# 1993 GT Richter 8.0 (info please)



## jeffgothro (Mar 10, 2007)

I'm familiar w/ the early bravados/psyclones, but not this one. Anyone have any special info on the richter 8.0? I assume its suspension specific? What years was this bike made, is it more rare then the other comp series frames in GT's line up? Any info besides what's on bikepedia is greatly appreciated.


----------



## laffeaux (Jan 4, 2004)

I'm pretty sure that 1992 was the first year for the Richter. It was in the '92 catalog with a Rock Shox fork (I think the only bike which came standard with a a suspension fork). It was listed just below the "Team Avalanche" in the catalogs, so it was considered "higher end" (likely because of the fork). The frame was True Temper GTX which was the same tubing as the Avalanche - so it's likely the same frame - the "Team Avalanche" came with Tange Prestige.

It's a decent bike, but not as nice as a the "Team" or Psyclone.


----------



## jeffgothro (Mar 10, 2007)

So far, this is all I've been able to find...and thanks for the info BTW. http://www.bikepedia.com/QuickBike/BikeSpecs.aspx?Year=1993&Brand=GT&Model=Richter 8.0&Type=bike


----------



## 1 cog frog (Dec 21, 2004)

*Did you look here...?*

http://www.mtb-kataloge.de/html/gt.html

Definitely more info than bikepedia.

frog


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

it's heavy...


----------



## jeffgothro (Mar 10, 2007)

Thanks, can't really view pdf files...I can, but I'm touring and using a phone for internet and my dumb smart phone takes forever to load a file...just to big to fit my tiny screen. I'll save the link.


----------



## livinlite (Apr 25, 2008)

laffeaux said:


> I'm pretty sure that 1992 was the first year for the Richter. It was in the '92 catalog with a Rock Shox fork (I think the only bike which came standard with a a suspension fork). It was listed just below the "Team Avalanche" in the catalogs, so it was considered "higher end" (likely because of the fork). The frame was True Temper GTX which was the same tubing as the Avalanche - so it's likely the same frame - the "Team Avalanche" came with Tange Prestige.
> 
> It's a decent bike, but not as nice as a the "Team" or Psyclone.


I had a 1993 Corrado and my friend had the Richter 8.0. I don't think it was in their lineup very long and probably didn't sell nearly as many as the Avalanche (which I think was aluminum at that point?) I'd put it as a mid-level XC race bike for that time in history. Very capable and probably still a great ride if you are okay with a 2" travel fork.

All the GT's back then (hardtails) were still on non-suspension-corrected geometry, so swapping in a chromo fork would be no problem.

Reminds me of a funny story...my buddy and I tried putting pennies in his Quadra 21 to increase the preload...something didn't work right and his front brake bridge cracked in half the first ride out...I think I was 14 at the time :nono:


----------



## pdxbike (Jun 8, 2011)

*Sill have '92 Richter 8.0*

I still have a '92 Richter. Bought it new in '93 for a good deal since they were closing out the '92s - think I paid about $600 for it. It was a great mountian bike at the time and I got a lot of good trail use out of it for the first 4 or 5 years I had it. Then used it more as a city bike the next few years with slicks on it. Got back into mountain biking in the early 2000s and it worked for a few seasons, but it was clearly a dated bike by that time. Finally retired it from the trails when the original Rock Shox MAG blew up and started spurting oil everywhere. Repaced that with a KONA rigid fork I got at a used shop here in Portland and still use the bike for commuting and city riding. Still has orginal XT shifter/brake levers, brakes, bars, stem and cranks. Think just about everything else has been replaced.

Pretty sure that it was GT's top level steel frame complete bike at the time. Had a bit of a weird mix of Deore components - XT shifters, DX derailuers and LX cranks - I think. Ritchey wheels I believe.


----------



## andaz (Nov 18, 2013)

*Fix/Tune up 92'Richter or get a new bike from a box store*

Hi All - I'm looking to get back into casual riding. Nothing more than taking a spin with the family around the block and perhaps on weekends. Wasn't sure if I should fix my Richter or get a new bike from Costco. The less I spend is better, but I don't want to throw good money after bad. My 92 Richter is in fair condition cosmetically I never rode it much - but now it need a major tune up - new tires/tubes...seats, cables and shifting adjustments. I'm estimating that it will cost around $250 parts and labor to get it running. Any suggestions on what I should do would be appreciated.



pdxbike said:


> I still have a '92 Richter. Bought it new in '93 for a good deal since they were closing out the '92s - think I paid about $600 for it. It was a great mountian bike at the time and I got a lot of good trail use out of it for the first 4 or 5 years I had it. Then used it more as a city bike the next few years with slicks on it. Got back into mountain biking in the early 2000s and it worked for a few seasons, but it was clearly a dated bike by that time. Finally retired it from the trails when the original Rock Shox MAG blew up and started spurting oil everywhere. Repaced that with a KONA rigid fork I got at a used shop here in Portland and still use the bike for commuting and city riding. Still has orginal XT shifter/brake levers, brakes, bars, stem and cranks. Think just about everything else has been replaced.
> 
> Pretty sure that it was GT's top level steel frame complete bike at the time. Had a bit of a weird mix of Deore components - XT shifters, DX derailuers and LX cranks - I think. Ritchey wheels I believe.


----------



## girlonbike (Apr 24, 2008)

My suggestion is to not get a Costco bike.


----------



## andaz (Nov 18, 2013)

Really? I had trouble with thinking this through... So, from your perspective and years of experience - A 10 year old mid grade bike with a tune up is still a better investment than something generic and off the shelf (w/assembly required). I was under the impression that component/technology and perhaps most of materials on some of the low-entry point (cheaper bikes) would offer significant improvements to ride and performance. Am I completely wrong?


----------



## laffeaux (Jan 4, 2004)

andaz said:


> Wasn't sure if I should fix my Richter or get a new bike from Costco.


I'd fix up the Richter. It's made from Tange double butted tubing and reasonably good components. A CostCo bike will have lesser quality components and lesser quality frame (likely heavier, and will not last as long) than the Richter - although it might be cheaper. The only downside of the Richter could be the fork - if it's blown you might spend more money, but if it's usable, keep on riding it.

A fixed-up Richter has some value if you were to re-sell it - maybe not a lot, but some. The CostCo bike has no value once it leaves the store - it's landfill material when you're done with it. The Richter will always be a solid frame that can be fixed up and ridden.


----------



## andaz (Nov 18, 2013)

Great feedback laffeaux. This is exactly what I needed to understand and is very helpful insights. Thank you!!



laffeaux said:


> I'd fix up the Richter. It's made from Tange double butted tubing and reasonably good components. A CostCo bike will have lesser quality components and lesser quality frame (likely heavier, and will not last as long) than the Richter - although it might be cheaper. The only downside of the Richter could be the fork - if it's blown you might spend more money, but if it's usable, keep on riding it.
> 
> A fixed-up Richter has some value if you were to re-sell it - maybe not a lot, but some. The CostCo bike has no value once it leaves the store - it's landfill material when you're done with it. The Richter will always be a solid frame that can be fixed up and ridden.


----------



## laffeaux (Jan 4, 2004)

andaz said:


> .... A 10 year old mid grade bike with a tune up is still a better investment than something generic and off the shelf (w/assembly required). I was under the impression that component/technology and perhaps most of materials on some of the low-entry point (cheaper bikes) would offer significant improvements to ride and performance. Am I completely wrong?


A CostoCo bike is not a bike; it is an object that looks like a bike. The frame and components are very low quality and not designed to last.

If you want a less expensive bike, good to a bike shop or one of the larger outdoor stores (REI, etc). They sell bikes in the $300-$400 range that will function fine and can be repaired.


----------



## lewisfoto (Nov 12, 2013)

I have to echo above responses. The GT was a quality bicycle when new and it still is today. Spending $250 will give you a far better working bike, and one that will be nicer to ride and break down less. Plus I think you could pull off the rebuild for less. You don't need expensive tires for casual riding and most LBS will have a bin of saddles that have been removed from demo bikes. Basic tune up should be in the $60 to $75 range...


----------



## GeePhroh (Jan 13, 2004)

I've still got mine set up as a commuter bike. The frameset is solid and I'm not getting rid of it anytime soon. If $250 is really your limit, it's probably worth fixing it up. I can say that the biggest issue with the Richter is not weight or components -- the geometry is definitely not suited to the way most people ride these days, and if you start riding a lot and try a bike with more modern geometry, you're going to want something new.

If you can push your pricepoint -- say double it... -- then you could actually get a pretty nice steel hardtail like a new Raleigh Tokul 1. I think the MSRP will be $550, but you'll be able to find it cheaper than that.

For sure, do not go the Costco route. As others have said here, you'll end up with a bike that will not be as durable as what you've got, and probably have the same not-so-great geometry.


----------



## Austin Dave (Jul 7, 2010)

girlonbike said:


> My suggestion is to not get a Costco bike.


Ya...but DO get the big honkin' jar of Kirkland Pesto. I eat that stuff on freaking everything: toast, crackers, veggies, noodles, meat, spoons. It's bigboy peanut butter.


----------



## andaz (Nov 18, 2013)

Thanks so much for all of the fast and helpful responses. This has been on my mind for a long time, and now I'm comfortable taking it into the shop for some real estimates. I will certainly avoid replacing it with a Costco "Bike" in the event the rebuild is more than expected but hopefully a tune and basic parts shouldn't cost that much. I especially appreciated the comments on geometry - something that crossed my mind and ringing a bell, I do recall feeling a bit awkward in terms of seating position. It's been a while, so I'll try a few other bikes before making a decision. Best Regards.


----------



## Linoleum (Aug 25, 2008)

GeePhroh said:


> I can say that the biggest issue with the Richter is not weight or components -- the geometry is definitely not suited to the way most people ride these days, and if you start riding a lot and try a bike with more modern geometry, you're going to want something new.


The Karakoram that I ride (w/the same geometry) definitely require a nice wide seat and a slight rise in the stem to be comfortable. I can only take the heads down attack position for so long.


----------



## eshew (Jan 30, 2004)

The Richter 8.0 was my 2nd decent bike purchase after my old fire mountain was stolen at the mall.... stupid $4 locks. 

It was Ferrari red & had a Quadra fork which I eventually destroyed (coins are a great preload device btw) and replaced with a Judy XC.

I really miss that bike, easily the fastest machine I had at the time, 14 years old and 56 mph on a paved hill was awesome. It wasn't without its' faults, the original bike came from the factory with a crack in the top tube a few inches from the seatpost that eventually grew into a problem. 

I also remember breaking the internal mounts on the stem & getting it replaced under warranty once. 

Should make a great bike but I 2nd the need to add some rider bars and maybe a shorter stem to make commuting a bit more comfortable. Although I was 5'8" on a 20" frame, so my situation is a bit exaggerated.


----------



## jeff (Jan 13, 2004)

Ride position will be key to your enjoyment on this bike. A little more upright and maybe a touch shorter will go a long ways. Of course it will cost.


----------

