# Fake Bridgestone MB-zip on ebay



## djmuff (Sep 8, 2004)

I just thought I'd send out a public service announcement in case anyone here was interested in bidding on the MB-zip on ebay (they call it a MB-zero). Here's a photo of it, and it's totally fake. I'll explain why.










Bridgestone only made the MB-zip in 1990 and 1991. I've got the catalogs from both years, and the MB-zip NEVER came with rack eyelets.









Seeing as though this bike has eyelets, it is definitely not an MB-zip. Plus, not just one, but BOTH seat tube decals are upside down. Bridgestone would never do that. Add to the fact that the MB-zip decals look weird- they don't look like the style Bridgestone had in 1990 and 1991. They look more like 1993's style of decals. Here is a photo of a REAL MB-zip, and you can see the difference in the decals:










Anyways, just thought I'd share. In other news, I just picked up a black chrome Schwinn Sierra MOS, I think it's a 1990. I'll post some photos soon.


----------



## sgltrak (Feb 19, 2005)

While the decals _do_ look suspect, it looks like the "real" one in the third photo has eyelets on both the rear dropouts and the fork. Perhaps it was repainted and the replacement decals were not original and carelessly applied.


----------



## 82Sidewinder (Jun 28, 2006)

djmuff said:


> I just thought I'd send out a public service announcement in case anyone here was interested in bidding on the MB-zip on ebay (they call it a MB-zero). Here's a photo of it, and it's totally fake. I'll explain why.
> 
> Bridgestone only made the MB-zip in 1990 and 1991. I've got the catalogs from both years, and the MB-zip NEVER came with rack eyelets.
> 
> ...


The MB-0 in the third photo appears to have eyelets on the rear dropouts. The bike in the auction could have been an amateur repaint/restoration, and they used later decals. (which were installed incorrectly)

Nice score on the Schwinn Sierra. I have an '87 Sierra frame in black chrome collecting dust. I wonder if yours could be earlier than '90.

Craig


----------



## manzell (Sep 14, 2005)

Here is my '90, with no eyelets
I agree the ebay zip seems off


----------



## holden (Jul 27, 2004)

manzell said:


> Here is my '91, with no eyelets


your is a 90.

the real one posted by djmuff is a 91.


----------



## holden (Jul 27, 2004)

djmuff said:


> ...anyone here was interested in bidding on the MB-zip on ebay (they call it a MB-zero). Here's a photo of it, and it's totally fake. I'll explain why..


i was thinking legit zip repaint with bad decal set too, not full fake.


----------



## holden (Jul 27, 2004)

/ duplicate message /


----------



## djmuff (Sep 8, 2004)

I double-checked both my '90 and '91 catalogs, and the MB-zip never had rack eyelits on the rear dropouts, so I think the pawn shop ebay MB-zip is a fake. Plus, the rear dropouts don't have a cutout. MB-zips don't have solid dropouts, they had a cutout. Totally fake.

And yes, I'm pretty stoked on my black chrome Sierra. It may be earlier than '90. I've tried to do some research on it and not had much luck.


----------



## 82Sidewinder (Jun 28, 2006)

djmuff said:


> And yes, I'm pretty stoked on my black chrome Sierra. It may be earlier than '90. I've tried to do some research on it and not had much luck.


What is the component line up? I have a number of old Schwinn catalogs, and I might be able to nail down the exact year.


----------



## Shayne (Jan 14, 2004)

*Another Vote For Potentially Real*

So you posted pics of 2 fake MB-0s?

Perhaps there was no dropout standard or your catalogue pics are of the same bike.

I've seen them with solid dropouts but no eyelets.


----------



## Shayne (Jan 14, 2004)

I think MOS started in 1989


----------



## holden (Jul 27, 2004)

djmuff said:


> I double-checked both my '90 and '91 catalogs, and the MB-zip never had rack eyelits on the rear dropouts, so I think the pawn shop ebay MB-zip is a fake.


catalogs aren't 100% accurate: the 90 zip in the catalog has a xc-pro front but later production versions for that year swapped to XCD. it also showed silver headset cups; some came with a black Ritchey.

IMHO the "pawn shop ebay MB-zip" is NOT a fake, but it has been repainted and poorly re-decaled.

compare its frame to the 91 zip that just failed to sell on ebay, #220012445397. i think we can agree that this referred frame is 99.99% true. in detail, it looks pretty close to the "pawn shop ebay MB-zip", no?


----------



## 82Sidewinder (Jun 28, 2006)

Shayne said:


> So you posted pics of 2 fake MB-0s?
> 
> Perhaps there was no dropout standard or your catalogue pics are of the same bike.
> 
> I've seen them with solid dropouts but no eyelets.


He must have because the "real" MB-0 clearly has eyelets on the rear dropouts.

Craig


----------



## Shayne (Jan 14, 2004)

*Solid dropout with eyelet*

Here's another...


----------



## mwr (Jul 17, 2004)

Shayne said:


> Here's another...


That one's a fake too.


----------



## Shayne (Jan 14, 2004)

*Ahhh, My Bad*

You right, must be a Vitus with the frenchy rear hub


----------



## holden (Jul 27, 2004)

re: the 91 zip in the bridgestone catalogue, i bet they used a 90 frame with 91 decals and a 91 fork.

someone should email grant


----------



## djmuff (Sep 8, 2004)

okay, now I'm confused, because I finally caught the eyelit on the non-drive side of the "legit" mb-zip I posted with the brooks saddle. The catalogs don't show eyelits, and the dropouts have cutouts. I'll take some photos of the catalogs and post 'em in a bit. I know that Bridgestone was/is all about function, but I was 99% sure that the MB-zip, being their limited-production, make-it-light super bike, did not have rack eyelits.


----------



## Shayne (Jan 14, 2004)

One Year Does, One Year Doesnt


----------



## holden (Jul 27, 2004)

djmuff said:


> I'll take some photos of the catalogs and post 'em in a bit.


not needed ...

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/bridgestone/1990/index.htm
http://www.sheldonbrown.com/bridgestone/1991/index.htm

bike catalogs are helpful but bear in mind, things can change from the time catalogs are designed and printed to the time the bikes are actually made. bike specs could change as well over the course of a production year.


----------



## djmuff (Sep 8, 2004)

thanks for those links. I don't see any rack eyelits on the dropouts in either catalog, but I do see this, which is confusing:









In this photo you can see there are no rack mounts on the seat stay, cutouts on the dropouts, and no eyelits on the dropouts.









Then in this photo, you can see rack mounts on the seat stay, in the photo that highlights the Dia-Compe brakes. Confusing. I didn't see any descrepancies like this in the 1991 catalog.


----------



## RobynC (Feb 14, 2004)

holden hit it on the head---catalogs are a marketing tool. this is exactly the reason most product catalogs have some variation on the disclaimer: "specification subject to change without notice."


----------



## sgltrak (Feb 19, 2005)

Often times catalog photos are of pre-production bikes, but specs change by the time the bike is actually in production. Catalogs are often photographed and printed well in advance of the actual bike's production. Bikes may even be a different model or year, but with the new paint job, for the sake of the catalog photos.


----------



## stan4bikes (May 24, 2006)

*may or may not be fake...*

but what kinda front fork is that?


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

stan4bikes said:


> but what kinda front fork is that?


The sussy fork is a Monolith Rebound. Will not compress from rider input but reacts quickly to bumps on the ground.


----------



## mello211 (Dec 25, 2005)

just checked my 91 and it has eyelets on both dropouts. i think you can barely see in this photo.


----------



## toddz69 (Apr 8, 2005)

mello211 said:


> just checked my 91 and it has eyelets on both dropouts. i think you can barely see in this photo.


Likewise with my '91 that now belongs to First Flight (#1498):

http://www.firstflightbikes.com/1991_Bridgestone_MB0.htm

Todd Z.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Catalogs LIE all the time. There was even a comment in an MBA review once (over a decade ago) talking about how they've come to accept all fork makers will claim half a pound LESS fork weight than reality, that probably has to do with steerer tubes cut so short as to make it unusable on all but the smallest size frame, and that was when reviewing a Scott Unishocks LF which really was the lightest suspension fork available at the time.

Rocky Mountain's 2005 and 2006 catalogs both listed frame weights for the Vapor model (as it happens, the Vapor thru Trailhead XC hardtails all share the same frame, just different paint differentiates them) of 3.4 pounds for a 18.5" frame. As it happens, the rocky rep gave the shop I worked at last year a bare Vapor frame to display. The size of the frame was 17.5", and its actual weight was 3.8 pounds (without bottle cage bolts or seatpost clamp). So smaller size frame and .4 pounds heavier in reality than the next larger size was supposedly to be.

I ordered a 2004 Oryx Hurricane 250 based off the catalog (which showed a pic of a horst-link 4-bar) and opened the bike box to find a non-horst faux bar instead is what the production frame became. Oh...and the frame weight in the catalog was claimed to be 6.0 Ibs... my actual frame weight? 7.7 Ibs. Bit of a fudge factor there.


----------

