Classic & Vintage - Anyone ever seen a big Klein?

Okay enough with all the threads for steel boat anchor vintage bikes. Maybe you've got a Cinelli, maybe it is a repainted Windsor, but at the end of the day it is still just a steel lightweight in name only. Okay, sure, there were better framesets and clearly better framebuilders but in reality what you still have is just plain' ol' steel. I'm saying that the master framebuilder badging is for the most part "paint only" on lugged steel bikes. Very rarely were these ever really built by the grandmaster with a torch in one hand and a cappuccino in the other the way so many would envision. I've always wanted to sand blast a bunch of epic vintage steel bikes and have discerning cyclists due "taste tests" after riding 'em. I'm betting that a Raleigh built with proprietary 555 or 555SL tubesets is not discernible to one cyclist in a hundred compared to a Mercyx, Cinelli, Masi, Olmo, Colnago, etc. I really think it would be interesting to have CycleArt paint up a bunch of stovepipe bikes as epic rides and paint down some epic bikes as middling bikes. I'm calling it now half this stuff is "cult" propaganda and wanting to believe.

That's my rant. Feel free to disagree. However, enough about steel. There were actually vintage aluminum bikes being made in the 19th century, let alone the oversized stuff that was USA built at the end of the 20th. I think the epic frames of the era of USA built Cannondale and Klein bicycles are forgotten in the all "steel is real" discussion.

So I've got a question. Now that USA built Cannondale grail bikes like the old 27" ST series touring ones are becoming harder and harder to find...how many people have actually seen the big Klein road bikes that are supposed to have been built?

I keep noticing people selling off their vintage Klein and Cannondales to make room for boat anchor junk like Surly Long Haul Truckers and I'm just aghast. That's like trading in your Porsche 911 for a freakin' Kia, for crying out loud. I mean at least get a "good" steel bike. I digress again...

Back on topic. According to the Klein geometry sheets there were supposed to be some monster Klein road bikes built. I bought one of these once but it turned out to be a run of the mill 63cm Quantum II (I think, it was definitely just a 63cm).

So has anyone ever actually laid eyes on a Klein that was 66cm or larger? The old Klein geometry charts showed that one of the Stage models and at least one other went big (like 68cm and even 72cm big). So I'm curious if anyone has an anecdote of ever laying eyes on a big Klein, or an actual image.

I've never seen one, let alone one for sale. Heck I've seen 70+ cm titanium Zinn bikes sold on eBay but never a single big Klein. So I pose the quesion, did they actually exist or were they something that Gary intended to make, but never did?

Thanks for reading my minority perspective, clearly I get tired of reading the dogma and drivel that Jan spews online and through Bicycle Quarterly, and also what comes out of the cult that Grant built.

Nope, I haven't seen one, but I haven't looked either.

People ride Klein bikes? I like them after they've been converted...to soda cans.

I actually see a bit of interest in '80s and early '90s cannondales. Dunno why, cuz those things kinda hurt to ride, IIRC.

Kleins are pretty rad too and there are folks who dig pre-Trek Kleins especially. The kooky proprietary fork/stem/headset action on the MTBs from back then is a bit of a bummer, though. Gotta really want a klein to deal with that nonsense. Seems like the lowend models always had normal stuff up front, though.

Never seen a 66cm Klein, myself. Probably had to special order those. Not the kinda thing you'd see on the floor of the LBS.

As for your challenge, I could easily tell my Pinarello from my old Trek 400T blindfolded. I might be hard pressed to discern Pinarello from my old Univega Super Sport.

Could you tell the difference between an old Klein roadie and a Walmart Denali with the same wheels/gruppo installed?

Anything larger than 63cm was rare, even in steel, so something that size in a Klein would be extremely rare.

mtnbke, Despite their popularity in my area during the late '80 and early '90s I've never seen a Klein larger than ~58-60 cm. I suspect there's some out there, somewhere. Large frames from even the major manufacturers are scarce and I would expect frames from the smaller manufacturers like the pre Trek Klein are even more so scarce. It is the larger frames that would benefit most from big tube aluminum technology so it is an interesting question.

Brad

No, but I've seen a couple of small Giants at my lbs!

I'm a Cannondale rider, 97 CAD 3 and love it. I disagree with your statement on telling a high end steel ride from a bike boom bike or a cheapy new bike now. I have been lucky enough to own a high end 531 Double Butted and lugged frame and at the same time a blow to mid range bike (at the time) and the International was better riding and handling by far. Just my personal take.

Klein's are very nice riding bikes! My main ride is a 2003 Klein. I also have a 87 Cannondale criterium that i bought new, It' a horrible bike. It vibrates like a tuning fork. It is really bad!! Cannondale made steady advances in design, I am sure the 90's & up dales are also good.
Panasonic used to make huge steel bikes for the US market.

we had a customer who had a 61 or 62. personally I think he was a bit of an idiot but that is beside the point here. the bike was very funky as it was a road bike but had those reversed track style dropouts that Klien was using in the early '90s

I'd have to say the same about the blindfold test. My 531db Raleigh Comp is one plushest rides and tracks like it's on rails. I can be doing something with my hands off the bars and then take a foot off just because I can and it steers whereever I want just thinking about it. I'm excited to get my Ciocc back from the painter and build that up before it snows and see what that's like. I'm not much of a fan of aluminum bikes as my Giant OCR1 was horrible on a century I did and they had a carbon fork. I just felt beat up afterward. Not to mention it was still a noodle and I could get the rearend to move enough to touch the pads and I don't run my calipers super tight either. My Colnago is aluminum with carbon seat stays and carbon fork and that isn't that bad to ride. I had a ST400 earlier this year and that thing was stiff. Felt like the thing was cnc'd from a solid block of aluminum.

It's been said before, but I'm going to say it again - there are about 1 billion things that go into how a bike rides. You can have mushy aluminum, lively carbon, dead feeling steel, etc etc. I have two 531c bikes, both from the same maker, put the same group on them, and I'd know which is which within a quarter mile. Throw a Schwinn Traveler (1020 tubing) or the Centurion Sport DLX in (Tange Infinity) and I'd still be able to say which was the 531 frame. Now if you took my 531c Gazelle, and my Columbus SL Serotta, that may take me a while to tell apart until I started throwing them both into the corners at speed.

Back on topic - didn't care a bit for the cheap aluminum frame I owned. Certainly wasn't any Klein or even a later Cdale though. I keep meaning to get over BF member Jsharr's place and check out the mid-80's Cdale touring bike he picked up recently. Can't say I've seen more than a handful of Kleins in person, always thought they were pretty interesting, but not really my cup of tea.

P.S. - if I threw enough money at it, I could probably build my upcoming custom steel up into a sub 16.5 lb bike without being too fragile. I'm aiming for about the 18lbs mark, which will be plenty light for my needs.

A true Giant of lugged aluminum goodness in the midst of a world of welded aluminum triangles
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6065/6130444801_9c647379b7_z.jpg
Not my Caminargent,but if anyone has one for sale.......

we had a customer who had a 61 or 62. personally I think he was a bit of an idiot but that is beside the point here. the bike was very funky as it was a road bike but had those reversed track style dropouts that Klien was using in the early '90s
I was helping a friend work on one of these. I went to take off the rear wheel and was baffled. I guess some of the pro teams running kleins had problems with neutral support not being able to do quick wheel changes.
I ride a 62, so I'm always on the lookout for big bikes. I have never seen one but there is one on ebay. Late 80s with shimano 600. Not a bad price, looks like it would clean up really nice with some work. Probably a 62 center to center.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/real-nice-65-5-cm-RED-KLEIN-QUANTUM-road-bike-you-tall-watchers-make-me-offer-/300623445708?pt=Road_Bikes&hash=item45fe8dbecc

Looks like he had it listed earlier for 375 with no bids. I bet he would take 300-350 for it.

/Must not make offer: too many bikes./

Maybe I could get it shipped to a friends house so my wife won't notice another bike. Damn you ebay!

Cannondale made some nice 66cm R400s & R600s up until a few years ago. I have never seen a Klein that large and I look.

The local coop had a fairly large Klein but not a 66, more like a 64 or so.

I look too and I once saw a vintage 65-66cm De Rosa at a local cross race. It wasn't being raced and wasn't a cross bike, it was just in the bicycle 'parking lot' of the event. Hopefully I'll find something like that before I'm too old to ride it.

Heckuva OP.

Okay enough with all the threads for steel boat anchor vintage bikes. Maybe you've got a Cinelli, maybe it is a repainted Windsor, but at the end of the day it is still just a steel lightweight in name only. Okay, sure, there were better framesets and clearly better framebuilders but in reality what you still have is just plain' ol' steel. I'm saying that the master framebuilder badging is for the most part "paint only" on lugged steel bikes. Very rarely were these ever really built by the grandmaster with a torch in one hand and a cappuccino in the other the way so many would envision. I've always wanted to sand blast a bunch of epic vintage steel bikes and have discerning cyclists due "taste tests" after riding 'em. I'm betting that a Raleigh built with proprietary 555 or 555SL tubesets is not discernible to one cyclist in a hundred compared to a Mercyx, Cinelli, Masi, Olmo, Colnago, etc. I really think it would be interesting to have CycleArt paint up a bunch of stovepipe bikes as epic rides and paint down some epic bikes as middling bikes. I'm calling it now half this stuff is "cult" propaganda and wanting to believe.

That's my rant. Feel free to disagree. However, enough about steel. There were actually vintage aluminum bikes being made in the 19th century, let alone the oversized stuff that was USA built at the end of the 20th. I think the epic frames of the era of USA built Cannondale and Klein bicycles are forgotten in the all "steel is real" discussion.

So I've got a question. Now that USA built Cannondale grail bikes like the old 27" ST series touring ones are becoming harder and harder to find...how many people have actually seen the big Klein road bikes that are supposed to have been built?

I keep noticing people selling off their vintage Klein and Cannondales to make room for boat anchor junk like Surly Long Haul Truckers and I'm just aghast. That's like trading in your Porsche 911 for a freakin' Kia, for crying out loud. I mean at least get a "good" steel bike. I digress again...

Back on topic. According to the Klein geometry sheets there were supposed to be some monster Klein road bikes built. I bought one of these once but it turned out to be a run of the mill 63cm Quantum II (I think, it was definitely just a 63cm).

So has anyone ever actually laid eyes on a Klein that was 66cm or larger? The old Klein geometry charts showed that one of the Stage models and at least one other went big (like 68cm and even 72cm big). So I'm curious if anyone has an anecdote of ever laying eyes on a big Klein, or an actual image.

I've never seen one, let alone one for sale. Heck I've seen 70+ cm titanium Zinn bikes sold on eBay but never a single big Klein. So I pose the quesion, did they actually exist or were they something that Gary intended to make, but never did?

Thanks for reading my minority perspective, clearly I get tired of reading the dogma and drivel that Jan spews online and through Bicycle Quarterly, and also what comes out of the cult that Grant built.

You might want to consider less caffeine.

And "Gary" didn't build much of anything. After his mommy set him up in business, and with his stolen equipment from MIT, others did the actual work. Have a great day!

No, but I've seen a couple of small Giants at my lbs!

This is funny of course, because "Klein" is German for "small". So "Big Klein" is like the reverse of "Small Giant"

Biggest I've seen is 63, and I keep track. Still, that's pretty big.
And anybody who compares these bikes to *Mart aluminum is just a troll.

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-SFSr_DZmMek/TaHbpveAcSI/AAAAAAAAK28/LfIPIgehL-M/s800/Quantum%2525201996%252520002A.jpg

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-XYf0Tcs8Vmk/TsLy_fNCtqI/AAAAAAAAL4g/gjsqeYaW4vY/s800/Quantum%252520Pro%2525201998%252520003A.jpg

No, but I've seen a couple of small Giants at my lbs!

:)

And anybody who compares these bikes to *Mart aluminum is just a troll.


Just speaking the OP's language, that's all. If he's gonna put me on gas pipe with Colnago painted on it, all else is fair game, ain't it?

I regularly see a guy riding a very large orange Klein in my general area, never had the chance to speak to him.

You might want to consider less caffeine.



+1:lol:

As the Original Poster I don't take stuff personally. What I get frustrated with is the lack of intelligent dialog in cycling. The lemming like shift (no pun intended) from 7 speed to 8, then 9, 10, and now 11. I hope it is not lost on anyone the underlying Spinal Tap amp corollary. I think the intellectually bankrupt stuff that comes out of Jan and his Bicycle Quarterly nonsense makes me fear for the state of the republic, when I realize that the subscribers vote. I understand brand identity, I understand the need for validation, and I understand marketing. However, at the end of the day riding a bike has to at least have a component about what riding the bike feels like along with what the telos of the bike being ridden "is." I think the "steel is real" cult is inane. You'll never find an aspiring roadie trying to qualify for a berth on a competitive UCI squad riding his steel bike. You'll never see a competitive gran tour rider on a steel frame ever again, and there is a reason. Aluminum and then titanium/carbon changed the paradigm. It's almost like the difference between a slant parallelogram derailleur and something beautiful like a Mavic 851 SSC. The erector set derailleur is just hauntingly perfect in every way. It makes any bike its hung on (Joe Bell or CycleArt paint be damned) look undeserving. However, that doesn't mean that it shifts as well as anything even low-end in the Suntour line (I'm thinking even half-plastic Blaze).

I've owned a Giant OCR1, unfortunately as well. Back in the day ~03-04 Giant was marketing the XL compact geometry frame as fitting like a 68cm (or was it 66cm) frame. Subsequent marketing material introduced a revision to just 63cm (or maybe 64cm). It didn't take me long to realize I owned a "63cm" bike that was just as too small for me as my old 63cm '89 Cannondale series 3.0, which was an epic bike for someone that would actually fit it (I have long since sold that frame off). With Cannondale you can't evaluate the frame/bike until you've actually, at least once in your life, actually ridden one built up with like components to what you actually love. That means that if you have a vintage Cinelli/Colnago/Serotta/Olmo/Guerciotti/Mercyx etc. you have to compare apples to apples. What Cannondale did not ever do (save for the ST series of touring bikes) was match forks to their bike that appropriately matched the bike. Find yourself a series 3.0 Cannondale that isn't a crit version (but don't be confused as non-crit bikes still have cantilevered stays) and take your best build for a 1" threaded fork and move it off of your handbuilt Italian and onto the C'dale fork and all. Then go ride it. It will the fastest bike you've ever been on. It will outclimb anything you've ever ridden and ever will ride again. The series 3.0 was the optimization of the aluminum Cannondale that resulted from Cannondale hiring a Stanford engineer to get them into carbon. Fortunately, he explained that he could transform their frame into something that would be lighter, faster, stronger, and stiffer than anything else. Every CAAD iteration that followed the series 3.0 made the Cannondale less than what it was. The series 3.0 is an insane bike. However, you can't evaluate it until you've ridden one with the components, wheelset, and fork that make the steel bike you love what it is. Put 'em on the series 3.0 and be prepared for insane. It's that good. Everything since climbs slower, sprints slower, and is weaker, albeit but also weighs less.

However, the purpose of this thread isn't to convert those that are born-again steel lovers. I have strong opinions on aluminum bikes. I'm no Marco Pantani, however. Although I do still squeeze into my old Mercatone Uno bibs when I'm not afraid of getting arrested. I'm nearly two meters and even when I was a competitive basketball player I weighed over 200lbs. I've since ballooned (read got fat). When I was dragging my non-cyclist body on the NORBA circuit in the early 90s I saved up to buy a Bontrager (Pre-Trek) Race Lite. I remember going to buy it. After everything I'd heard from those that absolutely loved the bike (and the Privateer) it just failed to be that, on a test ride. Kind of like riding a Santana after having ridden a Co-Motion or C'dale tandem. Admittedly, my outlier experience (even twenty years ago) is probably not yours. I'm not a typical cyclist in any aspect. My experience on a bike is completely outside the reference frame for almost all other cyclists.

I use 200mm and 205mm custom cranks (nearly 100cm cycling inseam) that really tax the BB. If a bike has any propensity for flex natively in a 56cm frame, you can imagine what it feels like when the triangles open up on a 63cm frame. I ride between a 68cm and a 70cm bike. I absolutely love vintage Cannondale ST touring bikes (pre-Cannondale optimization of the series 3.0). While they may not be what the 3.0 bikes are, they were made in 27" cm sizes (68.5cm c-t & 73cm to the top of the C'dale trademark extended seat collar) so they actually fit me.

So take my opinion with a grain of salt, and in context. However, meet me halfway and don't be a mindless lemming that believes that 9/10/11 is "better" what with increased dish, thinner weaker and faster wearing cogs/rings/chains. Don't believe that disc brakes (with smaller diameter actual "rotors" than rim brakes) are "better" than properly set up cantilevers and v-brakes (weight considered). Don't believe that you really need more than about 40mm of front suspension for competitive XC racing (anyone remember when the world champion used a flex stem and everyone not the world champion used front suspension?). A lot in cycling has to do with the need to keep selling stuff and that involves a cycle of marketed innovation that characterizes some epic components into the bin of obsolescence.

/blah blah blah

I buy nearly every 27" Cannondale ST I come across. The market for aluminum road bikes >63cm just doesn't exist.

However, I've seen with my own eyes the Klein geometry charts, and they definitely included bike much bigger than 63cm. Someone out there has to have seen one, read about one, seen one for sale...I've been looking for forever and never had more than 63cm bikes mislabeled as 66cm by people confusing c-c measurements with c-t (oversized tubes make comparing c-t between steel and aluminum problematic, and to a lesser extent even c-c).

I mean if I one the lottery I could have a Zinn/Paketa. However, I'm just a C&V retrogrouch at heart. Is it even possible to be a retrogrouch concerning Klein considering all the innovative stuff they did (pressed in BB, Mission control headsets/bars, proprietary dropouts, etc.).

I can't believe I'm so obsessed with finding one of these some day. I mean I don't even like the Gary Klein story. The manner in which he tried to characterize "his" contributions to the oversized aluminum bike development was disingenuous at best. I'm surprised he actually even tried that lawsuit. For those that don't know, there were affidavits submitted in the discovery of that lawsuit that testify that in that MIT class that Gary Klein was late to the party. Upper classmen in that same group had built oversized aluminum bikes and Gary had seen these. More interesting is that Gary's interpretation of what others did before him actually involved small aluminum tubing not the oversized ones the students senior to him had realized gave significant weight/strength/stiffness gains. Gary Klein, justly, lost his suit over Cannondale due to "prior art," meaning that everything C'dale and others had done was out in the public sphere prior to him having adopted it as well. Just for the record.

However, that doesn't stop me from buying older Klein bikes for family/friends when they need bikes. However, a cyclist can dream that there is one out there somewhere meant for him, and still early on in its fatigue cycles, can't he?

Didja try google?

Here's a claimed 64cm Klein. Unfortunately it's been sold. I know just a little bigger than 63, but....

http://workingbikes.org/sites/workingbikes.org/files/images/DSC_0493_0.JPG (http://workingbikes.org/image/tid/3091)

Well, with a 100cm inseam, I can understand why you don't like steel.

On the flip side, you can't understand what it feels like at 150lbs

I think I just through up & I was only a third into this diatribe.

As the Original Poster I don't take stuff personally. What I get frustrated with is the lack of intelligent dialog in cycling. The lemming like shift (no pun intended) from 7 speed to 8, then 9, 10, and now 11. I hope it is not lost on anyone the underlying Spinal Tap amp corollary. I think the intellectually bankrupt stuff that comes out of Jan and his Bicycle Quarterly nonsense makes me fear for the state of the republic, when I realize that the subscribers vote. I understand brand identity, I understand the need for validation, and I understand marketing. However, at the end of the day riding a bike has to at least have a component about what riding the bike feels like along with what the telos of the bike being ridden "is." I think the "steel is real" cult is inane. You'll never find an aspiring roadie trying to qualify for a berth on a competitive UCI squad riding his steel bike. You'll never see a competitive gran tour rider on a steel frame ever again, and there is a reason. Aluminum and then titanium/carbon changed the paradigm. It's almost like the difference between a slant parallelogram derailleur and something beautiful like a Mavic 851 SSC. The erector set derailleur is just hauntingly perfect in every way. It makes any bike its hung on (Joe Bell or CycleArt paint be damned) look undeserving. However, that doesn't mean that it shifts as well as anything even low-end in the Suntour line (I'm thinking even half-plastic Blaze).

I've owned a Giant OCR1, unfortunately as well. Back in the day ~03-04 Giant was marketing the XL compact geometry frame as fitting like a 68cm (or was it 66cm) frame. Subsequent marketing material introduced a revision to just 63cm (or maybe 64cm). It didn't take me long to realize I owned a "63cm" bike that was just as too small for me as my old 63cm '89 Cannondale series 3.0, which was an epic bike for someone that would actually fit it (I have long since sold that frame off). With Cannondale you can't evaluate the frame/bike until you've actually, at least once in your life, actually ridden one built up with like components to what you actually love. That means that if you have a vintage Cinelli/Colnago/Serotta/Olmo/Guerciotti/Mercyx etc. you have to compare apples to apples. What Cannondale did not ever do (save for the ST series of touring bikes) was match forks to their bike that appropriately matched the bike. Find yourself a series 3.0 Cannondale that isn't a crit version (but don't be confused as non-crit bikes still have cantilevered stays) and take your best build for a 1" threaded fork and move it off of your handbuilt Italian and onto the C'dale fork and all. Then go ride it. It will the fastest bike you've ever been on. It will outclimb anything you've ever ridden and ever will ride again. The series 3.0 was the optimization of the aluminum Cannondale that resulted from Cannondale hiring a Stanford engineer to get them into carbon. Fortunately, he explained that he could transform their frame into something that would be lighter, faster, stronger, and stiffer than anything else. Every CAAD iteration that followed the series 3.0 made the Cannondale less than what it was. The series 3.0 is an insane bike. However, you can't evaluate it until you've ridden one with the components, wheelset, and fork that make the steel bike you love what it is. Put 'em on the series 3.0 and be prepared for insane. It's that good. Everything since climbs slower, sprints slower, and is weaker, albeit but also weighs less.

However, the purpose of this thread isn't to convert those that are born-again steel lovers. I have strong opinions on aluminum bikes. I'm no Marco Pantani, however. Although I do still squeeze into my old Mercatone Uno bibs when I'm not afraid of getting arrested. I'm nearly two meters and even when I was a competitive basketball player I weighed over 200lbs. I've since ballooned (read got fat). When I was dragging my non-cyclist body on the NORBA circuit in the early 90s I saved up to buy a Bontrager (Pre-Trek) Race Lite. I remember going to buy it. After everything I'd heard from those that absolutely loved the bike (and the Privateer) it just failed to be that, on a test ride. Kind of like riding a Santana after having ridden a Co-Motion or C'dale tandem. Admittedly, my outlier experience (even twenty years ago) is probably not yours. I'm not a typical cyclist in any aspect. My experience on a bike is completely outside the reference frame for almost all other cyclists.

I use 200mm and 205mm custom cranks (nearly 100cm cycling inseam) that really tax the BB. If a bike has any propensity for flex natively in a 56cm frame, you can imagine what it feels like when the triangles open up on a 63cm frame. I ride between a 68cm and a 70cm bike. I absolutely love vintage Cannondale ST touring bikes (pre-Cannondale optimization of the series 3.0). While they may not be what the 3.0 bikes are, they were made in 27" cm sizes (68.5cm c-t & 73cm to the top of the C'dale trademark extended seat collar) so they actually fit me.

So take my opinion with a grain of salt, and in context. However, meet me halfway and don't be a mindless lemming that believes that 9/10/11 is "better" what with increased dish, thinner weaker and faster wearing cogs/rings/chains. Don't believe that disc brakes (with smaller diameter actual "rotors" than rim brakes) are "better" than properly set up cantilevers and v-brakes (weight considered). Don't believe that you really need more than about 40mm of front suspension for competitive XC racing (anyone remember when the world champion used a flex stem and everyone not the world champion used front suspension?). A lot in cycling has to do with the need to keep selling stuff and that involves a cycle of marketed innovation that characterizes some epic components into the bin of obsolescence.

/blah blah blah

I buy nearly every 27" Cannondale ST I come across. The market for aluminum road bikes >63cm just doesn't exist.

However, I've seen with my own eyes the Klein geometry charts, and they definitely included bike much bigger than 63cm. Someone out there has to have seen one, read about one, seen one for sale...I've been looking for forever and never had more than 63cm bikes mislabeled as 66cm by people confusing c-c measurements with c-t (oversized tubes make comparing c-t between steel and aluminum problematic, and to a lesser extent even c-c).

I mean if I one the lottery I could have a Zinn/Paketa. However, I'm just a C&V retrogrouch at heart. Is it even possible to be a retrogrouch concerning Klein considering all the innovative stuff they did (pressed in BB, Mission control headsets/bars, proprietary dropouts, etc.).

I can't believe I'm so obsessed with finding one of these some day. I mean I don't even like the Gary Klein story. The manner in which he tried to characterize "his" contributions to the oversized aluminum bike development was disingenuous at best. I'm surprised he actually even tried that lawsuit. For those that don't know, there were affidavits submitted in the discovery of that lawsuit that testify that in that MIT class that Gary Klein was late to the party. Upper classmen in that same group had built oversized aluminum bikes and Gary had seen these. More interesting is that Gary's interpretation of what others did before him actually involved small aluminum tubing not the oversized ones the students senior to him had realized gave significant weight/strength/stiffness gains. Gary Klein, justly, lost his suit over Cannondale due to "prior art," meaning that everything C'dale and others had done was out in the public sphere prior to him having adopted it as well. Just for the record.

However, that doesn't stop me from buying older Klein bikes for family/friends when they need bikes. However, a cyclist can dream that there is one out there somewhere meant for him, and still early on in its fatigue cycles, can't he?

i have a friend who rides a 62 or 63cm Klein frame from the early 90s, and has just acquired another Klein bare frame of similar dimension

...The series 3.0 was the optimization of the aluminum Cannondale that resulted from Cannondale hiring a Stanford engineer to get them into carbon. Fortunately, he explained that he could transform their frame into something that would be lighter, faster, stronger, and stiffer than anything else. Every CAAD iteration that followed the series 3.0 made the Cannondale less than what it was. The series 3.0 is an insane bike. However, you can't evaluate it until you've ridden one with the components, wheelset, and fork that make the steel bike you love what it is. Put 'em on the series 3.0 and be prepared for insane. It's that good. Everything since climbs slower, sprints slower, and is weaker, albeit but also weighs less.

I have a couple of 2.8 Cannondales, how do they fit into your evaluation? I also have a 2001 CAAD4, and I have to say I don't like it as much as the '96 2.8 SR500.

As ericbaker mentions, because of your size, steel would be flexy. That is unless someone made way oversized steel tubes from frame building. But of course it would weigh so much who would buy one?

In my own experience a larger steel frame does noticeably flex more. I had a 25" Paramount P-13. As it turned out it was too big for my 6'1" height and 250+ lbs. It would flex, especially when I was out of the saddle climbing. Last winter I bought a 24" P-13, transferred all the parts, with the only difference being the stem and bars. I don't notice the 24" frame flexing at all.

Oh, he loves the Cannondales also. Says that ST series tourers are the best tourers ever made and Rivendells are junk. :) Slightly paraphrased there, but fairly accurately, I think.

Oh, he loves the Cannondales also. Says that ST series tourers are the best tourers ever made and Rivendells are junk. :) Slightly paraphrased there, but fairly accurately, I think.

I've rode Cannondales spanning three decades now and their touring bikes do have an excellent reputation, but there are other brands that are just as good, we all know that. While I can understand from the OP's size and weight standpoint why he has his preferences, I don't agree with his blanket statements.

Brad

I take it from the photos in this thread that this is only a 63-64cm...

Klein Quantum - $400 (Mars/Adams Twp.) (http://pittsburgh.craigslist.org/bik/2728210757.html)

Date: 2011-11-30, 9:37AM EST
Reply to: sale-dujph-2728210757@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads? (http://www.craigslist.org/about/help/replying_to_posts)]

Klein Quantum pre-Trek 1995
Shimano 600 components, Large frame (rider is 6'5")
$400.00, was $2500.00 new.
412-260-5009



Location: Mars/Adams Twp.
it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests

http://images.craigslist.org/5Y05W25X03nb3ob3l0bbua8940c5e0c3e1952.jpg http://images.craigslist.org/5O35Y55R33k93p73lbbbu259f430491ed19ba.jpg
http://images.craigslist.org/5Y35V55T23nc3pc3odbbudfbeeb9695ea1157.jpg http://images.craigslist.org/5V65Z25R03n53m43labbu36cc637bad6712c6.jpg
PostingID: 2728210757

I'm kind of shocked a bit. I once saw a geometry chart for Klein and I swear it went up to 72cm. Can anyone authenticate that a big Klein >66cm ever existed?

mtnbke, I tried a simple Google search "Klein bicycle catalog" and it yielded this result:

Klein 1985 Brochure (http://www.equusbicycle.com/bike/klein/trulymagnificent/index.html)

Click on the spec sheet and it opens a PDF file. Just in case you don't have Adobe Reader, here is the top line for frame sizes.


46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70

Hope this helps.

mtnbike, I get your points pretty clearly and agree with many, if not most, of them. There is a lot of dogma that is passed as fact and many do not really question what is being said. As you stated in your second post to this thread, I too "me fear for the state of the republic" in that most people do not think critically and do not question they things they are told or read.

Back closer to the topic, I am not very familiar with the Klein bikes, but have seen a couple here and there but all in smaller sizes, 56cm or so.

Great read atmo. This is what makes the C&V forums rock!

I'm kind of shocked a bit. I once saw a geometry chart for Klein and I swear it went up to 72cm. Can anyone authenticate that a big Klein >66cm ever existed?

mtnbke, are you still in shock now that I produced the geometry chart to which you refer? :eek: Klein seems to have stopped at 70cm and did not stretch the frame to 72cm. :mad: Come on back, O Alumivangelist! :thumb:

A picture or two of my 25 inch 1988 ST400 just to keep this thread visually stimulating. :lol:

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p71/pastorbobnlnh/Bike%20Scenes/88CDalenSnowshoes3.jpg

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p71/pastorbobnlnh/Paramounts/1971%20P-13/P7270045.jpg

Oops! How did my 23" Paramount get in here? :twitchy:

Sexy lugs! mntbke hates lugs, tho.

Klein, biggest hype of the 80's. Original Klein's attracted the worst behaving, weight weenie, waxers. I never saw a real rider on a Klein back in the day. The "patent" was a design patent, not much protection, prior art killed it. Seinfeld has one, says all we need to know.

Jerry's Klein had a backwards fork for at least one episode! Awesome! Then Specialized started applying pressure and they had to walk by a Spec shop from time to time.

Whatever. The rumors I heard said that Michael Richards was the bike geek that got all the bikes in there in the first place. And we all found out recently that he's a psychotic racist! Hahahaha!

Interesting, the big Klein fanboy that hung out at the LBS I worked at was a racist too....

I have a couple of 2.8 Cannondales, how do they fit into your evaluation? I also have a 2001 CAAD4, and I have to say I don't like it as much as the '96 2.8 SR500.

As ericbaker mentions, because of your size, steel would be flexy. That is unless someone made way oversized steel tubes from frame building. But of course it would weigh so much who would buy one?

In my own experience a larger steel frame does noticeably flex more. I had a 25" Paramount P-13. As it turned out it was too big for my 6'1" height and 250+ lbs. It would flex, especially when I was out of the saddle climbing. Last winter I bought a 24" P-13, transferred all the parts, with the only difference being the stem and bars. I don't notice the 24" frame flexing at all.

Check out the Pegoretti Big Leg Emma. Oversized steel tubes, reinforced stays. Teeth-shatteringly stiff. Like those old 3.0 'dales
http://www.racycles.com/store/images/xl/peg_ble.jpg

Check out the Pegoretti Big Leg Emma. Oversized steel tubes, reinforced stays. Teeth-shatteringly stiff. Like those old 3.0 'dales
http://www.racycles.com/store/images/xl/peg_ble.jpg

But there is no way on the Good Green Earth that such low spoke count wheels can hold up under us heavy weights! :eek: We'd be flexin and flippin like nobody's business!:twitchy:

old Klein catalog on bulgier.net shows 63cm the largest stock frame. You could order up to a 70cm in a custom frame.

http://bulgier.net/pics/bike/Catalogs/klein/


Kleins that I have seen have nice paintjobs but I didn't care for the look of those huge seat stays. According to my LBS that sold Kleins, Japan was a big market for Klein and that is why Trek kept them alive for as long as they did.

But there is no way on the Good Green Earth that such low spoke count wheels can hold up under us heavy weights! :eek: We'd be flexin and flippin like nobody's business!:twitchy:

Amen to that Pastor! http://www.anchoredbygrace.com/smileys/azzangel.gif

A picture or two of my 25 inch 1988 ST400 just to keep this thread visually stimulating. :lol:

http://i125.photobucket.com/albums/p71/pastorbobnlnh/Bike%20Scenes/88CDalenSnowshoes3.jpg

That's a striking machine, Bob. Reminds me of Klein tourers. Very traditional, in a modern way.

-Kurt

That's a striking machine, Bob. Reminds me of Klein tourers. Very traditional, in a modern way.

-Kurt

Thanks Kurt. It is all apart at the moment. I keep trying to find the time to work on it. It is receiving a black Cannondale triple crank and black Paul Racer centerpulls. I also have racks and panniers to go on it along with a nice black single wheel trailer to pull behind. The only thing left to do is plan a north to south trip to Little Coral Gables!

Sexy lugs! mntbke hates lugs, tho.

Not true! I actually love the look of a lugged bike. However, beautiful art bikes are to look at, and they are breathtakingly beautiful with say Joe Bell or Cyclart paint, they still build boat anchor bikes that aren't half as strong as an ST, are heavier, don't climb as well, and in general just aren't as enjoyable to ride as they are to own. I just can't rationalize flexy noodly bikes. However, I do love lugs.

Heck,most aluminum bikes from the 19th century were lugged!

mtnbke, are you still in shock now that I produced the geometry chart to which you refer? :eek: Klein seems to have stopped at 70cm and did not stretch the frame to 72cm. :mad: Come on back, O Alumivangelist! :thumb:

That isn't the same geometry chart I remember. The one I was looking at used to be hosted on the Japan Klein site, as they stayed a going concern a little longer that Klein in the US. Did anyone save the .pdf from the Klein site or the Japan site? Does anyone have any old Klein manuals from the late 80's early 90's? I could be totally wrong, but I swear I remember that thing going up to 72cm.

However, 70cm is plenty large enough for me. Still, I am shocked. Where are these 66cm, 68cm, and 70cm Klein's? I've never once seen anything but a 63cm Klein. A 63cm Klein measures out to around 66cm from the center of the BB to the top of the seat collar, so most of the "66cm" bikes get mislabeled when sold, but truly are 63s.

That isn't the same geometry chart I remember. The one I was looking at used to be hosted on the Japan Klein site, as they stayed a going concern a little longer that Klein in the US. Did anyone save the .pdf from the Klein site or the Japan site? Does anyone have any old Klein manuals from the late 80's early 90's? I could be totally wrong, but I swear I remember that thing going up to 72cm.


Here's mine from the early days of custom frames:
http://lh4.ggpht.com/-yjSlNOZAkEE/SKxHjhNdnWI/AAAAAAAADWk/Rhk8LbOiFDQ/s576/Klein%252520Catalogue%2525201989%252520p15.jpg

I'm with diabloscott:
big Klein = jumbo shrimp
it's an oxymoron...