# 97 Norco Team Issue...



## edouble (Apr 16, 2004)

A bike that was truly ahead of its time. One of the best riding bikes ive ever thrown a leg over.


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

edouble said:


> A bike that was truly ahead of its time. One of the best riding bikes ive ever thrown a leg over.


Howdy edouble,
Glad you could make it back to the VRC board. I remember your name because a long time ago you said this:

"tom ritchey dosnt and never has, welded so while it may be a hand made frame tom ritchey didnt personally make it."

It was in this thread:

http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?p=212077#poststop

Just curious as to whether you could expound on that statement or not?


----------



## edouble (Apr 16, 2004)

*Yeah, its been a while...*



Fillet-brazed said:


> Howdy edouble,
> Glad you could make it back to the VRC board. I remember your name because a long time ago you said this:
> 
> "tom ritchey dosnt and never has, welded so while it may be a hand made frame tom ritchey didnt personally make it."
> ...


been over on the 29er board. I still love my old skool steel though. Anyways, I remember reading a profile of Tom Ritchey and his frames. It pointed out that Mr Ritchey had a builder of his choosing, an Asian fellow. I forget which country he was located in, but this person welded up all of the Ritchey frames. The article pointedly stated that "Tom Ritchey is not a welder". Those frames were sweet no matter who built them though :thumbsup: .


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

Fillet-brazed said:


> Howdy edouble,
> Glad you could make it back to the VRC board. I remember your name because a long time ago you said this:
> 
> "tom ritchey dosnt and never has, welded so while it may be a hand made frame tom ritchey didnt personally make it."
> ...


FB the elephant...never forgets.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

edouble said:


> The article pointedly stated that "Tom Ritchey is not a welder". Those frames were sweet no matter who built them though :thumbsup: .


I would love to see that article.


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

edouble said:


> been over on the 29er board. I still love my old skool steel though. Anyways, I remember reading a profile of Tom Ritchey and his frames. It pointed out that Mr Ritchey had a builder of his choosing, an Asian fellow. I forget which country he was located in, but this person welded up all of the Ritchey frames. The article pointedly stated that "Tom Ritchey is not a welder". Those frames were sweet no matter who built them though :thumbsup: .


i was under the impression that some(not sure what models, not a ritchey guy) of the front triangles were welded by someone else,but the rears were allways brazed by TR


----------



## laffeaux (Jan 4, 2004)

hollister said:


> i was under the impression that some(not sure what models, not a ritchey guy) of the front triangles were welded by someone else,but the rears were allways brazed by TR


Slightly derailed topic? Where' the Norco info?

Toyo (a small Japanese company) is the answer to who made the later Ritchey frames. I believe that current Ritcheys are made in Taiwian. Tom either completely made or had a hand in making all of the frames that bear his name for the first 20 years or so.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

laffeaux said:


> Slightly derailed topic? Where' the Norco info?
> 
> Toyo (a small Japanese company) is the answer to who made the later Ritchey frames. I believe that current Ritcheys are made in Taiwian. Tom either completely made or had a hand in making all of the frames that bear his name for the first 20 years or so.


Except Ascents...


----------



## Shayne (Jan 14, 2004)

*Just Curious...*

How is that bike ahead of its time?
Looks like any run of the mill 90s-current hardtail.


----------



## edouble (Apr 16, 2004)

*The difference is in...*



Shayne said:


> How is that bike ahead of its time?
> Looks like any run of the mill 90s-current hardtail.


the geometry and the tubes. most 90's ht's had short tt's and long stems. most 20in bikes had 23-23.5in tt's and high standover heights. Voodoo, Kona and Rocky Mountain were a few of the exceptions to the standover issue. The Norco has a 24in tt, low standover and a compliant ride that must be experienced to be believed. It also has a different head tube length than was the norm for a 20in 90's ht. Not long (think Jamis or Rocky 6.5in) or short (think IFand Salsa) like many of tha era, its right in the middle (5in) .It is very responsive, almost like an alu bike with more comfort than other steel bikes ive ridden. I can ride this bike in New England rocks all day without discomfort. The only 26er ive ridden that I can say that about. Yet its more responsive also. I own 6 other steel ht's ( 2 of which are custom) so I do have a good reference point. Looks can be deceiving  .


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

edouble said:


> the geometry and the tubes. most 90's ht's had short tt's and long stems. most 20in bikes had 23-23.5in tt's and high standover heights. Voodoo, Kona and Rocky Mountain were a few of the exceptions to the standover issue. The Norco has a 24in tt, low standover and a compliant ride that must be experienced to be believed. It also has a different head tube length than was the norm for a 20in 90's ht. Not long (think Jamis or Rocky 6.5in) or short (think IFand Salsa) like many of tha era, its right in the middle (5in) .It is very responsive, almost like an alu bike with more comfort than other steel bikes ive ridden. I can ride this bike in New England rocks all day without discomfort. The only 26er ive ridden that I can say that about. Yet its more responsive also. I own 6 other steel ht's ( 2 of which are custom) so I do have a good reference point. Looks can be deceiving  .


I would say that by 1997, it's all been done before w/ regards to HT design, geometry, tubing used, trial and error, etc.

But, perhaps the combo of tube length and frame geometry just so happens to be the perfect combo for you. You're lucky to have found a bike that you truly enjoy that much. Some people never find that.

However, I find some of your statements a bit silly though:

"It also has a different head tube length than was the norm for a 20in 90's ht. Not long (think Jamis or Rocky 6.5in) or short (think IFand Salsa) like many of tha era, its right in the middle (5in) "

Yeah....my 20" 1993 Slingshot had a 5" headtube.


----------



## edouble (Apr 16, 2004)

*I think you hit the nail on the head...*



Rumpfy said:


> I would say that by 1997, it's all been done before w/ regards to HT design, geometry, tubing used, trial and error, etc.
> 
> But, perhaps the combo of tube length and frame geometry just so happens to be the perfect combo for you. You're lucky to have found a bike that you truly enjoy that much. Some people never find that.
> 
> ...


that the combo is "perfect for me". Though ive gotten pm's from others that had owned or ridden a 97 and agreed with my opinion of this bike. The comment about the head tube was mearly my trying to point out some of the differences from other bikes i had noticed. Your 20 in 1993 Slingshot really dosnt apply because chances are it didnt have front suspension. The geometry therefore, would be quite different from a bike that is suspension corrected. Put a 80mm fork on your 93 slingshot and you'd kill the ride quality imho. Is that "silly" also? .


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

Rumpfy said:


> Except Ascents...


Ascents were the same as the Ultra. There was even a year or two when they were TIG'ed here in the states according to the catalog.


----------



## edouble (Apr 16, 2004)

*The article did say...*



laffeaux said:


> Slightly derailed topic? Where' the Norco info?
> 
> Toyo (a small Japanese company) is the answer to who made the later Ritchey frames. I believe that current Ritcheys are made in Taiwian. Tom either completely made or had a hand in making all of the frames that bear his name for the first 20 years or so.


that Tom Ritchey was responsible for all the "finish work" on all the frames. I forget what was meant by that though  . I know for a fact that the article stated that Mr. Ritchey "did not weld" . That I do remember. I would like to know the truth, did he or didnt he weld? .


----------



## Shayne (Jan 14, 2004)

*No....*



edouble said:


> Your 20 in 1993 Slingshot really dosnt apply because chances are it didnt have front suspension. The geometry therefore, would be quite different from a bike that is suspension corrected.


The whole point of 'susp corrected geometry' is so a suspension bike will have the same geometry as previous bikes designed around a rigid fork.

If I bought bike A in 1990 full rigid and then bought a new, suspension corrected version of bike A in 1994 they should measure out the same.

Comparing the Slingshot to the Norco is kinda apples to ugli fruit as they're different designs.


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

edouble said:


> the geometry and the tubes. most 90's ht's had short tt's and long stems. most 20in bikes had 23-23.5in tt's and high standover heights. Voodoo, Kona and Rocky Mountain were a few of the exceptions to the standover issue. The Norco has a 24in tt, low standover and a compliant ride that must be experienced to be believed. It also has a different head tube length than was the norm for a 20in 90's ht. Not long (think Jamis or Rocky 6.5in) or short (think IFand Salsa) like many of tha era, its right in the middle (5in) .It is very responsive, almost like an alu bike with more comfort than other steel bikes ive ridden. I can ride this bike in New England rocks all day without discomfort. The only 26er ive ridden that I can say that about. Yet its more responsive also. I own 6 other steel ht's ( 2 of which are custom) so I do have a good reference point. Looks can be deceiving  .


By 1997 there were many bikes with sloping top tubes. Even going way back to 1987 there were a few, with the first sloping tt bikes coming from Charlie Cunningham in the late 70s or early 80s. I wouldnt say head tube length really affects handling as the final position of a bike can be fine tuned anyway with bars/stem/fork, etc. Top tube length is actually a more accurate way to measure a bike. The seat tube length is, for the most part, just secondary. For example, take a WTB Phoenix, if you were to size them by the seat tube (its a sloping top tube bike) you would be off. Same with a compact road bike; you have to size them by the top tube now since the seat tubes have become shorter. I guess what Im getting at here, is in 1997 the sloping top tube thing was not a revolutionary geometry...

Or another way to say it is: Does your 24" top tubed bike have a short seat tube?

As for Tom Ritchey, he was one of the first to ever build a mountain bike frame. And he's considered by many (including his competition) to be one of the best frame builders ever.


----------



## Shayne (Jan 14, 2004)

edouble said:


> I would like to know the truth, did he or didnt he weld? .


Yes, thousands of bikes!


----------



## edouble (Apr 16, 2004)

*You made the point...*



Shayne said:


> The whole point of 'susp corrected geometry' is so a suspension bike will have the same geometry as previous bikes designed around a rigid fork.
> 
> If I bought bike A in 1990 full rigid and then bought a new, suspension corrected version of bike A in 1994 they should measure out the same.
> 
> Comparing the Slingshot to the Norco is kinda apples to ugli fruit as they're different designs.


I was trying to make better than me, thanks.


----------



## edouble (Apr 16, 2004)

*I know that and...*



Fillet-brazed said:


> By 1997 there were many bikes with sloping top tubes. Even going way back to 1987 there were a few, with the first sloping tt bikes coming from Charlie Cunningham in the late 70s or early 80s. I wouldnt say head tube length really affects handling as the final position of a bike can be fine tuned anyway with bars/stem/fork, etc. Top tube length is actually a more accurate way to measure a bike. The seat tube length is, for the most part, just secondary. For example, take a WTB Phoenix, if you were to size them by the seat tube (its a sloping top tube bike) you would be off. Same with a compact road bike; you have to size them by the top tube now since the seat tubes have become shorter. I guess what Im getting at here, is in 1997 the sloping top tube thing was not a revolutionary geometry...
> 
> As for Tom Ritchey, he was one of the first to ever build a mountain bike frame. And he's considered by many (including his competition) to be one of the best frame builders ever.


even stated so in my post. The point I have been trying to make is that the bike rides really well, these maybe a few reason's why. I have ridden bike's with the exact same geometry (of each other) but they felt completely different, have you not? . I have several 90's steel ht's (Jamis Dragon, Voodoo Bizango, Dean, Khs, Airborne blackwidow, etc) and ridden many others. the Norco's #'s are a little different from most. I also have gone through many manufact. catalogs just reading the different geometries of their xc ht's. Again, the Norco's #'s are a little different from most. I really dont know why it rides so well, this is just my guess, along with tube shapes, diameter's, length's etc.


----------



## laffeaux (Jan 4, 2004)

edouble said:


> that Tom Ritchey was responsible for all the "finish work" on all the frames. I forget what was meant by that though  . I know for a fact that the article stated that Mr. Ritchey "did not weld" . That I do remember. I would like to know the truth, did he or didnt he weld? .


If the article was from the late 90's, it may have been making clear that Tom no longer built the bikes himself. Tom has hand-built many many frames. He started building in 1973. In the mid- 80's some of his bikes were contracted out (he did the finish work), but a large portion of them were still built by Tom. Decals stated either "Hand Built by Tom Rtichey" or "Hand Built by Ritchey Mountain Bikes," depending on Tom's involvement.

This is true of most manufacturers who make it big(ish). Chris Chance did not weld all of the Fat Chance frames. Keither Bontrager did not weld all of the Bontrager frames. Ross Schaffer did weld all Salsa frames. In the early days of their companies they did, but as the companies grew and hired employees the owners moved into managerial roles.

So, yes Tom has brazed many a frame together.


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

edouble said:


> I know that, even stated so in my post. The point I have been trying to make is that the bike rides really well


Im responding to your statement about it being way ahead of its time.

One could argue that its 20 years behind. 

Anyway, thats really cool you found a bike that you really "gel" with. I recently found a bike like that as well. Its a good thing.


----------



## edouble (Apr 16, 2004)

*Yes it is...*



Fillet-brazed said:


> Im responding to your statement about it being way ahead of its time.
> 
> One could argue that its 20 years behind.
> 
> Anyway, thats really cool you found a bike that you really "gel" with. I recently found a bike like that as well. Its a good thing.


It may well be 20yrs behind (no disc mounts, cant handle long travel forks) but the ride is up-to-the-minute-sweet  . Glad to here you found such a bike also, what is it?. Oh, and for the record, I did a google search and you were right. Tom Ritchey did make his own frames and can weld :eekster: . I stand corrected.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

Shayne said:


> Comparing the Slingshot to the Norco is kinda apples to ugli fruit as they're different designs.


The Slingshot being the ugly fruit?


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

Rumpfy said:


> The Slingshot being the ugly fruit?


well, that'd be my guess.


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

Fillet-brazed said:


> well, that'd be my guess.


:skep: Hey. None of that.


----------



## Winans (Jul 27, 2005)

*Norco TI's*

I have a pair of them, and they have indeed been very nice riding frames in my opinion. One is inteded to transition to being a SS soon. I don't see many of those around anywhere, not that that means anything, but they didn't seem to be made in huge numbers.

Scott


----------



## edouble (Apr 16, 2004)

*sweetness...*



Winans said:


> I have a pair of them, and they have indeed been very nice riding frames in my opinion. One is inteded to transition to being a SS soon. I don't see many of those around anywhere, not that that means anything, but they didn't seem to be made in huge numbers.
> 
> Scott


what size are you riding?. If its a 20in maybe you could let one go  ! .


----------



## Winans (Jul 27, 2005)

*TI frames*

If I remember correctly, they are 18.5's. It has been awhile. I typically ride ~19.5 in general, but these fit nicely at that size. I think the 20" was too tall for me.

I still have my first built the way it has always been built - XC Pro MD, first year Bomber fork (replaced the original XC-600).

Scott


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

edouble said:


> the geometry and the tubes. most 90's ht's had short tt's and long stems. most 20in bikes had 23-23.5in tt's and high standover heights. Voodoo, Kona and Rocky Mountain were a few of the exceptions to the standover issue. The Norco has a 24in tt, low standover and a compliant ride that must be experienced to be believed. It also has a different head tube length than was the norm for a 20in 90's ht. Not long (think Jamis or Rocky 6.5in) or short (think IFand Salsa) like many of tha era, its right in the middle (5in) .It is very responsive, almost like an alu bike with more comfort than other steel bikes ive ridden. I can ride this bike in New England rocks all day without discomfort. The only 26er ive ridden that I can say that about. Yet its more responsive also. I own 6 other steel ht's ( 2 of which are custom) so I do have a good reference point. Looks can be deceiving  .


While american brands were largely following the short toptube/long stem routine a lot longer than canadian brands, and Kona/Norco/Rocky (and other north western BC/Washington/Oregon area brands) generally did have longer toptubes, they TOO still relied on long stems for a long time. But the whole long toptube/short stem routine REALLY started with Barracuda (which also had short chainstays... and is who Gary Fisher ripped his Genesis geometry idea from) in 1993.

As to the headtube length... again... nothing special about that Norco at all. Headtube lengths started shrinking as suspension fork lengths started increasing. All brands use shorter headtubes than they would have 15 years ago.


----------



## edouble (Apr 16, 2004)

*Thanks for the...*



DeeEight said:


> While american brands were largely following the short toptube/long stem routine a lot longer than canadian brands, and Kona/Norco/Rocky (and other north western BC/Washington/Oregon area brands) generally did have longer toptubes, they TOO still relied on long stems for a long time. But the whole long toptube/short stem routine REALLY started with Barracuda (which also had short chainstays... and is who Gary Fisher ripped his Genesis geometry idea from) in 1993.
> 
> As to the headtube length... again... nothing special about that Norco at all. Headtube lengths started shrinking as suspension fork lengths started increasing. All brands use shorter headtubes than they would have 15 years ago.


bit of history there. Its interesting to note where and how different design trends originated.


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Oh and since I didn't cover it... compliant ride is hardly a unique thing when it comes to titanium frames. With the exception of the Alpinestars Ti Mega, just about every titanium frame ever made has had a compliant ride.


----------



## GonaSovereign (Sep 20, 2004)

Nice Norco.
On the Ritchey front, TR was interviewed in some of the bigger MTB mags back in the day, noting that by the early 90's, for the P 23 and later series, TR built the fillet brazed ones himself and his welder made the tigged ones. No big deal; both ride nicely.


----------



## javadown2 (Nov 8, 2010)

*97 Norco*

Yeah, I know this post is a couple weeks old...just wanted to say nice ride! I also have the same frame..my bikes got stolen that year and I bought a "Team Issue" norco frame from a local shop and built it up, it is by far my favorite hard tail that I've ever owned(close tie with an old Norco nitro from way back).

Not sure if DeeEight is responding to your bike..it's not a Ti bike, just has the sweet welds and paint that "looks" Ti. It has Ritchy made seat tubes and filet brazed drop outs...if I remember correctly that is? 
I
Anyways, here is a picture of my updated bike which I had a shop weild on a disc break tab and GASP! cut off the old rim break hardware! Yeah yeah it will never be retro again..it's my ride and I like it this way! LOL.


----------



## Linoleum (Aug 25, 2008)

javadown2 said:


> Yeah, I know this post is a couple weeks old...


cough... years...


----------



## javadown2 (Nov 8, 2010)

Oh shiet..yeah many years! Lol

crawls under a rock


----------



## edouble (Apr 16, 2004)

javadown2 said:


> Yeah, I know this post is a couple weeks old...just wanted to say nice ride! I also have the same frame..my bikes got stolen that year and I bought a "Team Issue" norco frame from a local shop and built it up, it is by far my favorite hard tail that I've ever owned(close tie with an old Norco nitro from way back).
> 
> Not sure if DeeEight is responding to your bike..it's not a Ti bike, just has the sweet welds and paint that "looks" Ti. It has Ritchy made seat tubes and filet brazed drop outs...if I remember correctly that is?
> I
> Anyways, here is a picture of my updated bike which I had a shop weild on a disc break tab and GASP! cut off the old rim break hardware! Yeah yeah it will never be retro again..it's my ride and I like it this way! LOL.


Hey, better late than never!. I am just happy to see another Team Issue. Never even knew the bike existed until I found mine on ebay. I never ride it any more, have gone the 29er route big time. Seeing yours makes me want to
Pull mine out thought. Some of my best ever rides were on that bike in the rocky New England terrain.


----------



## javadown2 (Nov 8, 2010)

Hey..yes I've always been fond of steel bikes since the first time I started riding. I haven't tried a 29er bike yet..seems to be all the rage now adays. I will never give up this bike, even though it's more personal nostalgia. 

Anyways, thanks for the response and drag out that Norco!


----------



## cegrover (Oct 17, 2004)

The important question is whether Tom Ritchey has welded any frames in the last four years.


----------

