View Single Post
Old 10-06-20, 03:01 PM
  #41  
Ironfish653
Dirty Heathen
 
Ironfish653's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: MC-778, 6250 fsw
Posts: 2,213

Bikes: 1997 Cannondale, 1976 Bridgestone, 1998 SoftRide, 1989 Klein, 1989 Black Lightning #0033

Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 894 Post(s)
Liked 937 Times in 548 Posts
Originally Posted by Moisture
I dont contest this statement for a second. But what is it about these quality vintage bikes which really set the standard for what we expect in a modern bike, that makes them so capable?
The 90s represented the first generation of high performance mountain bikes, as opposed to the more relaxed, cruiser-like ATBs of the 80s. Suspension was still in it’s early phases, so being fast meant climbing and speed on the flats, not bombing downhills; so you ended up with steep, almost road bike geometry, and the signature long-and-low cockpit layout. Good XC bikes are light and agile, and good at getting your power to the ground.
Sure, modern big-wheel long-travel bikes do better in technical off-road situations, but those Classic XC bikes have more all-around bike capabilities.

Originally Posted by Moisture
What do you think of GT's triple triangle tech? Do you think it helps improve frame geometry and increases stiffness reasonably? Or is it more gimmick?
GT’s Triple Triangle was a carryover from it’s BMX day’s, and used as it’s visual signature on its MTB lineup.
Ironfish653 is offline  
Likes For Ironfish653: