EMGO fork tubes any good?

Good day, Here is a pair at a good price, anyone have experience with EMGO fork tubes?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/310638539651?it ... 23&vxp=mtr

I have used a few sets, no problems with the ones I have.

Remember they are made to a price. Chrome is thin, and the lower clip groove might need a little attention with a file.

A little cheaper here, http://www.ebay.com/itm/Fork-Tubes-Nort ... c3&vxp=mtr

The tubes need all the chrome they can get. See if you have the quarter-sized wear circle above the boots like most Nortons. Try Forking by Frank.

About 1/3 the cost of Andover replacements.
My project came with "Forks by Frank" and they are too fat. New upper bushings needed reaming out and a new oil seal is still creating way too much sticktion. If they don't smooth out with some riding and heat, I'll be looking at a pair of these too.

batrider said:

The tubes need all the chrome they can get. See if you have the quarter-sized wear circle above the boots like most Nortons. Try Forking by Frank.

Click to expand...

Yup, that's my reason for looking for new forks.

[ATTACH=full]54695[/ATTACH]

I installed a set of EMGO fork tubes. They fit just fine. Can't say how long they will last.

baldy said:

I installed a set of EMGO fork tubes. They fit just fine. Can't say how long they will last.

Click to expand...

Hi, Was that a recent installation? I ask because others have stated that the lower bush and clip do not fit..they need to mill the fork tube. The order desk at British Cycle Supply told me that they have not had any complaints about the lower bushings not fitting.
Thanks, Dennis

I've not had issues with installing the lower clips.

I have zero returns on 10+ sets so far, including 2 of mine.

I have had both the ANnorton ones and the EMGO ones in the lathe right after one another for modification of the tapered ends. The steel used on the english made ones is three times as tough as the Emgo butter steel. That said they are three times as cheap and not all that tough to change out. The sizes on the Emgo's have always worked for me about 12 pair so far.

I bought a set a few years ago that needed lathe work before the steel bush and circlip would fit. Another of our club members bought a set at about the same time, same thing. Maybe they're better now...

I put a pair of Emgo's on five years and 8,000 miles ago.
Fit with no problem and no sign of chrome wear.
So for me I'm satisfied.

I have no problems with the EMGO tubes , but I did notice some comments regarding bottom bush fitment

when I replaced my tubes for EMGO I did have some NOS bottom bushes on the shelf and complete set of AN replacements ( the bottoms were also tight )

The NOS bottom bushes I had were a perfect push on fit I can only assume the new production bottom bushes may have sizing issues not the tubes

No idea where EMGO are produced, just check the lower holes dont have bur's on the onside, some cheap ebay items have poor finnish. but at £38 a pair ..what do we expect?

My EMGOs bent easily and were straightened just as easily. :mrgreen:

swooshdave said:

My EMGOs bent easily and were straightened just as easily. :mrgreen:

Click to expand...

There's a factor to consider. If you have stock brakes up there then they should be ok. If you have upgraded your front brakes to function on a more modern level, then maybe you need to consider a less riskier prospect.

It real does not pay to go cheap on vital components, and I feel these are vital components. It may be just fine, as so many mention, but if you can afford it, go with a name brand tube.

Feeling better about going 80 or 90 or whatever has got to be worth the extra expense.

Pete, suggesting your big Norvil twin disc's when applied hard bend the cheap stanchions ,well thats a big issue! But i know £38 tubes [ebay] will not be Carbon/chrome steel mild Indian Steel :?:

john robert bould said:

Pete, suggesting your big Norvil twin disc's when applied hard bend the cheap stanchions ,well thats a big issue! But i know £38 tubes [ebay] will not be Carbon/chrome steel mild Indian Steel :?:

Click to expand...

I'm not really saying that either, John. I'm just thinking soft bendables tube are not as desirable up there as ones that are not soft bendable tubes.

That being said, I think we're on the same wave length.

Although you may have been simply stating the example for the sake of argument, for the record, I have the RGM single disk upgrade which stops as well as I need it to.

Norbsa 48503 wrote;

The steel used on the english made ones is three times as tough as the Emgo butter steel.

Click to expand...

There was a thread on the fork stantion subject a while back where ZFD said the material being used by AN now is apparently based on original spec. This isn't what the original poster asked about, but the more knowledge allows an informed opinion re options.

fork-stanchions-t11547.html?hilit=fork

I have just bought 1 x stantion from A.N. (via Mick Hemmings) but haven't got around to fitting it yet, but I am hoping for no fitment problems. We shall see :wink:

john robert bould said:

Pete, suggesting your big Norvil twin disc's when applied hard bend the cheap stanchions ,well thats a big issue! But i know £38 tubes [ebay] will not be Carbon/chrome steel mild Indian Steel :?:

Click to expand...

Gidday John. are the original spec fork tubes carbon/chrome. I would be surprised because even Andover tubes are built to a price.

I would suggest that if going down the alloy steel route, moly or manganese would be more appropriate,(fatigue resistance).. Regarding stifness, this is related to Youngs modulus and determiness ductility. there is no significant advantage regarding stiffness between 1030 and 4130 steel for a given wall thickness. they are all around 30,000 PSI. I reckon all tubes deflect the same amount at the INITIAL load (youngs modulus or ductility). The alloy steel tubes, having the yield closer to the ultimate tensile strength, will bend further before taking a permanent set. therefore 4130 will recover from a severe bend better than 1030. At a given initial load both materials will deflect the same.
other design characteristics, eg: tube length and wall thickness of course have a influence regarding adequate sizing of the tubes. There is no difference between the SAME GRADES and wall thickness between tubing drawn over a mandrell and resistance welded. Mandrell drawn tube is still welded, but the seam has been eliminiate by drawing.

I will speculate here expecting to be corrected by experts. Even for racing there is no need for exotic grades of tubes made from unobtanium. Ductility is more important than tensile strength. for racing specials, 4130 or 4140, for street use 1030 or even 1040 would be more than adequate from a strength and design point of view.

So I reckon there are 2 choices when speculating on genuine factory tubes. The material used is a plain carbon steel of arounnd .3/.4% carbon. has to be DOM. the other alternative is a moly or manganese alloy steel, but this would add a significant cost to manufacturing. Only Joe knows the proper answer to this and understandably keeps his commercial knowledge in house. I would bet on the plain carbon steel though.

Emgo tubes may have less stifness because under moderate load they do not recover . this is because of the yield being further away from the ultimate , suggesting the steel is very low carbon as per a rimmed type of steel. As to the OP's question., is EmGO any good, "Good" needs to be defined.
They may be adequate regarding material selection, but not satisfactory regarding chrome thickness, dimensional quality etc.
Good is a very subjective term. Corrections and contrary views welcomed. Bradleywelcomed

I wouldn't buy anything EMGO