Here is the deal:

- I need a new bike project as much as I need a hit upside the head
- that said, I looked at my parts bin, looked outside the window and saw a foot of snow on the hill I live on and thought for a second: hmmm maybe I should try to build myself a utilitarian mountain bike that can take that snow and get me to the grocery store 2 miles down the hill and 2 miles up the hill (1000 ft elevation to my place) if I needed to.
- and then I realized that I have never rode a mountain bike for real (I rode my wife's Cannondale super V on a couple of occasions for 2 minutes each time after I serviced it to make sure that everything works and a hardtail Specialized I flipped for a test ride, but those don't count)
- and then I (further) thought, that if I get into this type of a project, I might be opening myself up to doing some off-road triathlons with the thing (which would be a good thing).

So here comes my bind: I am looking for a bike I can use both as a bad weather chore runner and as an off-road racing machine (with a stripping of fenders, racks, saddle and seat post, and maybe wheels). I can adjust the mechanics to my liking (i.e. no twist shifting) so that's not a issue, but I would like it to have no suspension whatsoever, decent tire clearance (that would probably not be a problem with most MTBs), at least some places to hang fenders and racks and (here is a biggy) a non-slopping top tube. I'd probably go with a traditional MTB fit (small) because I am planning on doing some off roading with it. And I want the finished product (without fenders and racks) to be in the low to mid 20 lb range. (And aluminum and CF are out of the question; it has to be steel or titanium frame and I do not mind TIG-welded steel in this application).

So are there any other options out there than early Stumpjumpers or Marins (which will not break the bank? and the Marin might do so)

I've got four in the garage and one outside the garage that all fit your parameters, so yes you have options available. And I think the most I paid for any of them was $25 or less needing nothing more than basic maintenance and maybe tires. Timberlin (not Timberline), GT, Gary Fisher, Ross (the one in the yard), DiamondBack, Nishiki (hmmm, n+1 seems to have snuck into the MTB/ATB corner as I forgot about the Nishiki when I just ran out to the garage, when did I get that? Oh well....), others as well.

But while being great for winter commuters you might want some cush/suspension in the summertime if you'll be racing it, or not.

Keep an eye on your local craigslist since I see quite a few show up here locally.

Please excuse me for a bit while I head out to the garage again and see what else snuck in there that I forgot about ....

isn't it all about the N+1...

I hear you, and all of those could do (and I live about 10 miles from the old Ross factory) but would they be between 20-25 lbs as an end product?

A friend of mine has a black early Trek MTB. If I remember correctly it meets all your criteria. I can ask him if he wants to get rid of it. I'll let you know

My 1989 Nishiki Colorado is as utilitarian as it gets. Great 4130 frame that can take a pounding, good tire clearance and a straight TT. I have mine set up as an all out friction shifting beater and it is my favorite bike. It comes from the factory in dark blue with black splatter paint. Ugly but awesome.

Oh yeah... please let me know, especially if it is on the tiny side (like a 17 or 19 inch)

I think you'll be hard pressed to pass the weigh in.............I have a Gunnar Rockhound w/Reynolds 853 that sits about 25lbs with full LX and a suspension fork.

Yep, the Timberlin comes in right at 25 wthout the fenders and rack, the GF should be under 25 with a rack and fenders, the others are close except maybe the Ross. The heavy stuff I unloaded or swapped or stripped for parts. The DiamondBack might be over, GT I'm not sure about.
There was a lot of mfgr competition during the MTB bike boom.

I can hang them on the digital fish scale later this week if you want me to confirm the weights.

Reading Rockhound's comment makes me think I should hedge my weight estimates of the MTB's, so sprinkle the gains of salt until I can get the numbers.

That suspension fork really does the thing in as far as weight is concerned... about a pound heavier than a normal fork.

I think that a lot of the weight issues will be mitigated by a smaller frame (which is what I am looking for and I suspect that I will have a lot of fun trying to find one with a non-slopping TT.) Drive train components do not add much to the weight (other than BB and crank - those are fairly big in weight reduction) - the difference between a full 200GS and a full XTR group is less than 1/3 of a pound as far as derailleurs and shifters go. Popping on a decent saddle and post and a handlebar and stem could save at least a pound, maybe more.

I am kind of looking for the proverbial sweet spot: low weight frameset with enough strength to take a beating, but I am not sure that this might exist...

I think the non sloping top tube might be the deal breaker in your criteria...............Marin and Kona made some nice steel frames in the early 90s but I believe they had sloping top tubes. Should be easy enough to find a good steel frame as everyone seems to be abandoning their 26" rim brake'd rigs for disc's and 29ers. Dependant on how aggressive you plan to ride off road, a CX frame might be an option.

Got one of those and it has been my winter bike, my commuting bike and my long distance bike for years (since new in 1991) :



but it cannot do snow and nasty trails to save its life...

I think the above discussion does a good job of describing your package of needs, which really is defined by what is required for an off road bike tougher than a CX bike. Therefore, let me take this discussion in a different direction. That is, I suggest that you don't let C&V fashion unnecessarily limit your function and fun.

Sloping tubes were a relatively early MTB innovation and do make sense for a lot of reasons including weight, stiffness, off road comfort, etc. And front shocks make a huge difference in the quality of the off road ride and your abililty to take on the tougher challenges. I have done a good deal of riding in the West on both horizonatal tube/rigid fork and sloping tube/front shock bikes. For functionality, the latter is the clear winner. Believe me, it is very uncomfortable and inefficient running a rigid fork down rocky singletrack. In other words, it bounces all over hell.

So, my wholly unsolicited opinion is that you would be better served by by a 90's hardtail with a front shock. Think about it this way. The horizonatal TT MTBs were really an effort to take a street bike and convert it to a dirt bike. Later MTBs were designed to be dirt bikes.

Now, there might be some good choices available. For example, the hardtail below is Ti, about '94 English origin with 8-speed SRAM. I got it off of CL with a big box of other gear for $300. Oh, and by your own definition of C&V as 15 years, I'm there.

But, if you are still going in the other route, the world of CL is full of horizontal TT/rigid fork MTBs. Below, two Fisher Procalibers, 1989 and 1990. Actually, I want to put drops and CX tires on one of these.

Let us know how the project goes.

I really like the higher end steel Trek rigid frame MTBs. I have a couple of Trek 950s right now. Nice DX/LX components, True Temper steel frame, etc. 1993 and earlier will be a lugged frame.

Not sure you can hit the weight weenie target with a steel Trek. I need to weigh my wife's 950, which is pretty stripped down. Mine has heavy tires, racks, etc. so the weight is certainly higher than your target.

Probably not Pretty bikes though. I just looked at the specs of a '91 930 with triple butted TT steel and it is listed at 29 lbs for the 18". 5 lbs might not really sound like a big deal, but where I live, I have to do a 1000 ft climb on my return trip home; and at the level 5 lbs is about 20% of the bike weight...

I think that you're asking for way too much from a vintage steel anything, Dude. Much less a mountain bike. You may want to actually RIDE one a few times before you start ruling out options or imposing limits on what you'll accept.

The two things that you're asking for that show me that you're new to the mountain bike thing are your weight target and your dismissal of front suspension.

As for weight... do you know what owning a 20 pound mountain bike means? I can pretty much assure you that it isn't steel and it isn't cheap. You're basically asking for very lightweight steel road bike weights in a rugged mountain bike package. I don't see that happening... hell... a top shelf early 90's Trek 990 in full race trim weighed in at almost 24 pounds! And in the steel mountain bike world that bike is so light it's like riding a fart. It weighs nothing.

And front suspension... I suggest that you ride a mountain bike off road a few times before you jump out there and race one. There is a reason that front suspension is almost universal in mountain biking. You need to discover it. You'll have a very difficult time holding a line with a rigid fork and bumpy trails. Front suspension is a godsend on rough trails. If you ride very technical trails on a hardtail with a rigid fork... you'd better have extraordinary bike handling skills and catlike reflexes.

What you're asking for is possible, but you won't get it cheap or easy.

My 1995 Trek 950 is really stripped down. I added an era-correct RockShox Magnesium suspension fork, and scored a new pair of weight-weenie wheels and light weight racing knobbies for it.

And it still weighs in at over 28 pounds.

I've got a 1996 Trek 9800 CF and it was about 24 lbs stock.

Yeah... the 950 in '95 was steel and all rigid. According to BikePedia it was almost 26 pounds stock.

I concur with Hydrated. You might be better off with two separate bikes - one for groceries, and one for racing. The 950 is a good compromise bike - it does very well on the road (for a mountain bike), and is still a MTB. You can find things that are lighter (we built up a Marin for one of our Scouts, and it was lighter than a 950, and there was one kid who rode something called a Mountainsmith - IIRC, which was crazy light). However, if you want to go off-road to race, you're going to want something sturdy and with front suspension. I've ridden the C&O canal, and in some of the rougher spots, you really want suspension - and that's nothing compared to some of the terrain racers hit.

I'm riding a Trek 990, lugged frame, full Deore XT components with a front shock.
I do exactly what you are wanting to do.
I commute everday of the week on it and if someone wants to do some mountain biking on the weekend I can have it stripped of rack/bags/lights/and street slicks in about 20 minutes. I have an extra set of wheels with knobbies, so I dont have to change the tires.

My boss gave me this bike cause he dont ride any more. It may be the best all around bike in my line-up

You are probably right about the racing bit... on the other hand, I rode my wife's C'dale Super V with full suspension a couple of times (off road) and it drove me nuts. Very hard time moving the thing uphill because some of the pedaling effort it seems, esp. when off the saddle, is taken away by the suspension. On the other hand, she used to do a lot of nasty trail riding with it and swears by it...

Grocery getting without a car is pretty much out of the question here, because the closest grocery store is about 5 miles away, to reach it, I need to get into a well trafficked 55mph road with no shoulders, plus I have a 1000ft climb up the holler to come home to. Just like the idea of having a winter bike that can run light errands (like take a couple of packages to the post office and such)... My commute is about 30 yards from my bedroom to my home office, or 75 miles to Newark International, so that's not really a consideration here. I could potentially use my cross bike for this (like I do now), but I have been thinking of retiring it from that kind of use and turn it into a long rider only

I am at 4 keepers for me and 4 for the family right now (plus 5 more than need to go soon). I could maybe find space for N+1 but N+2...

If you can find one a pre-89 Fuji Mt. Fuji or pre 1990 KHS Montana Summit will fit what you are looking for; triple butted lugged steel frame, non suspension, no "U" brakes can run either canti's or V brakes. You can hit your weight requirements or at least get close, by upgrading to a cf or alloy handlebar, and some alloy rings on the KHS, (stock with steel Bio PAce) the Fuji came with Sugino and alloy chain rings. Someone ripped my Fuji (1984) I have the KHS now. Fuji was a pawn shop buy for $125 in 95 or 96, KHS was Desert Industries find for $8.00 (it needed tires)

If it's tall, I'd be interested.
THX.