# Dark Days of MTB



## ameybrook (Sep 9, 2006)

The recent EWR post got me thinking...

.. and I'm not too good at starting successful threads, but here it goes. Many of here witnessed the dark days of MTB, and can now comment on its origin. If you're looking for a date, I'll throw out 97. What products/events/ads/anything do you associate with these evil times?

For me:


Orange Manitou Suspension forks
Lime Green Stumpjumper M2
Yellow Kore stems
Tomac on a Giant
Gary Fisher Joshua
Rapid rise

I could throw out many more, but hopefully more will chime in.


----------



## scant (Jan 5, 2004)

schwinn/ yeti takeover.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

Great pro-mtb personalities started retiring. (unless you're Weins or Overend, still kicking ass).
I personally find most MTB stuff from the late 90's to look 'cheap'.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

ameybrook said:


> .. and I'm not too good at starting successful threadsre will chime in.


So don't link to the 16 page thread already on the subject?  

(actually, they're different, but I had to bust your chops. )


----------



## outside! (Mar 15, 2006)

ameybrook said:


> Many of here witnessed the dark days of MTB, and can now comment on its origin. If you're looking for a date, I'll throw out 97. What products/events/ads/anything do you associate with these evil times?
> 
> For me:
> 
> ...


Too funny, my riding buddy for my weekly night ride (which is tonight) rides one of those. I think his is a 99. I'll have to bust his chops. He is fast though.

If I were to add to the list, I would say Riser Bars. They are inherently evil you know.


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

cannondales


----------



## gm1230126 (Nov 4, 2005)

*Event...The death of Richard Long...*

The tragic death of GT Bicycles president Richard long on July 12th 1996. Spend some time reading through this blog started on the 10th anniversary of Richard's passing by GT team manager Doug Martin. You will come to better understand just how important his presence was to the entire industry at that time. Not many have done more for the sport of cycling or had such an impact on others lives by the examples he lived. One can only imagine where GT would be in the industry today had he not passed away when he did.

http://richard-long.blogspot.com/2006_05_01_archive.html


----------



## chefmiguel (Dec 22, 2007)

I would say
-Richard Longs death
-Shimano XTR (killed the whole CNC guys)
-when guys only raced only XC or DH instead of both
-Specialized buying the Horst Link patent


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

i know it is a silly answer but the gary fisher joshua is just so sad..


----------



## milehi (Nov 2, 1997)

push push shifters
bar ends
nine speed


----------



## girlonbike (Apr 24, 2008)

ameybrook said:


> The recent EWR post got me thinking...
> 
> .. and I'm not too good at starting successful threads, but here it goes.


I'm only posting in support of ameybrook. 

Aluminum
The dot com boom and the rise of the $3000 Serotta road bike


----------



## Eastcoaster (Feb 13, 2004)

*Good times for me....*

November of 1997. My EWR Original Woods Bike (that is still my main mtb to this day...although as "updated" as I can get it.) was made. Sadly, yes, it was one of the last made though. I didn't buy it back then. I couldn't find one. But, luckily, it found it's way into my hands a couple of years later!

As a result of not finding my EWR, it let me to the purchase of my Smorgasbord Hardtail...another great frame.

A great history of Smorgasbord is currently on Dirt Rag in the Blog section. "East Coast Steel", BTW!

Other things....Grip Shift X-Ray. (Unsure if I'm in the proper year on that one though.)


----------



## hairstream (Apr 20, 2008)

> Tomac on a Giant


... exactly.


----------



## cegrover (Oct 17, 2004)

scant said:


> schwinn/ yeti takeover.


Yep, I also feel like we lost of lot of "larger-but-interesting" brands to buyouts in the mid/late 90s to 2000 timeframe:

Schwinn - Paramount and Homegrown stuff was really cool, but they left high-end with the buyout
GT - all sorts of great product back in the day
Diamondback - did some really cool stuff in the 90s (nice steel bikes, Ti and carbon, and quality, early FS bikes)

Even smaller (volume, not influence) brands were lost, too: Salsa, Klein and Fat (okay Fat wasn't bought...).

I own a newer Salsa and think they've become a great brand in the current market, but they're obviously not the same handbuilt beauties.

I'm sure there are others...


----------



## azjeff (Jun 3, 2006)

Interesting replies.:thumbsup: But gotta ask..

_*If I were to add to the list, I would say Riser Bars. They are inherently evil you know.*_

Don't get it..riser bars were part of the early days of mtbs. Only evil when they have barends :madman:

*cannondales*



_-*Specialized buying the Horst Link patent*_

You hate a company for jumping on an opportunity? Blame Horst

For me I'd say it was the general dumbing down of the machine, trying to take any skill out of riding a bike well. And all the niches the industry was inventing to drive sales


----------



## muddybuddy (Jan 31, 2007)

Eastcoaster said:


> Other things....Grip Shift X-Ray. (Unsure if I'm in the proper year on that one though.)


The first generation with the clear plastic was 1993 or 1994 I think, I went through three sets of those before they came out with the smoke colored ones that weren't so fragile.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

hollister said:


> cannondales


:lol:


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

Blue collar bikes.


----------



## dirtdrop (Dec 29, 2003)

Jason McRoy. Gone but not forgotten.


----------



## Vlad (Feb 7, 2004)

"Freeride". Not freeriding or out-of-bounds or all-mountain riding or any other stupid term that the industry attempted to affix on technical trail riding, but the attempt to increase sales with lousy, disgusting, and un-inspiring bikes.

Cannondale's Super-V Active bike
Trek's Y bike
Rock Shox's double-crown, eggplant colored POS
Rock Shox Judys that cracked at the fork brace
GT LTS frames with bent seat tubes

XC race attendance dropping. I still had a blast finishing in the top third of my class in DH races on a hardtail.

Opening up California Bicyclist magazine and reading the Bontrager had been sold to Trek. Seeing Salsa, Ibis, and Fat Chance, and Ritchey go.

"Earthquake" Jake Watson passing at Keyesville.


----------



## Vlad (Feb 7, 2004)

BIKE magazine was so good in it's first three years. The funk issue was b!tchin', as was the issue that had those three Canadians (Tippie, Schley, and Olson) riding down those steeps in BC.


----------



## Vlad (Feb 7, 2004)

So many good memories. I can sit here and post away all night.


----------



## Vlad (Feb 7, 2004)

Getting religion on Brooklyn Machine Works' Park Bike after rolling around on one at Interbike '98. The Supertrucker was wild, too, but in an "I don't have any need for this bike" sort of way.


----------



## Vlad (Feb 7, 2004)

Taking delivery of my Curtlo in '98 when everybody else was going full suspension and aluminum.


----------



## Vlad (Feb 7, 2004)

I don't know. Even the dark days were fun, but sometime around 2000, it began to dawn on me that a lot of my fellow XC racers were dorks. Many of my hellos at the starting line were being rewarded with stares, rather than friendly replies. Oh well; whatever.


----------



## Vlad (Feb 7, 2004)

Okay, I'll shut up now.


----------



## jacdykema (Apr 10, 2006)

I second both aluminum and 1997

also:

full suspension
XTR goes grey
Trek buys almost everything of merit
Three other companies buy everything else of merit
MTBs start to all look the same (see above)
Short Track
"Freeride"
Pseudo Slick MTB tires
V-brakes
ISIS 
No longer seeing fat old hippy guys sitting on their rigid Fat Chances smoker doobers before making their DH runs. 
Full face helmets. 
The steady decline of observed trials
How many gears can we fit on this here cassette? 
People taking everything too God damn seriously.
GT 
Can we make it so people never actually have to feel the trail? 

Jesus, I'm grumpy!


----------



## SuspectDevice (Apr 12, 2004)

September 11th 2001. About 20 minutes before the first plane hit the first tower, the bankruptcy court sold GT/Schwinn to Pacific.....

Richard Long's death was the beginning of the end, and that was the nail in the coffin....


----------



## Vlad (Feb 7, 2004)

I liked the grey XTR group. V-brakes, too.

Semi-slick tires suuuuuuuuucked.


----------



## Vlad (Feb 7, 2004)

Juli Furtado + Lupus


----------



## bucktruck (Jan 8, 2006)

chefmiguel said:


> .............-Shimano XTR (killed the whole CNC guys)..............


Didn't kill them all. Some just had to go in a different direction. :thumbsup:


----------



## XR4TI (Sep 6, 2005)

hollister said:


> cannondales


They look kinda VRC now.


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

I'd say Trek buying everything, just to prove they had "cred". The Specialized AIM, ew....

I don't get the whole Cannondale hate bit though, is it a west coast east coast thing? For me, they were an early adopter, and an independent thinker. Now that they are a shell of their former selves, I have no love for the brand, but back in the day???


----------



## esilvassy (Jul 25, 2006)

For me the dark days co-inside with my gap in biking starting after getting a real job after school in 99 and moving to the city (where there was good riding but I did not know it). In the decline the years before that I was a poor college student and was not paying attention to new stuff as I could not afford anything. There was also less inspiring new stuff coming as well.

The good news is that I left that funk and am back riding like a fiend.:thumbsup: I still have my bike from then, a 93 Stumpjumper M2, I also have a newer full squish bike too. Both are a blast to ride.


----------



## chefmiguel (Dec 22, 2007)

I didn't say I hated Specialized for buying the Horst Link, I just noted that it changed the industry and buried alot of smaller companies. I always liked their steel bikes, don't think they have any in their new line.


----------



## KDXdog (Mar 15, 2007)

Dark days..."VS" everything - a made-up conflict.

Magazine editors had nothing better to do but start silly "VS" battles...aluminum vs steel vs Ti, Rock shox vs Manitou, east vs west, little builders vs the big guys, xc vs downhill vs "freeride", Bikers vs hikers, NORBA vs local race promoters, burritos vs burgers, welding vs brazing, air vs springs, e-stays vs normal, Moto influence vs roadie influence, Trek vs everyone, disc vs canti's vs v's, Euro vs USA, "zines" vs glossy mags, on and on and on. 

They still may do this, but I don't read them anymore. But, it is fun to read the old ones, I still have boxes of them!

And yes, I know I am guilty of some "east vs west" stuff here, but I'm just kidding around, not making a paycheck from it.

When me and my pals rode and raced, we never argued about anything except showing up on time and maybe who brought the cooler.

Hmmmm...were the Olympics a "good" thing for the sport? or did the idea of "money" and "cool" status (that "made" eveyone have a roof rack a top the BMW and bikes they didn't ride too much) kind of wreck things?

These days in the northeast, those Thule's have kayaks on them. Most of them look like they've never seen water!


----------



## jack lantern (Jun 23, 2006)

THE fenders. The one thing even more fragile than a 90's Breezer paintjob.

Shin guards and any other body armor.

Full face helmets.



Anyone else noticing a theme?


----------



## Slimpee (Oct 3, 2007)

esilvassy said:


> For me the dark days co-inside with my gap in biking starting after getting a real job after school in 99 and moving to the city (where there was good riding but I did not know it). In the decline the years before that I was a poor college student and was not paying attention to new stuff as I could not afford anything. There was also less inspiring new stuff coming as well.
> 
> The good news is that I left that funk and am back riding like a fiend.:thumbsup: I still have my bike from then, a 93 Stumpjumper M2, I also have a newer full squish bike too. Both are a blast to ride.


I'm w/ you except instead of a job it was HS and moving to a different part of the city. Fast forward to last summer when I was finally reunited w/ my '96 Kona and my bike love started up again. Since then i've raided CL for a '90-ish Bauer Fusion flat bar 700c bike (which I converted to drop bar), '91 KHS Montana Descent, and a '92 Klein Attitude. I still have the Kona which i'm in the process of SS'ing. I'm known in the local mtb community as quite the vintage lover...

As for the "dark ages" i'd have to agree w/ 97. That's when Judy's stopped being cool, threaded headsets were finished, and FS started to take off.

But, the real kicker is v-brakes...


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

You're all DH haters?


----------



## jack lantern (Jun 23, 2006)

Rumpfy said:


> You're all DH haters?


Guilty.

I just woke up old and grouchy one day.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

I should say...I don't 'hate' DH'ers. I think it'd be fun to gear up and shred at Northstar or Whistler. 

What bothers me about the evolution of gravity oriented disciplines, is how it changed the race scene. It went from events that everyone could participate in with one bike, to something too specific and too difficult for everyone to be a part of.


----------



## jack lantern (Jun 23, 2006)

Rumpfy said:


> I should say...I don't 'hate' DH'ers. I think it'd be fun to gear up and shred at Northstar or Whistler.
> 
> What bothers me about the evolution of gravity oriented disciplines, is how it changed the race scene. It went from events that everyone could participate in with one bike, to something too specific and too difficult for everyone to be a part of.


Well, I shouldn't say "hate", that's a bit strong. I'll just say I have no love for that discipline.


----------



## ameybrook (Sep 9, 2006)

Rumpfy said:


> I should say...I don't 'hate' DH'ers. I think it'd be fun to gear up and shred at Northstar or Whistler.
> 
> What bothers me about the evolution of gravity oriented disciplines, is how it changed the race scene. It went from events that everyone could participate in with one bike, to something too specific and too difficult for everyone to be a part of.


Thus polarizing the market.

My thoughts on DH:

In the late-80s, early 90s, MTB caught on like wildfire, new fitness craze, etc. Everyone went out and bought one. For some, it didn't take long to realize they (1) weren't that comfortable (2) you needed chamois for longer rides, thus making you look like a tool to your friends and (3) they weren't that fun unless you invested the time to learn how to ride it.

Enter DH. Up more people's alley, because going downhill on a bike is fun, right? So everyone throws down on a FS rig. Only it didn't take long to realize you couldn't ride it uphill to get to the descent.

Enter Lance. Road bikes and biking are attractive, and its easy to do. MTBs hang in the garage. Road bikes get used. MTB players start grasping at straws to figure out what to do and end up making it worse.

Those were some dark days. :skep:


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

azjeff said:


> Interesting replies.:thumbsup: But gotta ask..
> 
> _*If I were to add to the list, I would say Riser Bars. They are inherently evil you know.*_
> 
> ...


I would say 97 would be my pick too. And I have to say, FS doesnt eliminate the need for skill - there are still fast and slow guys on the modern bikes. (the skills do need to be revised a little for each though)

MTBing started with DH. I think most would argue that its the best part of the ride, and both rigid and FS bikes are very fun pointed downhill I think.


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

MendonCycleSmith said:


> I don't get the whole Cannondale hate bit though, is it a west coast east coast thing?


no.

I don't dislike cannondale because they're east coast

I dislike cannondales because they're cannondales*.....

*bitter shop rat in me?

ymmv


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

hollister said:


> no.
> 
> I don't dislike cannondale because they're east coast


that said...

LEFT COAST!!


----------



## mainlyfats (Oct 1, 2005)

Cheap. Suspension. Ruined. Everything.


----------



## klein nerd (Apr 9, 2008)

*It Was The Decine Of Racing And Norba*

IT was two things.

1. A notable lull in technology.

2. A complete ruin of NORBA racing. Racing was the sport. $55 per race and + you had to take week days off work, ect ect ect. Poor courses, downhill freak bikes, ect ect ect. Without a venue to compete, what is a sport. Everybody disbanded and went in their own direction to re invent the sport on thier own. Dark Age. But it is an important part of mtb history. I would say 96-2003. The 5th element shock validated suspension and re-invented the sport. But today, it is not the same sport.


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

klein nerd said:


> The 5th element shock validated suspension and re-invented the sport.


don't take this the wrong way

you're effing crazy


----------



## kool maudit (Nov 27, 2007)

matte black.

the end of jewel-like drivetrains.

"extreme" sport culture.

interchangeable european pros.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

klein nerd said:


> IT was two things.
> 
> 1. A notable lull in technology.
> 
> 2. A complete ruin of NORBA racing. Racing was the sport. $55 per race and + you had to take week days off work, ect ect ect. Poor courses, downhill freak bikes, ect ect ect. Without a venue to compete, what is a sport. Everybody disbanded and went in their own direction to re invent the sport on thier own. Dark Age. But it is an important part of mtb history. I would say 96-2003. The 5th element shock validated suspension and re-invented the sport. But today, it is not the same sport.


This coming from the guy who isn't familiar with WTB/King headsets and thinks Trimbles are made of steel.


----------



## Boy named SSue (Jan 7, 2004)

Rumpfy said:


> This coming from the guy who isn't familiar with WTB/King headsets and thinks Trimbles are made of steel.


Have you ever lifted a Trimble? Are you sure they aren't?


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

hollister said:


> don't take this the wrong way
> 
> you're effing crazy


I would have to agree.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

ameybrook said:


> Thus polarizing the market.
> 
> My thoughts on DH:
> 
> ...


bingo.


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

colker1 said:


> bingo.


Doesnt match up to me or people I rode/ride with. We rode/ride FS bikes up hill. We rode road bikes before Lance. But it its probably somewhat accurate. I assume you mean the Lance craze around 2000-present?


----------



## ssmike (Jan 21, 2004)

Upstart "bike" companies who threw out product willy-nilly and used their customers to do the testing.


----------



## outside! (Mar 15, 2006)

azjeff said:


> Interesting replies.:thumbsup: But gotta ask..
> 
> _*If I were to add to the list, I would say Riser Bars. They are inherently evil you know.*_
> 
> Don't get it..riser bars were part of the early days of mtbs. Only evil when they have barends :madman:


Lot's of ideas from the early days need to be excused due to lack of equipment choices. Then again, some of the early ideas were just dumb (like under chainstay brakes/mudtraps).

The late 90's is when the new riser bar craze started simply for fashion. They are heavy, weak and stupid. The only positive thing about them is that they can be rotated to supply more fitting choices for one bar/stem combo. If someone like Easton would offer taller stems and straight bars with more sweep, you could get the same hand postition and save weight with a stronger bar. Thanks to the riser fashion craze, there is now a small selection of flat bars. You are correct, bar ends on risers are dumb.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

Fillet-brazed said:


> Doesnt match up to me or people I rode/ride with. We rode/ride FS bikes up hill. We rode road bikes before Lance. But it its probably somewhat accurate. I assume you mean the Lance craze around 2000-present?


yes. lots of people on road bikes now were on mtbs before. 
plus:
fixed gear bikes are the new cool thing. 
trail closures.
ride everywhere on a road bike (doesn't it make a lot of sense?).


----------



## muddybuddy (Jan 31, 2007)

Boy named SSue said:


> Have you ever lifted a Trimble? Are you sure they aren't?


Oh, come on. Everyone knows there made out of aluminum.


----------



## LIFECYCLE (Mar 8, 2006)

Rigid steel framed bikes.Oops,that applys to all my bikes today.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

ssmike said:


> Upstart "bike" companies who threw out product willy-nilly and used their customers to do the testing.


McMahon suspension forks?


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

Rumpfy said:


> McMahon suspension forks?


cannondale


----------



## Sideknob (Jul 14, 2005)

Rapid Rise.

The demise of coloured ano.


----------



## jack lantern (Jun 23, 2006)

I know this is a petty gripe but I never cared for 4 arm spider cranks. The 5's had such a classier look to them.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

jack lantern said:


> I know this is a petty gripe but I never cared for 4 arm spider cranks. The 5's had such a classier look to them.


Agreed.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

Sideknob said:


> The demise of coloured ano.


Don't feel too bad for that, its making a decent comeback currently.


----------



## hairstream (Apr 20, 2008)

For me, things started getting a little dimmer when Tomac stopped wearing Duegis.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

azjeff said:


> Interesting replies.:thumbsup: But gotta ask..
> 
> _*If I were to add to the list, I would say Riser Bars. They are inherently evil you know.*_
> 
> ...


bingo again.

full suspension killed MTB. kind of a paradox: it increased speed, made aggro afrodable to anyone thus helping close trail access.
mtb had to stay like skateboarding to keep on going: gonzo attitude, skill based outsider sport.

now flame me w/ all you've got!

mtbs were magic to everybody when they had the all terrain attitude; incl. urban comuting.


----------



## klein nerd (Apr 9, 2008)

*I thought trimbles were one piece cast aluminum.*

Maybe people like me are why the sport suffered a dark age. They just didn't want to run into me on the trail. Can't blame them.


----------



## IF52 (Jan 10, 2004)

X Games. Think about it.


----------



## doctor-bond (Sep 8, 2008)

I'd also propose a direct link between the timeline of 'sell out' manufacturing issues well argued on this thread with a loss of bike aesthetics:

Aluminium; suspension; wide tubes; big welds; fat cranks; lots of decals; any thing - any colour; more choice; sub dividing riding styles: what is 'Free ride' and why is it 'North road'?

To sum up: it all got bad when things got fat [or perhaps 'phat']

And lay off under-chainstay brakes: they may clog but for the 99.9% of the time when you really aren't racing, they make your rear triangle look infinitely better. No really. Imposing jaunty canti elbows on a thin steel seatstay is like slapping a dollop of cream on a fine Fedora.


----------



## chefmiguel (Dec 22, 2007)

On a personal note 
-my last day full time at a bike shop. Miss those guys and the time spent with them. 
-Bob Seminara passing away. He was a boss of mine great guy, cool boss and was really active in getting MTB allowed on Staten Island back in the day.
-the end of the one inch head tube. Still looking for a decent fork.


----------



## Shredfit (Oct 13, 2008)

Rumpfy said:


> Don't feel too bad for that, its making a decent comeback currently.


LOL! Remebering a shop sale remark made by a friend trying to sell some bike bling...

Dude, you aren't a mano without some ano... (ca. 1995)


----------



## azjeff (Jun 3, 2006)

Fillet-brazed said:


> And I have to say, FS doesnt eliminate the need for skill - there are still fast and slow guys on the modern bikes.
> .


Disagree. FS eliminated the need to pick the good line. You can ride lazy, not have to put the wheels exactly right to get through a tasty section. Don't get me wrong, I love my 5" Stumpjumper whatever, at this stage with a flaky wrist and other creaks I can't ride a rigid bike 2-3 hours on the rough trails here. Good fun riding the FS on some of the tamer gnar around Sedona but it's a softer, blurry kind of riding. The older bikes make you PAY ATTENTION. Riders can be way faster on FS but not as skilled.

Ah yes..the older I get the better I was


----------



## gm1230126 (Nov 4, 2005)

Turtle Wax's "Metallic" was no longer available in 96 or 7 and there's never been another product like it since. (At least that I've tried). Only product out there that could make aluminum or Ti look like a mirror with a spray shot and a light wipe.


----------



## tymelero (Jun 15, 2006)

go ride!


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

azjeff said:


> Disagree. FS eliminated the need to pick the good line. You can ride lazy, not have to put the wheels exactly right to get through a tasty section. Don't get me wrong, I love my 5" Stumpjumper whatever, at this stage with a flaky wrist and other creaks I can't ride a rigid bike 2-3 hours on the rough trails here. Good fun riding the FS on some of the tamer gnar around Sedona but it's a softer, blurry kind of riding. The older bikes make you PAY ATTENTION. Riders can be way faster on FS but not as skilled.
> 
> Ah yes..the older I get the better I was


Skilled rider on a full rigid bike = fast, on a full suspension bike = faster.
Poor rider on a full rigid bike = not that fast, on a full suspension bike = only some what faster.

It really depends on the kinds of tails you're riding too. I totally agree that one can ride lazy, but when the trails get technical...suspension or not, you're going to need some skill. I don't think that full suspension levels the playing field.
Lots of variables makes this a difficult argument however.


----------



## wv_bob (Sep 12, 2005)

outside! said:


> You are correct, bar ends on risers are dumb.


Don't make me break out a picture of my Phoenix with a Crow Bar and stubby bar ends. :eekster:

It ain't about what YOU think is dumb, it's about what feels good to MY wrists


----------



## mik_git (Feb 4, 2004)

Rumpfy said:


> I should say...I don't 'hate' DH'ers. I think it'd be fun to gear up and shred at Northstar or Whistler.
> 
> What bothers me about the evolution of gravity oriented disciplines, is how it changed the race scene. It went from events that everyone could participate in with one bike, to something too specific and too difficult for everyone to be a part of.


Exactly... i love watching DH and thinks its still great but i miss the the whole 1 stop event, XC,DH and people did both events... and on the same bike.... I alwasys thought trials and dual slalom were cool side events... but i truly HATE 4X and this whole jump off cliffs movement


----------



## muddybuddy (Jan 31, 2007)

mik_git said:


> Exactly... i love watching DH and thinks its still great but i miss the the whole 1 stop event, XC,DH and people did both events... and on the same bike.... I alwasys thought trials and dual slalom were cool side events... but i truly HATE 4X and this whole jump off cliffs movement


And don't forget the uphill races that they used to run at most events. I always looked at that event as the one that separated the hardcore racers. Maybe they could bring that back as a part of a "combined" event; uphill, downhill and XC on the same bike. Now that is something that might get me interested in racing again.


----------



## azjeff (Jun 3, 2006)

Rumpfy said:


> It really depends on the kinds of tails you're riding too.


Dude, I've been married a LONG time...is this a trick question? 



Rumpfy said:


> I totally agree that one can ride lazy, but when the trails get technical...suspension or not, you're going to need some skill. I don't think that full suspension levels the playing field.
> Lots of variables makes this a difficult argument however.


We're saying the same thing only differently.


----------



## IF52 (Jan 10, 2004)

muddybuddy said:


> And don't forget the uphill races that they used to run at most events. I always looked at that event as the one that separated the hardcore racers. Maybe they could bring that back as a part of a "combined" event; uphill, downhill and XC on the same bike. Now that is something that might get me interested in racing again.


Yeah, I agree. I always thought the uphill events were cool. Any douche with more balls than brains can DH (sort of), but it takes mad endurance and finesse to climb well.


----------



## IF52 (Jan 10, 2004)

Rumpfy said:


> Skilled rider on a full rigid bike = fast, on a full suspension bike = faster.
> Poor rider on a full rigid bike = not that fast, on a full suspension bike = only some what faster.
> 
> It really depends on the kinds of tails you're riding too. I totally agree that one can ride lazy, but when the trails get technical...suspension or not, you're going to need some skill. I don't think that full suspension levels the playing field.
> Lots of variables makes this a difficult argument however.


Unskilled on anything means trouble. On full suspension it just makes it worse. The concept seems to embolden people, making them think they can go way faster that they should, jeopardizing their own and others' safety.


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

IF52 said:


> Yeah, I agree. I always thought the uphill events were cool. Any douche with more balls than brains can DH (sort of), but it takes mad endurance and finesse to climb well.


Thats a big sort of. Any douche with big lungs from their parents can climb. I admire the skill over genes actually.

That said, I always did well in uphill events but usually chose to skip the lung competition to save strength for the DH and XC.


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

IF52 said:


> Unskilled on anything means trouble. On full suspension it just makes it worse. The concept seems to embolden people, making them think they can go way faster that they should, jeopardizing their own and others' safety.


everybody should ride road bikes off road to slow them down.


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

wv_bob said:


> Don't make me break out a picture of my Phoenix with a Crow Bar and stubby bar ends. :eekster:
> 
> It ain't about what YOU think is dumb, it's about what feels good to MY wrists


exactly, saying in the same paragraph that risers are a fashion statement and then go on to say that bar ends on risers are dumb is quite contradictory.


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

mik_git said:


> Exactly... i love watching DH and thinks its still great but i miss the the whole 1 stop event, XC,DH and people did both events... and on the same bike.... I alwasys thought trials and dual slalom were cool side events... but i truly HATE 4X and this whole jump off cliffs movement


Yep, having an event like that where you have to ride the same bike throughout is pretty cool. The Downieville Classic is set up like that (no uphill though). It is probably the coolest race I can think of. If you havent yet done it, do it. Right now an east coast dude holds the crown.


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

azjeff said:


> Disagree. FS eliminated the need to pick the good line. You can ride lazy, not have to put the wheels exactly right to get through a tasty section. Don't get me wrong, I love my 5" Stumpjumper whatever, at this stage with a flaky wrist and other creaks I can't ride a rigid bike 2-3 hours on the rough trails here. Good fun riding the FS on some of the tamer gnar around Sedona but it's a softer, blurry kind of riding. The older bikes make you PAY ATTENTION. Riders can be way faster on FS but not as skilled.
> 
> Ah yes..the older I get the better I was


certainly. If you take a given trail at a given speed, the FS is easier. nobody can dispute that. What can be disputed is the fact that increasing the speed increases the challenges and also necessitates line picking decisions. Riding an FS bike forces you to chose lines but youre now ignoring some stuff. On a cross bike youre watching out for 1" diameter rocks. On a mtb you can forget those and watch out for 3" rocks, on an FS bike you can... see what I mean? An FS bikes also allows different (ie rougher) trails to be really fun.

Comparing a full rigid bike to FS is very similar to comparing a 'cross bike to a full rigid mtb. Its pretty much the exact relationship. One allows you to relax more than the other. One allows you to go faster in rough stuff. One forces you pick lines more carefully. Both require skill. Skill will still allow you to increase speed over someone without. Same difference.

I didnt do very well explaining that I dont think, but anyone saying FS bikes take away the skill needed should get off their mtb and use a road bike on your trails to stay in line with that logic. Take it all the way. Youre only in the middle of the spectrum on a rigid mtb - youre not on one end.

Oh, whats that you say? But the MTB is more fun on the trails? Why is that? Same reason an FS bike is fun.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

azjeff said:


> Dude, I've been married a LONG time...is this a trick question?
> 
> We're saying the same thing only differently.


Haha! Tails, trails whatever. 

Ya, I think we're on the same page.


----------



## IF52 (Jan 10, 2004)

Fillet-brazed said:


> ...except for the fact that theyre more forgiving.


Well, my point was it doesn't really matter what you're riding if you you lack good judgement. If your judgement is bad and your going faster you have less time to react.


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

IF52 said:


> Well, my point was it doesn't really matter what you're riding if you you lack good judgement. If your judgement is bad and your going faster you have less time to react.


I call for a mandate to allow only road bikes on trails from here on out to limit our speeds and increase our line picking abilities.


----------



## outside! (Mar 15, 2006)

wv_bob said:


> Don't make me break out a picture of my Phoenix with a Crow Bar and stubby bar ends. :eekster:
> 
> It ain't about what YOU think is dumb, it's about what feels good to MY wrists


A flat bar with the correct width and sweep coupled with a stem with correct length and rise would exaclty duplicate your current hand position and would be a lighter, stronger mount for your stubby bar ends.

Unfortunately the riser bar fashion craze has limited the selection of the flat bars and stems needed to make your wrists happy. Then again, have you tried? Some work with a tape measure, internet research and a good LBS may allow you to find this superior solution.

Riser bars are not generally designed to withstand the extra stresses caused by the increase leverage applied by bar ends (since bar ends are not in fashion). If I were you, I would inspect your bars near the stem clamp periodically. Maybe dumb was too strong a word, but there are better solutions that are driven by function, not fashion.

Riser bars are purely form over function. I prefer function over form. A few months back I saw some pro's bike in MBA that had carbon riser bars bolted into a stem mounted upside down to yield negative rise. Dumb. Mountain bikes were not created to look pretty. I have no problem with new ideas that have improved functionality (like V-Brakes).


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

outside! said:


> A flat bar with the correct width and sweep coupled with a stem with correct length and rise would exaclty duplicate your current hand position and would be a lighter, stronger mount for your stubby bar ends.
> 
> Unfortunately the riser bar fashion craze has limited the selection of the flat bars and stems needed to make your wrists happy. Then again, have you tried? Some work with a tape measure, internet research and a good LBS may allow you to find this superior solution.
> 
> ...


I do agree that the same position can be reached with a different stem and flat bar and that the flat bar is inherently stronger. However, I remember in about 93 or 94 when riser bars came out (for the second time). It was a beautiful thing for DH racing - wide, more sweep than all the available flat bars, and of course, more upright (like Francois Gachet and the like) for better DH weight distribution. A huge improvement over the 19" wide Hyperlites with 3 degrees of sweep. Thats how they came to be (at least in my eyes). It was what was available and it really worked well and felt great. In hind sight the riser bar manufacturer could have offered a stem and bar package to match this positioning, but instead they got there by only offering a riser bar. One thing you could argue, regarding your function over form issue, is that you get more facial clearance (ie more distance from your teeth to your stem) with a riser bar. Ask Rumpfy about that.


----------



## wv_bob (Sep 12, 2005)

> A flat bar with...


I understand all that - these bar ends aren't used for cranking on the bars during climbs, just as a hand rest.

Actually even the crow bar doesn't sweep enough. Have been tempted to pick up a Mary bar and give that a shot.



> Riser bars are purely form over function.


Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man. From my point of view it's exactly the opposite, the function of less wrist trouble over the form of going along and putting up with pain.


----------



## Slimpee (Oct 3, 2007)

wv_bob said:


> Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man.


x2. I'm putting risers on my SS because i don't want to be as stretched out.


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

doctor-bond said:


> I'd also propose a direct link between the timeline of 'sell out' manufacturing issues well argued on this thread with a loss of bike aesthetics:
> 
> Aluminium; suspension; wide tubes; big welds; fat cranks; lots of decals; any thing - any colour; more choice; sub dividing riding styles: what is 'Free ride' and why is it 'North road'?
> 
> ...


admittedly not the best mounting location brakes for riding in wet clay, but here are the advantages:

1. Stiffer mounting spot due to it being closer to the end of the stays (instead of in the middle where they easily bow) and stouter/thicker tubing in this location. This allows more leverage to be built in to the brake system because it is much harder to flex. More leverage means more braking power. Stiffer allows better modulation.

2. With the brakes down below, smaller, lighter seatstays were then allowed because they didnt have to be beefy to counter brake flex/forces. This allowed a lighter frame that rode a bit softer due to the thinner seatstays.

Use what's best in your region.

In NorCal, where these were made, they work very well.


----------



## kuna (Feb 25, 2005)

*Bingo*



ameybrook said:


> Thus polarizing the market.
> 
> My thoughts on DH:
> 
> ...


I have thought about what the heck happened to MTB racing, and Ameybrook seems to sum it up pretty good. Remember roller blades were pretty big back in the day, so was rocking climbing, and now it seems to be kayaking-where I live anyway. Usually new sports come out, everyone wants to try it - then usually it plateau's after the wanna-be's leave. MTB is evolving; FS bikes make more sense than a hard tail (I have both) in terms of traction and rider fatigue, plus I can pick multiple lines down a trail, instead of the one that won't break my bike or lose tracking on.

It still takes skill to navigate a difficult trail regardless of your bike, and I see lots of new riders with armor and 5"+ travel bikes going pretty slow on easy trails, even see lots of riders in full armor and big travel bikes taking the easier trails at Northstar and they were not the rental bike crowd. Riser bars - love em or hate them, more sweep, allow you to cut the steerer tube lower, no need for a "boner" type stem, I think it is preference. DH bikes are cool and seeing the progression in multiple areas means MTB is forever here and not some passing fad, eventually this extreme crowd in MTB will plateau and probably even decrease too. I don't enjoy MTB racing as much anymore, it costs lots of money for traveling all over the country to hit the big races, and stay in far off locations (ie SKI RESORTS), no prize money, expensive entry fees, lack of crowd and local races have maybe 7 guys in my class. I prefer to enjoy the dirt now :thumbsup: instead of killing myself on it, and save the racing to road and cyclocross. Why is XC racing in Europe still pretty big - races are in multiple laps allowing the crowd to see the action, there is a crowd because the courses are in city parks, etc, or if it is at a ski resort the countries there are quite small so you can easily take a day trip drive to races. United States are too big, but we have more trails and land!

Speaking of cyclocross...it's a sport that requires skill, great bikes can be had relatively cheap, entry fees are low (a UCI race I did was $40), and it hurts so bad that it eliminates the wanna-be riders. Plus at the races the crowds are big and can get crazy; why are they big - cause the race is short, you don't have to drive to a ski resort, you can put on a race inside a city park, put up a beer garden, you can see 50% of the course from where ever you stand. Oh yeah, it will never be any Olympic sport cause it is not held it the summer or winter. You should see the attendance of racers and spectators, wow!

I don't see a dark ages here, but rather a change in direction, it does stink that some of the boutique brands back in the day lost their heritage or died altogether, but new ones rose to take their place - don't believe me, look at all the brands at the handmade bike show - most of those fit the vintage style, only handle a bit better.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

Long time no see BA.


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

kuna said:


> I have thought about what the heck happened to MTB racing, and Ameybrook seems to sum it up pretty good. Remember roller blades were pretty big back in the day, so was rocking climbing, and now it seems to be kayaking-where I live anyway. Usually new sports come out, everyone wants to try it - then usually it plateau's after the wanna-be's leave. MTB is evolving; FS bikes make more sense than a hard tail (I have both) in terms of traction and rider fatigue, plus I can pick multiple lines down a trail, instead of the one that won't break my bike or lose tracking on.
> 
> It still takes skill to navigate a difficult trail regardless of your bike, and I see lots of new riders with armor and 5"+ travel bikes going pretty slow on easy trails, even see lots of riders in full armor and big travel bikes taking the easier trails at Northstar and they were not the rental bike crowd. Riser bars - love em or hate them, more sweep, allow you to cut the steerer tube lower, no need for a "boner" type stem, I think it is preference. DH bikes are cool and seeing the progression in multiple areas means MTB is forever here and not some passing fad, eventually this extreme crowd in MTB will plateau and probably even decrease too. I don't enjoy MTB racing as much anymore, it costs lots of money for traveling all over the country to hit the big races, and stay in far off locations (ie SKI RESORTS), no prize money, expensive entry fees, lack of crowd and local races have maybe 7 guys in my class. I prefer to enjoy the dirt now :thumbsup: instead of killing myself on it, and save the racing to road and cyclocross. Why is XC racing in Europe still pretty big - races are in multiple laps allowing the crowd to see the action, there is a crowd because the courses are in city parks, etc, or if it is at a ski resort the countries there are quite small so you can easily take a day trip drive to races. United States are too big, but we have more trails and land!
> 
> ...


I like it. Well said.


----------



## kuna (Feb 25, 2005)

*Yeah*

I pop up here and there: http://www.cyclingnews.com/cross.php?id=cross/2008/sep08/cross_vegas08 ...adding to dark days, in this race one guy has his retirement party that night (still smoking fast) and another guy is coming out of retirement (I'm sure you can figure out the names) Apparently I need to pick one or the other to get faster or just do what the missing 31 riders not in the results did and disappear.


----------



## outside! (Mar 15, 2006)

Fillet-brazed said:


> One thing you could argue, regarding your function over form issue, is that you get more facial clearance (ie more distance from your teeth to your stem) with a riser bar. Ask Rumpfy about that.


You definitely have a point there. It just bugs me that they are such the fashion that there is less selection of good flat bars.

wv_bob, have you tried the Ergon grips? They have helped my wrist pain.


----------



## outside! (Mar 15, 2006)

Fillet-brazed said:


> admittedly not the best mounting location brakes for riding in wet clay, but here are the advantages:
> 
> 1. Stiffer mounting spot due to it being closer to the end of the stays (instead of in the middle where they easily bow) and stouter/thicker tubing in this location. This allows more leverage to be built in to the brake system because it is much harder to flex. More leverage means more braking power. Stiffer allows better modulation.
> 
> ...


I will admit that the brakes worked really great when new and clean. I just think it is a design more fitting for bikes that don't actually go offroad in the nasty stuff. I want my bike to be as durable and maintainence free as possible. I used to commute to work partly off road everyday. My old chainstay mounted u-brake didn't clog up all the time, but the few times that it did (including during a race) made me hate it. Besides the fact that it was constantly filthy and the brake cable would start squeeking where it went through the stupid little plastic thing under the bottom bracket every couple of days. Oh yeah, then there is chainsuck. It was so much fun to have the brake in the way when you are trying to get a muddy chain back on the small cog. The only thing that belongs below the bottom bracket is a Bontrage style anti-chain suck plate. I wish all my bikes had those.

A brake bridge can solve any flex issues at the seat stays, and if your worried about frame weight, don't use riser bars. Seat stay mounted brakes aren't as pretty as under the chainstay brakes, but if I was concerned about pretty I'd be a fixie hipster.


----------



## ssulljm (Sep 3, 2006)

1990, when the UCI took over the status of "official" grantor of Mt Bike World Championships.
Initially done to facilitate qualifying procedure for summer olympics competition.

They summarily ditched older age graded world titles, attempted to limit sr women's status, dumped the intermediate, sport +beginner race opportunities at titled events.
What made mt biking the fastest growing cycling endeavor up to that point,IMHO, was when riders showed up at competitive events, they had people of similar age, sex,fitness, etc to compete with.
The disconnecting of these groups from involvement at world class venue's was so anti everything mt bike riders cherished. Ridin-racin of the same course Tomac, Ruthie M, Julie F, Sara B, Tinker J would duel on was what made championship events fun and accessible. UCI Shat all over that concept, turned it into a tour de france type event, that made me wretch, still does.
We raced Cross Country, Downhill, Hillclimbs, AND trials pretty much on the same bikes back then, gearing+tires were swapped around , not much else.


----------



## azjeff (Jun 3, 2006)

Wasn't 97 about the time Gary Fisher invented 29ers? Thought so.


----------



## mik_git (Feb 4, 2004)

Have thought for a while, if i ever won some huge lottery, i'd promote an event (obvioulsy with a huge prize purse so peopl would actually do it haha) that was a stage race where you could only ride one bike, but now with decent suspension, maybe either a limit to travel, or just hardtail only that had DH, long DH, XC, time trial, hill climb, criterium and technical short course XC. prizes for each evant, big prizes for points winner...

I like DH, but i don't like the fact that they used FS to go faster, then made course to make it harder, then made more travel to cope with course, then made course harder...etc ...etc...


----------



## wv_bob (Sep 12, 2005)

outside! said:


> wv_bob, have you tried the Ergon grips? They have helped my wrist pain.


No, but I'll check them out, thanks for the suggestion :thumbsup:


----------



## GonaSovereign (Sep 20, 2004)

ssulljm said:



> The disconnecting of these groups from involvement at world class venue's was so anti everything mt bike riders cherished. Ridin-racin of the same course Tomac, Ruthie M, Julie F, Sara B, Tinker J would duel on was what made championship events fun and accessible.


You got it. Me, 18 years old, New England Mtn Bike Champs NORBA race at Mt Snow, lined up for my dual slalom qualifier run after competing in the hillclimb. The DS match-ups were pretty random in qualification. Look over to my right and discover I'm lined up against Greg Herbold.

He beat me.

g


----------



## MTGseattle (Jun 29, 2008)

Hollister, There's a set of 180mm revolution cranks on ebay right now.


----------



## scooderdude (Sep 27, 2004)

jacdykema said:


> No longer seeing fat old hippy guys sitting on their ...YETIS... smoker doobers before making their DH runs.


You've obviously never seen me race. :yikes:


----------



## scooderdude (Sep 27, 2004)

outside! said:


> Riser bars are purely form over function.


That must be why nearly every motorcycle uses them.


----------



## scooderdude (Sep 27, 2004)

Although it's like outing someone from my own family, I'd have to say the HUGE shuttle-run crowd is about the worst thing to have happened to mountain biking in recent memory. 

The only thing good I can say about this subset to FR and DH is that it's bloody damn good fun. But it's jacking up our cred amongst other trail user groups for cause, frankly, and will threaten our access to public open space to ride in on down the road.


----------



## ssulljm (Sep 3, 2006)

Look over to my right and discover I'm lined up against Greg Herbold. 
He beat me.

You're in good company with that statement....
Herbold was a regular in many 80's cross country races also , always gave him credit for that, his strong belief that the fitness gained CC'ng gave him an edge when DH'ng, 
No argument there ....at all.


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

ssulljm said:


> Look over to my right and discover I'm lined up against Greg Herbold.
> He beat me.
> 
> You're in good company with that statement....
> ...


haha. Yeah, that's a good story. I remember Herbold racing the cross country - I miss those days.. And I agree, most any top DHer is also very fit. Its a 5 minute, all out anaerobic effort. Ive been closer to collapsing after a DH than after an XC.


----------



## Cdaleblue (Oct 15, 2008)

hollister said:


> no.
> 
> I don't dislike cannondale because they're east coast
> 
> ...


Yeah whatever. Thats just like your opinion man.


----------



## bushpig (Nov 26, 2005)

Fillet-brazed said:


> haha. Yeah, that's a good story. I remember Herbold racing the cross country - I miss those days.. And I agree, most any top DHer is also very fit. Its a 5 minute, all out anaerobic effort. Ive been closer to collapsing after a DH than after an XC.


Jergen Beneke showed up at one of our local races. His pics in the heros put him in mind. The guy was ripped and was a serious roadie in Germany before becoming a downhiller. Suffice to say he smoked everyone in the XC on his down hill bike. Fast fast guy.


----------



## outside! (Mar 15, 2006)

ssulljm said:


> 1990, when the UCI took over the status of "official" grantor of Mt Bike World Championships.
> Initially done to facilitate qualifying procedure for summer olympics competition.
> 
> They summarily ditched older age graded world titles, attempted to limit sr women's status, dumped the intermediate, sport +beginner race opportunities at titled events.
> ...


I think ssulljim nailed it here. As futher evidence, the 1990 Worlds in Durango were the first race I went to where the T-Shirt wasn't included in the race fee. (And the organizer's son was a dick when I pointed out the non-coolness of that move.)


----------



## outside! (Mar 15, 2006)

scooderdude said:


> That must be why nearly every motorcycle uses them.


Wow, your right. Sign me up for dual crown forks on my XC bike so I can mount riser bars with a cross bar (that I can cover with a fashionable pad covered in advertising logos).

Riser bars make sense on dual crown forks mounted on machines that weigh more than I do. On sub 30 pound bicycles, not so much.

If you like riding around with extra weight for no real benefit, you could start adding pie-plates and fenders to your mountain bike. Actually, pie plates and fenders serve a real purpose, they just aren't as pretty as riser bars. Fillet-brazed has brought up the only real advantage in favor of riser bars I can think of, extra clearance for your face (or other body parts).


----------



## tashi (Apr 17, 2005)

Sooo, anyway....but still on the flat bar thing:

It appears to me that the flat bar is back. DH versions from Chromag and Syncros, tons of XC versions, even wide ones with lots of sweep are offered by the companies that cater to the niner crowd (Salsa, Niner, as well as the big guys like Ritchey). I ONLY ride wide swept bars and my XC bikes ONLY have flat bars. Salsa Moto-Ace 11deg 710mm. Nice bar.


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

tashi said:


> Sooo, anyway....but still on the flat bar thing:
> 
> It appears to me that the flat bar is back. DH versions from Chromag and Syncros, tons of XC versions, even wide ones with lots of sweep are offered by the companies that cater to the niner crowd (Salsa, Niner, as well as the big guys like Ritchey). I ONLY ride wide swept bars and my XC bikes ONLY have flat bars. Salsa Moto-Ace 11deg 710mm. Nice bar.


yes, a tall 8" travel fork kinda negates the need for a 2.5" rise...


----------



## muddybuddy (Jan 31, 2007)

I don't know if anyone else noticed, but four of the five things that RC called the "most important mountain bike innovations of all time" in the current MBA have also been listed here as degrading the sport. Just an interesting observation.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

Fillet-brazed said:


> yes, a tall 8" travel fork kinda negates the need for a 2.5" rise...


You run the risers upside down. Duh.


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

Rumpfy said:


> You run the risers upside down. Duh.


...or just run drop bars.


----------



## Berkley (May 21, 2007)

Date of origin unknown...


----------



## muddybuddy (Jan 31, 2007)

Berkley said:


> Date of origin unknown...


Looking at the shoes, I don't think its too old.


----------



## chefmiguel (Dec 22, 2007)

I think Rumphy found his new avitar!


----------



## Zion Rasta (Jan 7, 2004)

Don't know if has been said, but here are the horrors of the dark days:

Anodize purple everything

foam helmets

Cycling apparel graphics (ok to wear color bike lycras)

Toe clips

Elastomer suspencion forks

Cannondale raven and super v

Aluminum forks

Cream colored wall tires

Bike nashbar

No ebay

short TT & 140mm stems

Suspension corrected? What the hell is that?

Suspension stems

ARAYA

Raleigh and mongoose were "top of the line"

4 spoke plastic wheels - yellow


----------



## pinguwin (Aug 20, 2004)

Zion Rasta said:


> toe clips
> 
> Aluminum forks


I would say that toe clips were on the way out during the dark days.

I'm not sure what you mean by aluminum forks. I can't think of too many, none that were popular. During the dark days, I would say that magnesium was more popular than even steel forks. Oh, Klein fans will heartily disagree with you about Al forks too.

Pinguwin

P.S. Even I wouldn't wear that orange get-up and there isn't much I would hesitate to wear.


----------



## pmiska (Nov 10, 2006)

Dark days... Late 90's, early 00's and the creation of the freeride bike. To me this marked the real turning point where mtb's started to really split into "distinct" factions. Not to mention the creation of an excuse to create under-engineered, portly and poor performing bikes in the name of durability (durability to survive what? flat out abuse and poor riding skill!)

I don't think suspension is inherently bad for the sport, heck it allows me to keep riding. My back can only take so many miles on my hard tail no matter how carefully I chose a line... 

I do miss the prevalence of botique builders, and the willingness of those builders to make bold designs, whether they really worked or not. 

I am really conflicted about the growing dirt jump/street movement... On the one hand I think to myself "that's not mountain biking", on the other hand, what I always liked about maountain biking is that it was free of the strict definitions that made the roadie community so uninviting. The other aspect is I see more small companies making some cool and progressive hard tails that I would actually love to build up for trail riding (personal opinion, but the blkmrkt mob looks like a really nice HT!). However, the whole genre of riding has a x-games type of stigma that attracts a less than stellar crowd to MTB riding. It also is the flashier and more marketable end of current MTB culture and thus gets more exposure to folks outside of the sport... 

Whether we like it or not, every portion of the sport will look bad to someone on the outside... And as a bunch of retro grouches, we are all going to find something to complain about....


----------



## literocola (Dec 18, 2006)

colker1 said:


> i know it is a silly answer but the gary fisher joshua is just so sad..


RIP my Joshua. Thing was impossible to actually ride.


----------



## ssmike (Jan 21, 2004)

ssulljm said:


> 1990, when the UCI took over the status of "official" grantor of Mt Bike World Championships.
> Initially done to facilitate qualifying procedure for summer olympics competition.
> 
> They summarily ditched older age graded world titles, attempted to limit sr women's status, dumped the intermediate, sport +beginner race opportunities at titled events.
> ...


And the UCI also just made skinsuits illegal for downhill racing. Is the object to get to the bottom of the hill fastest or look the raddest whilst racing?


----------



## mainlyfats (Oct 1, 2005)

pmiska said:


> I don't think suspension is inherently bad for the sport....
> QUOTE]
> 
> That was my point a few pages back. Good for you and your body, no doubt! Good for the sport - very questionable - good for maintaining the "good old days" of MTB - not so much!
> ...


----------



## xy9ine (Feb 2, 2005)

Rumpfy said:


> Don't feel too bad for that, its making a decent comeback currently.


 i, for one, am stoked. check out chromag's pretty new colors - purple is back!

for what it's worth - 'dark days' & 'mountainbikes' don't belong in the same sentence, imo. in my last quarter century of riding bikes offroad i've witnessed or partaken in almost every evolution / trend / subgenre failed or successful and have enjoyed every moment. bikes are good!


----------



## proto2000 (Jan 27, 2007)

*When I'm 64*



Fillet-brazed said:


> yes, a tall 8" travel fork kinda negates the need for a 2.5" rise...


If you are in the later stages of life and do enjoy your daily jaunts on your killer long travel bike, I cannot see why you would want to bend over the bars to make your back hurt worse than it does. I'm in this catagory as are a lot of BBers so here's my 2 cents. Full suspension is for all who are over 40. Taller bars=less back pain. Disc brakes means less effort on the levers. Better seat is nice on the rear end. All in all newer or new fangled is generally better. I do have a few relics in my quiver but I'm no average 50 year old and I do have a 8" travel bike that gets used as is my daily rider SC Heckler.

Peace


----------



## tashi (Apr 17, 2005)

Fillet-brazed said:


> yes, a tall 8" travel fork kinda negates the need for a 2.5" rise...


When I test rode my new Stumpjumper I thought immediately "the bars on this thing need to go down". I put a Salsa 11deg bar on there and the result is awesome. Fast and low on the climbs with the forks wound down, a position I just couldn't get with a riser. Unwind the fork and it feels like a DS bike, bars right up high where I need 'em.

Back when I was running a 3" Z2 and 135mm stem on the front of my Hot the riser bar was key fer sure. Modern forks and geometry and flat bars have eliminated that need.

These are definitely not the dark days. MTB might be in a gloden age right now, bikes that can do anything well are everywhere.

Dark days were 3" tires, 50lb Norco Shores, Super Monsters and the rest of the heavy crap from the freeride boom. Suuuuch overkill. Luckily now you can huck your meat on a 35lb bike that can actually pedal, if that's your thing.


----------



## uphiller (Jan 13, 2004)

tashi said:


> Sooo, anyway....but still on the flat bar thing:
> 
> It appears to me that the flat bar is back. DH versions from Chromag and Syncros, tons of XC versions, even wide ones with lots of sweep are offered by the companies that cater to the niner crowd (Salsa, Niner, as well as the big guys like Ritchey). I ONLY ride wide swept bars and my XC bikes ONLY have flat bars. Salsa Moto-Ace 11deg 710mm. Nice bar.


They always declare stuff dead and obsolete, then bring it back after several years, making it sound new and innovative.


----------



## uphiller (Jan 13, 2004)

I would like to add something about the whole belief that "riders who started riding on full suspension have less skill and finesse". That's true, but misses something very important: if you start out on a full-suspension machine, you immediately are able to attain higher speeds on bumpy trails. I think the kids who started with those bikes have better reflexes as a result.


----------



## vintagemtbr (Jun 6, 2004)

*Funny but true.*



Fillet-brazed said:


> everybody should ride road bikes off road to slow them down.


:thumbsup:


----------



## disease (Nov 27, 2007)

colker1 said:


> bingo again.
> 
> full suspension killed MTB. kind of a paradox: it increased speed, made aggro afrodable to anyone thus helping close trail access.
> mtb had to stay like skateboarding to keep on going: gonzo attitude, skill based outsider sport.
> ...


It was not the full suspension bike per se that killed mountain biking. There were full suspension designs such as AMP, Mantis, and others in the early years. These were designed for the same trail uses as hardtails. What killed mountain biking was television coverage. Television is responsible for presenting mountain biking as brief, spectacular events for spectators. This was contrary to the technical endurance epics that most riders experienced as mountain biking far from cameras and fans.

New riders saw this type of riding as mountain biking. They flocked to buy DH and "freeride" bikes, in order to impress their friends. I even remember some of my own group of riders buying into it, trying out wooden stunts built over existing trails, and stopping the group ride to demand attention while they "performed" for the rest. It was annoying beyond belief. It was usually the less fit and dedicated who subscribed to this new style. Prior to that, it was the ability to 'clean' a particularly dificult section of trail that won praise and admiration. But that was accomplished _during_ an uninterrupted ride. It was not the reason_ for _the ride.

Now I see only riders my age on the trails. Younger riders don't even know where the trails are. They park at the base of the chairlift if they are old enough. If not, they ride around the city in little packs, seatposts dropped, saddle tilted up, with six inch travel forks and disc brakes, just looking for for urban obstacle to jump from. They have no idea what they are missing.


----------



## tashi (Apr 17, 2005)

I can't believe that some of you think that NOW are the dark days of MTB!

There is a bike on the market for any type of riding now, not like in the 90's where everything on the market was based on racing. Personally I've never ridden so much new trail ('cause I returned to XC/trail bikes) and even the kids that only do cool and extreme sports are riding bikes - awesome! Those kids sure weren't going to start riding when getting ready for a ride meant coating yourself with lycra and grinding up a fireroad for an hour before you get to the "downhill". 24 hour events, adventure races, grassroots traditional racing and guided tours abound. Every development has it's downsides of course, and while some places have changed for the "worse" (ie: they're not all mine anymore and now need management) opportunities have only increased with the opening of the sport.

Viva la mountainbike!


----------



## hairstream (Apr 20, 2008)

I kinda dug the lycra (as long as it had something cool on it ...say, Yeti, Salsa, etc. I even liked having to ride up-hill. I still "like" the death grinds, it makes me feel like I've earned the long beautiful single track prize. I think we were more "fit" back then due to the "cross-country" nature of riding. It might even have something to do with the fact that I'm almost 50 and can't believe what other "non-riding" guys my age look like. Go figure. Still, I think there is room for everybody. And, if most of them want to spend their time riding the lift, that just means more open single track for me and my retro bretheren. PS. I only ride lifts in the winter. Ah, what do I know... I'm just an old fart.


----------



## klein nerd (Apr 9, 2008)

*technolgy was dark but the riding was wonderful*

There was a period of poor products on the market and a decline in racing and over all participation in the sport. However this was period of exciting riding styles being developed and the sport was rapidly changing. As a young man in college in Santa Cruz CA during the late 90's I participated in the transition from everbody doing XC to jumping, city riding, 3'' travel forks, ect.. and it was the best period of my life. But yes, the technolgy was not up to the demands of the riders, and massive numbers of racers were hanging up their bikes for good. Chow.


----------



## rabidweasel999 (Oct 22, 2006)

disease said:


> If not, they ride around the city in little packs, seatposts dropped, saddle tilted up, with six inch travel forks and disc brakes, just looking for for urban obstacle to jump from. They have no idea what they are missing.


Not looking for a fight or anything, but speaking as one of said seat-dropped hoodlums, I really don't think that the onset of people doing those things has harmed the sport at all.

Children of the 60s and 70s probably roamed around on their little Stingrays, hopping potholes and continually fine-tuning their technique in search of popping the perfect wheelie. I'm sure the roadies of the time hated that, but IMO it's just putting some youthful vigor into riding your bike.

Urban rides are a hell of a good time, I might point out. There's just something about tearing around on your bike hucking things that nothing else can replace, not even XC. Of course, I love riding trails as much as the next guy, but bragging about how many miles you rode on your bike isn't the same as bragging about how long that gap you cleared back there was. Personally, I need SOMETHING other that just moseying along to attract my interest. 

Besides, think of all the kids that aren't peddling crack on street corners. Instead, they're on bikes. :thumbsup:


----------



## disease (Nov 27, 2007)

rabidweasel999 said:


> Not looking for a fight or anything, but speaking as one of said seat-dropped hoodlums, I really don't think that the onset of people doing those things has harmed the sport at all.
> 
> Children of the 60s and 70s probably roamed around on their little Stingrays, hopping potholes and continually fine-tuning their technique in search of popping the perfect wheelie. I'm sure the roadies of the time hated that, but IMO it's just putting some youthful vigor into riding your bike.
> 
> ...


The trails I ride are extremely technical. If my local trails were not technically challenging, perhaps I would seek out urban challenges.

Urban riding is not the same as trail riding. I don't have any problems with urban riding per se. There are technical challenges available in the city, no question. I think that a good trail has technical challenges that equal or surpass anything to be found in the urban environment. I suspect that many newer riders who have purchased urban style bikes as their first and only rides probably never ride them outside of a city or bike park. I never see them on the more technical local trails, that's for sure. That is what I meant by they do not know what they are missing. They seem content to limit their riding to man made venues, assuming that the natural terrain could not possibly offer something as challenging.


----------



## rabidweasel999 (Oct 22, 2006)

I suppose I misunderstood you. Sorry about that.

I ride an aggressive AM bike and a crappy urban bike. I ride the AM bike (a Mongoose Khyber) more than I do the urban bike. While I do enjoy a good, rip-roaring technical trail, it's hard for me to get to one. That's probably a lot of the reason why you see kids riding urban stuff these days, although I might be wrong.

Anyway, I ride trails when I can, but that's not very often.

Back to ano, neon, and skinsuits.


----------



## GoldenEraMTB (Aug 25, 2008)

azjeff said:


> Interesting replies.:thumbsup: But gotta ask..
> 
> _*If I were to add to the list, I would say Riser Bars. They are inherently evil you know.*_
> 
> ...


I agree:

riser bars were around on the first mountain bikes...no bar ends please.

cannondales...wtf...as an answer to this thread- I don't get it.

I'll add one:
The demise of the LBS; three of the four in my area closed in the late 90s
oh and
the rise of the "FR" freeride bike.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

Zion Rasta said:


> Don't know if has been said, but here are the horrors of the dark days:
> 
> Anodize purple everything
> 
> ...


what's wrong w/ 140mm stems?


----------



## Vlad (Feb 7, 2004)

Primal Wear jerseys--hideous sh!t.


----------



## jeff (Jan 13, 2004)

Vlad's picks #4.


----------



## mechagouki (Nov 30, 2007)

ARAYA?

This thread shows how many good members don't come around any more. Too bad.


----------



## richieb (Oct 21, 2004)

I think the dark days of mtb coincided with the advent of Internet chat rooms and forums, where theoretical riders waste valuable saddle time debating the merits and pitfalls of various parts of the sport, makes every freakshow with a different wheel size feel lie he's part of a "movement", and pretty much leads to some of the most inane debates I have ever witnessed.

Oh, to the haters, shin pads and riser bars are necessary if you ever got the business end of a Club Roost double cage pedal scrape up your shin on a wet trials course.


----------



## scooderdude (Sep 27, 2004)

richieb said:


> I think the dark days of mtb coincided with the advent of Internet chat rooms and forums, where theoretical riders waste valuable saddle time debating the merits and pitfalls of various parts of the sport, makes every freakshow with a different wheel size feel lie he's part of a "movement", and pretty much leads to some of the most inane debates I have ever witnessed.
> 
> Oh, to the haters, shin pads and riser bars are necessary if you ever got the business end of a Club Roost double cage pedal scrape up your shin on a wet trials course.


What Richie said. :thumbsup:

And shin guards: I've lost count of the number of shin core samples I've collected in the hex head hollows of DH pedals, and rip roaring gashes I've had to field dress, when not paying attention while dinking around on my (and others') DH rigs. My shins are messed up!


----------



## 805MTB (Jul 4, 2010)

scant said:


> schwinn/ yeti takeover.


1997 YETI AS-3


----------



## Deuce Bigelow (Jun 9, 2010)

scooderdude said:


> And shin guards: I've lost count of the number of shin core samples I've collected in the hex head hollows of DH pedals, and rip roaring gashes I've had to field dress, when not paying attention while dinking around on my (and others') DH rigs. My shins are messed up!


I thought chicks dig scars? Wasn't that the whole point of those pedals in the first place?


----------



## ong (Jun 26, 2006)

Deuce Bigelow said:


> I thought chicks dig scars? Wasn't that the whole point of those pedals in the first place?


"He drinks too much, doesn't know how to communicate, and hates my friends, but at least his shins are riddled with tiny puncture scars."


----------



## ong (Jun 26, 2006)

double post


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

richieb said:


> I think the dark days of mtb coincided with the advent of Internet chat rooms and forums, where theoretical riders waste valuable saddle time debating the merits and pitfalls of various parts of the sport, makes every freakshow with a different wheel size feel lie he's part of a "movement", and pretty much leads to some of the most inane debates I have ever witnessed.


Double edged sword. Those same forums and chat rooms have given me a fantastic collection of bikes and some very good friends.

Its only a waste if you regret the time spent here when you could have otherwise been riding...

But I do agree a lot of e-waste is spewed. Its no substitute for riding or an actual real social life either...but some good has come from it.


----------



## [email protected] (Oct 17, 2009)

richieb said:


> I think the dark days of mtb coincided with the advent of Internet chat rooms and forums, where theoretical riders waste valuable saddle time debating the merits and pitfalls of various parts of the sport, makes every freakshow with a different wheel size feel lie he's part of a "movement", and pretty much leads to some of the most inane debates I have ever witnessed.


Truth be told, I don't think internet chat cuts into ride time. I think it is overwhelmingly cut from work time ... and perhaps other non-riding time that riders would prefer to procrastinate and ignore.


----------



## richieb (Oct 21, 2004)

Deuce Bigelow said:


> I thought chicks dig scars? Wasn't that the whole point of those pedals in the first place?


I could care less if chicks dig scars - I dislike pain immensely, and I like all my blood to be IN my body. If I was that worried about what chicks thought, would I have taken up trials in the first place?!?

Actually, for those of us who needed HIGH traction pedals for wet, muddy East Coast and BC trials competitions, those Roosts couldn't be beat!

If anyone ever rode bikes because they thought it would get them girls, they obviously picked the wrong sport. Any of us in committed relationships with women are in them IN SPITE of being cyclins, in my opinion...slippin' on some Barry White, slippin' off my shirt to exposed my drastically under-developed upper body and perma-farmer-tan.

Chicka-WOW.

SEXY!


----------



## sandmangts (Feb 16, 2004)

Rumpfy said:


> Double edged sword. Those same forums and chat rooms have given me a fantastic collection of bikes and some very good friends.
> 
> Its only a waste if you regret the time spent here when you could have otherwise been riding...
> 
> But I do agree a lot of e-waste is spewed. Its no substitute for riding or an actual real social life either...but some good has come from it.


I would not have been able to complete many of my bike builds had it not been for the advice and guidance of a few members of this forum among others. Made lots of friends here. Then again there are the others....

Dark age? Whenever Trek first spewed out the 9000 series full susser bikes. Manitou frames.

Golden age? For me it is now, I have a really decent collection of bikes to ride. I just sold my last Garage queen to buy a bike that is older than my father.


----------



## 805MTB (Jul 4, 2010)

You guys wanna know the *dark days* of mountain biking?

back when i used to go night riding with my dual beam Night Rider


----------



## jeff (Jan 13, 2004)

The day Zap started wearing a Salsa shirt in public.


----------



## Vlad (Feb 7, 2004)

I've met Zap. Nice guy.


----------



## Vlad (Feb 7, 2004)

And his truck had a super-rad SuperMex sticker.


----------



## Linoleum (Aug 25, 2008)

richieb said:


> slippin' off my shirt to exposed my drastically under-developed upper body


haha, too funny man!


----------



## Sideknob (Jul 14, 2005)

The carbon fiber obsession and tales of cracking frames / parts. (in other words, the present day)

(flame suit on)


----------



## jeff (Jan 13, 2004)

Vlad said:


> I've met Zap. Nice guy.


I met him at Mammoth and I'll agree with you. He was very approachable, liked my bike ect. so it was not at all intended as a slam. Not that Salsa cycles was flying under the radar in 1990 but when I saw that he and I were wearing the same shirt I no longer felt like I was ahead of the curve. It was that year I realized my summer passion was going main stream so I no longer felt like "one of the cool kids". That said, my passion for the sport has not diminished. I still love to turn people on to the sport, I still wrench on something almost every night and I still smile when I see someone heading out for a ride.

j


----------



## Repack Rider (Oct 22, 2005)

That falls squarely in the middle of my 11 years between new bikes.

I woke up one day and there was full suspension and disc brakes already beta tested, and 29 inch wheels. Did I miss anything?


----------



## TigWorld (Feb 8, 2010)

Anything with an elastomer in it.


----------



## IF52 (Jan 10, 2004)

TigWorld said:


> Anything with an elastomer in it.


Your cars engine compartment?


----------



## TigWorld (Feb 8, 2010)

IF52 said:


> Your cars engine compartment?


What's that got to do with the "Dark Days of MTB"?


----------



## IF52 (Jan 10, 2004)

TigWorld said:


> What's that got to do with the "Dark Days of MTB"?


Oh, yeah, my bad. You said anything with elastomer in it and I was just looking up the part numbers for engine mounts for my car and got confused.


----------



## Pimpride (Nov 14, 2005)

*97 Was too Organized and 2010 is too specialized, where's the fun?*

I remember 1997 as being when a riding started to be more about claiming your light weight parts and having a peeing contest about how your bike is set up. Group riding just seemed a little more fun before anyone gave a crap about purple anodized parts. Not that I don't like a little MTB 'eye candy' but get over it... The actual ride and the next turn is way cooler than your space aged, dual suspended, 29 incher, 650b wheeled recumbent with 4 feet of suspension. Seemed a lot more fun when people would 'run what they brung' and ride in jean shorts and the only helmets were Bob Ross Brand Afros with chin straps. Can't forget that mountain biking is #1 for fun, because in today's techo-kook, iphone 6.0 environment, someone can take the fun out of anything by trying to start a 'my bike is better than yours' peeing contest.


----------



## Vlad (Feb 7, 2004)

I'd bet I can pee farther than you can.


----------



## girlonbike (Apr 24, 2008)

I bet you can totally beat me.


----------



## Vlad (Feb 7, 2004)

Only one way to find out.


----------



## ericb49 (Aug 11, 2006)

girlonbike said:


> I bet you can totally beat me.


http://www.shepee.co.uk/


----------



## tintin40 (May 27, 2007)

klein nerd
mtbr member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 139
I thought trimbles were one piece cast aluminum.



They are a type of fiber Glass know as E Glass

And are wonderful bikes


----------



## Ride Free or Die (May 4, 2010)

Yeah modern, technologically advanced bikes totally suck. I hate everything that isnt the way it was 13 years ago. U brakes totally rock.Speaking of which the 94 Specialized Rockhopper was the best bike ever made, every bike should be that one forever. 
I hate that this sport is so affordable now. I hate that a good bike costs $4K. 
I like to see people on the trails fully clad in neon spandex, sporting a jersey for a team they'll never ride for. 
People who do 360s off of cliffs are A-holes.
I hate anyone who rides down a hill. 
Why would you want tires wider than 2.1"? 
Why dont more mountain bikers toke up?
I wanna scramble an egg while its still inside its shell. 
I miss bikes that were adorned with anodized parts representing every color in the rainbow.
Why dont people still ride those cool bikes with the big front wheel? Those were perfect. What ever happened to the velocipede? I hate any bike with pedals. 
I hate people who manipulate circular platters to make that wicky wicky sound. 
Todays music aint got the same soul, I like that old time rock and roll.
Why dont people sport handlebar moustaches anymore? Should be popular with the cyclists.
:rant: 
I hate emoticons

Really though, I like the old stuff I like the new stuff. Its all worth having in the collection
As far as I'm concerned, aside from mountain biking, the 90's sucked. 
P.S. My username is a reference to my state not my riding style, before anyone starts...LOL
I hate internet abbreviations.


----------



## Deuce Bigelow (Jun 9, 2010)

Ride Free or Die said:


> Why dont people sport handlebar moustaches anymore? Should be popular with the cyclists.


One of the coolest guys around sports one and has for a long time.


----------



## Vlad (Feb 7, 2004)

I don't know, man. The '90s gave us Steve Albini and so many great bands that he worked with.

3DViolet can eat a d!ck.


----------



## Ride Free or Die (May 4, 2010)

Deuce Bigelow said:


> One of the coolest guys around sports one and has for a long time.


You?


----------



## Deuce Bigelow (Jun 9, 2010)

Ride Free or Die said:


> You?


Nope. I'm not that cool. Refer here:

http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=339306


----------



## MERK26 (Aug 31, 2009)

The dark days for me were before Mountain bikes really existed. In about 1973, me and two buddies were riding in the woods of Eastern Ontario...they were on Sting Ray styled bikes and I was on my first 10 speed. I kept losing traction and sliding out, which inspired me to say..."Ya` know what would be neat? A ten speed with fat, knobby tires like a motorcycle!" 
If only I would have started up a little company making them... . 
First time I saw a "All terrain Bicycle" ...I actually said "That`s exactly what I meant!"


----------



## IF52 (Jan 10, 2004)

Vlad said:


> I don't know, man. The '90s gave us Steve Albini and so many great bands that he worked with.
> 
> 3DViolet can eat a d!ck.


No way dude, the 80s gave us Steve Albini. The 90s gave us the kick a$$ bands he produced on Touch and Go.


----------



## surly357 (Jan 19, 2006)

I don't care when the dark days began, I want to know when they're going to end......


----------



## mainlyfats (Oct 1, 2005)

IF52 said:


> No way dude, the 80s gave us Steve Albini. The 90s gave us the kick a$$ bands he produced on Touch and Go.


 And in the 00's he ruined Godspeed You Black Emperor! I'll never forgive him for that...


----------



## Ride Free or Die (May 4, 2010)

Deuce Bigelow said:


> Nope. I'm not that cool. Refer here:
> 
> http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=339306


Now I got ya. Though in some photos he's sporting more of a modified "push broom", very Norris-esque. I can only hope that one day my pathetic testicles will produce enough testosterone to produce a lip mane of similar stature.


----------



## ilostmypassword (Dec 9, 2006)

$$$ Greed $$$


----------



## 9.8m/s/s (Sep 26, 2005)

Fillet-brazed said:


> I call for a mandate to allow only road bikes on trails from here on out to limit our speeds and increase our line picking abilities.


Love it. I tried to make it my sig, but I had to modify a bit to stay within the 125 character limit. Hope you don't mind.


----------



## Vlad (Feb 7, 2004)

IF52 said:


> No way dude, the 80s gave us Steve Albini. The 90s gave us the kick a$$ bands he produced on Touch and Go.


Right you are!


----------



## 251 (May 13, 2008)

The progression of this thread really demonstrates the decline in the quality and value of these forums. 

Back on topic: I'm not impressed with much in MTB scene from around 2000 on. Advances I do appreciate include the comparative lack of flex in current suspension forks and tire design.


----------



## TraumaARNP (Oct 13, 2005)

Yup


----------



## victorthewombat (Jan 12, 2004)

maybe Murdochs capture in 1988. or sis in 1986, or more than likely....Rock Shox in 1991... caio

Wombat


----------



## Pimpride (Nov 14, 2005)

*Np*

Before 1999 and 2000 there were many companies still building frames in the US and the glut of aerospace materials from the former Soviet Union made for some nice scandium and titanium frames available (with disk brake tabs). Many comanies were gobbled up by larger Fish by then, but there was some unique stuff on the market from 97--->99. Not that theres some nice high end equipmet today, but everything is too specialized in that you need 10 different bikes. DH, AM, XC, Dirt Jump, Freeride/Trials, Commuter, RoadBike, BMX, Recumbent, 29", 650B.... I don't know what to do, my head is spinning. Maybe I'll ride my 1993 Amplifier....


----------



## tintin40 (May 27, 2007)

Now is the dark days of MTBing. It's just **** now. Bring back the early 90's


----------



## SHADES (Feb 23, 2005)

> Dark Days of MTB


The day after I painted TurbCat Tom's frame.


----------



## Vlad (Feb 7, 2004)

SHADES said:


> The day after I painted TurbCat Tom's frame.


ZING!!!

Such a rad bike.


----------



## mattytruth (Aug 2, 2006)

Whats with all this dark days b*llsh*t. If you're patient you can find just about any bike, frame or component you want on the internet. There are more American builders who are capable & willing to make anything you want. At least three different sources are producing a variation on bullmoose bars & I recently ordered a 1" threadless fork from White Bros. for my Yo Eddy (yeah I know, I should be running a rigid fork) & you know they offer it threaded as well We can still buy Phil hubs & bottom brackets new. Has anyone used better brakes than are being made by Paul right now along with a bunch of other beautifully made parts, all available new. Did anyone see the Chris King booth at the NAHBS this year? I mean talk about a variety of incredible parts! There are more places to ride than ever before at least where I live in the north east. Steel, Ti, aluminum, carbon fiber, bamboo.who cares? I say any day I can go in the woods on a bike & disappear for a while is a great day, no matter what the decade. or the bike The only dark days are the ones that you cant ride.


----------



## CroMoHo (Oct 20, 2009)

Specialized's bold slogan; *"Innovate or Die"* , I'm guessing somewhere around 1997.
Those bastards!


----------



## CroMoHo (Oct 20, 2009)

Oh yeah, but I'd also like to give kudos to IRD for being on of the only companies to start remaking older style components that are nice and actually work! Like have you seen their new-ish top mount thumb shifters? Very sweet!


----------



## Vlad (Feb 7, 2004)

mattytruth said:


> Whats with all this dark days b*llsh*t. If you're patient you can find just about any bike, frame or component you want on the internet. There are more American builders who are capable & willing to make anything you want. At least three different sources are producing a variation on bullmoose bars & I recently ordered a 1" threadless fork from White Bros. for my Yo Eddy (yeah I know, I should be running a rigid fork) & you know they offer it threaded as well We can still buy Phil hubs & bottom brackets new. Has anyone used better brakes than are being made by Paul right now along with a bunch of other beautifully made parts, all available new. Did anyone see the Chris King booth at the NAHBS this year? I mean talk about a variety of incredible parts! There are more places to ride than ever before at least where I live in the north east. Steel, Ti, aluminum, carbon fiber, bamboo.who cares? I say any day I can go in the woods on a bike & disappear for a while is a great day, no matter what the decade. or the bike The only dark days are the ones that you cant ride.


We're not talking about _now._

I liked Schwinn's _Cars suck_ ads. And then they got Toyota to sponsor their race team.


----------



## Pimpride (Nov 14, 2005)

*True That!*



mattytruth said:


> The only dark days are the ones that you cant ride.


True That


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

The 97 CT FS bikes must have been the last cool bike...


----------



## muddybuddy (Jan 31, 2007)

Or the harbinger of uncool bikes to come...


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

muddybuddy said:


> Or the harbinger of uncool bikes to come...


if you had one.


----------



## Tim Kriksciun (Mar 6, 2013)

Chinese manufacturing.


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

Tim Kriksciun said:


> Chinese manufacturing.


well actually, it's usually a sign of success when an American company is able to get their bikes produced overseas. China, Taiwan, Korea all produce the majority of bicycles nowadays and many companies were having their bikes made by them in the late 80's. Just because it's made overseas doesn't mean it's crap. There have been quite a few American made bikes that were absolute crap.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

We get it...you like Control Tech frames. Sorry man, they're not as great as you think they are. Otherwise they would have sold more and more people would own/collect/ride them.


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

zygote2k said:


> well actually, it's usually a sign of success when an American company is able to get their bikes produced overseas.


Success? I call that selling out, screwing your passionate employees who've helped you get to where you're at now, cashing in so you can live the big life, as opposed to one where you're actually in touch (albeit only slightly) with the folks who make your product.

Let me guess, perpetual corporate growth is what you believe to be not only healthy, but proper, and sustainable in perpetuity.

Yuck.

Chinese should make bikes for Chinese. If you want a Chinese bike, import one yourself as a buddy of mine did with his Flying Pigeon, and pay appropriately to do so.


----------



## girlonbike (Apr 24, 2008)

zygote2k said:


> well actually, it's usually a sign of success when an American company is able to get their bikes produced overseas. China, Taiwan, Korea all produce the majority of bicycles nowadays and many companies were having their bikes made by them in the late 80's. Just because it's made overseas doesn't mean it's crap. There have been quite a few American made bikes that were absolute crap.


I agree with you that just because it's made overseas doesn't mean it's crap. However, I'm going to disagree with your statement that it's usually a sign of success when a bike is produced overseas. I think all the American men and women that made handmade bikes and are still sweating out a living making handmade bikes here don't view it as a sign of success. Sure a person could sell their company to a big manufacturer or cut costs and farm it out overseas but that is a financial decision and not necessarily an indication of success. To equate money to success is doing a lot of artisans and wonderful framemakers a disservice.

I'd rather have a little soul in my vintage bikes but that is my own personal tastes for bikes.


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

Here's what I know about CT. They made lots of add on components like bars, stems, brakes, etc. They were an American manufacturing firm and were one of the first companies making CNC stuff. JC and Mert got involved with them around 96 and CT started making leader forks and the Team Issue FS bikes. They made less than 100 of the bikes and a few hundred of the forks. In 98 they filed bankruptcy and folded becuase they couldn't compete with the other companies that were making FS bikes overseas.
The bikes were mostly ridden by factory riders and weren't sold to the public. They had the best of the CNC work that Castellano designed compared to the Homegrown and the Szazbo. The Homegrowns used less superior parts and their welding isn't nearly as nice as what was on the CT. The Ibis is a close second in terms of nice CNC work, but if you look at the Szazbo, it has additional tubing and isn't quite as refined.
The sweet spot suspension was a cutting edge idea in the history of rear suspension and is still in use today on some of the very nicest FS bikes. 
I've been in contact with the designer and some of the early pioneers in the field of early MTB and they all say that CT kinda flew under the radar and did their own thing.

I'm willing to bet that you've never ridden one and if you had, you might have a different opinion.


----------



## girlonbike (Apr 24, 2008)

So how can you say overseas frames are a sign of success if you're saying your beloved CT was bankrupted by the same companies that do all of their work overseas?


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

you guys love to twist words and make assumptions here.

I don't think that ALL American companies want to get the manufacturing done overseas, just the ones who wish to stay competitive when all of their competitors are doing the same. I realize that some companies wish to remain small in order to give the customer the best value for their hard earned dollar. 
I'm all for American made things- I grew up on Hemi cars, guns, moonshine, and mountain bikes.
Since so little is actually known about CT, I've only gotten the info that I know about them from long hours of research and actually collecting their bikes and getting to know some of the people who were influential back in the day who helped develop the FS bikes.


----------



## 1niceride (Jan 30, 2004)

MendonCycleSmith said:


> Let me guess, perpetual corporate growth is what you believe to be not only healthy, but proper, and sustainable in perpetuity.
> 
> Yuck.


The world economy is a ponzi scheme just like you say..

I just don't understand 9, 10, 11 speed. I use 3 different gear inches most all the time. Thats my issue.


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

Just to throw this out there I think that NAHBS has shone a light so bright and so strong and so penetrating that I don't even remember a time when it was dark. All I see is a huge resurgence of what it was like in the early days with handmade bikes everywhere, crazy components made by crazy people showing up and the big manufacturers struggling to keep up. 

There, oh and I can't put an exact date on it but it was when racers stopped doing XC on saturday and the DH on sunday then fit in observed trials and the uphill time trial.


----------



## yo-Nate-y (Mar 5, 2009)

Control Tech made bikes?


----------



## KDXdog (Mar 15, 2007)

Don't blame chinese manufacturing for Control Tech's business problems. That's too easy. Folding after 100 bikes? The bikes were a drop in the bucket compared to everything else they made, so it had to be something else.

By the way, I'm positive the computer you're typing your anti-chinese rant on was made there. 

I know I must have posted on this thread in the past, but since it's been brought back from the dead, my 2 cents: FREE-RIDE = dark days.


----------



## mik_git (Feb 4, 2004)

Success!!


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

KDXdog said:


> Don't blame chinese manufacturing for Control Tech's business problems. That's too easy. Folding after 100 bikes? The bikes were a drop in the bucket compared to everything else they made, so it had to be something else.
> 
> By the way, I'm positive the computer you're typing your anti-chinese rant on was made there.
> 
> I know I must have posted on this thread in the past, but since it's been brought back from the dead, my 2 cents: FREE-RIDE = dark days.


I'm not blaming anything on CT's failure or bankruptcy. I simply don't know enough about them but I'm certain I know more about the company than anyone else here.
I'm pretty sure that your computer that you typed that witty response on and nearly everything in your house was made overseas too.


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

mik_git said:


> Success!!


same name different company.


----------



## mik_git (Feb 4, 2004)

well technically the same company, obviously when they went under, someone bought the name, probably hotlines or someone and ressurected them like nuke proof. But as they bought them out they can claim all their old "we've been making parts since '89" blah... so same name, same company, different owners.


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

mik_git said:


> well technically the same company, obviously when they went under, someone bought the name, probably hotlines or someone and ressurected them like nuke proof. But as they bought them out they can claim all their old "we've been making parts since '89" blah... so same name, same company, different owners.


If you all actually researched things like I do, then you'd come up with different conclusions but it's way easier for many of you to jump on the bandwagon when one of your own gets crushed by the competition.
It would be a better use of your feet on the pedals instead of in your mouths....

I'd like to see any of you out on the track or trails, then we can see who really knows what.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

zygote2k said:


> If you all actually researched things like I do, then you'd come up with different conclusions but it's way easier for many of you to jump on the bandwagon when one of your own gets crushed by the competition.
> It would be a better use of your feet on the pedals instead of in your mouths....
> 
> I'd like to see any of you out on the track or trails, then we can see who really knows what.


It's the same logo.. and it's a different company? It's a diff. management only.


----------



## girlonbike (Apr 24, 2008)

zygote2k said:


> If you all actually researched things like I do, then you'd come up with different conclusions but it's way easier for many of you to jump on the bandwagon when one of your own gets crushed by the competition.
> It would be a better use of your feet on the pedals instead of in your mouths....
> 
> I'd like to see any of you out on the track or trails, then we can see who really knows what.


----------



## mik_git (Feb 4, 2004)

whatl are you on about? I'm not jumping on any band wagon and who is crushing who? I like control tech, always have, only ever owned one of their old stems, don't really like the design of the bike you love so much, but thats just a personal opinion, not an evaluation of how they work.

But anyway since I'm so wrong why don't you explain it from all your research... from my end it seems pretty simple. Company makes stuff, company goes broke, closes down. At some point company gets bought up as some other company thinks that the name and heritage of the company can upsold, owning company relaunches the bought up company, claims made to the fact that they have been around since 19xx and were famous etc. Money is hopefully made.
Happens all the time,seems to be working pretty well with NukeProof. Cannondale, GT, Mongoose, Schwinn all went under, got bought out. They are all the same company but no longer owned or run or really have anything to do with the original company, but trade off the fact that they were. 

I don't know what your problem is, there wouldn't be anyone here on the forums who dislikes controltech. You seem to have this crazy love for their suspension bikes, which is fine, but if anyone doesn't seem to show an equal love or possibly indicate that they may not be the best bike ever made you go off the rails.


----------



## scrublover (Dec 30, 2003)

zygote2k said:


> The sweet spot suspension was a cutting edge idea in the history of rear suspension and is still in use today on some of the very nicest FS bikes.


Methinks you lost a lot of people right there.

The Sweet Spot sucked then, and it sucks now. It's just that back then, there weren't as many other better designs as there are now, with which to compare its sucky-ness.


----------



## TigWorld (Feb 8, 2010)

Dark days of FS MTB = URT

Works when seated, doesn't when standing. Dark dark days indeed.


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

colker1 said:


> It's the same logo.. and it's a different company? It's a diff. management only.


It's actually not even the same logo. Look closely at the US made stuff and then look at the new Chinese stuff- same wording but different design above the words. If you read the company history, it says they re-opened the US side of things in the mid 2000's. The original USA company was based in Washington state.
There have been many companies that folded and then the tooling and intellectual rights were purchased by a foreign corporation which still uses the same name as the original defunct company. ( ever hear of Christianity?)
I got this brilliant response from CT this morning when asking for more info on the older products:

Dear Rob,

We currently do not produce Team Issue FS anymore. You may find our currently product information on Control Technology - Main Page

Best Regards,
Gisele
Controltech
Wei Hau Accessories Co., Ltd
Tel No.:886-4-8231923 Ext120
Fax No.:886-4-8231976
Skpe:giselehandmaker
Mail: [email protected] 
Controltech Bike

The first link isn't even bike related.


----------



## mik_git (Feb 4, 2004)

SO are you agreeing with me or not? I can't figure it out. You seem to argue a point only to agree with what i'm saying... even the email "do not produce Team Issue FS anymore" seems to say, yeah we're controltech, were all changed a lot now, but yeah thats us those guys that used to make those.

How about you tell us all about whats what since you researched it all rather than just saying we're all idiots and know nothing about what we're talking about.


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

mik_git said:


> I don't know what your problem is, there wouldn't be anyone here on the forums who dislikes controltech. You seem to have this crazy love for their suspension bikes, which is fine, but if anyone doesn't seem to show an equal love or possibly indicate that they may not be the best bike ever made you go off the rails.


nothing has made me go off the rails- just trying to beat down the naysayers and bandwagon riders that are so prevalent here with the facts. I'm pretty sure that very few people that haunt these forums have never even seen a sweet spot bike let alone actually ridden them. everyone here likes to pile-on and razz the new guy and I'm only razzing back.



scrublover said:


> Methinks you lost a lot of people right there.
> 
> The Sweet Spot sucked then, and it sucks now. It's just that back then, there weren't as many other better designs as there are now, with which to compare its sucky-ness.


Did you ever ride one for any length of time? I ride mine every chance I get and enter many races and rides with these bikes. Sure, there are some handling characteristics that could be improved, but what bike do you know that doesn't have some issue with handling? I used to ride a full steel Diamondback Apex for many years and this bike is a million times more comfortable and durable for a 6'5" 275# gorilla like me. It climbs better than most modern bikes but tends to have the rear end unload when using hard braking on steep descents. I put my ass behind the seat to overcome this issue and ride on.



TigWorld said:


> Dark days of FS MTB = URT
> 
> Works when seated, doesn't when standing. Dark dark days indeed.


Actually it does work when standing/climbing hills. Not as efficiently as it does when you are seated. Can't agree that it's the dark days category because it's American innovation, made in USA, CNC'd artwork, and is still working 16 years later.


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

mik_git said:


> SO are you agreeing with me or not? I can't figure it out. You seem to argue a point only to agree with what i'm saying... even the email "do not produce Team Issue FS anymore" seems to say, yeah we're controltech, were all changed a lot now, but yeah thats us those guys that used to make those.
> 
> How about you tell us all about whats what since you researched it all rather than just saying we're all idiots and know nothing about what we're talking about.


I never said that any of you were idiots and didn't know what you were talking about. I just made many needed clarifications. I actually respect many of the people who give me a hard time here.
Are you still mad cause I busted on your cheese-t, I mean GT collection? Triple Triangle Team Whoo! Sorry, couldn't help myself. We busted on GT's like that back in the day too.


----------



## mik_git (Feb 4, 2004)

You do realise that the triple triangle is the best bike design ever put into use don't you... but using that design, there is 3% increase in torsional stiffness, in addition the the 3% gain in torsional flexabilty.


----------



## mik_git (Feb 4, 2004)

anyway to get this thread back somewhere on topic I would say in addition to the splitting up of DH and XC world cups which sort of segregated the sport a bit,
-shaun palmer, the day after he turned up at the 96 worlds and did really well, everybody in my neck of the woods come monday was lining up to order pretend troy lee full face helmets, and as much fox moto gear as they could get their hands on.

-the fact that a whole bunch of manufactures (controltech included) either went bust or got gobbled up by the big manufacturers and pretty much disappeared.


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

mik_git said:


> You do realise that the triple triangle is the best bike design ever put into use don't you... but using that design, there is 3% increase in torsional stiffness, in addition the the 3% gain in torsional flexabilty.


I remember hearing the propaganda back in the day about the 3t design but many of them were big heavy klunkers that sported low end parts, were made overseas and had silly names and paint jobs. Funny how no one else made triple triangle frames except GT... really 3%? Not enough in my book to make a difference.
I also do remember Hans Rey coming here in the late 90's riding his GT and doing some fantastic stunts in the parking lot of the now defunct Washington Bike and Ski shop at Reston Town Center. The original Zaskar was pretty nice though. I think that's what Hans rode that day.


----------



## mik_git (Feb 4, 2004)

Ha you need to reread my post... no idea if the TT does anything at all, I know people claim its stiffer in the rear end. For me I just think it looks cool...well GT's, you could get a TT Shogun, but that wasn't cool, go figure...
And yeah, its only high end GT's that do it for me, I do like the name and I do like the paintjobs, but low end, even mid range, I agree (i'ms sure others wouldn't) but heavy and overpriced for the spec.


----------



## Uncle Grumpy (Oct 20, 2005)

zygote2k said:


> Funny how no one else made triple triangle frames except GT...


You should do some of that research you were going on about on the last page.

Grumps


----------



## KDXdog (Mar 15, 2007)

Dark days revisited: people who know who to use the web to "research" for information, then profess to know more than anyone else, including people who may actually have BEEN INVOLVED in the bike industry.

Enjoy your C-T collection, they may be worth something someday, but I'm glad they are worth "fighting for" to you. And please refrain from the "meet me out on the trail" challenge, you have no idea who you are challenging or their abilities.

I'm thinking of taking my Control Tech (generation 1) quill stem out in my driveway, along with my NOS Control Tech suspension seat post, and about 4 sets of bar ends, and smashing them with a sledge hammer. Just because someone out there "knows" more about the company than me...


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

zygote2k said:


> nothing has made me go off the rails- just trying to beat down the naysayers and bandwagon riders that are so prevalent here with the facts. I'm pretty sure that very few people that haunt these forums have never even seen a sweet spot bike let alone actually ridden them. everyone here likes to pile-on and razz the new guy and I'm only razzing back.
> 
> Did you ever ride one for any length of time? I ride mine every chance I get and enter many races and rides with these bikes. Sure, there are some handling characteristics that could be improved, but what bike do you know that doesn't have some issue with handling? I used to ride a full steel Diamondback Apex for many years and this bike is a million times more comfortable and durable for a 6'5" 275# gorilla like me. It climbs better than most modern bikes but tends to have the rear end unload when using hard braking on steep descents. I put my ass behind the seat to overcome this issue and ride on.
> 
> Actually it does work when standing/climbing hills. Not as efficiently as it does when you are seated. Can't agree that it's the dark days category because it's American innovation, made in USA, CNC'd artwork, and is still working 16 years later.


The bar has been raised so much higher since the days of URT.. not only in design terms but how bikes are ridden in forest trails and bike parks. Ibis was one of the URT proponents but check their FS mojo.. it's sooo much better and you can do things on 6' travel bikes that you can't do on your CT URT.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

Triv00ett said:


> I personally find most MTB stuff from the late 90's to look 'cheap'.


i like the emergence of SS in the late 90s. It was a reaction against the cheapness and pretense.. funny how at the same time the SS movement gained traction and won things got even more silly w/ 6 grand all mountain, trail, dh, enduro subdivisions while trails are groomed for acrobatics.
Meanwhile 26in wheels become children's toys and unridable. 29ers are not enough so a new in between wheel is created. 
The other day i went on a long ride and was asked if my canti brakes could handle the trail..
I find riders as much to blame as the industry... Riders svck all kinds of ******** thrown at them.
I believe new is better than old, specially around suspension, but the BS is amazing.


----------



## DoubleCentury (Nov 12, 2005)

*Dark Days Indeed*

I rode this last summer and I won't be owning another URT bike ever again.


----------



## Xlr8n (Apr 29, 2010)

URT's were a short lived design for sure.


----------



## Xlr8n (Apr 29, 2010)

zygote2k said:


> ...they had the best of the CNC work that Castellano designed compared to the Homegrown and the Szazbo. The Homegrowns used less superior parts and their welding isn't nearly as nice as what was on the CT...


Welding wasn't as nice? Are you referring to the Schwinn Homegrowns that were actually welded by Control Tech themselves during that timeframe? Control Tech manufactured all of the URT Homegrowns for Schwinn from '97-'99. They also produced nearly all of the hardtail models as well. The only Homegrowns not made by Control Tech during those three years were the Factory Hardtail frames that were made by Yeti, which by most accounts had some pretty looking welds themselves. So which of these Homegrowns are you implying had inferior welds?

"less superior parts"? How about the '97 Homegrown Factory suspension URT bike that was equipped with a full XTR gruppo along with a Control Tech stem and seatpost? or the '98 model again with full XTR and Titec titanium bars, stem, and post. Are those the "less superior parts" you are referring?

In '98 the Schwinn lineup had 4 URT offerings. The next year only 1. Why do you suppose that is? It was a flash-pan design that was quickly outdated and failed to sell to the degree needed to continue.

The Ironic thing that also deserves mention here is the only reason Control Tech even offered a URT bike is because they were making the frameset for Schwinn to their specifications which they allowed Control Tech to copy. Schwinn provided them with the bushings and allowed them to make a few of their own as part of the production deal they had at the time.


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

zygote2k said:


> I remember hearing the propaganda back in the day about the 3t design but many of them were big heavy klunkers that sported low end parts, were made overseas and had silly names and paint jobs. Funny how no one else made triple triangle frames except GT... really 3%? Not enough in my book to make a difference.
> I also do remember Hans Rey coming here in the late 90's riding his GT and doing some fantastic stunts in the parking lot of the now defunct Washington Bike and Ski shop at Reston Town Center. The original Zaskar was pretty nice though. I think that's what Hans rode that day.


I remember this bike:










which I am pretty sure predated the GTtriple triangle. At that time GT has a bike where the top tube and seat tube intersected with the seattube protruding through the top tube and the top tube protruding behind the seat tube with a scalloped GT logo capping it. The seat stays attached to the top tube behind the seattube. Until Shogun disappeared then the seatstays moved to the front of the seat tube and the protruding top tube with scalloped GT logo remained. I totally remember the uber cheezy ads in the mags at the time for those GT's, I think they had just enlarged their BMX bikes at the time.

Not saying the triple triangle thing wasn't stiff, just GT wasn't the only company to use it and was the company to invent it.


----------



## KDXdog (Mar 15, 2007)

1951 Thanet Silverlight. Almost everything "new" on a bike has been done before.


----------



## syklystt (Mar 31, 2010)

I have a couple of those old GT's that were, as you stated, large bmx bikes...I have them BMXers too...the first GT MTB was just a big version of their BMX bike. I have seen two other companies that produced triple triangle designs in the 80's before GT and at the same time as GT (late 80's)...big GT fan here from the BMXer dayze.

I also feel that the mid 90's was a start...NORBA made anybody that wasnt a pro jump through hoops to do anything. I personally stopped an important meeting at Mt.Snow becasue I was soo peeved at the way it was ran...the only thing that was cool about it was I had the backing of all the peeved europeans..and they were ready to riot...I quit racing nationals after that..just no fun....I have stayed a XC racer/rider with the emergence of freeride and DH...but I also took to learning that stuff...now its all about fun on a 5-6" travel bike that can do almost aything that XC to DH bikes do...dayum is it nice to use all them skills and great technology.......my biggest gripes nowdays are that the FS bike designers forgot that we ride in dirt.....they gots more nooks and crannys than an english muffin...and pivots galore...sometimes less is more.

I personally feel the darkest days are right now...cant figure out the 29er crowed yet...all the trails are buffed out, bermed out, flowed out....de rocked, de treed....de logged...de rooted.......why dont they just ride on pump tracks....i dont need any skills to race XC anymore...just a fast bike....kinda like a road race on a soft surface, with berms so you dont have to worry about turning a handlebar that is twice the width of your shoulders.....um...yeah...thats when it all started for me!


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

syklystt said:


> I personally feel the darkest days are right now...cant figure out the 29er crowed yet...all the trails are buffed out, bermed out, flowed out....de rocked, de treed....de logged...de rooted.......why dont they just ride on pump tracks....i dont need any skills to race XC anymore...just a fast bike....kinda like a road race on a soft surface, with berms so you dont have to worry about turning a handlebar that is twice the width of your shoulders.....um...yeah...thats when it all started for me!


I agree.


----------



## Baulz (Sep 16, 2005)

Xlr8n said:


> In '98 the Schwinn lineup had 4 URT offerings. The next year only 1. Why do you suppose that is? It was a flash-pan design that was quickly outdated and failed to sell to the degree needed to continue.


Because in '99 they jumped head first into the Lawwill designed bikes with 4 offerings. The next year only 1. A great design that also did not sell well, and the ones that did sell broke.

Did Schwinn ever really have a succesfull full suspension bike?


----------



## Shayne (Jan 14, 2004)

Baulz said:


> Did Schwinn ever really have a succesfull full suspension bike?


No
Schwinn was dead long before suspension was on the scene


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

syklystt said:


> I have a couple of those old GT's that were, as you stated, large bmx bikes...I have them BMXers too...the first GT MTB was just a big version of their BMX bike. I have seen two other companies that produced triple triangle designs in the 80's before GT and at the same time as GT (late 80's)...big GT fan here from the BMXer dayze.
> 
> I also feel that the mid 90's was a start...NORBA made anybody that wasnt a pro jump through hoops to do anything. I personally stopped an important meeting at Mt.Snow becasue I was soo peeved at the way it was ran...the only thing that was cool about it was I had the backing of all the peeved europeans..and they were ready to riot...I quit racing nationals after that..just no fun....I have stayed a XC racer/rider with the emergence of freeride and DH...but I also took to learning that stuff...now its all about fun on a 5-6" travel bike that can do almost aything that XC to DH bikes do...dayum is it nice to use all them skills and great technology.......my biggest gripes nowdays are that the FS bike designers forgot that we ride in dirt.....they gots more nooks and crannys than an english muffin...and pivots galore...sometimes less is more.
> 
> I personally feel the darkest days are right now...cant figure out the 29er crowed yet...all the trails are buffed out, bermed out, flowed out....de rocked, de treed....de logged...de rooted.......why dont they just ride on pump tracks....i dont need any skills to race XC anymore...just a fast bike....kinda like a road race on a soft surface, with berms so you dont have to worry about turning a handlebar that is twice the width of your shoulders.....um...yeah...thats when it all started for me!


I think the smooth trails aren't a reflection of a particular crowd just more a reflection of the vast increase in the amount of people mountain biking. When we first started riding there wasn't such thing as mountain biking trails, just hiking, equestrian, motorcycle and animal tracks we took over. Then as we started taking over more and more extreme trails popped up. Sadly as we have grown in users the splintering of our once boilerplate group has been excessive with trails that meet every need and this has resulted in the dumbification of trails to meet the common denominator (often the dumberer in fact). People then search out or build trails that meet their needs more and more. This in turn has lead to bikes evolving to handle the trails demands and this has resulted in more extreme trails being built as people learn and get bored with the new style of trails.

Escalation of the sport is responsible for trail sanitizing and bike complexity which has led to escalation of the sport, etc.

What I enjoy after decades in the sport, and perhaps this is where you all come from too, is riding these new fangled trails built for these new must have bikes on my rigid bike or singlespeed. They are just as amazing and much more interesting and I almost never get tired of riding them because they are designed for a bike so much more advanced than my bike.


----------



## Xlr8n (Apr 29, 2010)

Baulz said:


> Because in '99 they jumped head first into the Lawwill designed bikes with 4 offerings. The next year only 1. A great design that also did not sell well, and the ones that did sell broke.
> 
> Did Schwinn ever really have a succesfull full suspension bike?


Does it matter what they switched to? The point was they switched designs after only 2 years because the URT design was largely unsuccessful. Halfway between a hardtail and a functional full suspension. Most would either save the weight and go hardtail or go all out with a full suspension that worked out of the saddle.

Anyhow, that was the least of the points my post was making.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

zygote2k said:


> I'd like to see any of you out on the track or trails, then we can see who really knows what.


I'm your huckleberry.


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

Rumpfy said:


> I'm your huckleberry.


Is it odd that I read that in character?


----------



## CCMDoc (Jan 21, 2010)

Rumpfy said:


> I'm your huckleberry.


*NOW* I understand that line. Ameybrook once said that to me and I misinterpreted it as self-deprecating. Reading it again I had to look it up and ...
Got it.


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

xlr8n- thanks for sharing your info, I appreciate it. I knew if I spoke out of my ass enough, someone with more info would come along and enlighten me.
If you look at the Ibis, the CT, and the Homegrown, you can easily see which one is more advanced/better designed. Even the bikes that JC is making today more closely resemble the CT more than the other 2.
I believe that the URT bikes were built during the times of rapid changes in FS bikes and that they just got phased out with newer FS concepts that were coming out in the late 90's.
As far as components go, XTR isn't really much to go on, but if you look at the rear shocks that were offered on these bikes, Schwinn took the Fox4 because it was cheaper and when CT made their bikes, they made them just a little better than the Homegrowns and used the Fox 5r. CT also made their own V-brakes, seatpost, handlebars, stem, bar ends and put them all on their "Team Issue" bike. They even had a factory race team.

FWIW, every time I show up at a bike race/ride, I win "the coolest bike" prize hands down. People out here on the East Coast love the CT bikes.


----------



## muddybuddy (Jan 31, 2007)

That's only because you haven't showed up at a real vintage gathering, like Keyesville.


----------



## Uncle Grumpy (Oct 20, 2005)

zygote2k said:


> I believe that the URT bikes were built during the times of rapid changes in FS bikes and that they just got phased out with newer FS concepts that were coming out in the late 90's.


Yes. But swap "newer" for "better". URTs had their place at a time when FS was gaining its feet in the sport. URTs solved a problem, which was dealing with chain length changes that plagued some single pivot designs but those issues were resolved with better pivot placement or multi pivot designs, better shocks, learning to pedal properly etc.



zygote2k said:


> CT also made their own V-brakes, seatpost, handlebars, stem, bar ends and put them all on their "Team Issue" bike. They even had a factory race team.


We all officially love Control Tech. We all have a secret stash of their parts that we keep sealed away and take out to fondle as a guilty pleasure. We all supported their factory race team. When I see a Control Tech seatpost (I have one on one of my road bikes) I get misty eyed about the good old days. If you took Natalie Portman, coated her in body oil and gave me an hour with her, I'd still go play with the Control Tech stash, it's simply just that awesome. And we all agree. There. It's official. Control Tech Control Tech Control Tech. Mmmm, that feels good to say.

Now can we move on?



zygote2k said:


> FWIW, every time I show up at a bike race/ride, I win "the coolest bike" prize hands down. People out here on the East Coast love the CT bikes.


What were some of the prizes? Please tell me it was a Control Tech stem?

Grumptrol Tech


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

muddybuddy said:


> That's only because you haven't showed up at a real vintage gathering, like Keyesville.


Fair enough. There aren't any Vintage rides or races out here that I know of. If there were, I might be inclined to enter one.
Last year at Dirtfest, I still won and there were plenty of VRC bikes on hand. 
When you're 6'5" and outspoken as I am and can belch louder than any known beast on the planet, it's kinda hard to compete against me if you're one of those short people on an old Yeti. Not that I don't think Yeti's are cool- I'd love to take one of those ones with the elevated chainstays and turn it into a single speed belt drive.


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

Uncle Grumpy- I like your humor. thanks.


----------



## girlonbike (Apr 24, 2008)

zygote2k said:


> I knew if I spoke out of my ass enough, someone with more info would come along and enlighten me.


Wow, what a time waster you've just proven yourself to be.


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

girlonbike said:


> Wow, what a time waster you've just proven yourself to be.


did you say something relevant or yet again are you busting my chops because it's easier?


----------



## girlonbike (Apr 24, 2008)

Whatever, dude.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

I once had a control tech stem and it was so out of alignment i wonder if they had any kind of QC. I still have it.


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

Why is it every time one of these t.w.a idiot urt fanboys shows up, they proceed to throw a Foot stomping, snot bubble blowing tantrum before they go away?

"you all suck, but please include me!!!"


ffs, don't go away mad. Just go away.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

NOt only the CT stem was out of alignment but one of the bolts would rotate free when clamping the steerer.


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

colker1 said:


> I once had a control tech stem and it was so out of alignment i wonder if they had any kind of QC. I still have it.


I'm sure it's possible that QC of any company let something out the door that shouldn't have. I recently saw some very high end campy carbon stuff that looked like 6 year olds made it. It happens.


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

hollister said:


> Why is it every time one of these t.w.a idiot urt fanboys shows up, they proceed to throw a Foot stomping, snot bubble blowing tantrum before they go away?
> "you all suck, but please include me!!!"
> ffs, don't go away mad. Just go away.


Hollister- you are a the true definition of a hypocrite. you'll slam me on the forums but you actually want something from me via pm. VRC traitor.
I never said any of you suck. I only posted things here that I thought would be appropriate but many of you lashed out at me saying that my choice of bike sucked or that it wasn't VRC enough for the likes of some of you. I also posted lots of information that I did lots of research on but yet again it wasn't good enough for you and when I asked for more info or even responses from e-mails, none of you could grow a set and actually help a brother out.
I think many of you should MTFU or shut up. I'm here to stay.


----------



## girlonbike (Apr 24, 2008)

Just so you know and are not surprised by it, posting up pms is a bannable offense. Tread lightly.


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

girlonbike said:


> Just so you know and are not surprised by it, posting up pms is a bannable offense. Tread lightly.


I didn't post a PM.


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

I asked you what you had, you responded with a vague answer. But that has nothing to do with your meltdown here.

Your reading comprehension sucks

You are a predictable pattern though


----------



## bushpig (Nov 26, 2005)

zygote2k, with respect, you appear to be an idiot. And the bike sucks. Plus I'm on the east coast and I know.

*disclaimer* I *did not* send a PM trying to buy the sick ControlTech Poopmobile.


----------



## girlonbike (Apr 24, 2008)

zygote2k said:


> I didn't post a PM.


I did not say you did. Like I said, it's a warning.


----------



## Groundoggy (Nov 27, 2011)

Threads like these really expose what an immature group of ******bags post here.


----------



## bushpig (Nov 26, 2005)

Jon Hallur - It's Full of Stars II - YouTube


----------



## KDXdog (Mar 15, 2007)

zygote2k said:


> Fair enough. There aren't any Vintage rides or races out here that I know of. If there were, I might be inclined to enter one.
> Last year at Dirtfest, I still won and there were plenty of VRC bikes on hand.
> When you're 6'5" and outspoken as I am and can belch louder than any known beast on the planet, it's kinda hard to compete against me if you're one of those short people on an old Yeti. Not that I don't think Yeti's are cool- I'd love to take one of those ones with the elevated chainstays and turn it into a single speed belt drive.


What exactly did you win? 
I'm getting confused. was there an official coolest bike award, or was that in your opinion? Or did you actually race? And in what class? I'm guessing Clydesdale, no? How many more time do you need to mention your height?

You are interesting. There's a guy in florida on the site that like colored tires. I think you two would get along quite well.


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

I've finally realized what the Dark Days of MTBR are. 
It's your reluctance to listen to anyone who isn't part of your 'club' and to naysay and talk endless amounts of BS about someone who rides something that you don't like or has a different opinion of things. Many of you just like to pile on because you don't have anything constructive to say and some of you talk out of both sides of your face. 
You people should be ashamed of yourselves.


----------



## syklystt (Mar 31, 2010)

rockcrusher said:


> I think the smooth trails aren't a reflection of a particular crowd just more a reflection of the vast increase in the amount of people mountain biking. When we first started riding there wasn't such thing as mountain biking trails, just hiking, equestrian, motorcycle and animal tracks we took over. Then as we started taking over more and more extreme trails popped up. Sadly as we have grown in users the splintering of our once boilerplate group has been excessive with trails that meet every need and this has resulted in the dumbification of trails to meet the common denominator (often the dumberer in fact). People then search out or build trails that meet their needs more and more. This in turn has lead to bikes evolving to handle the trails demands and this has resulted in more extreme trails being built as people learn and get bored with the new style of trails.
> 
> Escalation of the sport is responsible for trail sanitizing and bike complexity which has led to escalation of the sport, etc.
> 
> What I enjoy after decades in the sport, and perhaps this is where you all come from too, is riding these new fangled trails built for these new must have bikes on my rigid bike or singlespeed. They are just as amazing and much more interesting and I almost never get tired of riding them because they are designed for a bike so much more advanced than my bike.


back to the regular scheduled program.....

i agree and have watched some great riding spots slowly converted to be accessable the new crop of riders...which in itself is a great thing, but those that have taken time to hone their skills, well, it gets real boring real fast...although one can surely go fast on these trails, and yes, on a VRC its kinda cool, but my preferences lie on a rock strewn hill, in all directions (hills are another thing thats dissappearing from the local trails)...im really preferential to very difficult rocky, steep up and down.....dont know why, I quit asking myself why long ago...i really like my newfangled ride too, but im gonna try to ride more VRC this summer just to see what it can be like (I have lots of new chioces this year).....and CT guy...I'm planning on going to dirtfest (red Foes XCR..or some vintage bike)...I'd like to ride with ya'....i hear great things about that festival.

anyhow...my gripe on the smooth trails is...was...what happens when all these newbies get hooked on this great sport...or whatever you call it...and want more?...then they go to P.A. and get themselves hurt in the hills cause, they dont know how to ride that fancy bike.....ow well...hopefully I sidetracked y'all for a few.


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

hey syklystt- thanks for that reply. I'll be at Dirtfest and I look forward to meeting you. I'll be the tall guy on the CT


----------



## KDXdog (Mar 15, 2007)

zygote2k said:


> I've finally realized what the Dark Days of MTBR are.
> It's your reluctance to listen to anyone who isn't part of your 'club' and to naysay and talk endless amounts of BS about someone who rides something that you don't like or has a different opinion of things. Many of you just like to pile on because you don't have anything constructive to say and some of you talk out of both sides of your face.
> You people should be ashamed of yourselves.


What constructive things should be said to someone who post they "know more than anyone here" on a subject they CLEARLY do not?

I have a ProFlex I like. Many here have given me a bit of crap about the bike, directly or indirectly, I don't care, it's all good. 
Your 6'5" skin should be a bit thicker. IMO, anything thrown at you (at least by me) has been in direct response to your postings first.

Can't take the heat? Think before you type.

If I come across any CT bikes or articles, I'll send you a PM. That's if you haven't abandoned "us".


----------



## Xlr8n (Apr 29, 2010)

zygote2k said:


> ....As far as components go, XTR isn't really much to go on, but if you look at the rear shocks that were offered on these bikes, Schwinn took the Fox4 because it was cheaper and when CT made their bikes, they made them just a little better than the Homegrowns and used the Fox 5r. CT also made their own V-brakes, seatpost, handlebars, stem, bar ends and put them all on their "Team Issue" bike. They even had a factory race team...


fwiw- From '97-'99 Schwinn spec'd all the Homegrown URT bikes with Rock Shox rear suspension products, not Fox. In '97 and '98 it was Coupe Deluxe and Super Deluxe shocks. In '99 it was SID. :thumbsup:


----------



## Uncle Grumpy (Oct 20, 2005)

zygote2k said:


> I've finally realized what the Dark Days of MTBR are.
> It's your reluctance to listen to anyone who isn't part of your 'club' and to naysay and talk endless amounts of BS about someone who rides something that you don't like or has a different opinion of things. Many of you just like to pile on because you don't have anything constructive to say and some of you talk out of both sides of your face.
> You people should be ashamed of yourselves.


I heartily agree. Now, let's drop this and get back to the topic.

The darkest days for MTB were clearly when Mountain Cycle got bought out by Kinesis and that became the beginning of the end for Mountain Cycle.

I know a lot of people don't like the San Andreas, but their opinions are wrong because the San Andreas was the best bike ever and holds it own against the current crop of so called wonder bikes. I have one, along with a Moho. Both are cracked and are now just hanging up in the garage but despite their cracks, they are still the greatest bikes ever. The San Andreas was so good they only made less than 98 of them because they were so awesome that a vortex may have opened into another dimension of radness. I only own one because if you own more, the power can be too much for any one man.

Mountain Cycle pioneered a lot of stuff, like the upside down fork which was a motocross idea, the Pro Stop disc brake which was the coolest most Xtreem disc brake ever and the brake upon which all other brakes are judged and they even used San Andreas parts in the Mir Space Station because the alloys are so advanced.

Many companies outsourced their frames building to Mountain Cycle, such as Ritchey, Yeti, Klein and Huffy. I even read somewhere that a Mountain Cycle Shockwave was given as a gift to try to broker peace in the Middle East and won the Nobel Prize that year.

So there, the darkest days were the demise of Mountain Cycle. If anyone disagrees with me they are a rampant sook. I'm 6'4", I have an IQ of 155 and my farts can make a cattle dog vomit, so do not under any circumstances attempt to race me. I will smash you with my power and knowledge, like a Viking on a game show.

:thumbsup:

Grumps


----------



## mik_git (Feb 4, 2004)

mountain cycles suck, they were either silvery polished or painted colours...whats with that, clearly rubbish.


----------



## scrublover (Dec 30, 2003)

zygote2k said:


> Did you ever ride one for any length of time? I ride mine every chance I get and enter many races and rides with these bikes. Sure, there are some handling characteristics that could be improved, but what bike do you know that doesn't have some issue with handling? I used to ride a full steel Diamondback Apex for many years and this bike is a million times more comfortable and durable for a 6'5" 275# gorilla like me. It climbs better than most modern bikes but tends to have the rear end unload when using hard braking on steep descents. I put my ass behind the seat to overcome this issue and ride on.


I've tried a couple URT bikes on for size over they years, and intensely disliked every single one of them. Horses for courses. We get it. You like the bike. But insisting it's the bestest EVAR is...misguided. Trying to convince everyone isn't going to work. Ride what you like.



zygote2k said:


> FWIW, every time I show up at a bike race/ride, I win "the coolest bike" prize hands down. People out here on the East Coast love the CT bikes.


Huh. I'm on the east coast. Have ridden a lot of places out here, out west, and and the middle. Have yet to see one. everyone I've ever really chatted suspension stuff with agreed the URT more or less sucked.

Back on track - I'm not a normal VRC guy, but...

Somewhere when the worlds of XC FR DH sort of split from general just riding trails on a bike. Not sure exactly how the various groups became so polarized, but that's it to me. Designs of bikes changed with (or did it help precipitate?) that split. Now you have to be on the right bike to ride the certain way, and in the right sort of shorts and jersey, bottle vs. pack, etc. We're riding bikes outside here people, it ain't rocket surgery - it's supposed to be fun, not antagonistic.

I'd love to do a VRC build, but my current stable keeps me busy enough. I'm of the mind to pick something up that feels right if seen in the window of a local pawn shop, garage sale, or whatever. So I lurk and have fun doing so, checking out all the bikes that I coveted (ok, still covet) in the early 90's.


----------



## Uncle Grumpy (Oct 20, 2005)

mik_git said:


> mountain cycles suck, they were either silvery polished or painted colours...whats with that, clearly rubbish.


You only say that because you haven't done any research. I've done my research. Ya gotta do the research!

Grumps


----------



## CCMDoc (Jan 21, 2010)

Uncle Grumpy said:


> I heartily agree. Now, let's drop this and get back to the topic.
> 
> The darkest days for MTB were clearly when Mountain Cycle got bought out by Kinesis and that became the beginning of the end for Mountain Cycle.
> 
> ...


You owe me a freakin' iPad case and a roll of paper towels. Good thing I enjoy the smell of coffee as it will be the only thing I smell for the rest of the day.
Hysterical!


----------



## CCMDoc (Jan 21, 2010)

As alluded to by others, to me the dark days began when you couldn't "run what you brung" and still be competitive in all of the disciplines (uphill, cross country, slalom and downhill, usually in that order). Even Trials had a seperate category for those who used their "regular" bikes.


----------



## Shayne (Jan 14, 2004)

KDXdog said:


> . There's a guy in florida on the site that like colored tires.


LOL!

And there's this guy Kyle with a Cannondale....


----------



## syklystt (Mar 31, 2010)

CCMDoc said:


> As alluded to by others, to me the dark days began when you couldn't "run what you brung" and still be competitive in all of the disciplines (uphill, cross country, slalom and downhill, usually in that order). Even Trials had a seperate category for those who used their "regular" bikes.


I toally agree....I love the bike im riding now, I can do it all, but as you said, I wouldnt be as competitive in an actual race situation for anything...unless its a long XC course in PA or WVA with a ton of rocks, roots and hills...there are some good places still for this stuff...but for what I have local, I need a specific bike to be competitive.
and I know it doesnt allways work this way, but...i always said that there is a bike for any and each occasion and one can never have enough bikes....goes same for motorcycles.


----------



## Mr Crudley (Jan 27, 2006)

Uncle Grumpy said:


> I'm 6'4", I have an IQ of 155 and my farts can make a cattle dog vomit, so do not under any circumstances attempt to race me.
> 
> :thumbsup:
> 
> Grumps


This is true, take heed fellow MTB'ers. 
Always take the lead on Uncle, especially after a curry night :eekster:


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

Xlr8n said:


> fwiw- From '97-'99 Schwinn spec'd all the Homegrown URT bikes with Rock Shox rear suspension products, not Fox. In '97 and '98 it was Coupe Deluxe and Super Deluxe shocks. In '99 it was SID. :thumbsup:


Actually the 96 and 97 models had the Fox 4r, and the 98 and 99 models had the RS shocks. I'm going off the catalog scans...
I appreciate you giving me the link to the Tomato. I learned a little more about my BOC and a lot about the Schwinn versions.
Thanks.


----------



## Trower (Apr 27, 2009)

Rumpfy said:


> You're all DH haters?


I ride a monster cross and a rigid steel SS.......

To each his own I say!


----------



## Repack Rider (Oct 22, 2005)

The Dark Days for me would be the exodus of the pioneering owners of the small bike companies that sprang into existence during the '80s. One by one, they got crushed by the big companies, and bought out so their names could be marketed, or they lost interest in a market they helped create and moved on to other things.

John Parker and Yeti
Chris Chance and Fat Chance
Kent Erickson and Moots
Ross Shafer and Salsa
Richard Cunningham and Mantis
Charlie Cunningham and WTB
Steve Potts and WTB

Any others?


----------



## oldskoolwrench (Jul 12, 2012)

IMHO (read: very humble) the 'dark days' started with the arrival of the 'freeride' movement, trying to imitate Supercross with massive jumps, 6 pack bumps and 
huge air. Six inches of suspension taught a whole generation of riders to slam
their bikes down the trail, with no regard for 'reading the lines' and 'following' the trail.

Maybe I'm old fashioned... that's why I ride a 20 year old full suspension rig with 2" of travel front and rear. But hey... it gets me down the Portal trail every time.


----------



## girlonbike (Apr 24, 2008)

Repack Rider said:


> The Dark Days for me would be the exodus of the pioneering owners of the small bike companies that sprang into existence during the '80s. One by one, they got crushed by the big companies, and bought out so their names could be marketed, or they lost interest in a market they helped create and moved on to other things.
> 
> John Parker and Yeti
> Chris Chance and Fat Chance
> ...


Aren't you missing the big ones: Gary Fisher, Gary Klein and Tom Ritchey?

At least Erickson, CC and SP still continued to make bikes though. Several of them also didn't make a whole lot of money.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

I was waiting for:

Charlie Kelly and MountainBikes.


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

You're all fired


----------



## girlonbike (Apr 24, 2008)

hollister said:


> You're all fired


Sweet!


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

hollister said:


> Is it odd that I read that in character?


Not at all. I typed it in character.



CCMDoc said:


> *NOW* I understand that line. Ameybrook once said that to me and I misinterpreted it as self-deprecating. Reading it again I had to look it up and ...
> Got it.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

zygote2k said:


> When you're 6'5" and outspoken as I am and can belch louder than any known beast on the planet, it's kinda hard to compete against me if you're one of those short people on an old Yeti.


I know a short guy on a Yeti Ultimate who could crush you in any bike race. Being big and outspoken doesn't mean you can ride, just means you're obnoxious.


----------



## mainlyfats (Oct 1, 2005)

Repack Rider said:


> The Dark Days for me would be the exodus of the pioneering owners of the small bike companies that sprang into existence during the '80s. One by one, they got crushed by the big companies, and bought out so their names could be marketed, or they lost interest in a market they helped create and moved on to other things.
> 
> John Parker and Yeti
> Chris Chance and Fat Chance
> ...


Bontrager comes to mind...

I know that some of them were bad situations, but I always assumed that most of those buy-outs were exactly what those wearied originators were after... As in "now I can focus on what I do best, rather than badly running a company"...


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

mainlyfats said:


> Bontrager comes to mind...
> 
> I know that some of them were bad situations, but I always assumed that most of those buy-outs were exactly what those wearied originators were after... As in "now I can focus on what I do best, rather than badly running a company"...


So would Scot Nicol and Ibis be the opposite of 'Dark Days'?


----------



## girlonbike (Apr 24, 2008)

Ray of Sunshine Days!


----------



## ameybrook (Sep 9, 2006)

Rumpfy said:


> I know a short guy on a Yeti Ultimate who could crush you in any bike race. .


That guy is such a fucxing azzhole.


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

Rumpfy said:


> I know a short guy on a Yeti Ultimate who could crush you in any bike race. Being big and outspoken doesn't mean you can ride, just means you're obnoxious.


Good thing I wasn't talking about riding- only showing off my cool bike.
I'm sure that mysterious Yeti rider and many others could clean my clock on the trails.


----------



## mainlyfats (Oct 1, 2005)

```

```



Rumpfy said:


> So would Scot Nicol and Ibis be the opposite of 'Dark Days'?


As in, his new stuff is better? (I just bought a new Hakkalugi - my first full carbon bike)


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

mainlyfats said:


> ```
> 
> ```
> As in, his new stuff is better? (I just bought a new Hakkalugi - my first full carbon bike)


disc hakkalugi?


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

zygote2k said:


> Good thing I wasn't talking about riding- only showing off my cool bike.
> I'm sure that mysterious Yeti rider and many others could clean my clock on the trails.


At least you know that much.  I don't think your CT will get noticed next to a proper Yeti either though....sorry.



ameybrook said:


> That guy is such a fucxing azzhole.


Big BIG a$$hole.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

mainlyfats said:


> As in, his new stuff is better? (I just bought a new Hakkalugi - my first full carbon bike)


Not better or worse. I just meant that an original company founder taking back the reigns and making the brand successful again.

The vintage line up is awesome, but the current line up is arguably far more successful. Current Ibis doesn't have a bad bike to offer.


----------



## mainlyfats (Oct 1, 2005)

colker1 said:


> disc hakkalugi?


I figured I'd walk before I run and got a canti frame. Carbon + disc brakes would probably blow my mind...


----------



## mainlyfats (Oct 1, 2005)

Rumpfy said:


> Not better or worse. I just meant that an original company founder taking back the reigns and making the brand successful again.
> 
> The vintage line up is awesome, but the current line up is arguably far more successful. Current Ibis doesn't have a bad bike to offer.


I certainly find brand stories more compelling when I can trace a merit-based line back to the originator.

Retrotec strikes me as an interesting deviation from the big crush small business model.


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

Rumpfy said:


> At least you know that much.  I don't think your CT will get noticed next to a proper Yeti either though....sorry.


I guess that depends on who is looking...
the last 2 Yetis I saw had lots of cool parts on them but both were cracked in places that couldn't be fixed. It seems that they made lots of bikes that subsequently cracked due to the use of thin walled aluminum in places that should have been thicker.
I think one of those Yetis with elevated chainstay would be a good candidate to convert to a belt drive bike.
Gotta find a way to breathe some life into one of those crusty relics from too far back in the day.

I'd take a nice Klein over a Yeti any day though.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

mainlyfats said:


> I figured I'd walk before I run and got a canti frame. Carbon + disc brakes would probably blow my mind...


I am atracted to rim brakes and a threaded BB as well.. can't see anything wrong w/ V brakes on 700c wheels w/ medium sized rubber. The carbon Hakka is my dream bike right now.


----------



## bushpig (Nov 26, 2005)

I like the rebirth of Ibis. Good story. I definitely like the threaded bb.


----------



## Wasmachineman NL (Jan 31, 2012)

> Lime Green Stumpjumper M2


OP, are you smoking crack? Lime Green SJ M2's were awesome, I also had one and it rided very nicely, go research your facts before you say FUD.


----------



## ameybrook (Sep 9, 2006)

Wasmachineman NL said:


> I also had one and it rided very nicely, go research your facts


Is that a fact?


----------



## laffeaux (Jan 4, 2004)

mainlyfats said:


> I know that some of them were bad situations, but I always assumed that most of those buy-outs were exactly what those wearied originators were after... As in "now I can focus on what I do best, rather than badly running a company"...


I think in many (or at least some) cases guys went into the business of building frames because they wanted to be frame builders. Years later, after the have become moderately successful, they are no longer building frames; they are managing people and finances and paying others to build frames. And they may be making no more money than when they started. So they're now doing a job they they really didn't want and not being paid well to do it. Selling would seem like a good option - more money, more free time, and the opportunity to choose a new career path.


----------



## syklystt (Mar 31, 2010)

laffeaux said:


> I think in many (or at least some) cases guys went into the business of building frames because they wanted to be frame builders. Years later, after the have become moderately successful, they are no longer building frames; they are managing people and finances and paying others to build frames. And they may be making no more money than when they started. So they're now doing a job they they really didn't want and not being paid well to do it. Selling would seem like a good option - more money, more free time, and the opportunity to choose a new career path.


haa...nothing like management duties ruining a perfectly good job....mental stabiliity is worth more than any pay...well almost!


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

maybe many of these small companies were in it for profit all along. they had a desirable product and in order to strike it rich, they sold out to a large corporation.
it's the american dream.


----------



## mainlyfats (Oct 1, 2005)

zygote2k said:


> maybe many of these small companies were in it for profit all along. they had a desirable product and in order to strike it rich, they sold out to a large corporation.
> it's the american dream.


Dude... How old are you?


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

mainlyfats said:


> Dude... How old are you?


old enough to know that many people who had home or small businesses who didn't want to work for the man but decided to sell the things that they liked to make to the right people. when you do that for a while and then a big company comes along and says, " I'll give you half a million dollars for the intellectual and property rights" then you realize that you'd rather have the half mil instead of making the stuff in your garage or small shop. It's what has happened to many people in this industry.


----------



## mainlyfats (Oct 1, 2005)

zygote2k said:


> old enough to know that many people who had home or small businesses who didn't want to work for the man but decided to sell the things that they liked to make to the right people. when you do that for a while and then a big company comes along and says, " I'll give you half a million dollars for the intellectual and property rights" then you realize that you'd rather have the half mil instead of making the stuff in your garage or small shop. It's what has happened to many people in this industry.


I'll wager that this ridiculously narrow vision of small, craft-based business has happened to exactly zero people of any importance in "this industry".


----------



## mik_git (Feb 4, 2004)

I would think that many small builders who started out in the garage, but once it actually became a buisness along with all the hassles that comes with it, would happily sell out to a big company for cash, but I wouldn't have thought that they went into it at the start with the intention of selling out for cash.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

mainlyfats said:


> I'll wager that this ridiculously narrow vision of small, craft-based business has happened to exactly zero people of any importance in "this industry".


.....except CONTROL TECH!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

ameybrook said:


> Is that a fact?


It is an absolute fact. Green Stumpjumpers ride very nice. The orange ones ride like sh!t though.


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

mik_git said:


> I would think that many small builders who started out in the garage, but once it actually became a buisness along with all the hassles that comes with it, would happily sell out to a big company for cash, but I wouldn't have thought that they went into it at the start with the intention of selling out for cash.


A much better statement than what I tried to say. I'm sure they did it for the pure love of the hobby/sport in the beginning. 
I currently do R&D for a garage based business and I'm sure if a big enough company offers the owner the right price, he'd sell the rights to the product and start up something else.


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

mainlyfats said:


> I'll wager that this ridiculously narrow vision of small, craft-based business has happened to exactly zero people of any importance in "this industry".


I'm willing to bet that this is the more likely scenario that happened to the majority of the "important" people in this industry. I'm sure they started with the love of the hobby at first though.


----------



## syklystt (Mar 31, 2010)

mik_git said:


> I would think that many small builders who started out in the garage, but once it actually became a buisness along with all the hassles that comes with it, would happily sell out to a big company for cash, but I wouldn't have thought that they went into it at the start with the intention of selling out for cash.


I agree that there were some small shops that actually did have MTB's in their hearts when they started, but that would be very, very few...its all about seeing a market and doing what you know to bring a product to that market....remember, the cnc craze was not started in anybodys garage....cnc stuff is from all those manufacturing houses that lost all their work when the aerospace funding went away...they neeed to use their machines...i'm sure none of them even caread about cycling at all...its about money, thats it...some made it big for whatever reason, some not...but no biking tinkerer in their garage has cnc equiptment...maybe a bridgeport and a lathe, but this person cannot mass produce the stuff that flooded the market back then.


----------



## wv_bob (Sep 12, 2005)

Rumpfy said:


> It is an absolute fact. Green Stumpjumpers ride very nice. The orange ones ride like sh!t though.


What if I had an orange one and painted it green?


----------



## Shayne (Jan 14, 2004)

wv_bob said:


> What if I had an orange one and painted it green?


The next owner would be very surprised by the handling


----------



## Saddle Up (Jan 30, 2008)

I can't stop thinking about Natalie Portman covered in oil.


----------



## mik_git (Feb 4, 2004)

syklystt said:


> I agree that there were some small shops that actually did have MTB's in their hearts when they started, but that would be very, very few...its all about seeing a market and doing what you know to bring a product to that market....remember, the cnc craze was not started in anybodys garage....cnc stuff is from all those manufacturing houses that lost all their work when the aerospace funding went away...they neeed to use their machines...i'm sure none of them even caread about cycling at all...its about money, thats it...some made it big for whatever reason, some not...but no biking tinkerer in their garage has cnc equiptment...maybe a bridgeport and a lathe, but this person cannot mass produce the stuff that fooded the market back then.


i think my point got blurred in my simplification. I think there were a few people that got into it for their love of bikes be it frame making or parts, when I said garage should have said small as in say, not Trek etc. And I'm sure some people got into it with no intention of anything other than wanting to make some nice stuff. But surely post people would go into it to make money, thats only sensible. I jsut wouldn't think that even the ex areospace guys, sure thwey see an opportunity, but it would be to make money (sure) and build up the company. I just don't think they would be - Lets start making some stuff, so we can sell it to a big company. I would have though it would be - lets give it a go and see what we can achieve/do and go from there.


----------



## syklystt (Mar 31, 2010)

mik_git said:


> i think my point got blurred in my simplification. I think there were a few people that got into it for their love of bikes be it frame making or parts, when I said garage should have said small as in say, not Trek etc. And I'm sure some people got into it with no intention of anything other than wanting to make some nice stuff. But surely post people would go into it to make money, thats only sensible. I jsut wouldn't think that even the ex areospace guys, sure thwey see an opportunity, but it would be to make money (sure) and build up the company. I just don't think they would be - Lets start making some stuff, so we can sell it to a big company. I would have though it would be - lets give it a go and see what we can achieve/do and go from there.


Actaually, I work as a contractor for medical design...in this industry, you get(as in purchase) an idea, have someone develope it, then sell the company.....then get an idea,,,its a cycle and the only reason that the "start-ups" are created is to sell the business off. It's not just the "american way", its a buisiness tactic that works quite well.

but i do think that allot of folks that made stuff were in it because they loved cycling and wanted to be part of it. I've thought about it for a very long time. Maybe one of these days???? Some of the best innovations were from tinkerers in their garages...they sold their parts to bigger companies when they found it too much to keep up with. People like Bontrager are still out there riding thier bikes...i'd sell out in a second so I can ride all the time....and do what I want.


----------



## Repack Rider (Oct 22, 2005)

mik_git said:


> I think there were a few people that got into it for their love of bikes be it frame making or parts, when I said garage should have said small as in say, not Trek etc. And I'm sure some people got into it with no intention of anything other than wanting to make some nice stuff. But surely post people would go into it to make money, thats only sensible. I just wouldn't think that even the ex areospace guys, sure they see an opportunity, but it would be to make money (sure) and build up the company. I just don't think they would be - Lets start making some stuff, so we can sell it to a big company. I would have though it would be - lets give it a go and see what we can achieve/do and go from there.


I'm the only person here who actually had the experience. In 1983 a big investor came sniffing around with the thought of buying MountainBikes. Trouble is, there was nothing to sell him. Three guys who had a shaky business relationship, and ... what? The garage?

Gary and I didn't get into it with the express idea of making money. We were just going to make some cool bikes so our friends could catch up with what we already had. We had a business immediately because demand was crazy, but we didn't know that going in. Our initial project was to sell nine bikes, but we couldn't stop Tom Ritchey from making more and we couldn't stop people from wanting them.


----------



## syklystt (Mar 31, 2010)

:thumbsup:


Repack Rider said:


> Gary and I didn't get into it with the express idea of making money. We were just going to make some cool bikes so our friends could catch up with what we already had. We had a business immediately because demand was crazy, but we didn't know that going in. Our initial project was to sell nine bikes, but we couldn't stop Tom Ritchey from making more and we couldn't stop people from wanting them.


Now thats the "dream"......cool idea...cool product...cool cutomers.....sometimes it all falls inplace.....would make for a good book


----------



## slapheadmofo (Jun 9, 2006)

Darkest days are ones where I'm so bored, I find my way on to MTBR, where it seems that mountain biking gets closer and closer to road biking with every word typed: soulless and epicly overwrought.

So many people here overthinking it.


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

Anyone want to invest in a few CNC machines and then we can start making retro CNC parts?


----------



## mik_git (Feb 4, 2004)

I wish someone would...


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

mik_git said:


> I wish someone would...


I know how to program and run them- I used to work for a small machine shop and ran a waterjet. I made lots of parts for the aerospace industry and made crazy stuff like a custom one-off turbo charger for a motorcycle. Bike parts would be easy.


----------



## TigWorld (Feb 8, 2010)

If you can program, then just contract out the CNC work. No point buying, maintaining and housing CNC machines until you've got the volume to justify it.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

wv_bob said:


> What if I had an orange one and painted it green?





Shayne said:


> The next owner would be very surprised by the handling


Haha! Nice, guys.


----------



## syklystt (Mar 31, 2010)

zygote2k said:


> I know how to program and run them- I used to work for a small machine shop and ran a waterjet. I made lots of parts for the aerospace industry and made crazy stuff like a custom one-off turbo charger for a motorcycle. Bike parts would be easy.


those cnc'd parts are actually very easy to draw up/desugn....I've been doing 3d moddeling since it was possible (on a computer)...I can crank that stuff out all day long no problem. The issues are not if it can be done, but why. The vrc bmx crowed is already dealing with such issues and it makes buying the real thing very difficult at times. I really hope nobody does this to our sport. There is some money to be mae, but not much. Now, if I had a better idea to bring to market, thats a diff story. Ive been kicking that around for a long time. I have access to cnc machines and 3d printers...lots can be done, if one is ambitious and has the time to put in....me, i gave up haveing two jobs a long timne ago...my freetime is spent with my kids or riding. I need a good bike company to hire me and pay me big bucks to come up with better product...someone like crankbros that understands art and engineering....and r&d. i'm stuck in a job with golden handcuffs...otherwise I'd be in the industry somehow (need the writeoff).

Zygote2k....we'll have to talk about this more in depth....over a beer....at the festival.


----------



## pinguwin (Aug 20, 2004)

syklystt said:


> remember, the cnc craze was not started in anybodys garage....cnc stuff is from all those manufacturing houses


I work in a professional machine shop (not as an employee but a moocher) when I have the time. These guys make a lot of bike parts for several different small manufacturers. Frequently someone with a bridgeport and lathe comes to them with a part they've been experimenting with over the months or years and asks them to start cranking some out on the their CNC machines. They'll come to them every few months and need another thousand of a given part. The manufacturers are not quite big enough to warrant their own equipment and even if they are big enough, might not want to get out of their area of expertise.

So it's a viable prospect that someone tinkering in a garage could have been involved in the CNC craze just that they didn't do the actual programming or running of the machine. Keep in mind that one possibility with the CNC houses freed up at the end of the cold war might suddenly have become more affordable to the garage tinkerer is that their machine billing costs might have went from $200/hr to $100/hr (just pulled those figures from the air) when said CNC houses had a glut of machine time.

Perhaps the one person on this list who has actual experience in the CNC craze, Mr. Grafton, might chime in.


----------



## syklystt (Mar 31, 2010)

pinguwin said:


> So it's a viable prospect that someone tinkering in a garage could have been involved in the CNC craze just that they didn't do the actual programming or running of the machine. Keep in mind that one possibility with the CNC houses freed up at the end of the cold war might suddenly have become more affordable to the garage tinkerer is that their machine billing costs might have went from $200/hr to $100/hr (just pulled those figures from the air) when said CNC houses had a glut of machine time.


This is how I do all my work at my job. Contract out all manufacturing (except some 3d printing). I'm sure there were alot of folks also doing it that way.

I too would like to hear from someone that was there, actually doing it.


----------



## sho220 (Aug 3, 2005)

zygote2k said:


> The sweet spot suspension was a cutting edge idea in the history of rear suspension and is still in use today on some of the very nicest FS bikes.
> I've been in contact with the designer and some of the early pioneers in the field of early MTB and they all say that CT kinda flew under the radar and did their own thing.
> 
> I'm willing to bet that you've never ridden one and if you had, you might have a different opinion.


All it takes is one ride on a URT or "sweet spot" bike to understand why everyone bailed on the concept. Stand on the pedals for the rough stuff and you get a rigid frame. Sit your butt on the seat on smooth sections and you have tons of plush suspension just doing nothing. And for all that, you get to pedal around a few extra pounds of dead weight...derp...


----------



## sho220 (Aug 3, 2005)

colker1 said:


> NOt only the CT stem was out of alignment but one of the bolts would rotate free when clamping the steerer.


CT seatpost bolts have the tendency to do the same thing...


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

sho220 said:


> All it takes is one ride on a URT or "sweet spot" bike to understand why everyone bailed on the concept. Stand on the pedals for the rough stuff and you get a rigid frame. Sit your butt on the seat on smooth sections and you have tons of plush suspension just doing nothing. And for all that, you get to pedal around a few extra pounds of dead weight...derp...


Not all URT bikes handle the same.
There were plenty of differently designed URT's- maybe 20 or more that I've seen.
The CT does just that-pick your butt off the seat for rough stuff and sit down for the smooth sections- sorta like how you learned to ride a hardtail. Bike only weighs 25# though.
Apparently there were many professional riders that raced URT's for more than 1 year, so I find it hard to believe the statement, "All it takes is one ride on a URT or "sweet spot" bike to understand why everyone bailed on the concept". 
The URT was just one of the many steps in the process of FS that got us to where we are today. I ride mine everyday and it's very comfortable- maybe if you had ridden one more than once, you'd have a different impression....


----------



## zygote2k (Jun 5, 2011)

sho220 said:


> CT seatpost bolts have the tendency to do the same thing...


I have 4 of these and have never experienced this problem. I have sheared one off at the mount after taking a huge jump and had the jagged seatpost tear through my shorts narrowly missing my junk and leg and belly as I went back over the rear tire.


----------



## syklystt (Mar 31, 2010)

sho220 said:


> All it takes is one ride on a URT or "sweet spot" bike to understand why everyone bailed on the concept. Stand on the pedals for the rough stuff and you get a rigid frame. Sit your butt on the seat on smooth sections and you have tons of plush suspension just doing nothing. And for all that, you get to pedal around a few extra pounds of dead weight...derp...


As far as the URT suspensions go, I have never tryed one. As a person whom embraced FS from early on, I love my FS bikes and always have, even with their shortcommings (which to me, are way overshadowed by what they can do). When the URT came out, I just wrote it off instantly...my thinking is such: I have bad knees and when my seatpost is 1/4" off from the correct height, my knee gets major pain to the point of paralisys...it just qiuits. Its no problem if set properly though. On a URT, that distance changes (seat to pedal distance), this reason alone is why I couldnt ride one of them. I feel that a suspension bike should be designed such that the seat to pedal distance remains the same (kinda like the song). I could be totally wrong, but I do know that it has the potential to ruin my knee, so I just stayed away. I dont knock them cause there's gonna be folks that love them. It is a bike, and there's sooo many bikes cause we all like diff things...but we all love bikes too....isnt it sooo cool that way!....if it were all the same, we wouldnt need a forum...just strava


----------



## sho220 (Aug 3, 2005)

zygote2k said:


> Not all URT bikes handle the same.
> There were plenty of differently designed URT's- maybe 20 or more that I've seen.
> The CT does just that-pick your butt off the seat for rough stuff and sit down for the smooth sections- sorta like how you learned to ride a hardtail. Bike only weighs 25# though.
> Apparently there were many professional riders that raced URT's for more than 1 year, so I find it hard to believe the statement, "All it takes is one ride on a URT or "sweet spot" bike to understand why everyone bailed on the concept".
> The URT was just one of the many steps in the process of FS that got us to where we are today. I ride mine everyday and it's very comfortable- maybe if you had ridden one more than once, you'd have a different impression....


I rode a Schwinn Homegrown URT for about 2 years. That was 2 years too long. And you are correct...the URT is one of many failed steps in the process of FS that got us to where we are today...sometimes, making mistakes is the best way to learn...


----------



## syklystt (Mar 31, 2010)

I hope to ride one someday soon. As I build a bunch of old, unusable suspensuion designs, I'd like to have an URT there for proper comparrison. I have been riding FS for almost 20 years and figure that I can ride them fairly well by now. My intention is to build a fleet of those old designs and test them aginst each other and aginst some new technology FS bikes. I'd really like to know how far we've came. What actually worked and didnt (all opinion of course except for a few designs). I intend to bring some to events/races to let others have some fun with them too. Should be an interesting test, hopefully I'll be doing this throughout this summer. I just need time to build these things up (and get an AMP and a URT). I just finished my DH/Freeride and XC bikes...they take priority and have nothing to do with VRC. I cannot even think for a moment that any of these bikes will compare to the new stuff, but I will acknowledge them if they do. other thn that, it's just a fun test to do with some VRC full sussers....Yes, I did say VRC!


----------



## Uncle Grumpy (Oct 20, 2005)

syklystt said:


> I hope to ride one someday soon. As I build a bunch of old, unusable suspensuion designs, I'd like to have an URT there for proper comparrison.


I hear ya. I'm building this for laughs. A lot of the parts are temporary, such as the wheels, tensioner, pedals and saddle. No brakes et either. It has a CT seatpost so that makes everything right. I can't wait to try it on something other than the 100' of singletrack in my back garden.

























So far I really, really like the way the saddle to crank length changes. Reminds me of a water bed. 

Grumps


----------



## mik_git (Feb 4, 2004)

lol at the CT seatpost


----------



## TigWorld (Feb 8, 2010)

syklystt said:


> ...My intention is to build a fleet of those old designs and test them aginst each other and aginst some new technology FS bikes. I'd really like to know how far we've came...


The major leaps forward have been in shock design, in particular the platform valving was a major step forward. As far as designs go, there's not much new. The stuff that worked 15 years ago still works today and for the most part is still being made. Many bikes still use a single pivot design (Scott, Santa Cruz) or horst link (speci FSR) bikes. The virtual pivot bikes are probably the only post-vintage development that is widely used (DW-link, VPP, Maestro) and they are definitely good. The single pivot designs are still not so good, no matter what smarts they try to pack in to the shock. The horst-link bikes are better now than ever with the platform shocks available. The stuff that is no longer made, like URT designs were craptacular and have deservedly gone the way of the dodo.


----------



## syklystt (Mar 31, 2010)

TigWorld said:


> The major leaps forward have been in shock design, in particular the platform valving was a major step forward. As far as designs go, there's not much new. The stuff that worked 15 years ago still works today and for the most part is still being made. Many bikes still use a single pivot design (Scott, Santa Cruz) or horst link (speci FSR) bikes. The virtual pivot bikes are probably the only post-vintage development that is widely used (DW-link, VPP, Maestro) and they are definitely good. The single pivot designs are still not so good, no matter what smarts they try to pack in to the shock. The horst-link bikes are better now than ever with the platform shocks available. The stuff that is no longer made, like URT designs were craptacular and have deservedly gone the way of the dodo.


I have about the sameopinion on the way things have gone. I dont have a VRC VPP bike but would get one if the price is right. I currently ride a foes XCR with the curnutt shock (the one that designed platform valving),...I also have 2 FXR's. these are all single pivot desings but work sooo well. Opinin on this is mine of course. I still have issues with negative travel on a bike as I cannot stand the front end diving...cant ride them 30psi stans things either...dont people actually lean their bikes with tubeless???

I cant wait for another 20 years to go by and I can look back at all the wierd things that they are doing right now.....29"....27.5"....wide bars....sooooft tubeless wheels....all those curvy downtubes even where they dont need them...complicated suspension designs with many pivots.....faaaat tires......

One thing for sure, there's a resurgence of R&D going on(it dipped after the nineties)....and the custom bike scene is gettin' huge.....I love the weirdness, I just dont participate in much of it.


----------



## syklystt (Mar 31, 2010)

uncle grummpy...cool lookin' bike, that fork looks sweet on there.....ready to shred some big downs!


----------



## Uncle Grumpy (Oct 20, 2005)

The fork is 97 Judy XL, but, thanks to a blown cartridge it has been upgraded to 98 internals because that 12 months of intensive R and D would have made a world of difference. The fork is a great match for the rear suspension. Make of that comment what you will. The forks look more gnarly thanks to the little front triangle.

Grumps


----------

