Hybrid Bike Norco Indie 4 2014 - Cheap Suspension Fork Upgrade

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Plodder84

New Member
Hello All,

I bought this bike a few years ago and it has served me well so far. https://www.norco.com/bike-archives/2014/indie-4/

However I do quite a bit of light off-road riding on gravels trails etc, and the ride feels really hard. I have 40mm wide tires on rather than the 38mm that it came with which helps, but I'm also thinking of swapping out the rigid fork the bike came with for one with suspension. Does anyone have a suggestions for a relatively cheap fork that would provide the added comfort that I'm after?

Thanks in advance.
 

Spiderweb

Not So Special One
Location
North Yorkshire
Hello All,

I bought this bike a few years ago and it has served me well so far. https://www.norco.com/bike-archives/2014/indie-4/

However I do quite a bit of light off-road riding on gravels trails etc, and the ride feels really hard. I have 40mm wide tires on rather than the 38mm that it came with which helps, but I'm also thinking of swapping out the rigid fork the bike came with for one with suspension. Does anyone have a suggestions for a relatively cheap fork that would provide the added comfort that I'm after?

Thanks in advance.
What PSI are you putting in the tyres?
 
As I understand it, the frame won't be the right shape to accept a suspension fork. It would certainly seem that to replace suspension with rigid, a special extended fork is needed, called, IIRC, suspension-corrected. Assuming you could fit the fork, the geometry would be somewhat 'tipped backward', I would imagine.
 

BeardyAndyM

Well-Known Member
Location
Southampton
Suntour used to do a hybrid spec fork, basically a short travel 29er fork but they are heavy as hell. see what the fattest tyre you can squeeze in there is and lower the pressures for a cheap fix!
 
Location
Loch side.
A fork that will make a noticeable difference to your ride will cost more than what the bike originally cost. Cheap suspension forks make no difference to your ride. Nevertheless, they are specc'd on thousands of inappropriate bikes just because of customer perceptions.
 
OP
OP
P

Plodder84

New Member
Thanks for the replies guys. I've decided to try and stick some 47mm wide 29er tyres on, should have enough clearance on the frame I reckon. I currently run the tyres I've got at around 60PSI, and the recommended range is 50-85. I'm reluctant to run them much lower in case I pinch flat, but with some wider tyres I'll probably drop the pressure down to ~40PSI which should make it more comfortable. I've also swapped the grips out for some more ergonomic and squishier ones in order to dampen the vibration through my hands.
 

SkipdiverJohn

Deplorable Brexiteer
Location
London
Run the front tyre at only about 75% of the pressure of the back one. If you google "Frank Berto tyre pressure chart" it will give a ball park suitable pressure for various tyre widths depending on how much rider and bike weight is loaded on to each tyre. Avoid suspension forks like the plague. They add weight to the bike and cheap ones are the work of the devil. Decently engineered ones would cost more than your bike.
 

Chris Bush

New Member
Plodder84, I have the same bike. It's my second Indie after my 2010 Indie 2.
I don't know why, but they are fairly harsh-riding pigs.
I agree with the other posters. Stay clear of cheap suspension forks and the frame really isn't designed for one, but I've seen it done.
If you're bent on a more compliant fork you could try steel or carbon, I guess.
Going to a fatter tire is not a bad option because you can run lower pressures and, yes, you should run lower pressure in the front. You can likely get a 47 on the front without a fender. The aluminum fork on the Indie 1 2014 gives a bit less clearance than the steel fork on the older Indie 2.
One thing about these bikes is they're extremely versatile. I use mine for just about everything, including touring. The ride really softens up with some weight. These frames are meant to carry a load.
I'm only about 5'8" with a 30" inseam, so I swapped out the crankset for a 22, 32, 44 with 170mm crank arms and the stock cassette for a 12-36. You don't have as high a top speed, but for me it's a much more usable gear range, especially if you go to fatter tires and you're starting to get into sizes approaching MTN bike territory.
Lastly, when I your, I just swap out the 700c wheels for a set of 26" with fat tires. Lowers the center of gravity and lowers the bike so I can swing my leg over the load on the back and overall makes the bike way more stable and easier to handle loaded.
Hope this all helps a little. These really are great bikes once you learn how to live with them.
Oh, I put Ergon groups on too and a Brooks saddle.
Cheers
 

SkipdiverJohn

Deplorable Brexiteer
Location
London
I don't know why, but they are fairly harsh-riding pigs.
I agree with the other posters. Stay clear of cheap suspension forks and the frame really isn't designed for one, but I've seen it done.
If you're bent on a more compliant fork you could try steel or carbon, I guess.

Fundamentally I think this comes down to the frame being aluminium, and anything with alloy forks as well is going to be even worse. I have only ever ridden a couple of aluminium frames, and I have found them to have a really harsh and unforgiving ride on regular tyres inflated to normal pressures. I refuse to own anything other than all-steel frames myself, and keep the weight down by choosing quality butted tubes, like Reynolds 531.
Alloy frames have to be designed not to flex, because aluminium has such a poor fatigue life compared to other frame materials. It's quite possible to design an alloy frame that is very comfortable and light, but the inherent flex would make it's fatigue life unacceptably short and no manufacturer would risk the litigation from accidents caused by sudden fatigue failures on the road.
Mass production of welded alloy frames in countries with low energy and labour costs, has made lightweight bikes available at a lower price point than was achievable in the steel era, but the trade-off is harshness.
 
Location
Loch side.
Fundamentally I think this comes down to the frame being aluminium, and anything with alloy forks as well is going to be even worse. I have only ever ridden a couple of aluminium frames, and I have found them to have a really harsh and unforgiving ride on regular tyres inflated to normal pressures. I refuse to own anything other than all-steel frames myself, and keep the weight down by choosing quality butted tubes, like Reynolds 531.
Alloy frames have to be designed not to flex, because aluminium has such a poor fatigue life compared to other frame materials. It's quite possible to design an alloy frame that is very comfortable and light, but the inherent flex would make it's fatigue life unacceptably short and no manufacturer would risk the litigation from accidents caused by sudden fatigue failures on the road.
Mass production of welded alloy frames in countries with low energy and labour costs, has made lightweight bikes available at a lower price point than was achievable in the steel era, but the trade-off is harshness.
Where do you propose this flex happens in steel frames and what sort of magnitude are you talking about?
 

SkipdiverJohn

Deplorable Brexiteer
Location
London
Where do you propose this flex happens in steel frames and what sort of magnitude are you talking about?

I would say most of the flex in a steel frame occurs in the forks/steerer, and around the BB area. No idea of the magnitude, but frame flex can definitely be felt by the rider. I have noticed that steel frames with steel unicrown forks seem to give a less comfortable ride than a same-sized steel frame with traditional forks.
 
Location
Loch side.
I would say most of the flex in a steel frame occurs in the forks/steerer, and around the BB area. No idea of the magnitude, but frame flex can definitely be felt by the rider. I have noticed that steel frames with steel unicrown forks seem to give a less comfortable ride than a same-sized steel frame with traditional forks.
I won't let you off the hook yet. I want to explore your statement.

Where and how in the fork (singular) and steerer do you see/feel flex? Where in the BB area do you feel/see flex.

Give magnitude a guess and add plane into it all as well. In other words, in what plane?

C'mon, elaborate a bit. Do you feel this whilst seated? Standing? Sprinting? How do you feel it?
How many millimeters at each point?
 

SkipdiverJohn

Deplorable Brexiteer
Location
London
Fork movement - primarily fore-aft. BB movement - along the axis of the BB axle. Magnitude? I'm guessing pretty small, maybe 0.1 inch or less? I'm sure that when riding over rough tarmac at speed and looking down at the fork (in the singular, just to please you) you can sometimes see what looks like high frequency vibration, although the ridder's body will also be vibrating.
 
Location
Loch side.
Fork movement - primarily fore-aft. BB movement - along the axis of the BB axle. Magnitude? I'm guessing pretty small, maybe 0.1 inch or less?

OK, you weren't very specific and I hope I don't put words on your mouth. You're saying the fork moves fore-aft by 2.5mm? Is that forwards by 1.5mm and backwards by 1.5mm? Yes/No?
Anyway, the fork is making a pendulum movement fore-aft, that can indeed be seen. However, a fore-aft arc of 2.5mm translates to a vertical movement (that's what we are after, the suspension effect if you want) of less than a 10th of a millimeter. You can feel that over and above the 5mm flex in your tyres and 5mm flex in your saddle? Remember, a sheet of paper (80gsm) is a tenth of a millimeter. Go ride over one and see if you can feel it. Don't forget your earplugs, cause the tyres may give secret away.

BB movement - along the axis of the BB axle.

Granted, that flex is indeed visible, but how does it contribute to compliance (suspension effect)?
Short answer, it doesn't


I'm sure that when riding over rough tarmac at speed and looking down at the fork (in the singular, just to please you)

Thanks for pleasing me. I have a thing about multiple forks on bicycles.

The long and the short of it all is that you cannot feel the difference between a steel and aluminium bike. This was widely perpetuated in the bike magazines around the time that Cannondale popularised the first aluminium bikes. The word "harsh" was used by an American magazine editor with zero engineering cred, yet he made the word go viral.

It is nonsense. The rear triangle is for all intends and purposes, completely rigid. That's where all the butt jarring comes from, the rear. It has no compliance.

The differences are acoustic and it is easy to assign properties to sounds. I have to resist the urge to do so myself.

I've taken this thing to the n-th degree over many decades, to the point of copying a Cannondale CAAD 4's frame in steel. I used exactly the same tube lenghs, angles, weld techniques etc and made a steel Cannondale. I still have it today. I cannot tell you what bike I'm riding other than to look down and see. Obviously I saw before I get on, but still. There is NO DIFFERENCE. The Cannondale is noisier because the gear cables ping against the fat downtube.
 
Top Bottom