Show us your vintage mountain bikes!
10-16-13, 10:18 PM
#3926
Behold my avatar:
Join Date: May 2006
Location: SW Colorado
Posts: 1,034
Bikes: 2019 Gorilla Monsoon, 2013 Surly Krampus, Brompton folder
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6941 Post(s)
Liked 444 Times
in
289 Posts
compact geometry, 29+ tires, threadless 1-1/8" oversided bars, eternal bearing bb, hollow forged cranks, light mechanical disc brakes. indexed shifting... Yeah I'd say a few things have changed, but regardless. How do you like the Krampus and what type of riding do you do on it mostly?
.
What really matters are the design innovations: wheel and tire size, and frame geometry. This bike could have been built in 1982 with the technology available at the time, and function pretty much the same.
.
Anyway, I love the bike. I ride a lot of tight singletrack, maybe 30% technical and the rest pretty fast. Some steep climbs here and there, for which the factory spec gearing was inadequate.
.
10-17-13, 02:57 PM
#3929
Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 45
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
that S&S bigfoot is really awesome :-)
Starting to drag a few of my bikes out of storage for the slow winter months, one that I enjoy riding the most is the King Sting. must find a different seat to put on this bad boy.
Starting to drag a few of my bikes out of storage for the slow winter months, one that I enjoy riding the most is the King Sting. must find a different seat to put on this bad boy.
10-17-13, 03:03 PM
#3930
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Yukon, Canada
Posts: 8,759
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 16 Times
in
14 Posts
None of those engineering innovations are essential to the function of the bike.
.
What really matters are the design innovations: wheel and tire size, and frame geometry. This bike could have been built in 1982 with the technology available at the time, and function pretty much the same.
.
Anyway, I love the bike. I ride a lot of tight singletrack, maybe 30% technical and the rest pretty fast. Some steep climbs here and there, for which the factory spec gearing was inadequate.
.
.
What really matters are the design innovations: wheel and tire size, and frame geometry. This bike could have been built in 1982 with the technology available at the time, and function pretty much the same.
.
Anyway, I love the bike. I ride a lot of tight singletrack, maybe 30% technical and the rest pretty fast. Some steep climbs here and there, for which the factory spec gearing was inadequate.
.
__________________
1 Super Record bike, 1 Nuovo Record bike, 1 Pista, 1 Road, 1 Cyclocross/Allrounder, 1 MTB, 1 Touring, 1 Fixed gear
1 Super Record bike, 1 Nuovo Record bike, 1 Pista, 1 Road, 1 Cyclocross/Allrounder, 1 MTB, 1 Touring, 1 Fixed gear
10-17-13, 04:19 PM
#3933
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Yukon, Canada
Posts: 8,759
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 113 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 16 Times
in
14 Posts
grateful dead is awesome! missing the stem binder?
__________________
1 Super Record bike, 1 Nuovo Record bike, 1 Pista, 1 Road, 1 Cyclocross/Allrounder, 1 MTB, 1 Touring, 1 Fixed gear
1 Super Record bike, 1 Nuovo Record bike, 1 Pista, 1 Road, 1 Cyclocross/Allrounder, 1 MTB, 1 Touring, 1 Fixed gear
10-17-13, 04:46 PM
#3936
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 3,084
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
4 Posts
Similarly sure, but I think you are under appreciating what outboard bearings, stiffer cranks, stiffer oversized tubes and modern metal extrusion do for the ride of the bike. The tires and rims are of such a higher quality than could have been made in 1982. Sure it could have been imagined to some degree in 1982 but I am not sure someone could have actually built it. In the late 1980s they were lacing two rims to one hub and running side by side tires in the iditabike. I am sure the performance of that system was far inferior to todays' fat bike tires.
10-17-13, 06:05 PM
#3937
Behold my avatar:
Join Date: May 2006
Location: SW Colorado
Posts: 1,034
Bikes: 2019 Gorilla Monsoon, 2013 Surly Krampus, Brompton folder
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6941 Post(s)
Liked 444 Times
in
289 Posts
.
Back in 82 they could have made wide rims and fat tires with zero extra technical innovation. Same with the frame. It would have had friction shifting, a 6sp freewheel, and canti brakes, etc.
.
Last edited by dgodave; 10-17-13 at 06:10 PM.
10-17-13, 08:03 PM
#3939
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Upper Left, USA
Posts: 1,915
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 634 Post(s)
Liked 444 Times
in
298 Posts
That Mongoose is great! I have one that is awaiting some TLC. I am going to save these pictures just in case I ever decide to have the missing decals on my frame repro'ed. Thanks!
10-17-13, 10:07 PM
#3940
Senior Member
None of those engineering innovations are essential to the function of the bike.
.
What really matters are the design innovations: wheel and tire size, and frame geometry. This bike could have been built in 1982 with the technology available at the time, and function pretty much the same.
.
.
What really matters are the design innovations: wheel and tire size, and frame geometry. This bike could have been built in 1982 with the technology available at the time, and function pretty much the same.
.
Those design innovations are exactly what make it not a 1982 frame but something that has evolved over 30 years. Sure the bike would function the same in that you pedal and balance it goes forward, but along with those frame changes and component upgrades, bikes got better. That Surley is a pretty bike, but being made of steel and having a rigid fork does not equate it to anything available in 1982.
Last edited by Aemmer; 10-17-13 at 11:05 PM.
10-17-13, 11:20 PM
#3941
Senior Member
Tex,
Great question I will try to answer this when I have a little time. Tend to get long winded on things like that. Any friend of .83 is a friend of mine. If you want to take the Ritchey out for a ride out at Black Diamond or say Skookum (I think Tiger is closed soon) or possibly a leisurley Thursday night ride, you are welcome to give it a spin.
Great question I will try to answer this when I have a little time. Tend to get long winded on things like that. Any friend of .83 is a friend of mine. If you want to take the Ritchey out for a ride out at Black Diamond or say Skookum (I think Tiger is closed soon) or possibly a leisurley Thursday night ride, you are welcome to give it a spin.
10-18-13, 12:51 AM
#3942
Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 45
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
TalkingHeads,
Odd looking bicycle: love it though.
GT Corrado: never built up, pretty sad really !!
Last edited by WheelTired; 10-18-13 at 01:04 AM.
10-18-13, 01:34 AM
#3945
52psi
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 4,015
Bikes: Schwinn Volare ('78); Raleigh Competition GS ('79)
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 790 Post(s)
Liked 802 Times
in
391 Posts
Man, WheelTired, that's some good stuff. I'm studying all the stuff you're posting in case something shows up on the local CL. Well, that and they're just awesome old bikes. Like most everyone else, I love that S&S. The rest are pretty slick too, though... I agree with whoever said "Keep postin' those babies!" 
__________________
A race bike in any era is a highly personal choice that at its "best" balances the requirements of fit, weight, handling, durability and cost tempered by the willingness to toss it and oneself down the pavement at considerable speed. ~Bandera
A race bike in any era is a highly personal choice that at its "best" balances the requirements of fit, weight, handling, durability and cost tempered by the willingness to toss it and oneself down the pavement at considerable speed. ~Bandera
10-18-13, 07:46 AM
#3948
Behold my avatar:
Join Date: May 2006
Location: SW Colorado
Posts: 1,034
Bikes: 2019 Gorilla Monsoon, 2013 Surly Krampus, Brompton folder
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6941 Post(s)
Liked 444 Times
in
289 Posts
Couldn't you use this same logic to say it is the same as a paperboy bike built in the 30's?
Those design innovations are exactly what make it not a 1982 frame but something that has evolved over 30 years. Sure the bike would function the same in that you pedal and balance it goes forward, but along with those frame changes and component upgrades, bikes got better. That Surley is a pretty bike, but being made of steel and having a rigid fork does not equate it to anything available in 1982.
Those design innovations are exactly what make it not a 1982 frame but something that has evolved over 30 years. Sure the bike would function the same in that you pedal and balance it goes forward, but along with those frame changes and component upgrades, bikes got better. That Surley is a pretty bike, but being made of steel and having a rigid fork does not equate it to anything available in 1982.
.
But thats due essentially to design decisions rather than engineering decisions. The distinction is real, even though there's a gray area where they overlap. Think of it as what to build vs how to build. Back in 82, all the necessary how questions to build a Krampus were already answered: steel frames, wide-range gearing, canti brakes, rubber tires, aluminum rims.
.
For the paperboy bike, you still had to develop whole systems for adequate gearing, lightweight framebuilding, braking, etc to get to where early mtbs started.
.
10-18-13, 09:56 AM
#3949
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 3,084
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
4 Posts
I know. I agree. Its not equal at all.
.
But thats due essentially to design decisions rather than engineering decisions. The distinction is real, even though there's a gray area where they overlap. Think of it as what to build vs how to build. Back in 82, all the necessary how questions to build a Krampus were already answered: steel frames, wide-range gearing, canti brakes, rubber tires, aluminum rims.
.
For the paperboy bike, you still had to develop whole systems for adequate gearing, lightweight framebuilding, braking, etc to get to where early mtbs started.
.
.
But thats due essentially to design decisions rather than engineering decisions. The distinction is real, even though there's a gray area where they overlap. Think of it as what to build vs how to build. Back in 82, all the necessary how questions to build a Krampus were already answered: steel frames, wide-range gearing, canti brakes, rubber tires, aluminum rims.
.
For the paperboy bike, you still had to develop whole systems for adequate gearing, lightweight framebuilding, braking, etc to get to where early mtbs started.
.
By 82, they had the "how" of building a dual-suspension aluminum mtb with discs down, although they didn't have the geometry or optimal design tweaks figured out yet.... I could swing a leg over a modern dual-boingger and argue that it has all the trappings of an early 80s bike... I just wouldn't feel sincere in doing so.
