# '89 Red Shred



## da'HOOV (Jan 3, 2009)

I picked up what I think is an "89 C'dale Red Shred frame today. Polished Aluminum in very nice shape, 26" rear, 13" ground clearance and a rear Campy Euclid Monoplaner brake. It came with a Tange fork (not sure if its original) correct Tange Falcon headset and Shimano Bottom Bracket. Also has the correct Deore "Endless band" front Derailer. Pics to follow..:thumbsup:


----------



## Fred Smedley (Feb 28, 2006)

da'HOOV said:


> I picked up what I think is an "89 C'dale Red Shred frame today. Polished Aluminum in very nice shape, 26" rear, 13" ground clearance and a rear Campy Euclid Monoplaner brake. It came with a Tange fork (not sure if its original) correct Tange Falcon headset and Shimano Bottom Bracket. Also has the correct Deore "Endless band" front Derailer. Pics to follow..:thumbsup:


Veiled for sale ad?


----------



## da'HOOV (Jan 3, 2009)

*no, it's not for sale.........*



Fred Smedley said:


> Veiled for sale ad?


What is wrong with you people?


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

Hahaha!


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

Ride it!


----------



## cousineddie (Oct 23, 2008)

colker1 said:


> Ride it!


 What's wrong with you people?


----------



## eastcoaststeve (Sep 19, 2007)

Alright...probably gonna be an unpopular stance, but here goes....


it's really getting old watching you guys pile on Stan every time he posts a "find"...

* yes, I know he doesn't ride like Ned Overend...probably more like Ned Flanders, but I 
seriously doubt he's the "only" non-rider in VRC land. I've seen quite a few guys post on
this board and RB that obviously never turn a wheel in dirt or anger.

* we assume every bike he posts is "for sale"...but honestly, who isn't above PMing an 
"offer" if they see something they really want? It's not just Stan, I've seen a lot of thinly 
veiled "sale" posts, and while they get a razz or two, it's nothing like the beat down Stan 
gets whan he posts.

* his pictures often leave a bit to be desired, but they'd fit right in with most of the 
submissions to RBOTM 

* Cousin Eddie is a d*ck 




Flame away 


Steve


ps....Stan post a pic of the C'dale already....no one will buy it on a damn description alone


----------



## cousineddie (Oct 23, 2008)

eastcoaststeve said:


> * Cousin Eddie is a d*ck


Hey thanks!:thumbsup:


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

eastcoaststeve said:


> * his pictures often leave a bit to be desired, but they'd fit right in with most of the
> submissions to RBOTM


what pictures? the pictures of what he thinks "is an "89 C'dale Red Shred frame" ?

I'm not seeing them

*note: I'm not actually asking for pics of a cannondale to be posted. I just thinks its been funny from the OP on down


----------



## ameybrook (Sep 9, 2006)

eastcoaststeve said:


> it's really getting old watching you guys pile on Stan every time he posts a "find"...


Are you kidding? He LOVES this stuff. Being at the center of the drama, drumming up potential buyers for his "controversial" sales...


----------



## eastcoaststeve (Sep 19, 2007)

hollister said:


> what pictures?
> 
> *note: I'm not actually asking for pics of a cannondale to be posted. I just thinks its been funny from the OP on down


Haha, careful Hollister...you'll hurt Mendon's feelings 

Steve


----------



## eastcoaststeve (Sep 19, 2007)

ameybrook said:


> Are you kidding? He LOVES this stuff. Being at the center of the drama, drumming up potential buyers for his "controversial" sales...


Yeah AB, you make a good point...he does seem to fan the flames around here...

Steve


----------



## 1978 (Sep 23, 2010)

I'm looking forward to the pics, here is my '89 'Red Shred' for comparison!


----------



## eastcoaststeve (Sep 19, 2007)

1978 said:


> I'm looking forward to the pics, here is my '89 'Red Shred' for comparison!


Very very nice...but is it hard to keep your feet on the crank arms when you pedal?

Steve


----------



## 1978 (Sep 23, 2010)

Yes it is actually, I just can't seem to work out why.........


----------



## Fatmikeynyc (Jun 20, 2005)

1978, that's actually kind if interesting...how much is your's for sale for?


----------



## 1978 (Sep 23, 2010)

Funnily enough, it sold last week. It is being collected in the morning. I'll be sad to see it go to be honest.


----------



## Fatmikeynyc (Jun 20, 2005)

1978 said:


> Funnily enough, it sold last week. It is being collected in the morning. I'll be sad to see it go to be honest.


Interesting.

How much did you sell it for?


----------



## bushpig (Nov 26, 2005)

I kind of dig it! I wonder where I could find one for my collection...


----------



## ameybrook (Sep 9, 2006)

1978=Stan Sock puppet


----------



## sho220 (Aug 3, 2005)

ameybrook said:


> Are you kidding? He LOVES this stuff. Being at the center of the drama, drumming up potential buyers for his "controversial" sales...


and you dummies hook him up by keeping his stupid posts at the top of the forum for days on end... Stan rules this forum...


----------



## sho220 (Aug 3, 2005)

ameybrook said:


> 1978=Stan Sock puppet


no...those pics are not nearly soggy enough...


----------



## 1978 (Sep 23, 2010)

Ameybrook=seller of dodgy Tioga Revolvers (thanks for the advice btw)


----------



## 1978 (Sep 23, 2010)

fatmikeynyc said:


> interesting.
> 
> How much did you sell it for?


£500


----------



## jeff (Jan 13, 2004)

Thanks but no butter on mine this time.


----------



## jeff (Jan 13, 2004)

1978 said:


> £500


Good price for used Cdale. :thumbsup:


----------



## 1978 (Sep 23, 2010)

jeff said:


> Good price for used Cdale. :thumbsup:


Pretty rare in the condition though  I don't think It's been ridden more than 10 times since 1989!!


----------



## chefmiguel (Dec 22, 2007)

I like that C'dale, never saw a Red Shred before. I need one I think.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

1978 said:


> Ameybrook=seller of dodgy Tioga Revolvers (thanks for the advice btw)


Hey 1978, what year were you born?


----------



## 1978 (Sep 23, 2010)

1984, why?


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

1978 said:


> 1984, why?


No reason. I guessed 1972.


----------



## 1978 (Sep 23, 2010)

Rumpfy said:


> No reason. I guessed 1972.


Unlucky.


----------



## Deuce Bigelow (Jun 9, 2010)

Rumpfy said:


> No reason. I guessed 1972.


Isn't Stan older than that?


----------



## dontyoueatthatyellowsnow (Nov 21, 2005)

ameybrook said:


> 1978=Stan Sock puppet


Now Im jealous...I thought *I* was Stans *ONLY* sock puppet!


----------



## Fred Smedley (Feb 28, 2006)

da'HOOV said:


> What is wrong with you people?


If you would of posted photos I would not of thought the worse, but telling the world you came up with a a uncommon bike but are to lazy to post pictures is suspect. Personally I don't care either way , but post the pictures.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

Deuce Bigelow said:


> Isn't Stan older than that?


Stan was born in 1912. He's old as fcuk!


----------



## da'HOOV (Jan 3, 2009)

ameybrook ...exactly which posts have "drummed" up sales for me? Please name a couple....and do you have every bike and every part that you've acquired since you started posting here? I'm sure you haven't bought/sold anything from/to anyone in this forum have you? that would be unscrupulous methinks 


Anyhow, moving on....heres some pics. The serial # is 18-121388-019...18"... 12/13/1988...build #019 ? I think thats how to read it. Can anyone confirm? (I just threw the bars and wheelset on to get measurements and a better feel for the geometry).


----------



## Deuce Bigelow (Jun 9, 2010)

But, it's not even red!


----------



## da'HOOV (Jan 3, 2009)

Fred Smedley said:


> If you would of posted photos I would not of thought the worse, but telling the world you came up with a a uncommon bike but are to lazy to post pictures is suspect. Personally I don't care either way , but post the pictures.


for what it's worth..I posted less than 18 hours ago "pic's to follow"...maybe you should keep your accusations to yourself.....

edit..."if you would HAVE posted photos I would not HAVE thought the worse, but telling the world you came up with AN uncommon bike but are TOO lazy to post pictures is suspect. Personally I don't care either way, but post the pictures"

sorry, I couldn't help it. There's probably a few more I missed but those are just so SO obvious...


----------



## da'HOOV (Jan 3, 2009)

Deuce Bigelow said:


> But, it's not even red!


well, thats something I was curious about. Did they have bare frame options? Did someone strip it? Is it a different model completely like an SM900 or were all SM900s Red Shreds?


----------



## Fred Smedley (Feb 28, 2006)

da'HOOV said:


> for what it's worth..I posted less than 18 hours ago "pic's to follow"...maybe you should keep your accusations to yourself.....


Feel better now ?


----------



## da'HOOV (Jan 3, 2009)

Fred Smedley said:


> Feel better now ?


Yes, thank you. Very therapeutic.


----------



## bushpig (Nov 26, 2005)

1978's is nicer. Yours is a Stanbike.


----------



## da'HOOV (Jan 3, 2009)

bushpig said:


> 1978's is nicer. Yours is a Stanbike.


Well smack me upside the head and call me Gomer....there's genius in them there words. Thanx Captain Obvious.


----------



## J_Westy (Jan 7, 2009)

da'HOOV said:


> Anyhow, moving on....heres some pics. The serial # is 18-121388-019...18"... 12/13/1988...build #019 ? I think thats how to read it.


I believe that's corrected according to:
Vintage Cannondale - Information and Help



da'HOOV said:


> well, thats something I was curious about. Did they have bare frame options? Did someone strip it? Is it a different model completely like an SM900 or were all SM900s Red Shreds?


Stripped... too bad.

The Red Shred was actually a SM1000 in '88, but I don't know how you'd tell it from a SM700.

http://66.147.244.179/~vintagm8/year/1988/1988.pdf


----------



## da'HOOV (Jan 3, 2009)

J_Westy said:


> I believe that's corrected according to:
> Vintage Cannondale - Information and Help
> Stripped... too bad.
> The Red Shred was actually a SM1000 in '88, but I don't know how you'd tell it from a SM700.
> http://66.147.244.179/~vintagm8/year/1988/1988.pdf


Thanx JW, I was going by the late '88 serial #, the Mombat info and the '89 CDale catalog, I figured an SM600 or SM900. Hard to tell for sure but it's still a straight frame that should be fun to build.

http://www.vintagecannondale.com/year/1989/1989.pdf


----------



## J_Westy (Jan 7, 2009)

da'HOOV said:


> Thanx JW, I was going by the late '88 serial #, the Mombat info and the '89 CDale catalog, I figured an SM600 or SM900. Hard to tell for sure but it's still a straight frame that should be fun to build.
> 
> http://www.vintagecannondale.com/year/1989/1989.pdf


Yup -- you could be right there... hard to tell w/o the paint.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

Stan, does life suck being overly sensitive and devoid of any humor? Reeeeelax.


----------



## da'HOOV (Jan 3, 2009)

Rumpfy said:


> Stan, does life suck being overly sensitive and devoid of any humor? Reeeeelax.


Oh Eric...yes it does. I feel so empty and alone. My life is a worthless void. My very existance seems futile and I'm not sure it's worth going on......Nobody likes me, everybody hates me, think I'll go eat worms. Big fat juicy ones, short thin slimy ones.....

Oh wait...you and ameybrook, fasteddie ( or whatever the fruck he goes by) and Fillet, hollister and yes, even GOB...you guys and your hord of friends give me reason to go on, to persevere, to fight the good fight, To dream the impossible dream, to fight the unbeatable foe, to bear with unbearable sorrow, to run where the brave dare not go.....

Eric, does life suck being a dick all the time? too effin bad


----------



## girlonbike (Apr 24, 2008)

Don't pull me into this Stan. Not cool at all.

Quoting a kindergarten song pretty much sums up the maturity level.


----------



## da'HOOV (Jan 3, 2009)

girlonbike said:


> Don't pull me into this Stan. Not cool at all.


 Sorry, but it's not cool getting dumped on constantly either. I didn't start this melee, all I did was post a bike and as usual the sheet started flying. I'm not the type to not defend myself against false statements and accusations.

Maybe the mods should try and corral some of this BS. If they let it continue, they become enablers of the problem.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

I hate canondales.


----------



## cousineddie (Oct 23, 2008)

da'HOOV said:


> Sorry, but it's not cool getting dumped on constantly either..


You get dumped on because of your overly-sensitive reactions, as well as past history. Try rolling with the punches a bit and see what happens. Still, I think you secretly like the drama. If you didn't, you would have moved over to Retro Bike long ago, where they drool over dumpster finds and don't frown upon veiled or not-so-veiled for sale ads.

As for your latest find, I think it would get more positive feedback if you had just posted photos of the bare frame. In the photos, it looks like a heap, with the cables strewn about like fallen power lines.

Just my 2 cents.


----------



## Shayne (Jan 14, 2004)

da'HOOV said:


> well, thats something I was curious about. Did they have bare frame options? Did someone strip it? Is it a different model completely like an SM900 or were all SM900s Red Shreds?


Cannondale made 2 different MTB frames. One with sloping tt and 13" bb, one with straight tt and 11.5" bb. The SM900 and SM600 were identical except for the components hung on them.

That was the nice thing about Cannondale back then. You got the same frame on a $2000 bike that you did on a $500 bike.


----------



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

This whipping boy bs is boring.


----------



## bushpig (Nov 26, 2005)

Stan, it horrifies me to think that people have to deal with you in real life. My heart goes out to them.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

da'HOOV said:


> Eric, does life suck being a dick all the time? too effin bad


I'm not a dick all the time. I'm not even a dick to you all the time. In order to continue to be the martyr you love being, you need that to be true.

I do enjoy getting you riled up though, you're such an easy target. :winker:


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

colker1 said:


> I hate canondales.


Haha! :lol:


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

It's always da'RAMA


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

da'HOOV said:


> Sorry, but it's not cool getting dumped on constantly either. I didn't start this melee, all I did was post a bike and as usual the sheet started flying. I'm not the type to not defend myself against false statements and accusations.
> 
> Maybe the mods should try and corral some of this BS. If they let it continue, they become enablers of the problem.


I really think you should give Retrobike a try. I'm not saying that to dump you off on them, but you obviously never ever get a fair shake here....so why keep coming back to the abuse?
GM1230126, GoldeneraMTB, and SFKlein have made RBUK their home and seem welcomed there and a lot happier as a result. I'm just sayin...


----------



## Deuce Bigelow (Jun 9, 2010)

Stan-

Its not possible to vigorously stir the pot without having some back splash.

I still don't understand how you're surprised by the reactions you get.


----------



## giantbikeboy (Dec 3, 2004)

good stuff in here.


----------



## jeff (Jan 13, 2004)

I ran out of popcorn already. I'll take butter this time, thank you.


----------



## da'HOOV (Jan 3, 2009)

Deuce Bigelow said:


> Stan-
> 
> Its not possible to vigorously stir the pot without having some back splash.
> 
> I still don't understand how you're surprised by the reactions you get.


surprised? no, I wouldn't say that..... Amazed? thats maybe a better term. Think about it....who's playin who? 

63 posts? over 1000 hits? MTBR should be payin me :thumbsup:


----------



## abaris (Feb 13, 2010)

I'll give 40.


----------



## abaris (Feb 13, 2010)

abaris said:


> I'll give 40.


Opps! I'm sorry this isn't ebay.


----------



## WickedPhatChance (May 28, 2011)

Following the ebb and flow of the drama starting from the original post, Colker's reply gets first prize for total hilarity in the fewest words.


----------



## sho220 (Aug 3, 2005)

da'HOOV said:


> ameybrook ...exactly which posts have "drummed" up sales for me? Please name a couple....and do you have every bike and every part that you've acquired since you started posting here? I'm sure you haven't bought/sold anything from/to anyone in this forum have you? that would be unscrupulous methinks
> 
> Anyhow, moving on....heres some pics. The serial # is 18-121388-019...18"... 12/13/1988...build #019 ? I think thats how to read it. Can anyone confirm? (I just threw the bars and wheelset on to get measurements and a better feel for the geometry).


This thread was much better without the pics...


----------



## dontyoueatthatyellowsnow (Nov 21, 2005)

Rumpfy said:


> GM1230126, GoldeneraMTB, and SFKlein have made RBUK their home and seem welcomed there and a lot happier as a result. I'm just sayin...


This is our playground see? And no ones gonna play here but me and my blokes...see?









Speaking on behalf of the Lurkers here...those three former Members (like Stan) added a lot of value to this Forum.

It is too bad they rubbed you five the wrong way and your childish constant bullying sent them packing


----------



## IF52 (Jan 10, 2004)

[trying to change subject] hey, look at that, the Cleveland Indians got Jim Thome back [/trying to change subject]


----------



## bushpig (Nov 26, 2005)

I like the old Cannondales. I know they don't always get much love but I think they were cool, at least until the 3.0 bikes.


----------



## bushpig (Nov 26, 2005)

dontyoueatthatyellowsnow said:


> This is our playground see? And no ones gonna play here but me and my blokes...see?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


GM added value at least. I think you would be hard pressed to find any "bullying" of those guys in any case. Stan doesn't get bullied. He is just an annoying moron. The one area where he has clearly added value is the Raleigh Edge Olsen stuff. Beside that - nada.


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

bushpig said:


> I like the old Cannondales. I know they don't always get much love but I think they were cool, at least until the 3.0 bikes.


:thumbsup::thumbsup:


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

dontyoueatthatyellowsnow said:


> This is our playground see? And no ones gonna play here but me and my blokes...see?
> 
> Speaking on behalf of the Lurkers here...those three former Members (like Stan) added a lot of value to this Forum.
> 
> It is too bad they rubbed you five the wrong way and your childish constant bullying sent them packing


Glad you're enjoying their company. I'm enjoying them gone. Win win!

I would love it if you could convince Stan to head to Retrobike and its completely drama free zone. You don't have cliques or arguments or people that don't like each other over there right? I didn't think so. :thumbsup:


----------

