EBB down and forward while tensioning. If you like a high BB height, rotate up and forward while tensioning. The highest BB height that can be attained on our frames is 53mm (with the EBB at the 12 o’clock position). I hope this helps.

    As stated, the c-t-a is 470mm and the rake is 45mm. Weight will be 550 grams. This fork has been tested a lot, and it’s really strong. We’ve lliterally broken over 40 forks in the test lab doing destructive testing, and we’re confident in the strength of this fork.

    Steve
    Niner Bikes

  33. Guitar Ted Says:

    Steve: Thanks for stopping by and commenting. I appreciate it, and the readers surely do as well. I’m looking forward to seeing the finished product launch at Sea Otter. 🙂

  34. prphoto Says:

    I was real excited under I heard they will be $400. Is that true? Ouch!
    I know stuff costs money but my steel cro-moto was around $100.
    But if you want to play you gotz to pay!

  35. Jared Says:

    I have to admit, since I’m going SS and fully rigid this year, this new offering has made my decision more difficult. Twice the price, but half the weight. I think it’d be a perfect match on an Aluminum frame (AIR 9 or other Salsa Scandium variety), but I’m not sure about how it would look on a thin-tubed steel frame. Decisions, decisions…

  36. JohnnyG Says:

    @ Steve, Niner Bikes: I hate to add confusion, but why does your website show the weight of the fork to be 2 pounds?

  37. Steve Says:

    Johnny, I just went on to our website and can’t seem to find where it says that it’s two pounds. In fact, I can’t find any reference to weight. Can you be more specific on where it says that? The fork weight is 550 grams. If I can find the infraction on the web site, I’ll have it changed asap.

    Steve
    Niner Bikes

  38. Jared Says:

    Steve, the reference is on the online store.

  39. Steve Says:

    Thanks for the heads up guys. What’s happening is that that field is auto populating with the SHIP weight from our system instead of the actual weight. We’re working on correcting this right now.

    Steve
    Niner Bikes

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: