Can some on please measure then length of their 23 fork, say from the centre of the axle bolt to the bit where they are flush on the top yolk.

Thanks

Hopefully this drawing is of some use to you. If not I try and remesure what you need.

so that pic is saying they are 75.9 from the top yoke to the bottom of the spindle?

Be careful of compressed/uncompressed lengths.

Aaarrrggghhh all I want to know is the difference between 29 and 23 forks with regard to length.

I wish my mate would just join the forum and ask himself!

NC23 forks are the longer of the two, not sure by how much exactly, 5mm or so I think.
Therefore NC23 forks on an NC29 is ok, but NC29 forks on an NC23 is risky.

But you probably knew that

Thanks Woz,

My mate has a 23 with 17" rear, CBR6 shock and GF linkage.

GFs instructions say you can drop standard 23 forks 6mm through the yokes if running this set up....so if 29 forks are only 5-10 mm shorter he should be ok running those flush in the yoke.

If you see what I mean.

Ah that's interesting, I'm running the same but didn't know Graeme specified an acceptable fork drop amount - was going to experiment, now I don't have to! Unless he was talking about race bikes with a 160 rear tyre and 70 profiles? As this would raise the front slightly compared to standard tyres.

Yeah I'd say it might be possible, he'll need to check that the fork lowers don't hit the bottom yoke when bottomed out, and more importantly he'll need to check the trail hasn't been shortened by too much. I don't know what a minimum safe trail value would be though, sorry.

tanuki wrote:so that pic is saying they are 75.9 from the top yoke to the bottom of the spindle?

Yes. Did take those measurements sometime ago, but I'm pretty sure that would be uncompressed with standard 20 year old springs. If you still need to find out I could measure them again over the weekend?

If that's what the measurements are he'll be fine...unless you happen to be next to your bike with a tape measure and have a hankering for 5 karma :)