They're zero rake forks, compensated for by the head tube angle
In general rake is to account for head tube angle. if you have ANY head tube angle you need rake, otherwise the bike will not want to go straight. the more slack the HA, the more rake you need. Go to wikipedia and read about rake, HA, and trail on forks.
Some (stupid) trick bikes sacrifice handling and tolerate (key word) zero rake so the fork can be spun and face any direction without change in (the crappy) handling or hitting the downtube. But it's sacrifice made by some fools and it's really an unsatisfying sacrifice unless you're always riding trick.
i agree the aforementioned bike does appear to have no rake, but i don't know why considering it's not a trick bike. it may actually be that it has 1 or 2 cm of rake and we can't see it. Rake can be in the form of forward bent fork legs or simply straight legs which are angled forward.
In general rake is to account for head tube angle. if you have ANY head tube angle you need rake, otherwise the bike will not want to go straight. the more slack the HA, the more rake you need. Go to wikipedia and read about rake, HA, and trail on forks.
Some (stupid) trick bikes sacrifice handling and tolerate (key word) zero rake so the fork can be spun and face any direction without change in (the crappy) handling or hitting the downtube. But it's sacrifice made by some fools and it's really an unsatisfying sacrifice unless you're always riding trick.
i agree the aforementioned bike does appear to have no rake, but i don't know why considering it's not a trick bike. it may actually be that it has 1 or 2 cm of rake and we can't see it. Rake can be in the form of forward bent fork legs or simply straight legs which are angled forward.