Quote Originally Posted by velogirl View Post
Steel forks are more stable and corner and descend better than carbon. Yup, I'm a carbon sl#t just like the next girl -- got em on almost all my bikes. But I believe in the value of steel. And the weight is just about nothing. Some folks will tell you that carbon will dampen road noise, but a good steel fork will do just fine.
Wow, I have never heard that. How do you know this velogirl? Everything I read said that carbon would dampen road shock better than steel. Regarding weight, what the frame builder told me was that sure, some carbon forks are gonna be a lot lighter than some steel forks, but since I am comparing a stock carbon fork with aluminum steerer to his custom steel fork, the weight difference is small. I forgot to ask him though, that if a carbon fork has an aluminum steerer, what does a steel one have, steel or aluminum, cuz I know aluminum can be harsh. I unerstand why folks put a carbon fork on an aluminum bike, but am not sure then why they are so popular on steel bikes.

Another question, while I am not building this to be a 'touring bike' but it might nice to have the versatility to carry stuff if the need arises. This bike does have eyelets for a rear rack, and obviously if I went steel on the fork I could have it built with eyelets too. But, it takes side pull not canti brakes. Do you know if I can put med or long reach sidepulls on to use wider tires, or is that something that the frame has to have been built to handle (they are usually built up with a standard ultegra kit)? I have no interest in fenders. I guess I can just see if the wheel/tire from my touring bike physically fits in the frame as a first step. I am also curious about the frame geometry. My touring bike has a 73 STA, 71.5 HTA while this bike has a 73 STA and 72 HTA. Would that make it less stable if I wanted to use it for occasional touring?