Cal or anyone else who has the experience; please do tell me how my geometry is "jacked" as I'm sick of being told this. This week I will be measuring neck angle, fork length to configure what the trail currently is vs stock so we can put this silly dilemma to bed.
There are plenty of folks far more knowledgeable than I am with respect to geometry. But,
my input/opinion is this: I have ridden lots of bikes over the past 35 years on the street, literally traveling nearly 500,000 miles on 2 wheels. I dare say, that among them, few ever shared the exact rake/trail numbers amongst them. Many were probably close, and there are solid, industry targets for differing types of bikes that are worth consulting.
Depending entirely upon the type of bike, its purpose, your riding style and habits, I don't know if you can create a bike from numbers that's "perfect". Many pro riders tweak endlessly for
their style and preference, and of course track conditions. But thats on the track. Can you really ride on the street the difference in 0.5 degrees of trail? I am dubious.
Looking at your bike, the only thing that catches my eye is the aspect ratio on the rear tire (we've discussed since your choice for it) looks too tall. A taller diameter rear wheel than the front is not a good idea. Will it handle? Probably. Jeez, your entire bike is non-stock and upgraded on the handling/steering/braking fronts, so who's to say? Ride the darn thing, and tweak it as you go. Any "opinion" as to it being jacked up is conjecture
in my opinion. Without measured numbers, how can anyone say for certain what the geometry will do? Its all cobbled together from other bikes.
Besides, what do "they" know; you have a steering damper installed
