I found a Specialized RockHopper large frame bike in the paper for $100. I checked it out and it has Shimano Deore derailers, and is a very nice bike. I'm 6'2" so a large frame was a must. Heck, this thing is almost TOO big... almost

I broughtit home and started cleaning it up a bit, and I think the rear wheel may need to be trued. Its got a VERY slight left/right wobble near the seam of the wheel. The bike is otherwise perfect! Its older, a 1992 and so is a rigid frame- exactly what I've been wanting.

Of course, I couldn't ride it to work today, its raining too hard and I'm not ready for a rainy commute... yet

Take care and thanks for everyones help this forum has given.

Congrats on the bike purchase!

Pics?

You must be in Tx,it has been raining here for days!

None yet! Will have this weekend though, my buddy's got a digicam, I don't.

OK here's pix of my bike. I expect to change the handlebar and shifters this winter, and if I get really anal I'll strip the paint and powder coat it I still have to put my bike computer and slick tires on it, I'll likely work on that tonight though.

No, not in TX. Reno NV. Weather here can change very quickly. Yesterday was beautiful in the morning, then it rained in the afternoon, and then last night it rained all night. Now its nice again, but overcast and a little cold. But not raining, at least!

Wow, that's a tall bike. Makes the wheels look small, like they're 24"-ers or something.

Crackin' good shape that bike's in, for 12 years old.

Yowza! That's a big bike. Check out the stem and handlebars too. I would say the bike is older than 1992. Those under-seatstay U-brakes went out of fashion sometime in 1990. Specialized only used them between 1987 and 1989. That and it looks like the chainrings are Biopace rings which Specialized also abandoned by 1990. I'm going to guess the bike is more like 1988 or 1989 model. It looks in really good shape though.

Right on, right on. Yeah its a biggy. Then again, so am I at 6'2" and 300lbs

Thanks for the dating info! I don't really care what year it is. Its in great shape and thats what I wanted. Did I pay a good price for it, or is it high for a 15 year old bike? Just curious. I'm happy with the purchase, which is what counts really

It might have been a high price but if the frame and components are in as excellent a condition as they seem to be (that saddle looks much newer than 1989) then I think you got a good deal. It's really hard to find high-quality steel MTB frames these days. The Rockhoppers back then were made with either Tange Prestige or Tange DB cro-mo which are very good steel tubesets.

It's an EXCELLENT price if it's something you'll ride! ;-) But seriously it's a nice looking ride, and it appears as though it wasn't used a lot or was lovingly cared for! I have an older 520 with the bio-pace rings on it, can't tell for sure if yours does or not but it was suggested. I have some suspicions about what effects they may have had on my knees though but never bothered to replace 'em. Something about a more traditional geometry that get's me excited. Looks like it'll make a great commuter if that's what your going for, and an excllent ride for your size! I would have spent that much for a bike in good shape if I were looking.

Rock on! I bought my road bike used, and it is in excellent shape. I have put about 800 miles on it with no problem. Very dependable. Best -

Thanks guys! I feel great about the bike. I rode it home 6mi from work to home and it was GREAT. Can't wait to get a rack on the back and some saddlebags, and street tires. Gotta work on it when I get some time!

Yeah its got biopace rings. What are those? I don't know the difference really. I had another bike with those and didn't know the difference.

It's a Cannondale saddle, looks to be the same as the one on my '03 badboy.

Great to know about the saddle. Thanks!

I forgot to mention: I rode it home from work today and it was GREAT. I loved it. I rides nice and tall and I can actually pedal without squishing my legs up, since it is the right size for me.

Biopace were ovalised rings as opposed to just round chainrings. The idea behind Biopace and the shaping of the rings was to eliminate deadspots in your pedalling. Unfortunately, it also hampered riders who developed proper spinning techniques. By learning proper spinning, deadspots are reduced and can sometimes be eliminated. Shimano's original Biopace rings introduced in the mid-1980s were designed for newer riders and thus made to accomodate a lower cadence (around 60). As riders progressed and started spinning upwards of 95RPMs, the Biopace rings caused them to bob up and down or back and forth. Shimano also released Biopace HP (high-performance) rings which had a less pronounced ovalisation. By the end of the 1980s, Biopace rings got so round that Shimano (and other companies who had by this time cloned the idea) abandoned the whole concept altogether.

Gotcha. Should I be into replacing the chainrings with 'standard' chain rings or is this something that goes all the way down to the BB?

You should be able to replace the rings with standard rings as the mounting holes are still perfectly circular. Be mindful of the BCD (bolt-circle diameter). However, if you're happy with riding them then by all means continue to use them.

Ditto on the biopace. My winter commuter has biopace rings (second set, actually). All of my other bikes (Cannondale Al road bike, Mongoose comfort folder, Rans semi-'bent, Schwinn hybrid tandem, Robin Hood 3-speed, etc.) have round chainrings. I sometimes spin fast, I sometimes spin slow. The biopace rings have never given my knees any trouble. YMMV, of course. Try 'em for a while. If they don't give you any grief, leave 'em on. It'll help retain the originality of the bike.

Strip the paint? Why? Yeah, they're low-res pics, but the finish looks pretty good.

I would second the suggestion to keep the original paintjob if it's in good condition. And speaking of condition, another thing struck me... It looks like the bike was hardly used or at least not used much offroad given that the "dork-disc" is still attached. Usually those things crack and fall off after only a few hours of serious riding. You might want to check the chain anyways and replace it even if there's a little doubt just to preserve the rest of the drivetrain. A SRAM 7sp. chain should be pretty cheap.

Well it LOOKS good from the pic but in reality there are a number of spots (some of them large) where the paint has chipped or rubbed off, and there are rust spots. The plan is to sand down to metal with 600 grit and paint just those spots, for now. Then this winter its going to get stripped and painted. Should turn out really nice. I plan on keeping the original blue (I know an automotive paint store that can match it, in automotive paint) and doing white sections with black trim between them. Should look pretty nice when I'm finished

Checked the chain, and its good. See my previous post about the paint. The "dork disk" is that the plastic thing behind the cassette? Should that come off? It would probably look better w/o it....

It looks like it has plenty of road miles, and has been crashed once or twice (or more) but mostly I think its just wear and tear that has worn down the finish. There's enough bare metal spots to concern me enough to spot paint for now, and do a complete refinish this winter.

When you said you checked the chain, did you check it with a chain gauge or a ruler? You can't tell by looking... chains stretch over time and have to be replaced at a certain point...

I checked it according to the Richards manual. Says to put it on the biggest chainring and pull the chain. If you can see a tooth in full, its wore out. Its not.

I dont really trust that method 100%... either measure it or check it with a chain guage I would say. I'd be surprised if a bike that old had a good chain still!