# Mystery frame



## Jimmyfixit (Dec 28, 2012)

Hello all. As per suggestions in my other post. Can any of you guys and gals ID my brother-in-laws frame. Here's the link in bike and frame discussion.

http://forums.mtbr.com/bike-frame-discussion/mystery-frame-830804.html

Hope it is ok to post the link here.

Thanks!


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

Gut reaction says Walgoose. Parts mix makes me scratch my head. 

Weld appearance has little to do with manufacturer, or quality. I posted a thread a while back with some close ups of welds on a frame that wandered through the shop, got a bunch of guys all excited, then dropped the hammer, it was a Walgoose, oops....

It's amazing how well those robots weld. 

Why someone put a highish end older mix of parts on it is beyond me. The rear shock is the giveaway on this one. 

If I'm wrong, which I often am, I'll happily retract.


----------



## Jimmyfixit (Dec 28, 2012)

Maybe... But if it is a "walgoose". Then one would think I / we / you should be able to find a picture of one.. Somewhere on Al Gore's world wide web...
Don't care if it is... Just want to know for sure. 
Thanks for your input. We appreciate any and all help!


----------



## StanleyButterfly (Nov 4, 2009)

In my experience, people who buy bikes at Walmart don't get all excited about it and do a photoshoot. 

I'm going to go with mongoose.


----------



## Jimmyfixit (Dec 28, 2012)

Thanks for your input.


----------



## YakimaDeathYaks (Aug 15, 2012)

Looks lilke a Ziegler-Lam made in Kent, WA


----------



## banks (Feb 2, 2004)

I have the brother to your fork, the DCS90. All steel and coils!


----------



## Jimmyfixit (Dec 28, 2012)

YakimaDeathYaks said:


> Looks lilke a Ziegler-Lam made in Kent, WA


You nailed it! Awesome! Thanks a lot!


----------



## VintageRocks (Jan 27, 2013)

MendonCycleSmith said:


> Gut reaction says Walgoose. Parts mix makes me scratch my head.
> 
> Weld appearance has little to do with manufacturer, or quality. I posted a thread a while back with some close ups of welds on a frame that wandered through the shop, got a bunch of guys all excited, then dropped the hammer, it was a Walgoose, oops....
> 
> ...


Ok, so I finally took the time to register. Thanks to my Bro for solving this mystery. Where is the "*retract*"?

Why is the rear shock "the giveaway on this one"? My Cannondale Delta V-2000 came with a very similar shock.

Also Marin used these shocks. Search MTBR for "Marin 1999 B-17 Full Suspension Bike" click the first result (I can't post links) So how is my shock a sign its a WalGoose?


----------



## VintageRocks (Jan 27, 2013)

StanleyButterfly said:


> In my experience, people who buy bikes at Walmart don't get all excited about it and do a photoshoot.
> 
> I'm going to go with mongoose.


This reply is confusing? Are you saying you think its a Walmart bike and we are lame for posting the pics? Or are you saying we wouldn't have taken the time if it were a Walmart bike? Also, he said I bought it on Craigslist (not Walmart). ????


----------



## VintageRocks (Jan 27, 2013)

YakimaDeathYaks said:


> Looks lilke a Ziegler-Lam made in Kent, WA


Thanks Man!!!! Do you know anything about the company?

Eric at White Brothers said my forks are 1998 models so I'm guessing this is a 1998 bike and they came stock or where an option.

I found an old Mountain Bike publication with a used one for sale for $800 back in 2001. At $1400 new it was not a super expensive bike but not cheap either.

(_FOR SALE Ziegler-Lam Mountain Bike. Mega 2000. Full suspension bike. Scram 9.0 
components throughout. Like new. Rear rack included. Too much bike for me. $1400 
value. Will let go for $800. Must see_) Tacoma Wheelmen's Bicycle Club
N e w s l e t t e r
July 2001 (can't post links).


----------



## VintageRocks (Jan 27, 2013)

banks said:


> I have the brother to your fork, the DCS90. All steel and coils!


How do your forks work? Mine would barely move up and down. Eric at White Bros. told me the nylon spacers that keep the springs in place absorb moisture over the years and swell up. He said the should fall right through the fork tube, if you were to drop it in the tube. Mine had to be forced out they had swollen so much. Now my forks work great! White Bros still has the parts for the forks too.


----------



## VintageRocks (Jan 27, 2013)

YakimaDeathYaks

Thanks for solving the "Mystery Frame" uhhh...mystery.


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

VintageRocks said:


> Where is the "*retract*"?
> 
> Why is the rear shock "the giveaway on this one"?


The retraction was mental, as in, "oh, huh, never heard of that one, okay, moving along..." Sounds like you want a deep, heartfelt, public apology or something? 

As for the rear shock, no name "brand", big brightly color, basic font sticker, cheap looking hardware, fat coils with virtually no travel, looks like a classic cheapo rear shock unit, that's all. Looks can be deceiving, but a quick search of the brand turned up only this, which kinda does the heavy lifting for me....

Shock Works DR-185 Older Rear Shocks Reviews

Ride it like you stole it.


----------



## girlonbike (Apr 24, 2008)

yes, public flogging is back.


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

girlonbike said:


> yes, public flogging is back.


Grab your Cricket bat.....

:ciappa:


----------



## VintageRocks (Jan 27, 2013)

MendonCycleSmith said:


> The retraction was mental, as in, "oh, huh, never heard of that one, okay, moving along..." Sounds like you want a deep, heartfelt, public apology or something?
> 
> As for the rear shock, no name "brand", big brightly color, basic font sticker, cheap looking hardware, fat coils with virtually no travel, looks like a classic cheapo rear shock unit, that's all. Looks can be deceiving, but a quick search of the brand turned up only this, which kinda does the heavy lifting for me....
> 
> ...


Here is a picture of the Cannondale shock which also "_brightly colored_" , "_fat coiled_", and to you probably looks to have _"vitually no travel"_. Pretty much your exact description of "the giveaway on " being a Walgoose. This is a vintage forum right?  ShockWorks might not be around anymore but they were hardly "_no name "brand_" as you put it.

They made many different models of shocks and even some pretty cool DH forks. Shockworks Big One RAM Forks photo from the Mtbr Mountain Bike Photo Gallery

They were not as popular as the big names and maybe not as universally loved but hardly "no name". My model is a ShockWorks R1050, it's not the one you mention. The only bikes I have seen with these shocks on them are good bikes like Marins, Azonic Saber, Ziegler-Lam 

I can't get this link to come up but this old MTBR post shows at least some folks new who they were": 
_Who do you support Fox, Marzocchi or Shockworks - Mountain Bike ...
archive.mtbr.com/12/0EF569C9.php_


----------



## YakimaDeathYaks (Aug 15, 2012)

VintageRocks said:


> Thanks Man!!!! Do you know anything about the company?
> 
> Eric at White Brothers said my forks are 1998 models so I'm guessing this is a 1998 bike and they came stock or where an option.
> 
> ...


There pretty crappy bikes to be completly honest, the geometry on them is horribile and i think a couple websites voted it the worst full suspension bike of all time...seriously. Some had decent components but most was run of the mill parts. There not in anyway desirable, there was a couple frames a Mega and i think a hardtail for sale on CL last year and they wanted 15 bucks apiece or 25 for both.


----------



## VintageRocks (Jan 27, 2013)

MendonCycleSmith said:


> The retraction was mental, as in, "oh, huh, never heard of that one, okay, moving along..." Sounds like you want a deep, heartfelt, public apology or something?
> 
> As for the rear shock, no name "brand", big brightly color, basic font sticker, cheap looking hardware, fat coils with virtually no travel, looks like a classic cheapo rear shock unit, that's all. Looks can be deceiving, but a quick search of the brand turned up only this, which kinda does the heavy lifting for me....
> 
> ...


Now lets look at your "_with virtually no travel, looks like a classic cheapo rear shock unit_," statement.

This link shows what looks to be my exact shock, sans the brightly colored (Walgoose give away) red spring:
_What New Rear Suspension should I get?_

Its good for 6" of travel. Is that "_virtually no travel_" for a 1998 mountain bike? You cannot simply look at a shock and discern "travel". The design of the swing arm and linkage determines that. My dirt bike shock only has 4" of piston travels but 12" + of rear wheel travel.

This thread will explain it for you nicely:
_Question about rear shock length - Pinkbike Forum_


----------



## VintageRocks (Jan 27, 2013)

YakimaDeathYaks said:


> There pretty crappy bikes to be completly honest, the geometry on them is horribile and i think a couple websites voted it the worst full suspension bike of all time...seriously. Some had decent components but most was run of the mill parts. There not in anyway desirable, there was a couple frames a Mega and i think a hardtail for sale on CL last year and they wanted 15 bucks apiece or 25 for both.


Ouch! Links please. [edited out for sale spam] Was a link to one for $350

I beg to differ on the _"desirable"_, I like it and a few other folks seemed to as well over in the Bike and Frame post. Mine looks like a lot of attention and expense went into it. The newer ones including the one for sale above, seem to be gravitating toward cheaper builds, (just my opinion).

I have yet to see one with _"run of the mill parts_", mostly SRAM 9, XT, XTR. Not sayin they did not make them that way too.

I like unique 2 wheelers, I have a vintage ATK motorcyle and had a Cannondale motorcycle (both USA made). I like vintage so much, because so many cool designs were made in the USA! To me the rarity of this bike, the raw aluminum and the great components make it super cool.

I was most excited (when you figured out what this bike was) to learn in was made in the USA.


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

VintageRocks said:


> Here is a picture of the Cannondale shock which also "_brightly colored_" , "_fat coiled_", and to you probably looks to have _"vitually no travel"_. Pretty much your exact description of "the giveaway on " being a Walgoose. This is a vintage forum right? ShockWorks might not be around anymore but they were hardly "_no name "brand_" as you put it.


And it totally sucked, all of them died pretty quickly too.

Do recall though, Magna, Next, etc are all "brands" too. No name brands to be sure, but still a "brand".

Go ahead and love your bike, ride the crap out of it, no skin off my nose. I stand by my assessment though, nothing awesome, rare, or worth getting ones knickers in a twist over.

You asked for opinions, and got them. Mine is no more important at days end, than anyone elses.

If you're looking for validation of its utter, totally awesome radness no matter what the facts point to, you're in the wrong place.


----------



## YakimaDeathYaks (Aug 15, 2012)

MendonCycleSmith said:


> And it totally sucked, all of them died pretty quickly too.
> 
> Do recall though, Magna, Next, etc are all "brands" too. No name brands to be sure, but still a "brand".
> 
> ...


I agree if you like it, you like it. But as i have learned its no holds bar in this forum you will get what people really think about a bike and in this forum its about quality, Kleins don't even get much love in here and they are some of the best bikes ever made. Zeigler-Lam just didn't make it, even a pro-flex is 10 times as desirable. so its pretty much given on your bike that it won't receive much love, its gotta say something that you can't even find a shred of info about them.


----------



## YakimaDeathYaks (Aug 15, 2012)

*Lam for Sale*

Good 7005 tubed all aluminum frame, 24 speed Ziegler-Lam Mountain Bike. 
SRAM 5.0 component set. KIMLIN rims, RockShox Suspension.
Light weight: in good rideable condition. Made in Kent, WA.

Theres nothing on this bike worth 5 bucks, maybe the pedals.
There asking 120 bucks and its been online for over a year.


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

YakimaDeathYaks said:


> I agree if you like it, you like it. But as i have learned its no holds bar in this forum you will get what people really think about a bike and in this forum its about quality


Agreed. And I'm not even one of the snobby ones 

FWIW, I actually have a ProFlex 957, and would never even think of posting it here and expecting lots of fawning appreciation...

Quality starts with things like this, and only get's better the deeper you look.


----------



## VintageRocks (Jan 27, 2013)

MendonCycleSmith said:


> If you're looking for validation of its utter, totally awesome radness no matter what the facts point to, you're in the wrong place.


Of course I'm not looking for anyone's validation, that would be silly. We just wanted to know what it was and get reliable information. MTBR seemed like the right place.

You made blanket statements like discerning the travel of bike by how how long the shock is and "_the giveaway on " being a Walgoose_" is the shock has "bright colors". It seems appropriate for a discussion forum to ask for some explanation.

YakimaDeathYaks, Still thanking you for figuring it out and nothing you've said makes me like it less  Like I said before, the odder and rarer the better for me and when you are like that you get used to others "not getting it" and thus don't want or look for others approval. So... if it somehow seems I'm asking others to like it (instead of the intention, which was to identify it) then that's a misread.


----------



## Bokchoicowboy (Aug 7, 2007)

YakimaDeathYaks is dead on about what you will hear in this forum, and it is one of the reasons I steer clear of most discussions in the VRC. Don't get me wrong, I really enjoy what many posters say, absolutely respect the regular posters and am blown away by their encyclopedic knowledge...but this place does at times get quite hostile and many posters are what I would categorize as elitist. Takes the fun out of it for me. Bring the wrong bike into the VRC forum, and you get your ass handed to you.

Just sad.


----------



## VintageRocks (Jan 27, 2013)

Totally agree on the Pro-Flex, I love 'em. I want a naked one with the Girvin Fork (odd stuff's cool).


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

VintageRocks said:


> Of course I'm not looking for anyone's validation, that would be silly. We just wanted to know what it was and get reliable information. MTBR seemed like the right place.
> 
> You made blanket statements like discerning the travel of bike by how how long the shock is and "_the giveaway on " being a Walgoose_" is the shock has "bright colors". It seems appropriate for a discussion forum to ask for some explanation.


By bright colors, I was referring to the label on the shock, bright colors along with a very basic letter font are common on cheapo shock units. All coils are painted, unless they're titanium, lest they rust.

Typically, you'll see coils that are super fat in the wire cross section, with virtually no space between them, on cheap bikes with little travel, or, better bikes from BITD, with virtually no travel.

Why little travel? Because the spring quickly reached it;s fellow coils and binds, preventing further travel.

The Cannondale you posted, had virtually no travel. Hence looking similar.

With the coils as they are, and the stroke as short as it is, I'd be amazed if you can get 6" out of it. Not saying it can't happen, but I have been doing this for a long time, and generally have good sense for what's what.


----------



## VintageRocks (Jan 27, 2013)

Surely by now you realize u are wrong? It's not a Walgoose shock in any way. It came on Marins and Azonics, NOT cheap bikes. That's a fact. Now it's the font that you think is cheap? Geez&#8230; Your skills at bike identification via shock appearance are questionable at best.

I gave you a link to a Marin with the same shock and it gives 6" of travel, what more do you need?

Some people just can't admit when they are wrong. You seem like it means a lot to you to pooh-pooh this bike. That's cool (whatever floats ur boat) but at least make sense.

*Bokchoicowboy*, good advice, I'm seeing it too.


----------



## girlonbike (Apr 24, 2008)

Dude, chill out.


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

VintageRocks said:


> Surely by now you realize u are wrong? It's not a Walgoose shock in any way. It came on Marins and Azonics, NOT cheap bikes. That's a fact. Now it's the font that you think is cheap? Geez&#8230; Your skills at bike identification via shock appearance are questionable at best.
> 
> I gave you a link to a Marin with the same shock and it gives 6" of travel, what more do you need?
> 
> ...


Wrong? Oy vey, final stop on this train ride for me.

I have only been responding a lot, as you seem very adamant about getting some level of acceptance from me about your bike and how it's not cheap. I'm sorry if it bothers you, it is. Or should I say, started out that way, and the frame, being the heart of the bike, well, it's still a cheap bike. Just with high end parts.

Any bike that has that shock or one similar on it, is a cheap bike. Not a Walgoose perhaps, but not a high end bike by any stretch of the imagination. Cheap bikes, by definition, are ones that came out of the box with low end parts (not to be confused with one that has had higher end parts installed after the fact, such as the case with yours) and has a retail value primarily targeted at the recreational user, most often $1000 or less, most well under that.

Just because a Marin, Jamis, Trek, Specialized, whatever, came with the same shock that happens to be on your bike, does not automatically make it high end by association.All those companies make super basic stripped down, cheapo, entry level FS bikes for the recreational market too, and that would be the sort of components they would use on them. Most in recent past have gone to more reliable base models from the big boys to avoid hassles that inevitably come from the cheap crap though. Think Chevette vs Corvette. Both are 'vettes, both Chevys but one is decidedly higher end.

Not that I care if it's a high end bike or not. You asked for opinions got many, and became all upset when one of them didn't agree with your personally held beliefs about it. I simply tried explaining what I meant, and you've done nothing but get increasingly bent about it.

Doesn't mean it's a bad bike, the only truly bad bike is one that never gets ridden. Doesn't mean you can't ride the heck out it.

You got your info, you now know what brand it is. If you wish to discuss it further, go for it.

If you keep asking me specifically to admit I'm woefully wrong, that your bike is a rare gem, and state unequivocally that everyone else who has used rear shocks by the same company that made yours, and had a crappy experience, is wrong? Not gonna happen.

Actually, I'm one of the nice guys around here. Provide valid info as best I can, call them like I see them, treat folks fairly, etc. If you'd prefer to hear what the rest of the peanut gallery thinks, I'm sure if you beat a dead horse long enough, you'll hear more opinions, and you may not like them either.

I stated that it appeared to be of Walgoose origin. It would seem to be a step above that. Kinda like how a Ross was a step above a Columbia or Murray. The distance between a bike that's a step above a Next, and the types of bikes more commonly discussed on this forum, is huge.

Simply put, no one who knows anything about bikes, and is building them as a bike company might do, would hang a $1000 White Bro's DH fork on the front, and put that shock out back. A Rock Shox, Fox, Manitou, Cane Creek etc? That would be proper for a bike with that level of gear on it.

That shock is original to the bike (nobody would put a cheapo Chinese coil damper on their high end custom build), and speaks to the overall level the manufacturer was building the bikes to. Entry level, recreational FS, at best.

Worth noting that it has a canti housing stop no longer in use, which means the brakes were upgraded to V's at likely the same time as was everything else of any decent level on it.

If my giving you this level of info, (so that you can be a better informed person), all gleaned from many years working in the trenches, is somehow offending to your being, my apologies. I seek to inform honestly, that's all. I will not however, pointlessly stroke your ego and tell you it's a diamond when it's paste, that's unfair and dishonest.

Furthermore, that length fork on there, that short a head tube, with such minimal gusseting, and built to who knows what level of quality, I;d be careful Inspect regularly for cracks. When that thing goes, you'll know what dirt tastes like, along with blood, teeth, etc. Not being a jerk, baiting you, etc, seen it, been there, done that. Don't know you, but would still hate to see you hurt.


----------



## jeff (Jan 13, 2004)

Bokchoicowboy said:


> YakimaDeathYaks is dead on about what you will hear in this forum, and it is one of the reasons I steer clear of most discussions in the VRC. Don't get me wrong, I really enjoy what many posters say, absolutely respect the regular posters and am blown away by their encyclopedic knowledge...but this place does at times get quite hostile and many posters are what I would categorize as elitist. Takes the fun out of it for me. Bring the wrong bike into the VRC forum, and you get your ass handed to you.
> 
> Just sad.


Of course it's elitist. It's cycling. The sport always has been and always will be full of elitism. Rodies, short track racers, fixyhipsters, gravel grinders, commuters, endurance riders, free riders, DH, BMXers and VRC geeks. All a buncha elitists. This forum is no different than most others out there.


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

With apologies to Tom Robbins 

"... the instant ELITISM became a dirty word among VRCers, any potential for a high culture to develop in their forum was tomahawked in its cradle."


----------



## girlonbike (Apr 24, 2008)

I'll tell you who's elite....NFL football quarterbacks. We are not snobs in comparison.


----------



## YakimaDeathYaks (Aug 15, 2012)

girlonbike said:


> I'll tell you who's elite....NFL football quarterbacks. We are not snobs in comparison.


Brady and Ryan can suck it :thumbsup:


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

Im just gonna post this way cool, totally OT pic, and run out of the room....


----------



## VintageRocks (Jan 27, 2013)

MendonCycleSmith said:


> Wrong? Oy vey, final stop on this train ride for me.
> 
> I have only been responding a lot, as you seem very adamant about getting some level of acceptance from me about your bike and how it's not cheap. I'm sorry if it bothers you, it is. Or should I say, started out that way, and the frame, being the heart of the bike, well, it's still a cheap bike. Just with high end parts.
> 
> ...


I have seen nothing to suggest its not a well built frame but if you can provide something other than your opinion on that matter, I'm all ears.


----------



## girlonbike (Apr 24, 2008)

What sort of evidence are you looking for? An affidavit by the designer? The builder? A survey by all former owners? What exactly are you looking for?


----------



## cegrover (Oct 17, 2004)

I am confusing


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

Tl;dr

Lipstick on a pig


----------



## VintageRocks (Jan 27, 2013)

*girlonbike*, I get the feeling you two don't read all the posts, follow links etc. I think I've been pretty clear and certainly never suggested any of the things you list.

Look at my first post:
[I"]If I'm wrong, which I often am, I'll happily retract." [/I] I asked where the retraction was? It started out tongue-in-cheek but his response struck me as smug and riddled with inaccuracies so I responded. If you will read his posts, he made some pretty spectacular generalities which beg a response on a "discussion" forum. Then the whole "with virtually no travel" thing really got me wondering why he was digging in deeper.

What sort of forum is this if I can't legitimately ask how someone can say "with virtually no travel" simply by the length of the shock? Suspension does not work that way. I kinda figured that would segue into a meaningful discussion on the dynamics of suspension. Boy was I wrong.

I registered to have some distracting fun but this ain't that. You should want people to come here and contribute. I bet the owner of this forum would want that, and the adwords revenue more people could generate.


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

VintageRocks said:


> *girlonbike*, I get the feeling you two don't read all the posts, follow links etc. I think I've been pretty clear and certainly never suggested any of the things you list.
> 
> Look at my first post:
> [I"]If I'm wrong, which I often am, I'll happily retract." [/I] I asked where the retraction was? It started out tongue-in-cheek but his response struck me as smug and riddled with inaccuracies so I responded. If you will read his posts, he made some pretty spectacular generalities which beg a response on a "discussion" forum. Then the whole "with virtually no travel" thing really got me wondering why he was digging in deeper.
> ...


Looks like your shock leverage ratio is about 3:1 (eyeballing some measurements) so if you have 1.5" of shock stroke you will have 4.5" of travel.

How's that?


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

VRC ain't the target demographic for the advertisers here


----------



## VintageRocks (Jan 27, 2013)

Right now there is a Re-targeting ad on my screen. Do you know what that means? It means the ads are targeted to the the individual's recent web searches. So, yes it is VRC demographic.


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

And here you are!

Win win

You could prove how right you are and go away


----------



## VintageRocks (Jan 27, 2013)

*Fillet-brazed*, Thanks for the response. At this point, on this forum I don't know if you are serious or not (my apologies if you are).

I think I'll take Mr. One-Line-Zingers advice and leave.


----------



## da'HOOV (Jan 3, 2009)

such a friendly forum....not 

sorry VintageRocks, there are some real ________ here.


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

There were a bunch of bikes from this era that I think pioneered the "buy from the china/taiwan catalog then stick our stickers on them" approach to bike catalog spectrum. I certainly recall that Wheeler and the new brunswick owned Mongoose started it. That is why many people in the other thread thought it might be a mongoose. 

The problem with those early frames was that they weren't really designed to perform, just to look like the more popular bikes of that era. A very similar thing is occurring now with carbon frames from asia. Some companies are buying them, slapping stickers on them and selling them. But they kinda, sorta, really look like some other brands carbon bike and they kinda sorta almost but not really look like a specialized or trek. 

The difference, and I think this is what Mendon was getting at, with suspension travel and his assertion that it had no travel was that it is a really high stroke ratio, meaning for each inch of travel the shock only moves a small amount. This kind of thing necessitated high spring rates and high damping rates but with the tiny shocks they were not really able to get much damping or spring action of of them so they were hard, unyielding and not very good at actually providing suspension. The cannondale and treks that started the suspension craze had the same problem. Over the years the designers realized that you needed around a 2:1 or less ratio to get suspension that would work with the mountain bikes parameters. That is light weight, low speeds. What worked on a 300lbs motorcycle at 45mph just doesn't work on a 30lbs mountain bike. Don't confuse travel length with travel quality. 

Now as others have said it doesn't make the bike bad, and in fact it is well festooned with nice parts, however it isn't any more of an amazing find than a comparable wheeler or univega or mongoose of that era either but if it is a great bike for you ride it and enjoy it.


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

rockcrusher said:


> The difference, and I think this is what Mendon was getting at, with suspension travel and his assertion that it had no travel was that it is a really high stroke ratio, meaning for each inch of travel the shock only moves a small amount.


Which therefore means long travel.



rockcrusher said:


> This kind of thing necessitated high spring rates and high damping rates but with the tiny shocks they were not really able to get much damping or spring action of of them so they were hard, unyielding and not very good at actually providing suspension. The cannondale and treks that started the suspension craze had the same problem. Over the years the designers realized that you needed around a 2:1 or less ratio to get suspension that would work with the mountain bikes parameters. That is light weight, low speeds. What worked on a 300lbs motorcycle at 45mph just doesn't work on a 30lbs mountain bike. Don't confuse travel length with travel quality.


That early first generation Cannondale shown above is actually fairly close to 1:1 and is not even in the same ballpark as the early Trek offerings as far as leverage ratio goes. Most bikes now I think are around 2.5-3:1 and I personally think this provides better action than lower leverage ratios.

Early dirt bikes (mid 70s) were also 1:1 and now they're all about in the 3:1 range.


----------



## rockcrusher (Aug 28, 2003)

Fillet-brazed said:


> That early first generation Cannondale shown above is actually fairly close to 1:1 and is not even in the same ballpark as the early Trek offerings as far as leverage ratio goes. Most bikes now I think are around 2.5-3:1 and I personally think this provides better action than lower leverage ratios.
> 
> Early dirt bikes (mid 70s) were also 1:1 and now they're all about in the 3:1 range.


Yeah the cannondale didn't show up for me so I had no idea. I though the industry settled on the 2.2:1 as the best performance, at least for something under 6" of travel. I bet a 1:1 motorcycle would have had great traction in the little stuff, probably not so great in the big stuff though.

I have always wanted to try the foes super low ratio bikes. I understand the concept and as a heavier guy have always had a hard time getting my suspension set up. Of course i have long since discarded suspension as something I need to mountain bike, back to how it was meant to be so many years ago.


----------



## noSheldonBrown (Sep 30, 2018)

Not trying to bring an old thread to life or beat a dead horse, but I thought I'd add my 2 cents if anyone looks here in the future, since there's very little info out there.
I'd just like to point out that Ziegler-Lam bikes were 100% American Made! in Kent WA.
Except when they used Shimano, Sram and some other components.
The Retro-Direct Drive Mechanism the owner pioneered, (designed + made in USA)
(Allows backwards pedaling to convert to forward motion)
was heavy, not very efficient although interesting to me at least.
I read that part was endorsed my some nationally recognized MTB rider but don't recall the name.
I saw the Owner at the 1999 Chicago Bike show and almost bought the RetroDirect Drive BB
($168) but my uncle talked me out of it.
The company went out of business soon thereafter.
In 2006, I bought a Ziegler-Lam Mega with Super-Gear for I think $400 plus shipping. Which retailed for $1300, I believe.
After some digging online, I read that frames, although heavy, were sought-after as cheap Down-Hill specific rides.
The company's main source of sales seemed to be police-forces and security companies, that weren't savvy enough about tech advancements in MTB.
I saw a few pictures of SuperGear MEGA bikes online but most of the links have since disappeared.


----------



## noSheldonBrown (Sep 30, 2018)

Also the headset has a locking mechanism that looks very similar to the USE Ring-Go-Star, (British MTB, tri-bike parts company)
See the following company literature sitting on Ebay for the last year:


----------



## noSheldonBrown (Sep 30, 2018)




----------



## noSheldonBrown (Sep 30, 2018)




----------



## noSheldonBrown (Sep 30, 2018)




----------

