Ronno6

mtnbke, I remember that the downtube increased in diameter in '86, up from 1.5" to 1.625 if memory serves.
Actually, the more I think about it, the downtube was originally 1.375, then increased to 1.5" in '86.
I know that this does not agree with the specs from the '83 drawings.
I will have to dig out an older frame to check.
Other than that, I believe that all else is the same.

mobilemail

First, I haven't had much time to spend on the forums lately. I like you guys, really! Just been busy. Thank you for a most entertaining return. :-)

To the point of the thread...I had an ST in the late 80s that I used for some loaded touring, weekend stuff really. I thought it was the best touring bike I ever had, not too stiff at all considering it was just a 21" frame. Even loaded I could mash on it when loaded and still get no flex. Shouldn't have sold it. Would love to find another.

That said, my "perfect bike" is the one I was just on that let me enjoy an awesome, epic adventure. I have probably had 30. :-)

fender1

I. Love. This. Thread.

pastorbobnlnh 

It's a hoot! Isn't it!

investmentbiker

Your T1000 looks good. I'd never seen that blue like on your ST.
Here's mine. I took the racks off until the next tour.

KonAaron Snake 

That's because you're in the burbs...you don't get as many ranting lunatics out there. Oddly fixated ranting is far more common out here...heck, you can always find Philly Jesus around one of the parks.

Ronno6

Babe the Blue Ox was originally Blueberry and in sad shape.
I had the frame powdercoated, color is Blue Ice Explosion and is beautiful!
Your T1000 looks great!

Ronno6

mtnbke, here is what I have found:
I measured the downtubes only of various vintage ST/T frames.
The '83-'85 should be 1.5" as per the lit. I did not measure.
The '86-'88 have a 1.75" downtube.
The '90 ST400 and my T1000 have 2" downtubes that are slightly tapered/ovalized towards the headtube.
So, yes, the materials engineer who designed the 3.0 series SR frames had some influence on the ST/T frames as well.
However, they still retained the oval seatstays responsible for the great lateral stiffness of the rear triangle.
Different, yes. But not the total departure seen in the 3.0 SR frame design.

mtnbke

Ooh is that a TA Spécialités Cyclotouriste crankset? On a big ol' 27"? Is the crank stiff? I've never ridden one of those. What crank length do you use? I've never ridden one of those. They were the crank of choice for randonneuring and touring forever, though. Is the crank stiff?

I've currently got some High Sierra/Zinn 205mm triple cranks on my ST800. I used TA Spécialités Alize chainrings, mostly because they are beautiful, and partly as an homage to the Cyclotouriste crankset.

mtnbke

PM'd you. Those tubes on the T series are completely re-engineered, shaped, butted. Now I need some of those 27" Ts!

Ronno6

Yup. Got it.Thanks.
I enjoy all the 27" 'Dale Sport Touring or Touring bikes that I have in riding condition.
The '90 ST600 has yet to undergo restoration; it remains in as-found condition.
A good clean-up might be all that is needed.
I found it in Texas on CL about 10 miles from where my daughter and her family live.
Couldn't resist..................
I bought the T1000 frame and fork of CL, also in Texas, but a few hundred miles from where they live.
Luck thing was, my son in law covered the territory where I found it and he was able to pick it up for me!
Talk about Karma.....................
The '90 ST400 came from New York City, another CL find.
I picked up an '88 ST400 from Miami, also Cl, and a friend of mine that was coming my way
picked it up for me.
The last 2 were both Blueberry ST400's from 1988, one from Titusville, Fl, and another from near New Smyrna.
I lived in Florida at the time.

So, a last question: the '90 vintage bikes are both ST series bikes, but---re-engineered tubing ??

fender1

I do love me some Philly Jesus ....especially his crowd funding site for no reason other than pretending to be Jesus ....now if he were raising money to buy an '83 ST800, I could get behind that. The "son of God" can't be seen on anything less than an "epic" ride,

Ronno6

That would be a good trick......................seeing as how the ST800 was not offered til '86..............
I'm just sayin'......................

BTW..I had always thought that "ST" stood foe "Sports Touring," but,
the 1986 catalog states that it is "Super Touring."

fender1

Well, since the ST series can bend time and space, it should not be that hard. Throw in some Jesus and you have all the bases covered......

KonAaron Snake 

Stop making fun of mass produced aluminum bikes that were blatant Cheap-o Klein rip offs. Philly Jesus wouldn't do that - he'd just make a Cannondale from the tin foil in his home made bong. You're just jealous because your Riv is a fancy version of a pug 8.

tricky 

So, so good. I am not totally convinced that mtnbke isn't some strange AI sent to do tests on us.

pastorbobnlnh 

I'n not so certain about bending time and space, but my '96 SR500 can "worm hole" the pavement and take away the bumps. That's rather flippin' amazin'!!!


See the quote above your post, tricky. I believe it contains a hidden message.

RobE30

This sounds plausible. I wonder if he had to scrape the res off before tig welding it

USAZorro

My Bob Jackson and Raleigh Team Pro are both lighter than this ST, and would annihilate it in a race.

Aluminum is a non-starter for me. Period. I find the frames ugly in appearance due to the tube diameters required, and absolutely lacking in any sort of resonant flex that helps me when I climb, thereby failing my standards for visual and riding "aesthetics". I also am not a partaker of the GP Kool-Aid, but that is largely because I don't want to spend that much money on a bike.

Other people are going to have different criteria than I do, which is why GTs and Pedersen's, and all things Aluminum exist (to choose a random few). Stay away from 55cm, lightweight, lugged steel frames in sound condition that are being sold for a bargain and nobody gets hurt.

Ronno6

All plausible rationales for the less height enhanced rider.
In 63cm, 25" and especially 27" the larger tubes are considerably more esthetically correct.
I have a 27" Fuji Royale (well....2 actually.) from the early 80's and it is so huge that the skinny tubes
look (and ride) like so much spaghetti.Comfy, yes. Vibration damping, you bet.
Flexy.........yuppers. Just try to sprint on it.......you will take out riders on either side of you!

So, for my $$$$$ in my size, the Cannondale is the way to go..and go...and go...........

USAZorro

Cycling equipment in general can be cruel to the extremely short and the extremely tall. I do consider myself fortunate to be of average height (at least in the time range of the bicycles I most covet).

KonAaron Snake 

I think this makes a lot of sense and I can see why a Cannondale would be appealing to you. It's really the same reason I think their tandems ride nicely.

Out of curiosity, have you ever tried OS tubed steel? Like MAX?

mobilemail

I am height ret@rded. Pity me.

Ronno6

Nope. I've been mostly on Cannondales since 1987 or so.
I do have a 65cm Leader LD717 that I really like and a 62cm Fetish that I keep at my son's home.

I have heard that OS steel is harsher than aluminum. But, dunno.

Ecrevisse

The term BOB originated as the Bridgestone Owner's Bunch, which was a marketing initiative by Grant Petersen at Bridgestone. Bikes that he designed and spec'd were all steel luged frames. When Bridgestone pulled out of the US market and Grant started Rivendell, he emphasized steel lugged frames. He was very proud of the fancy lugs offered on some of the frames.

Cannondale is a welded aluminum frame. Nothing near as pleasing to the eye as a steel lugged frame. A Cannondale could never be considered BOBish based their frame.