Results 1 to 84 of 84
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2

    New question here. Stumpjumper 94-96???

    Hello All!
    Last weeked I finally decided to get my bike out of the garage after many years.
    I remember buying my Stumpjumper sometime between maybe 94-96?
    Anyone any ideas which year the bike was released?

    So would my bike be classed as Vintage/Retro???
    Is there a market for old Stumpjumpers out there?

    I've included some pictures. It's in mint condition and working smoothly, never ridden off road, rarely ridden at all. It's been living in my garage for the past maybe 10 years or so. Everything on the bike is original as when bought from the shop, even the tyres are the original ones. The only exception is the grips have been changed.

    Thanks in advance!
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: robinmiller's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    461
    I have a 1993 Stumpjumper, and i remember a bit about the 1994 line, an from that, i'd say yours is a 1995 or 1996 model, and not earlier. The 1993 rigid steel models were dark metallic red or a weird purple/green fade, and the 1994 models were dun-colored, and had Deore LX parts.

    That rear derailleur looks like a 1996, although it might have been the same for '95, i can't remember.

    Anyway, the Stumpjumper is a fantastic bike. I don't know if it's old enough to be collectible yet, but it's a great ride

    I think the '95/96 models had suspension adjusted geometry (looks that way from the tall fork) so if you put a nice 80mm fork on there, you'll have a fantastic bike even today. It's a Tange Prestige frame. About the only modern feature it will lack would be rear disc brakes.

    Or you could hang it up in your garage for another 10 years and see if it accumulates any more value (or just dust!)
    Last edited by robinmiller; 06-27-2005 at 09:22 AM.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    216
    if its all stock I would say its a 1995. It has X-Ray grip shift in the clear plastic version which were the early ones. SRAM later changed to a smoked grey clear plastic that was supposedly a bit stronger.
    rise above

  4. #4
    Complete Bastard
    Reputation: mward's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,282
    The serial number will tell the year on bikes from that era.

    For instance, the serial number of this bike starts "93 S ..."

    (This is from the race yesterday, my 93 stumpjumper m2 fs)


  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2
    Thanks for the help!

    You were all right about the age of the bike, which goes to show you guys know your stuff!

    I checked the serial number, which confirms it's a 95 Stumpjumper

    Cheers!

  6. #6
    Singletrack Snob
    Reputation: Vitamin G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    262
    Quote Originally Posted by robinmiller

    That rear derailleur looks like a 1996, although it might have been the same for '95, i can't remember.

    I think the '95/96 models had suspension adjusted geometry (looks that way from the tall fork) so if you put a nice 80mm fork on there, you'll have a fantastic bike even today. It's a Tange Prestige frame. About the only modern feature it will lack would be rear disc brakes.
    I ride a '95 Stumpjumper as my main mtn bike, this looks like a '95 as well. The model FS (front suspension) model sold in '95 came with a Rock Shox Mag 21 fork, giving it 63mm of travel. I'm still running that fork, and have wondered what it would handle like with a 80mm fork on there.

    The bike came with X-ray 800 grip shifters, LX front der, and XT rear der. LX canti brakes, tahoma stem and seatpost (30.4 mm). Specialized seat, handlebar, rims and tires.

    Pretty much love this bike!
    "I've got a card in my spokes, I'm practicing my jokes. I'm learning!"

  7. #7
    Complete Bastard
    Reputation: mward's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,282
    It's okay with an 80, that's what's on that frame I'm riding and I find it just fine in tight twisty singletrack. Frankly I think the old rockshok mag21 were about the best forks ever, and wish they still made them. If yours isn't leaking, keep riding it! Mine leaks.

  8. #8
    John Galt
    Reputation: cegrover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,647
    Question for the Stumpy experts:

    What year of Stumpjumper Team was purple with yellow lettering?

    In the early- to mid-90s, one of my college roomates had that bike and it was sweet. I had my gray Rockhopper Comp (1991-ish) at the time. The labeling was similar as far at the lettering and also his "Team" and my "Comp" lettering were located on the seat stay.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    49
    1991 with an XC Pro gruppo. I have the same bike in almost mint condition

  10. #10
    crash test dummy
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    545

    I ride a '94 FS

    Quote Originally Posted by Vitamin G
    I ride a '95 Stumpjumper as my main mtn bike, this looks like a '95 as well. The model FS (front suspension) model sold in '95 came with a Rock Shox Mag 21 fork, giving it 63mm of travel. I'm still running that fork, and have wondered what it would handle like with a 80mm fork on there.

    The bike came with X-ray 800 grip shifters, LX front der, and XT rear der. LX canti brakes, tahoma stem and seatpost (30.4 mm). Specialized seat, handlebar, rims and tires.

    Pretty much love this bike!
    Practically the only surviving components have been the frame and the stem. I swapped out the Judy XC fork for a Marzocchi MX Comp coil fork, with 85mm of travel. The bike remains comfortable, competent, and stable. In retrospect, I would get a fork with a lockout or some climbing control.

    It is a fantastic steel frame. Takes heaps of abuse, handles great, and is compatible with today's components.


  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    26

    Steel Stumpy and S-Works: any difference?

    Was there any difference between the steel S-Works and Stumpjumper frames of the early- to mid-90s? The 95 Specialized catalog says the steel Stumpjumper used Tange Prestige tubes. I thought the S-Works did as well.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by nutallabrot
    1991 with an XC Pro gruppo. I have the same bike in almost mint condition
    I used to have one of them. Light as you like. I defaced mine with silly stuff like anodized alloy bottle cage and stem (ouch) bolts and put a Specialized suspension fork on which ruined the handling. The fork was the one with machined lower legs. Can anyone remember what they were called? Then it was stolen from my flat while my flatmate slept in the next room. Lovely frame. In the shop where I worked there were rumours that they were built in the same factory in Japan as Ritcheys of that era. Anyone know if that was true or not?

    Can you post some pictures?

    Cheers
    Gary

  13. #13
    Singletrack Snob
    Reputation: Vitamin G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    262
    Quote Originally Posted by moonter
    I used to have one of them. Light as you like. I defaced mine with silly stuff like anodized alloy bottle cage and stem (ouch) bolts and put a Specialized suspension fork on which ruined the handling. The fork was the one with machined lower legs. Can anyone remember what they were called? Then it was stolen from my flat while my flatmate slept in the next room. Lovely frame. In the shop where I worked there were rumours that they were built in the same factory in Japan as Ritcheys of that era. Anyone know if that was true or not?

    Can you post some pictures?

    Cheers
    Gary
    Are you talking about the Specialized Future Shocks? I had one on a ParkPre Hammer. The shock that I had was essentially a Mag-10 in disguise.

    I'll try to get a photo of my '95 Stumpjumper in the next couple of days. It's pretty modified from stock, although I have most of the original components still in my basement.
    "I've got a card in my spokes, I'm practicing my jokes. I'm learning!"

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: robinmiller's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    461
    Quote Originally Posted by velokid
    Was there any difference between the steel S-Works and Stumpjumper frames of the early- to mid-90s? The 95 Specialized catalog says the steel Stumpjumper used Tange Prestige tubes. I thought the S-Works did as well.
    It was custom butted tubing, so it's possible the S-works was even lighter. The Stumpjumpers were made in Japan - maybe the S-works was US built?

  15. #15
    Ebo
    Ebo is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,730
    I would say it is a 96 by looking at those Specialized cranks. The 95 had Shimano cranks. Nice bike. I have a 95 M2, a 98 M2, and a 98 NiTi Stumpy. Good frames indeed.

  16. #16
    Singletrack Snob
    Reputation: Vitamin G's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    262
    Quote Originally Posted by moonter

    Can you post some pictures?

    Cheers
    Gary

    1995 Stumpjumper FS, with Mag 21 Fork.
    "I've got a card in my spokes, I'm practicing my jokes. I'm learning!"

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    49
    That's a 1996 model. Mine is exactly the same - Ser No 95L0960. It came with LX apart from the XT rear mech and the X Ray Gripshifts, Son of Strongarm Comp cranks and Mavic 221 rims. The colour is Indigo Blue.

    I say mine's the same but it isn't. Mine's morphed over the years so much that there's nothing original on it bar the bare metal. What's more is that the frame's away for it's third coat of paint and will get new forks, chainset, mechs, stem, bar and saddle.

    I'm sure it'll keep going for another 10 years yet!

    Thanks for the pictures; I never got around to taking any of my bike in its original state.

  18. #18
    Combat Wombat
    Reputation: BrianU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,285

    I have a 1994 Stumpjumper, the green one.

    Quote Originally Posted by steviep
    That's a 1996 model. Mine is exactly the same - Ser No 95L0960. It came with LX apart from the XT rear mech and the X Ray Gripshifts, Son of Strongarm Comp cranks and Mavic 221 rims. The colour is Indigo Blue.

    I say mine's the same but it isn't. Mine's morphed over the years so much that there's nothing original on it bar the bare metal. What's more is that the frame's away for it's third coat of paint and will get new forks, chainset, mechs, stem, bar and saddle.

    I'm sure it'll keep going for another 10 years yet!

    Thanks for the pictures; I never got around to taking any of my bike in its original state.
    Bought it new in 94 and I can remember trying not to annoy the guys at the LBS when I called every day to see if just maybe it was delivered early. I still have the Specialized catalog that I looked at every day for 3 months before finally having enough cash to go buy it. It is hanging in my garage, although all the components are scattered in various boxes and shelves. One of these days I am going to put it back together and ride it.

    Brian

  19. #19
    The "M" is silent and inv
    Reputation: Darth onkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by mward
    The serial number will tell the year on bikes from that era.

    For instance, the serial number of this bike starts "93 S ..."

    (This is from the race yesterday, my 93 stumpjumper m2 fs)

    I was given a puple fade Stumpjumper m2 with yellow lettering. I am trying to pindown the year of the bike. It currently has a delapitaed Manitou fork, but I would like to switch to a rigid fork. I am I looking to put a 80mm? Where can I fine the serial number on my bike?

  20. #20
    Complete Bastard
    Reputation: mward's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,282
    Look on the dropout, it's stamped in fairly big obvious numerals. Sounds like a 93 non suspension model.

  21. #21
    The "M" is silent and inv
    Reputation: Darth onkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    9
    Thanks for the info.
    I'll check that out when I get home. Any guesses as to what size forks I need on that?

  22. #22
    Complete Bastard
    Reputation: mward's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,282
    You'd need a rigid fork with no suspension correction, since it originally had no suspension.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: robinmiller's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    461
    Yep.. that was the M2 'sister' model to my Prestige version. Rigid, with no suspension correction.

  24. #24
    75% Mountain cycle
    Reputation: SanAnMan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    327

    1994 or '95 had the 1 1/8" steer tube

    I may be wrong but I remember that it was '95, that the 1 1/8" steer tube was used. All others before were 1".

  25. #25
    Complete Bastard
    Reputation: mward's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,282
    Quote Originally Posted by SanAnMan
    I may be wrong but I remember that it was '95, that the 1 1/8" steer tube was used. All others before were 1".
    Yes, you're wrong. My 93 has a 1 1/8" steerer tube.

  26. #26
    The "M" is silent and inv
    Reputation: Darth onkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    9

    mward You Da Man

    Thanks, nembers were easy to find with your help. Was the guy I got this from an idiot for putting on the Manitou fork?

  27. #27
    Complete Bastard
    Reputation: mward's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,282
    Well it depends. In that pic there I'm running an 80mm fork and the bike was designed for what, 45mm of travel? I had a 100mm fork on it once and had it set to sag a little more than usual and frankly it handled fine. You just have to finesse it around more in the turns but it wasn't a chopper like some people would have you believe. Now I'm riding a bike with a 72 deg head angle and that doesn't bother me that much either. Maybe I'm an oaf but it doesn't seem to affect my riding. Our trails are very twisty here too, lots of tight turns.

    If you want suspension, putting a fork on there that'll crank down to 63 mm of travel probably wouldn't make much of a handling difference.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    13
    I've got a 95 Stumpjumper FS M2, black with grey. I love this bike, I rode it up until last week when I got a Kona Explosif frame. I put a 80mm fork on it and it was unrideable, or else I would be on it right now. It will make a nice restoration project, as I kept most of the parts that were originally on it.

  29. #29
    Complete Bastard
    Reputation: mward's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,282
    Interesting, it would appear that 'unrideable' is largely a matter of personal style. I don't find the extra front end height or slacker head tube associated with a longer fork objectionable, I guess others do.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    13
    By "unrideable" I mean it could not possibly be riden. The front end pulled side to side, making steering almost impossible.
    2001 Kona Explosif
    1995 Specialized Stumpjumper FS M2

    www.myspace.com/Metachemical

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    13
    I find it strange that your 93 will ride fine with an 80mm fork, but my 95 is unrideable? Anybody have any ideas?
    2001 Kona Explosif
    1995 Specialized Stumpjumper FS M2

    www.myspace.com/Metachemical

  32. #32
    -bustin punks
    Reputation: fatchanceti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    609

    SN Location

    Where are they on the M2 Stumpjumpers? Most of my bikes have them on the bottom of the BB shell, but I don't see it there on my wife's 96 or 97 Stmpy Frame...

    FCTi

  33. #33
    Complete Bastard
    Reputation: mward's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,282
    Read post #20.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    77
    I have always wanted a Stumpjumper and one has come up on my local Craigslist for sale that I can buy for $175. It appears to be the exact same 96 model as shown at the beginning of this post but it has a Rock Shox Judy that is branded as a Future Shock? Is this a decent deal or should I pass?

    I was planning to replace the STX brakes and LX shifters with XT m737 stuff (v-brakes). and swap the STX on to another frame I have to sell for around the same price so the bike should be almost free when I get done. Thoughts?

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: logbiter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,821
    Quote Originally Posted by Dhorn33
    I have always wanted a Stumpjumper and one has come up on my local Craigslist for sale that I can buy for $175. It appears to be the exact same 96 model as shown at the beginning of this post but it has a Rock Shox Judy that is branded as a Future Shock? Is this a decent deal or should I pass?

    I was planning to replace the STX brakes and LX shifters with XT m737 stuff (v-brakes). and swap the STX on to another frame I have to sell for around the same price so the bike should be almost free when I get done. Thoughts?
    price sounds a bit steep.. what's the rest of the component spec? steel or M2?
    If it's the carbon fiber judy, you can offload it for a bit of change and get a better fork, assuming it's functional.
    more likely that it's the future shock that's a mag20/21... if so, I'd offer a bit less.
    IMHO- the m2 is a good rider, if on the stiff side, the steel model has a bit more cache for most of us here, and more comfy for long rides.


  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    77
    A crappy pic from the ad is below. I don't know if the frame is steel or m2 but it has LX shifter/brake levers, Specialized Cranks, XT rear derailler, STX brakes and that is about all I know from my phone conversation with the owner. I think he bought it new and doesn't know much about it but claims to have paid $1700 for it new but I think that is a bit of an exageration. More thoughts?


  37. #37
    VRC Illuminati
    Reputation: Rumpfy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    17,646
    If it's STX, doubtful it's an FSX fork on there.


    Offer $100-125 cash at best. You'll spend way more trying to upgrade the rest of the spec to XT.

    You could probably find a complete bike with better parts for less than you'd spend on that bike + upgrading.
    -eric-

    http://www.rumpfy.com
    Wanted: NDS Suntour XC Pro Microdrive 175mm Crank Arm.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    77
    Looking at the pic and the brochures online it almost has to be that S-works Rock Shox FSX fork? It sure looks like it to me - but I will find out in an hour or so. It would help explain his saying he paid $1700 for it new I think?

    The bike was listed for $275 and I already offered him $150 for it. He came back with $175 so I guess I can look at it and keep trying. There are some lights on it too that I can sell to recoup some of the cost.

    What is more desirable - the m2 or the steel bike?

  39. #39
    VRC Illuminati
    Reputation: Rumpfy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    17,646
    Does kind of look like an FSX. Hard to say. If it is, then it's worth it for you to buy.

    If not, then he way over paid for a full STX'ed Stumpy at $1700.


    As for M2 vs. ...say a steel S-Works, it'll depend on who you ask.
    -eric-

    http://www.rumpfy.com
    Wanted: NDS Suntour XC Pro Microdrive 175mm Crank Arm.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    77
    Well I went and bough the bike. It is a 96 Stumpjumper steel base model with XT rear der., LX front, Strongarm cranks, LX shifter/brakes (these must have been swapped in for the stock Grip Shifts), Mavic 221 rims with LX hubs and DT Swiss spokes, Specialized Tires, stem and seat. Oh - and it has a carbon fiber Rock Shox FSX fork! The guy also threw in a Nightsun Team Max headlight setup. I am pretty happy and will start working on it over the weekend.

  41. #41
    VRC Illuminati
    Reputation: Rumpfy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    17,646
    Quote Originally Posted by Dhorn33
    Well I went and bough the bike. It is a 96 Stumpjumper steel base model with XT rear der., LX front, Strongarm cranks, LX shifter/brakes (these must have been swapped in for the stock Grip Shifts), Mavic 221 rims with LX hubs and DT Swiss spokes, Specialized Tires, stem and seat. Oh - and it has a carbon fiber Rock Shox FSX fork! The guy also threw in a Nightsun Team Max headlight setup. I am pretty happy and will start working on it over the weekend.
    Ah the LX/XT'ed version + a carbon FSX fork...can't go wrong there. Now its worth his original asking price...but you got it for a song.

    Enjoy.

    If you ever don't want the fork...I do.
    -eric-

    http://www.rumpfy.com
    Wanted: NDS Suntour XC Pro Microdrive 175mm Crank Arm.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    77
    I swapped on my old Manitou FS Ti fork and took it for a little spin and I really like this bike! The bike does have STX canti's but otherwise it is LX and XT - wierd?

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: logbiter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,821
    Quote Originally Posted by Dhorn33
    I swapped on my old Manitou FS Ti fork and took it for a little spin and I really like this bike! The bike does have STX canti's but otherwise it is LX and XT - wierd?
    good deal then! I bought the M2 FS base model that year (shoulda got steel!). same build as that, all lx (except x-ray shifters), strongarm cranks. the stx canti's were likely swapped at some point. The next model up came with the judy xc and better bits.

    coincidently, the fs ti was the first decent fork I put on it. I bought the fsx judy the next year on closeout from supergo...
    I put some heavy wt speed springs in it (cambriabike might still have some). w/ some funky shrink wrap stuff to keep it from making noise (what was that stuff called?)
    I blew through a few cartridges in the first 6 months (warrantied by the LBS) and then I traded one of the bike shop employees for his FS ti rather than get a hardbody or eko-air kit cartridge kit.

    parts are now difficult to come by for those old judy's (hippietech will rebuild it, but not very cheap). the ultimate weight weenie upgrade was the eko-air kit, which brought it well below 3lbs IIRC.


  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    77
    According to this site the STX brakes were stock - wierd huh?
    http://www.airfreetires.com/Specs/St...mper&Year=1996

    So my bike is stock with the exception of the FSX and the LX shifers/brake levers. I wish I could have gotten matching rigid fork with it but you can't get everything you want I guess.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    77
    Here are a couple bad pics of mine a few hours after I bought it home and swapped on the FS Ti while I attempt to fix up the FSX fork...




  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: logbiter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,821
    Quote Originally Posted by Dhorn33
    According to this site the STX brakes were stock - wierd huh?
    http://www.airfreetires.com/Specs/St...mper&Year=1996

    So my bike is stock with the exception of the FSX and the LX shifers/brake levers. I wish I could have gotten matching rigid fork with it but you can't get everything you want I guess.
    spechy catalog here is a bit different, but no biggie.
    http://mtb-kataloge.de/html/specialized.html
    the dealer catalog has the nitty gritty.

    those tubes look fat for the steel model though! maybe it's just the pics or my eyes.
    Oh, and there's nothing particularly special about the stock rigid fork (aside from being painted to match). I've still got mine in 'silver satin', which is a really nice color. It was made by tange & it rides pretty nice. All I have left from the M2, aside from some fond memories of good rides & a sore back.


  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    77
    That one actually shows the brakes as STX too? This is the plain jane Stumpy- not the FS model. I imagine the original buyer had the FSX form put on in lieu of the rigid on along with the LX shifters instead of Grip Shift.

    I already have a rigid "suspension corrected" fork on my 93 Trek 930 so I guess I don't need another rigid bike. I am buying a Manitou EFT today too from a local guy so I guess I will have some options with the FS Ti and the FSX and my Manitou 3! Now if I could just get out and start riding more....

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    77
    Man - I love this bike! I took it out a few times this weekend and I am in love. The first trip was with the 75 pound bike trailer loaded up with kids- and then I got to go on a ride last night by myself. I was mostly on pavement but this bike feels very fast, responsive and fun. I haven't had the pleasure of riding some of the high end stuff I see on here - but the geometry on this thing just fits me. I ended up "racing" a guy that was all geared up on a road bike and he had a confused look on his face when I peddled past him doing 20+ mph and saying "nice night huh"! Good times.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: wykes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    35

    UK only? stumpjumper, last of the steel frames?

    This might stump you (get it?, stump, stumpjumper...) I bought my stumpjumper, fully rigid in '99 in England and I'm currently working on upgrading with higher spec components from the same year.
    My serial number is M7JM91380, doesn't seem to follow the order of the common serial numbers, the bike also has different drop outs, with the Reynolds stamp on them.
    I bought it in new '99 but suspect it's older since it's steel and fully rigid... any ideas? anyone else seen one like this, UK stumpjumper fans out there?
    It has an 8 speed cassette, I'd love to upgrade the wheels especially but wonder about the compatibility with newer sizes??
    Attached Images Attached Images

  50. #50
    Re-friggin'-Lax!!!
    Reputation: WEBERTIME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    630
    Several companies did seperate specs/bikes for Europe and the USA. Specialized did that with the Chromoly Stumps.
    If necessity is the mother of invention, laziness is the deadbeat dad that knocked her up.

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    81

    Did anyone see this auction go off this evening?

    Nice flame custom paint , Kooka Cranks , XTR F&R , IBC Hydraulic Brakes , etc , etc......for $200 bucks!

    Seemed like a a rare good deal for Ebay........ especially on a Sunday evening.



    http://cgi.ebay.com/1992-Specialized...QQcmdZViewItem

  52. #52
    VRC Illuminati
    Reputation: Rumpfy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    17,646
    That was a good deal, though the flame paint actually hurts the value of the bike.
    -eric-

    http://www.rumpfy.com
    Wanted: NDS Suntour XC Pro Microdrive 175mm Crank Arm.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    81

    I would prefer this paintjob over the factory.

    That paint job does not inhibit the price in my opinion.

    Assuming that it is in fact a quality custom job (Difficult to tell from the pics). Those flames are much more desirable than the factory paint on this otherwise non descript mass produced bike. They are a dime a dozen!

    If however it were a more rare bike then of course I would defer to the original factory paint. But in this case, the flames work for me. Especially since the vaule is in the parts.

  54. #54
    VRC Illuminati
    Reputation: Rumpfy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    17,646
    Hokay.
    -eric-

    http://www.rumpfy.com
    Wanted: NDS Suntour XC Pro Microdrive 175mm Crank Arm.

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    85
    Quote Originally Posted by dontyoueatthatyellowsnow
    Nice flame custom paint , Kooka Cranks , XTR F&R , IBC Hydraulic Brakes , etc , etc......for $200 bucks!

    Seemed like a a rare good deal for Ebay........ especially on a Sunday evening.



    http://cgi.ebay.com/1992-Specialized...QQcmdZViewItem

    Quote Originally Posted by Rumpfy
    That was a good deal, though the flame paint actually hurts the value of the bike.
    Yes, that was a good deal...surprised I nabbed it

    and, Rumpfy, you are right again, the "custom" paint does hurt the value of the bike, as this bike is an M2 Team from 1992 in great condition, hard to come by anymore, and significant if you are a specialized/ned fan...I would have much preferred it to look original like the one done by ameybrook here:
    http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=23922

    nevertheless, the parts are cool, and in great working order...even if it is a strange mix. As for the custom paint, I've seen much better, and I've seen worse. It does hurt, but I probably would not have gotten this deal had the pics/paint in the ad been any better or true to stock.

    Quote Originally Posted by dontyoueatthatyellowsnow
    That paint job does not inhibit the price in my opinion.

    Assuming that it is in fact a quality custom job (Difficult to tell from the pics). Those flames are much more desirable than the factory paint on this otherwise non descript mass produced bike. They are a dime a dozen!

    If however it were a more rare bike then of course I would defer to the original factory paint. But in this case, the flames work for me. Especially since the vaule is in the parts.
    Your opinion is probably wrong in this case, for the reasons I state above.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rumpfy
    Hokay.
    You could've set him straight

  56. #56
    VRC Illuminati
    Reputation: Rumpfy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    17,646
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldenEraMTB
    You could've set him straight

    Eh. He said it was in 'his opinion', I didn't see any point in raking him over the coals over it (even though I'm quite sure his assessment was incorrect ).


    Ameybrooks M2 is/was the finest example of that bike I think. It was so well done.
    -eric-

    http://www.rumpfy.com
    Wanted: NDS Suntour XC Pro Microdrive 175mm Crank Arm.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    85
    Quote Originally Posted by Rumpfy
    Eh. He said it was in 'his opinion', I didn't see any point in raking him over the coals over it (even though I'm quite sure his assessment was incorrect ).


    Ameybrooks M2 is/was the finest example of that bike I think. It was so well done.

    True.

    and yes, Ameybrooks, along with the story behind it, is the best I could find.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    81
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldenEraMTB
    Yes, that was a good deal...surprised I nabbed it

    and, Rumpfy, you are right again, the "custom" paint does hurt the value of the bike, as this bike is an M2 Team from 1992 in great condition, hard to come by anymore, and significant if you are a specialized/ned fan...I would have much preferred it to look original like the one done by ameybrook here:
    http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=23922

    nevertheless, the parts are cool, and in great working order...even if it is a strange mix. As for the custom paint, I've seen much better, and I've seen worse. It does hurt, but I probably would not have gotten this deal had the pics/paint in the ad been any better or true to stock.



    Your opinion is probably wrong in this case, for the reasons I state above.



    You could've set him straight

    Ahhh....Buyers remorse rears its ugly head again!

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    85
    Quote Originally Posted by dontyoueatthatyellowsnow
    Ahhh....Buyers remorse rears its ugly head again!


    actually, I had my fingers crossed till it arrived. I was hoping I would not have any of that type of remorse...but had my doubts when the only other bidder, (a bidder with well over 1,000 feedback), did not bid again.

    I opened the box, and slowly unpacked it. It wasn't till I took it for a spin, that I breathed a sigh of relief, and promptly left positive feedback

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    33
    80mm's fork fit our old bastards, they don't spoil them. Be warned about the 100mm's that's pushing it...

  61. #61
    VRC Illuminati
    Reputation: Rumpfy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    17,646
    Quote Originally Posted by captain8track
    80mm's fork fit our old bastards, they don't spoil them. Be warned about the 100mm's that's pushing it...
    At 80, its not too pretty. I notice the wallow and raked out front end quite a bit. Rideable, but not ideal.

    edit: I should say, if the frame isn't suspension corrected at all. If it is suspension corrected, ya, 80 would probably not hurt so much.
    -eric-

    http://www.rumpfy.com
    Wanted: NDS Suntour XC Pro Microdrive 175mm Crank Arm.

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    85
    63 is tops for my old bikes

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Slonie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    171
    I'm not sure how many inches of travel this RS Jett has but...I'm planning on taking my '91 back to a rigid fork. It looks pretty darn slacked-out in front to me. I also am probably a "little" big for this frame, but I'm not an expert. That's why I come here.

    Also, is this a semi-excuse to post a pic of "racing" CX on it this last weekend?


  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    33
    yup it's to small, and don't stick the 91fork on it, you have to find "the right" fork for it, try finding something cheap in cr-mo with suspension geometry from hmm 94 or something, that will work fine. I have an M2 from 93, and it's for my girl so I just stuck a random rigid fork on it and it's way to low. I then found a suspension corrected one and it shaped up just perfectly. But now I'm receiving an old Judy sl in good shape to replace that with, oh happy day. BTW mine had an Jet fitted, when I bought it. I don't think it's that bad but mine has 80mm's travel and is now fitted on another bike, until I've made up me mind about a new fork...

    The picture displays my girl 93'M2, with a "correct" fork, I just build it up for a testride with me, so the long stem isn't there anymore and it's going to have XT cantis, other tires and a judy soon. But it's in really good shape! it's a tad to small for me but still it, performs like a true racer!
    Attached Images Attached Images

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Slonie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    171
    Ah, it's my fault for posting in the 94-96 thread, but my M2 is a '91.

    Now if only I could stretch the frame out by an inch or two in each direction...

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    33
    ah sorry didn't read that part. i get a bit confused by this forum sometimes haha. what do u feel about the jet? a cannondale fatty fork would be cool on the specialized and they are a lot of them available with no suspension geometry

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    77
    I was just doing a search to research another cromoly Stumpjumper I am buying tonight and ironically this thread came up with pics of the last cromoly 96 Stumpjumper I bought! Wierd. I still have the 96 and I picked up a 92 M2 rigid that has a 1" threaded fork on it recently and tonight I am picking up another mid 90's steel one that is champagne color. I am hoping to find a deal on a bright geen M2 and once I do I will probably sell a few of these other ones.

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    698
    those are some niiiiiiiiiice bikes, yes i would love to find a 21.5" stumpy
    **Merry Christmas**

  69. #69
    -bustin punks
    Reputation: fatchanceti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    609

    98 Green

    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/rmplum/5083998254/" title="CIMG3161 by rmplum, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4106/5083998254_7551063d89_b.jpg" width="1024" height="768" alt="CIMG3161" /></a>

    98, Dew Green, 17"

    Carbon SID, Mavic 517/XTR 950 wheels, etc.

    Wife's bike, but she's moved on. The frame is mint.

    About 23 lbs without pedals.

  70. #70
    Proud Snob
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    286
    Man I've wanted one of those S-Works since high school. Love those.

    Here's my 95 Stumpjumper. Enjoying riding rigid, but having an old SID rebuild with a travel reducer in case I want to try out a bouncy front end.


    9 speed, XT/XC717 wheels, XT mechs, XT levers/shifters, LX cranks, SD7 brakes. It's the only bike I've put together and not wanted to change anything immediately. More spacers that I'd prefer, but I got lucky and nailed the fit and have zero complaints after spending hour after hour after hour on the bike. I only wish I didn't have to use those god awful zip ties

    I'd be pretty stoked if I found another one and could build it up the exact same but with some Big Apple tires for commuting/bar time/anything else not in the dirt. And then have an older S-Works.

    I swear I'm not a Specialized fanboy, I just found a design that I like and would be content sticking with.

  71. #71
    -bustin punks
    Reputation: fatchanceti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    609
    oops, just re-read the thread title. Sorry my Greeny 98 is not quite old enough for this!

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    77
    I only wish I didn't have to use those god awful zip ties
    I know! My 96 is the same way since I switched to XT v-brakes. I would like to find one of those problem solver cable stops and get rid of the zip ties but so far no luck. I had gone to a ridid fork over the summer but this weekend I reinstalled the Judy FSX and took it on a 20 mile ride last night and I was reminded of just how much I love to ride this bike. It just plain works.

  73. #73
    Proud Snob
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    286
    I hate those clamps. I had a pair on my Steamroller, and yuck. My solution now is WCS patterned zip ties.

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    54
    Good deal for $160?


  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,424
    Quote Originally Posted by AbnInf
    Good deal for $160?

    Seems fair enough................

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    33
    Quote Originally Posted by AbnInf
    Good deal for $160?


    That is a bit steep. I just picked this up yesterday for $80.

    1995 Stumpjumper, Judy XC FS, clipless pedals, WTB tires, and in excellent condition.
    http://sandiego.craigslist.org/csd/bik/2089740485.html

  77. #77
    BMW 2002, Dodge A100, etc
    Reputation: Pimpride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    602
    Looks like a cool rigid rider. Keep it as a skills bike. It will change the personality of your favorite trail if you have a long travel hard tail or full suspension rig. Rigid bike are fun around town and on fire roads too. Looks to be in good shape and if you are the original owner, you should keep it.... Sellers remorse...

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,424
    Quote Originally Posted by loudawwg56
    That is a bit steep. I just picked this up yesterday for $80.

    1995 Stumpjumper, Judy XC FS, clipless pedals, WTB tires, and in excellent condition.
    http://sandiego.craigslist.org/csd/bik/2089740485.html
    That is more of a steal, I still think $160.00 is a FAIR price.

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation: yo-Nate-y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2,734
    Meh, $80 might be a bit cheap but I wouldn't pay $160 for it. If it were a little older, or with some nicer aftermarket parts, sure. The tires look beat, and the forks probably need some work too.
    Somec is like the digital Zunow
    And this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JD5h3y0a9AU

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by yo-Nate-y
    Meh, $80 might be a bit cheap but I wouldn't pay $160 for it. If it were a little older, or with some nicer aftermarket parts, sure. The tires look beat, and the forks probably need some work too.
    I'm going to look at it today. It certainly needs tires, but when I see the spoke protector and the original reflector on the post that tells me it probably hasn't been ridden too hard. With those tires it probably hasn't seen much dirt. And I still remember how to work on a Mag 21. Even have my old pump.

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    33
    Here is the 94 Stumpjumper I picked up the other day. The components on it tells me that is is a 1994 Stumpjumper FS but the Serial number begins with 95..... The bike was extremely well kept and the only thing i changed was the rear tire which I replaced the WTB velociraptors with some Kenda Nevs. I rode it in to work today and am amazed how well it still rides. I bought this for $80 as shown in the pics.



  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,424
    Quote Originally Posted by loudawwg56
    Here is the 94 Stumpjumper I picked up the other day. The components on it tells me that is is a 1994 Stumpjumper FS but the Serial number begins with 95..... The bike was extremely well kept and the only thing i changed was the rear tire which I replaced the WTB velociraptors with some Kenda Nevs. I rode it in to work today and am amazed how well it still rides. I bought this for $80 as shown in the pics.


    Nice score, I have the same frame/color, mine only set me back $10.00. My research indicated that this color was only available as a 95 model. My serial is 94, but often frames are built before model year. I have yet to build mine, I am going to use a surly 1X1 rigid fork and rob a DX group from a donor bike.

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    33
    Quote Originally Posted by Fred Smedley
    Nice score, I have the same frame/color, mine only set me back $10.00. My research indicated that this color was only available as a 95 model. My serial is 94, but often frames are built before model year. I have yet to build mine, I am going to use a surly 1X1 rigid fork and rob a DX group from a donor bike.
    Nice. Yeah I am having a difficult time trying to figure what year my bike is. The 1994 catalog shows the Stumpy FS coming in Dry Green color. The 95' catalog says the FS came in Champagne. The key things that are confusing me are :
    1. my serial number starts with 95
    2. my bike came with a Judy XC
    3. My rear derailleur is XT rest of compnents are LX

    http://www.retrobike.co.uk/gallery2/...2_itemId=15638

    Anyhoo, I was wondering if anyone has pics of their 94-96' stumpjumpers with current day forks.

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    1,424
    Quote Originally Posted by loudawwg56
    Nice. Yeah I am having a difficult time trying to figure what year my bike is. The 1994 catalog shows the Stumpy FS coming in Dry Green color. The 95' catalog says the FS came in Champagne. The key things that are confusing me are :
    1. my serial number starts with 95
    2. my bike came with a Judy XC
    3. My rear derailleur is XT rest of compnents are LX

    http://www.retrobike.co.uk/gallery2/...2_itemId=15638

    Anyhoo, I was wondering if anyone has pics of their 94-96' stumpjumpers with current day forks.
    I believe your bike was originally a rigid as mine as the FS's had mag 21's Bikepedia has all the component specs as well as colors for different models.

Similar Threads

  1. Stumpjumper FSR or Reign?
    By BarfBike in forum Giant
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 05-23-2005, 05:51 PM
  2. Stumpjumper M4: Size, Fit, Performance.
    By grumpstumper in forum Specialized
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-28-2004, 12:50 PM
  3. Specialized Stumpjumper FS, HT, and FSR XC Pro
    By MoparShaha in forum Bike and Frame discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-03-2004, 08:59 PM
  4. Enduro vs. Stumpjumper 2003
    By fornax in forum Specialized
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-10-2004, 09:41 PM
  5. Light XC Frames? FSR, Stumpjumper, Truth
    By myitch in forum Weight Weenies
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 02-17-2004, 01:58 PM

Members who have read this thread: 4

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

mtbr.com and the ConsumerReview Network are business units of Invenda Corporation

(C) Copyright 1996-2018. All Rights Reserved.