Results 1 to 23 of 23
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    464

    Division of "Vintage bikes"

    So I get that bikes up to 97 are considered Vintage but I'm also hearing that bikes with full suspension aren't considered to be in the same 'class' as unsuspended. Why aren't there 2 distinct Vintage forums on MTBR?
    It would seem like it would make things much easier for forum noobs like myself- we wouldn't be irritating the klunker crowd with FS questions and such...

  2. #2
    All Lefty's, all the time Moderator
    Reputation: MendonCycleSmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    12,615
    If there was a FS VRC, they'd get irritated by folks showing up with five old Treks that they can't get parts for anymore, who wouldn't bother to read the stickies either.

    Better to just wait out the crowd. Time will win eventually. Even some of the old crusty folks 'round these parts have a soft spot for some old FS or another.

    FS just starts to represent the era when production took off, and the little, cool, rugged individualist builders impacts start to fade, so it's kinda like seeing your kid go to college. Sad to realize that party is over, but then again, another party is just beginning

    Show up with a Ted Wojcik or a Mountain Goat Whiskeytown FS, and you'll likely get some lively, positive conversations flowing though.

    Ones with "big" names on them? Not too exciting. Klein Mantra's and Trek Y's come to mind....

    Things like your CT? Just wait a few years, a lot of these OG's around here aren't even that comfortable with suspension forks yet.
    This is a Pugs not some carbon wannabee pretzel wagon!!

    - FrostyStruthers



    www.mendoncyclesmith.com

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    392
    well, I wasnt toolin around the woods in the 80's without a motor but there were several manufactuers making full sus bikes. I recently aquired a set of the Fat Tire Flyer mags and have been reading them cover to cover. There are alot of articles and ads with FS bikes. So really, there are many to choose from, just that they are extremely obscure.
    I personally like the FS bikes the most. I have several rigid bikes but they are for screwing around on. I wont ride offroad much on anything without cush...im gettin' too old for that....and I ride way too hard...cant slow down yet.
    So, my current list (yes, I'll get some pics later) which is compromised of completes and frames (without years listed cause I dont have them memorized and dont have the info handy, I will add with each pic).

    Boulder Gazelle....This is the first one I was drooling over. I love the integrated shock and the elevated chainstays (both of which didnt last too long).

    Mantis profloater...this is the second bike I drooled over back when it was tested in MBA...I still want a medium green one if anybody has one for sale. In the early nineties, there was a guy from Michigan that would come down and race on one, all polished....dayum nice bike....dont remember him beating me on it though!

    Fisher's RS-1...what can i say, designed the the Great Mert Lawwill...

    GT RTS-1 and LTS/STS bikes...well, the active lts/sts were interesting rides. I have a rts-1 and an LTS to build and will aquire an STS someday when the price/timing is right. I never rode one but have several friends that rode LTS's.

    Canonadale delta V....chainstretcher extrodinaire.....but the headshock was a good still unit for BITD....my buddy would kill on the downs with his.

    Trek...sorry cant remember the model (i got one packed away somewhere) that had the beam suspension with the doughnuts...cant wait to build that thing up and ride it!!!

    AMP....I have the fork, but no frame yet...I will get one of these eventually.....amp had a good run with the horst rear end.

    Porflex...Girvin Offroad....now these were the first things I actually saw on the trail...wrote them off quickly because of the noodly looking frame. Got to ride one for a week as a demo.....I was sold, hooked and never rode rigid again (unless its road or park). Girvin had the proflex line then the 856's came out and they changed it all...once you ditched the bumpers for soem risse airshocks, thak bike kicked Arse. I raced for proflex for a couple seasons when the 856 came out...rode K2 bikes for years after that.
    I have a K2 Oz that I'm building up to see how it feels again....cant wait to her the naysayers on the proflex...but in reality, I won alot of expert races on them proflexes aginst some really good riders.

    Theses are a few of the bikes I remember well and want to ride again. Most will be junk as they were before, but hey, when were all sittin around a campfire sippin a cold brew, its fun to clunk around on a marvel of engineering like the old trek doughnutt bike.

    I didnt think FS bike were excluded here at all, just not represented yet. Well, you just started it. I am going to add the bikes I have and start new threads accodingly. If the old school guys dont want to party with FS crowed, no biggie, there's several types of VRC bikes I dont care for, but still can acknowledge their existance and purpose in life.

    Here's to riding a bike fast, through rocks, roots, drops, jumps and everything else that comes into view.
    Last edited by syklystt; 03-30-2013 at 02:56 PM. Reason: cant spell

  4. #4
    Phobia of petting zoos.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    478
    Quote Originally Posted by syklystt View Post
    Trek...sorry cant remember the model (i got one packed away somewhere) that had the beam suspension with the doughnuts...cant wait to build that thing up and ride it!!!
    They were commonly referred to as the Trek Ejector Seat.

    Quote Originally Posted by zygote2k View Post
    It would seem like it would make things much easier for forum noobs like myself- we wouldn't be irritating the klunker crowd with FS questions and such...
    There are no irritating questions. Only irritating people.

    But good point on the second forum. You go start it. We'll all be along shortly.

    Grumps

  5. #5
    VRC Illuminati
    Reputation: Rumpfy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    16,689
    In the grand scheme of things, VRC is too small to have multiple forums for it. At least, not on mtbr. A vintage specific website like Retrobike has it divided out.
    -eric-

    http://www.rumpfy.com

    Wanted: Syncros 27.2 x 425 seatpost, 26.8 x 400 IRD seatpost

  6. #6
    Certified Bike Junkie
    Reputation: muddybuddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,737
    There was discussion at one point about somehow dividing it, but for some reason, some people were offended with the notion of dividing it into "the nice vintage bike forum" and "The crappy old bike forum".
    Need: McMahon brake for roller cam mounts, Mountain Goat fork.

  7. #7
    gobsmacked Moderator
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    7,138
    Weird.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    212
    To me, "Vintage" as in all other industries is considered 25 years. That makes anything 1987 or older vintage. No more no less!

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: yo-Nate-y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2,644
    Until next year.
    Somec is like the digital Zunow
    And this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JD5h3y0a9AU

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    212
    Quote Originally Posted by yo-Nate-y View Post
    Until next year.
    true that!

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    392
    so will my future posts just be deleted.....cause....this is VRC...not just vintage...and most bikes I've seen here are from the 90's, not he 80's. I undestand the folks that dont like FS bikes, thats just their opinions and they dont need to repond to what they dont care to.....but are YOU discrediting all FS bikes on the forum because you dont like FS bikes????....just seems to be a severly focsed set of bikes if thats the case....there aint a rigid bike alive that will outclimb a FS bike...and I didnt say rider, I said bike...just plain physics here (and im talking mountain biking...not dirt road biking).....and downhill, well there's not even a comparrison to have there....only place a hardtail is REAL good is smooth singletrac and gettin milk from the store....even then, I'd be planted on a fs bike.....my rigids are all for doing nothing on at all...like riding with real little kids.

  12. #12
    the new Gilbert Grape
    Reputation: laffeaux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,219
    Quote Originally Posted by syklystt View Post
    so will my future posts just be deleted.....cause....this is VRC...not just vintage...and most bikes I've seen here are from the 90's, not he 80's. I undestand the folks that dont like FS bikes, thats just their opinions...
    There is not a universal agreement on what is "vintage" and what is not. Some of us feel that there are plenty of "vintage" full-suspension bikes, while others might draw their line in a time period before they existed. I think that you're worrying too much about what others think.

    Quote Originally Posted by syklystt View Post
    only place a hardtail is REAL good is smooth singletrac and gettin milk from the store....even then, I'd be planted on a fs bike.....my rigids are all for doing nothing on at all...like riding with real little kids.
    This statement is completely bogus, and contradictory to your whole point. I ride rigid bikes on most of the trails in my area - include modern rigid bikes. I own modern and "vintage" FS bikes, but prefer rigid or hardtail bikes on my most trails. Non-FS bikes may not work for you, but they work fine for others.

    There are lots of people with lots of opinions. Some don't think that late '90s frames are vintage. You don't think that rigid bikes cam be ridden on rocky terrain. So what? There is not a right answer. Ride/buy/collect what you want. Some people will like your stuff, others will not. As long as you're happy that's all that matters.
    Each bicycle owned exponentially increases the probability that none is working correctly.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    392
    that is it....and I agree totally with you...I know what I said about rigids was just my opinion...it was really just to say "hey, we all have our opinions" casue I know most folks here prefer to ride rigid, old bikes. There's gonna be folks out there that would beat me on rocky trails with a rigid (its the person not the bike)...im sure of that. I have read all the stickies and the links for what is and isnt VRC....such a debate it is....but my thing is how all the reponders to this post just write off FS bikes...If you dont like them, just dont post...why is this difficult.

    i guess I should ask it this way....

    to the moderators.....will posts about 80's and early/mid 90's FS bikes be allowed in this forum?

    I thought is was to 1997.....???

    Just wondering because I am ramping up to build some bikes and I was planning on posting about them and my comparrisons when riding them....no need to do the extra work if it's going to be deleted or even bashed about like the CT bike. After reading the stickys about this forum, I would think that many of the long time posters would be banned for what they do/say to new poeple whom would just like to share some of their passion with (what they think) are likeminded folks. Why does this place need to be a source of discontent for all but the posters with 1000's of posts????

    I for one, like to see all bikes, not just ritcheys, potts and hams...heck, you prob. will never see any of these in the state that I live in.
    I'm just confused as to this thread and would liek to know how FS bikes are accepted in here...or not.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    392
    Quote Originally Posted by laffeaux View Post
    I think that you're worrying too much about what others think.
    I guess that I would prefer this to be the case.

  15. #15
    the new Gilbert Grape
    Reputation: laffeaux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,219
    Quote Originally Posted by syklystt View Post
    but my thing is how all the reponders to this post just write off FS bikes...If you dont liek them, just dont post...why is this difficult.

    ....will posts about 80's and early/mid 90's FS bikes be allowed in this forum?
    Yes, it's fine to post them. Really nice and innovative FS bikes are much appreciated. However, as far as the Control Tech goes, it's not really either of the above. It's not bad to post it, but few will get excited about it. It's not a "bad bike" it's just not innovative for the time.

    Control Tech built the later Mantis Pro Floater frames, which WAS one of the most innovative bikes of the time. Post one of those and more people will get excited. To me the "sweet spot" CT makes little sense as it represents a step backwards from a Pro Floater and was made by the same company. Why sell a product in 1997 that was inferior to your 1996 product?

    Again, if you like it that's great. I have bikes that few on this board would appreciate, but I like them and they mean something to me. I don't post those particular bikes because I know that the audience that likes them is small. For your CT bike, if there was a great "back story" about you and the bike it would be something interesting. But on it's own it's a dated design that really didn't have a lot of impact on the bike industry.
    Each bicycle owned exponentially increases the probability that none is working correctly.

  16. #16
    gobsmacked Moderator
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    7,138
    No, it won't get deleted unless it's deleted for the usual things. Hawking your wares for sale, WTB spam, outings, flaming, etc.

    Not sure if you missed the subtlety of it, but it was the delivery of the CT posts that caused the backlash.

    As for 80's and early to mid 90's FS bikes, those are always welcome here. Post away. Plenty of people appreciate them here and there are actually lots of threads with them included.

  17. #17
    gobsmacked Moderator
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    7,138
    Quote Originally Posted by syklystt View Post
    there aint a rigid bike alive that will outclimb a FS bike...and I didnt say rider, I said bike...just plain physics here (and im talking mountain biking...not dirt road biking).....and downhill, well there's not even a comparrison to have there....only place a hardtail is REAL good is smooth singletrac and gettin milk from the store....even then, I'd be planted on a fs bike.....my rigids are all for doing nothing on at all...like riding with real little kids.
    I absolutely disagree with you here. Not just this board, but throughout all the forums, people are going to disagree with you here. Your sweeping generalization that "there aint a rigid bike alive that will outclimb a FS bike" is, imho, inaccurate.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: yo-Nate-y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2,644
    Post up your bikes! make some content for the VRC forum. Don't expect everyone to love everything, but better to contribute than to convince yourself not to. There are plenty of FS bikes represented in these pages, though to be sure some designs and brands are better regarded than others.
    Somec is like the digital Zunow
    And this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JD5h3y0a9AU

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    392
    Thanks for the replys...I do understand the CT thread thing...just that is is similar to other things I've read and it was recent..thats all.

    The only ones I was considering posting are the mantis, boulder and the fisher....most of my others are just gimiky things for fun more than anything else...and most from the late 90's....dont expect love or hate, but just didnt want to post if im off base from what is supposed to be here....
    sun is shining...time to go ride like an April fool.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    392
    Quote Originally Posted by girlonbike View Post
    I absolutely disagree with you here. Not just this board, but throughout all the forums, people are going to disagree with you here. Your sweeping generalization that "there aint a rigid bike alive that will outclimb a FS bike" is, imho, inaccurate.
    I know...this is a heavily debated subject. My statement is accurate (im my feeble mind) as in the physics of climbing rely on traction. Traction is increased on a FS bike by the correct pivot location and gear combo, making the tire bite down....I've climbed behind many great racers through the years (yes, behind....but I was close enough to watch)....me on a FS bike, everybody else on rigids (I also was the only one with hairy legs too) going up big climbs....they have to stand (inneffiecient) and then slip all over, whilest I sat and tooled up right behind them....then had energy to keep going at the top (faster recovery)....the stronger riders will always prevail. But the bikes themselves, way different....of course thats only when the going gets tough....and as always... a bike for every occasion.

  21. #21
    Sneaker man
    Reputation: mik_git's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,145
    Hey, browse soem more threads, there are plenty of Fs bikes in here, just need to look to find them. And none of our bikes (i think) would be excluded from the forum, as vrc is vintage, retro and classic (although correct retro bikes arn't really appreciated ha!). You just have to remember if you post something crappy it will get the comments it deserves, or if you post up a bike and say "this is the best bike money can buy/ever made" pretty sure you will get some one telling you exactly why it isn't, in great detail.

    As to FS and climbing, I've owned some both old and new(ish) and still prefer a HT.
    2003 Yeti ARC
    2008 GT Zaskar Reissue
    1996 GT Xizang
    2012 Cervelo R3

  22. #22
    Team Brooklyn
    Reputation: CCMDoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    1,147
    Quote Originally Posted by mik_git View Post
    As to FS and climbing, I've owned some both old and new(ish) and still prefer a HT.
    Me too
    Wanted: more of the same ... but different

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    392
    Ss
    Quote Originally Posted by CCMDoc View Post
    Me too
    ha......its one of those open ended questions.....all opion and situation......but i do love my fs ride...i will go rigid sometime soon just to get a feel.for it again...on XC...... as i just got done with a 3 hour session on my black market MOB....rigid with a 1/2" travel fork....made for what its used for.

Similar Threads

  1. "Next" and "Mongoose" mountain bikes
    By SpAgetttt in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 163
    Last Post: 8 Hours Ago, 03:31 AM
  2. watch out for handlebars/grips being too tall on 12"/14"/16" bikes
    By cmc4130 in forum Families and Riding with Kids
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-22-2013, 08:43 PM
  3. Replies: 2850
    Last Post: 01-01-2013, 08:36 AM
  4. "Vintage" carbon fiber, circa 1991 Carbonframes Onyx
    By First Flight in forum Vintage, Retro, Classic
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-05-2011, 02:18 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-18-2011, 10:28 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •