Right?! What does shoes size correlate to, if not foot length??!! Bonkers.
Even if he was like “I need to know the measurement from the back of the foot to the cleat placement” I could understand that as like the lever length, but just to be like ‘no shoes sizes, foot length only’ the shoe size is literally the length of the foot that fits in the shoe.
I’m gonna be real, I don’t care that he’s a butthole, in fact I’ve come to love his whole schtick, even if it’s not a schtick.
“here’s what’s available it’s one option and it doesn’t make sense and im right, if you’d like to still give me money you can and we both know you will.”
Sort of my hero. Publicly sniffing your own farts and making a living out of it.
I remember weighing my BMC monstercross fork when I built it up and got in the 1200g range. Can’t recall if that was cut or uncut, though. and that’s for rim brakes!
Steel forks have a high minimum weight - the steerer and crown are beefy because of all the forces that they handle. Now that we have discs the entire fork leg needs to be reinforced to handle the torque, rather than it all being taken by the crown in a rim brake.
There’s a reason you see so many carbon forks on otherwise alloy builds.
you do not benefit from it at all in actual riding
that high minimum weight is to be cheaply manufactured and pass lab testing that is even less representative of use than Grant’s swordfighting antics
another way to state the problem is that a traditional single-butted tapered fork blade is extra-unreinforced through the middle of the taper where the top of a caliper mount lands — it’s gone from the thick end at the crown to the thin section already, but the taper reduction in diameter hasn’t multiplied the wall thickness enough yet