Info: PACE RC39 Type C

[Morpeth]

[Whispers]

Probably shouldn’t mention this, if anyone from Pace is a regular here, well… sorry.

Some news on the eagerly awaited super light weight RC39, It is to be called the Type C. I had the chance to talk to a Pace technician at their factory this morning and hold the latest fork, due for release sometime late this year. Please note I did have a genuine reason for being there; picking up my own 39. The new fork will feature Ti hardware, the internals remain the same but they have swapped sides to allow for a shorter lockout cable, the lockout cable looks to be Kevlar or similar. The crown in finished in a titanium gold/silver but remains Mg construction. I think it probably weighs about XXXg* less than the current model, but who knows, this was just a preproduction model.

Once again, sorry Pace but I had to… you know who I am.

ps. I tried for a mobile photo but thought it a little obvious

[/Whispers]

*Must learn not to speculate

[IanB]

Wow, 150g saving sounds quite a bit on an already light fork
Back in the days of the old RC38 Airforce 2's, the lockout cable used to have a kevlar outer. Always wondered why they went to the heavier looking one on the 39's. Apart from Ti or alloy bolts in the lowers, there must be some fancy gubbins inside.

A sneak peek would have been good - couldn't you have shouted "wow, look at that!" and point to something behind them, and then take the photo

[Axis II]

Will it be V-brake compatible, this version?

[Morpeth]

As far as i could tell the lowers were the same as the current model, so yes they probably could take a V brake- although rear mounted, which i quite like
(perhaps i am being a twunt; you did know the RC39 takes V-brakes already?)

As far as the internals - "no major changes" i was told, i assume this to mean no fancy new adjustable bits!

Not keen on the new crown colouring, the decals were very simple too, same style of writing, same colour, just a bigger 'Type C'

As for the photo, i can only apologise

[Axis II]

[quote="Morpeth"]As far as i could tell the lowers were the same as the current model, so yes they probably could take a V brake- although rear mounted, which i quite like
(perhaps i am being a twunt; you did know the RC39 takes V-brakes already?)

Yup, I just wanted to confirm. Lot's of forks are losing canti mounts these days, which is a sad thing for a V-brake lover.

[Motaro]

damn there my mony wil go to time for new fork if it lighter

[chrism]

150g is a lot to lose given the same lowers. Maybe 20g to be had in the cable (with a shorter one), 10g in ti bolts. Also not much spare I can see in the crown/steerer (I presume that wasn't carbon?) In which case the internals must be considerably lightened.

Then again 150g less would put it at just over 1200g cut, which seems fairly implausible to me for a 100mm fork which is stiffer than a SID.

[STATO]

I assume Morpeth that they were 80mm only?

if so then some weight could be lost from shortened stantions and damper shafts, unlike the 80mm RC39's which are just 100mm with reduction spacer.

Just a thought.
Rich

[Morpeth]

chrism - my hand scales may be a little off but i think it was a fair estimate, look at the reduction in weight from the RC31 to the RC31 Ti (60 - 70g). We can only wait and see, perhaps i should not speculate next time.

STATO - Couldn't say, the fork i saw was set to 80mm (deduced from visible stantion). I can't help but notice you are from Newcastle, any chance you could give up your weekend and build my bike up for me and bleed the brakes??
Skewers, tubes and pedals arrived this morning, still no luck with the X.O Jockeys!!

[STATO]

funny man M. you going to pay me for fixing your bike all the time? see you later.

[chrism]

look at the reduction in weight from the RC31 to the RC31 Ti (60 - 70g).

Not quite the same thing with those, where a ti bonding tube is used at the crown. Since there is no equivalent bonding tube on the RC39, it's not possible to save weight this way. Apart from the internals, the only steel bit on an RC39 is the bolts at the bottom AFAIK. Maybe they have changed lots of bits of the internals to Ti.

No reason not to speculate - it's all interesting. Though out of curiousity, you're quoting a weight saving of 150g, but not what you weighed it as - wasn't aware you had. So what was the weight?

One other thought - if you're basing your conclusion on the weight you got, are you sure it had oil in?

[Morpeth]

[Sobs .51 tears] just so things are crystal;

I held (in my two hands) a new prototype Pace RC39 Type C fork. I neglected to weigh the fork, to measure its internal dimensions or indeed to check if it was correctly topped up with oil. I have (or so it would appear) underestimated the impact (to you at least chrism) of speculating as to the possible weight saving. For this reason I retract my previous suggestions as to the weight saving and happily now state;

“The fork was noticeably lighter than the standard RC39 (80mm, uncut steerer, with appropriate level of oil) which I held in my other hand, if I may speculate about the weight saving; perhaps as much as a handful of titanium RC39 fittings.”

[bighead]

Has anyone weighed the weight of the spring inside a RC39? I remember the one inside my Skareb weighed about 33gr. Im thinking weight could be saved if it was changed to a titanium one, not to mention the possibility of a better ride.

[STATO]

hey hey, just thought id dig this old thread up instead of starting a new one....

piccies of the new RC39 on an orange bike.



http://www.ace1mail.com/gallery/2007-orange-bikes-gallery/files/page10-1015-full.html

[bighead]

What a find. They look like 100mm versions. The exterior does not look any more special than the normal RC39s