# 1984/85 Ritchey NOS super-pimp



## First Flight (Jan 25, 2004)

Just got this one in on Tuesday and dusted her off. Paint was called Wild Irish Rose and was applied by Columbine. All of the parts were black anodized and all the hardware/fasteners were gold plated. Even the spoke nipples and bottom bracket cir-clips were plated. After all of this, the bike was never ridden.

<img src=https://firstflightbikes.com/_borders/Ritchey14K.JPG>

<img src=https://firstflightbikes.com/_borders/Ritchey14Kbrake.JPG>

<img src=https://firstflightbikes.com/_borders/Ritchey14Krder.JPG>

<img src=https://firstflightbikes.com/_borders/Ritchey14Khub.JPG>

<img src=https://firstflightbikes.com/_borders/Ritchet14Kclamp.JPG>

<img src=https://firstflightbikes.com/_borders/Ritchey14Kdecal.JPG>

<img src=https://firstflightbikes.com/_borders/Ritchey14Khead.JPG>


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

cause a gold chain woulda been too bling?


----------



## taikuodo (Jul 3, 2006)

Real Gold?


----------



## dick (Dec 13, 2006)

Classy


----------



## kb11 (Mar 29, 2004)

Now that is unique, nice score Jeff :thumbsup:


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

gold black and pink. huh...
why do all old ritcheys are big while all old fats are small? i know.. it's hidden alongside the meaning of life.


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

colker1 said:


> gold black and pink. huh...
> why do all old ritcheys are big while all old fats are small? i know.. it's hidden alongside the meaning of life.


42.

that thing is amazing


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

That thing's insane.

Old school 'money is no object' project.

Attention to detail to the N'th degree!


----------



## Cycleshark (Jan 21, 2004)

wowserz! jefferoni.......you'll need an extra security guard once I visit your museum! :crazy:   :thumbsup:  

uncle pete


----------



## colker1 (Jan 6, 2004)

who owned this thing? a cappo di tutti cappi?


----------



## Guest (Jun 9, 2007)

sweet, congrats! now that makes good for the lost Goat, doesnt it?

wanna trade?  

Carsten


----------



## el-cid (May 21, 2004)

:eekster: :arf: :ihih: :band: 

wow


----------



## First Flight (Jan 25, 2004)

All real gold. Even the spoke nipples are gold plated, not gold alloy. The Specialized chain stay protector, cir-clip for the bottom bracket, seat post hardware, every single nut and bolt, roller cam springs, Campy pump head........the detail and dedication to the theme is pretty amazing. Even the "decals" are gold leaf.


----------



## Buonarroti (Mar 19, 2004)

Just curious, what is that spring on the seat post? Never seen one of those.


----------



## Guest (Jun 9, 2007)

Buonarroti said:


> Just curious, what is that spring on the seat post? Never seen one of those.


that's a Hite Rite. More info here

http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=302937

Carsten


----------



## Bigwheel (Jan 12, 2004)

Holy Crap.


----------



## mainlyfats (Oct 1, 2005)

*Sorry to be so lame*

But let me add another holy crap. I've never, ever, seen that kind of crazy detail lavished on a mountain bike. It's like the bastard love child of Ritchey and Liberace...


----------



## miles (Jan 6, 2004)

That is the most amazing thing I have ever seen on this board. That right there is almost enough to make me want to take a road trip to the other edge of the continent to see it.

Honestly, if I had been the one that built it up, I never would have ridden it, either.

Godamn. I can't stop looking at those pictures.



miles


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

Ghost jump it.


----------



## retrobikeguy (Oct 27, 2005)

, that has to be one of the most beautiful bikes I have ever seen.

must be one of your best ever finds :thumbsup:

is that a custom built in shoulder strap as well ?


----------



## ScottyMTB (Oct 26, 2005)

Rumpfy said:


> Ghost jump it.




Nice one, that thing is beautiful.


----------



## pinguwin (Aug 20, 2004)

Hey, isn't someone going to say, "Jeff, now go out and ride the tar out of it!"?

'Guin


----------



## ssmike (Jan 21, 2004)

pinguwin said:


> Hey, isn't someone going to say, "Jeff, now go out and ride the tar out of it!"?
> 
> 'Guin


Hey Jeff, go ride the tar out of it! Roll the dub-sixes!

Okay, that's one that I might concede to leaving in its unridden state. The attention to detail definitely crosses the fine line of obsessive-compulsive. Super nice addition to the collective.


----------



## ssmike (Jan 21, 2004)

hollister said:


> cause a gold chain woulda been too bling?


Why not let us be the judge of that. Jeff, you want?


----------



## SKULLY (Nov 16, 2005)

I didn't know that TR built a custom for Rick James. That thing is a Super Freak! You pick it up at the estate sale?


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

*Do It!!!*



ssmike said:


> Why not let us be the judge of that. Jeff, you want?


yes!!


----------



## IF52 (Jan 10, 2004)

So what's the story then? Who, why? Was that a trade show splurge or something? Did gold teeth come with it too?


----------



## cegrover (Oct 17, 2004)

IF52 said:


> So what's the story then? Who, why? Was that a trade show splurge or something? Did god teeth come with it too?


Great pic. Does God have teeth?


----------



## IF52 (Jan 10, 2004)

Argh! Typo. I'll fix it.


----------



## MrOrange (Jun 21, 2004)

*Yeah*



hollister said:


> 42.
> 
> that thing is amazing


42 is it.


----------



## filegiant (Aug 1, 2004)

<img src=https://firstflightbikes.com/_borders/Ritchey14Krder.JPG>

Perhaps a bit of an oversight, but the rear derailleur cable's black Teflon coating is peeling up in this picture...tisk, tisk


----------



## IF52 (Jan 10, 2004)

filegiant said:


> <img src=https://firstflightbikes.com/_borders/Ritchey14Krder.JPG>
> 
> Perhaps a bit of an oversight, but the rear derailleur cable's black Teflon coating is peeling up in this picture...tisk, tisk


And there is a chip in the paint where the chainstay meets the dropout


----------



## mtroy (Jun 10, 2005)

mainlyfats said:


> But let me add another holy crap. I've never, ever, seen that kind of crazy detail lavished on a mountain bike. It's like the bastard love child of Ritchey and Liberace...


:lol: :lol: Thanks man, you made my day.

However, that is amazingly cool...in a gold leaf Vatican ceiling kinda' way.


----------



## salsa-luma (Jun 8, 2007)

That thing is over the top! Nice find, no wonder it was never ridden... gold plating, black ano!!! sick...


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

IF52 said:


> And there is a chip in the paint where the chainstay meets the dropout


burn it!


----------



## mingodog (Mar 14, 2006)

That's awwwwsome !! If I win the lottery, I'll try to buy it off you


----------



## IF52 (Jan 10, 2004)

I like the very road bike-esque detailing on the dropouts/derailleur hanger. Notice how the chrome was masked off. Lovely.


----------



## First Flight (Jan 25, 2004)

Apparently the British don't have much appreciation of the older stuff?

http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11230&postdays=0&postorder=asc&vote=viewresult

At least the Ritchey is one vote ahead of the Rockhopper


----------



## scant (Jan 5, 2004)

First Flight said:


> Apparently the British don't have much appreciation of the older stuff?
> 
> http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11230&postdays=0&postorder=asc&vote=viewresult
> 
> At least the Ritchey is one vote ahead of the Rockhopper


cross forum tastic 
being a brit I'd hazard a guess that most brit retro mountain bike lovers are generally more interested in the early to mid 90s anodnised cnc era. this pole certainly suggests so http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11307
personally I'm loving the ritchey for its pure over indulgence :thumbsup:

I think this is definately 1 bike NOT to be ridden, imagine scraping off some of that gold leaf... OUCH!


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

First Flight said:


> Apparently the British don't have much appreciation of the older stuff?
> 
> http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11230&postdays=0&postorder=asc&vote=viewresult
> 
> At least the Ritchey is one vote ahead of the Rockhopper


cryin shame


----------



## bushpig (Nov 26, 2005)

hollister said:


> cryin shame


I agree. That Rockhopper is sweet!


----------



## hollister (Sep 16, 2005)

*thanks*



bushpig said:


> I agree. That Rockhopper is sweet!


great, now i got espresso in my keyboard


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

bushpig said:


> I agree. That Rockhopper is sweet!


Hahaha!


----------



## First Flight (Jan 25, 2004)

When we started picking up older mountain bikes 5 or 6 years ago, we drew the line a index shifting. If it clicked, it was too new. We started finding a couple of neat newer bikes so the definition of vintage was changed to thumb shifter bikes. Some of the CNC stuff was kinda cool so we added that as well. Once full suspension showed up, the small guys all got a shot at it before the biggies figured it out. I suspect we are seeing the same thing now with 29" bikes.......small guys are prospering but the biggies are getting ready to step in and kill it. As to eras:
1979-1986: friction shift, no suspension, lots of craftsmanship
1987-1990: index thumb shifters, mass production, bigger quantity/lower quality
1991-1995:the horror of original push/push, lots of colorful stuff that worked as well as LX at 5x the price. beginning of the end for many small companies except for the new breed working of full suspension
1996-2001: most cool brands are dead or bought out, CNC stuff is gone, suspension refinement
2001-current: single speeds start to hit which gives small companies hope followed by 29", couple of small component manufacturers survive on niche markets

I think the 79-86 era was the most inspiring era and the 96-01 was the most depressing era. Other opinions?


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

Rumpfy said:


> Hahaha!


oh man, if that RockHopper ever hit the open market...

You should see DoubleCentury's Hard Rock collection, though.


----------



## IF52 (Jan 10, 2004)

First Flight said:


> When we started picking up older mountain bikes 5 or 6 years ago, we drew the line a index shifting. If it clicked, it was too new. We started finding a couple of neat newer bikes so the definition of vintage was changed to thumb shifter bikes. Some of the CNC stuff was kinda cool so we added that as well. Once full suspension showed up, the small guys all got a shot at it before the biggies figured it out. I suspect we are seeing the same thing now with 29" bikes.......small guys are prospering but the biggies are getting ready to step in and kill it. As to eras:
> 1979-1986: friction shift, no suspension, lots of craftsmanship
> 1987-1990: index thumb shifters, mass production, bigger quantity/lower quality
> 1991-1995:the horror of original push/push, lots of colorful stuff that worked as well as LX at 5x the price. beginning of the end for many small companies except for the new breed working of full suspension
> ...


Interesting thoughts there. I was living in South Florida during the first era, so I can't say from experience. However, based on the artifacts and history that came out of that era I have to agree.

I honestly thought the second and third eras were pretty exciting too though. Both eras still had tons of interesting small builders with still more to come. In the third era people were really trying to make a mark, unfortunately with a lot of the billet stuff the mark was usually a bloody gash or two somewhere on your body. But some of that stuff was really gorgeous and worked well for what it was. Some of the makers started out claiming to be as good or better than Shimano, then backed off claiming the stuff was meant for racers. It really gave owners a chance to express themselves, even if the expression became somewhat formulaic. I guess out of that though, I kind of started to develope a dim view of boutique anything.

96-2001, yeah, I agree. Glad I left the business by then.

I don't get singlespeed. My knees need the extra gears.

I don't get 29er either. What is it? It just seems somebody found a way to push the 700c wheel Hybrid to a slightly different audience. Am I missing something? Didn't Bianchi try this years before with the Project 7, etc.?


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

Fillet-brazed said:


> oh man, if that RockHopper ever hit the open market...
> 
> You should see DoubleCentury's Hard Rock collection, though.


Yeah, I heard there's some pretty good NOS Hardrock examples in that collection.

So lucky.


----------



## laffeaux (Jan 4, 2004)

IF52 said:


> I don't get singlespeed. My knees need the extra gears.
> 
> I don't get 29er either. What is it? It just seems somebody found a way to push the 700c wheel Hybrid to a slightly different audience. Am I missing something? Didn't Bianchi try this years before with the Project 7, etc.?


The 29er and SS are just different bikes that accomplish the same goals of having fun on the trails. I own both and really enjoy both. A lot of people see a 29er as a complelely different thing, but it's not IMO. It's a different trait of a bicycle, not a lot different from varried stay lengths, or varried head tube angles. I really like my 29er, but it's just a differernt bike for riding trails.

What 29er and SS have done is opened up the market to the small manufacturer, and to steel frames. In the late 90's, small companies and steel frames were mostly gone. Large companies can build cheaper frames that satisfy the requiremens for most riders. However, large companies are ofen slow in reacting to the needs of the few. If nothing else, 29ers and SSers opened the door to the revival of the small builder. Large caompanies are starting take note and introducing their own versions of these frames now (particularly the 29ers), so we might soon witness the demise of a lot of the cool small companies that have been filling the "need."


----------



## El Caballo (Nov 22, 2004)

IF52 said:


> I don't get 29er either. What is it? It just seems somebody found a way to push the 700c wheel Hybrid to a slightly different audience. Am I missing something? Didn't Bianchi try this years before with the Project 7, etc.?


I can't speak for anyone else, but as a tall person, I feel a lot less like a bear on a little circus bike and a lot more like a regular person on a real bicycle. Trying one for the first time was a major "ah-ha" experience, and riding it since has only confirmed that a) they fit me much better and b) I have a lot more fun riding them.

For people of more average dimensions, it's more a matter of taste. They ride very differently. Some will like it and some won't.


----------



## IF52 (Jan 10, 2004)

I hate to take up this thread with discussions of SS and 29er, but...

Knees, what about your knees? When I was in my 20s I used to think I was a tough guy and could push big gears on the road. Now I'm older and my knees hate me for that. It seems to me that SS would be a lot of spinning out or grunting. 

29er. I'll have to try it. I'm tall at 6'5" and don't really feel like I'm riding a clown bike, but I can see your point. How is the ride different? I did get a chance to ride a Project 7 way back in the early 90s, and I recall it being kind of weird, I think as much from the thought of a fat 700c tire than anything else. 

I do agree with Laffeaux about what they represent in the way of offering a niche for small builders. Thing is though, did a lot of those older specialty builders go away because they couldn't compete or because they just got sick of it (Chris Chance) or saw the dollar signs that companies like Trek (Keith Bontrager maybe?) could throw their way for the rights to their name.


----------



## ssmike (Jan 21, 2004)

IF52 said:


> I hate to take up this thread with discussions of SS and 29er, but...
> 
> Knees, what about your knees? When I was in my 20s I used to think I was a tough guy and could push big gears on the road. Now I'm older and my knees hate me for that. It seems to me that SS would be a lot of spinning out or grunting.
> 
> ...


I had horrible painful knees in college in the early 80's. Cycling cured the pain and single speeding has not brought any harm to my knees after about 10 years of single speeding. Yes, there's lots of spinning and lots of grinding. But I try to minimize each by simply pedaling at a cadence that feels comfortable. It's very fun because it's just so quiet.

29ers - yep, laffeaux's assessment is pretty much spot on. It's pretty interesting that 29" and single speeds caused the "rediscovery" of steel. Kind of like steel was inappropriate for a geared 26" wheel bike.

As a fellow tall rider, only 6'3" but with a 37.5" inseam, I have not had the "aha" moment. Sure, I had the "wow, these big wheels feel pretty cool" moment, but not the "aha" moment that made me question why I still have 26" wheel bikes.

My saddle height sure makes me look like a bear on a bike, but I don't get that perception when I ride my bikes. I think part of that has to do with the fact that my 26" wheel bikes are very well designed. I think if you are tall and you don't like how your 26" wheel bike rides, then, sure, a 29er could be a great choice.

The way I see it, 29" wheels or single speeds (26 or 29) are just another choice in what is available just like a 26" wheel 4" travel suspension bike or a 5" travel bike or a 6" travel bike....are options.


----------



## pinguwin (Aug 20, 2004)

Interesting ideas, Jeff. I do agree that the 1996-2001 phase was pretty sad. The first phase was certainly very innovative but I didn't see as much movement in some way as say, 1988-1990. To me, that is the time when people 'got it'. They figured out what geometries worked and for what purposes. I would say that things, at least for 26" bikes really haven't changed. Yes, there is full suspension but still, the chainstay lengths, head/seat angles, etc were basically figured out 17-18 years ago. 

I've been riding since 1983, so that's my background on it.

Pinguwin


----------



## Bigwheel (Jan 12, 2004)

Collecting anything involves a bit of luck. If we could all get in the way back machine it would be great but the real trick is in anticipating the good stuffs acceptance in the future. 

I agree that the bikes from the dawn of mtn. biking are the most exciting, like that descender for example and the excellent examples of early bikes that seem to appear on here daily. But the ones that get my juices flowing the most are the rare birds that I remember seeing only glimpses of back then while riding around on my Ross. The Cunninghams, Potts etc. that I couldn't see spending extra money on then.... 

So don't you think that it is fair to say that even today collectible bikes are being made that in 25 years will be fawned over and picked apart perhaps on a MTBR that is being run by the offspring of the current weblords? What bikes will they be? For sure they will be rare low production/one off models that are loaded with the latest technology that particular year had to offer and in pristine condition. In the future they will be so far removed from what people will be riding then that it will be considered cool. 

So what bike should you buy today that will be the envy of your retirement community? If only we had a crystal bike ball eh?


----------



## MendonCycleSmith (Feb 10, 2005)

I just have to say thanks to Jeff for pics of the bike in question. That is just off the hook. :thumbsup:


----------



## gm1230126 (Nov 4, 2005)

Im guessing it was an Al Farrell bike?


----------



## First Flight (Jan 25, 2004)

gm1230126 said:


> Im guessing it was an Al Farrell bike?


No, we got it from the original owner and his name was Steve.


----------



## IF52 (Jan 10, 2004)

First Flight said:


> No, we got it from the original owner and his name was Steve.


So what is the story behind it? The original owner just wanted a flashy bike? The guy had it built for his mistress? Nothing exciting at all?


----------



## First Flight (Jan 25, 2004)

He said that a bunch of his buddies had been sending out road parts to get them anodized or plated but he wanted to be different and do it to a mountain bike. Once it was done, he had too much invested to go out and get it dirty so he bought another bike to actually ride and this one hung on his wall for 20+ years.


----------



## Tassie Devil (Feb 7, 2005)

First Flight said:


> I think the 79-86 era was the most inspiring era and the 96-01 was the most depressing era. Other opinions?


Can't comment on 79-86 era as it never really happened in my part of the world, but I'm not sure I would call the 96-01 period the most depressing as there are a quite a few shining lights in that era (eg Bomber Z1 and other components which actually worked).

In comparison to the early 90s boom period with the excess of expensive good looking but bad performing parts and frames, a bust period was inevitable as people realised that performace counted more than looks and you couldn't go past second somthing like gen XTR (as an example).

There were still quite a few novel designs being produced in the period especially on the DH front as courses changed from fire road blasts to more technically challenging events.

In some respects the current offering of black, white and grey components on offer in todays market is more depressing than those of the late 90s so I suppose it all depends on perspective.


----------



## Slow Eddie (Jun 13, 2007)

*Steve Who?*



First Flight said:


> No, we got it from the original owner and his name was Steve.


...Jobs? Truly one-of-a-kind.


----------



## yoginasser (Sep 14, 2006)

Amazing


----------



## rutteger (May 6, 2005)

*No appreciation indeed !*



First Flight said:


> Apparently the British don't have much appreciation of the older stuff?
> 
> http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11230&postdays=0&postorder=asc&vote=viewresult
> 
> At least the Ritchey is one vote ahead of the Rockhopper


Hmmm, missed this one first time round.
Think it's a bit of an incorrect generalisation to say we here in the UK don't appreciate the 'older stuff' from the interim results of Bike of The Month. As is proved month after month BoTM isn't a straightforward contest, people cast votes with their hearts as well as heads. What would appear to be the strongest contender (as one might say Jeff's Ritchey is) doesn't always win. This month's competition is a fine example, the bike currently heading up the poll is AmeyBrook's Wicked Fat Chance. Is it as high end / valuable / rare / desirable as the Ritchey? Probably not, but, and this is important, AB has put a lot of effort into the restoration of this bike to come up with something top notch with a great story behind it. This is obviously something which counts to the retrobike users. Anyhow it's not too late to change things, a few days left to cast your votes for BoTM here > http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11230&start=75

Oh, and as I mentioned on the BoTM thread the Ritchey is simply stunning, certainly a worthy addition to the First Flight collection.

cheers

John


----------



## First Flight (Jan 25, 2004)

rutteger said:


> Hmmm, missed this one first time round.
> Think it's a bit of an incorrect generalisation to say we here in the UK don't appreciate the 'older stuff' from the interim results of Bike of The Month.
> 
> cheers
> ...


Hey John,
I think like many stereotypes, there is a lot of truth at the heart of it. You guys had a poll of your favorite eras, and the newer stuff was heavily favored. In looking through your forum, the mid-1990 era seems to be the most discussed era.

I wonder if it is due to the sport starting a little later in the UK? From the guys I know here, the age of the collectors seems to average mid 30's through mid 40's? Do you have any idea what the average age is on the UK forum? younger?


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

rutteger said:


> Hmmm, missed this one first time round.
> Think it's a bit of an incorrect generalisation to say we here in the UK don't appreciate the 'older stuff' from the interim results of Bike of The Month.


Like Jeff said, it's a bit of a stereo type. But a generalization is just that.
Generally speaking, Retrobike/UK guys lean towards newer (mid 90's) mtb collecting.

Obviously not always the case, but I think thats reflected in many of the BOTM entries and topics of discussion.

It's not a negative thing, just (an) observation.

You guys are especially good about retro gatherings.


----------



## pinguwin (Aug 20, 2004)

I was in New Zealand a few months and it's as if there is a void before the mid-90's. A few people did it but I don't know a single person there who was riding in 1990. 

I was in Fiji after that and I didn't even see a mountain bike at all, in fact I hardly saw bikes at all. They do have excellent bus systems but I thought that more people would ride bikes given that a car is out of reach of most people.

Pe. Nguin


----------



## rutteger (May 6, 2005)

Jeff / Rumpfy

Would totally agree with you that the main interest on retrobike is towards the early 90s bikes and kit. It often seems to turn into an anodizing and cnc bonanza! As you point out this fits in with the fact mtb'ing really took off in the UK late 80s / early 90s. Don't have any reliable demographic data from the site but it does seem most are 30-40 and started their mtb'ing (if not cycling) careers in the early 90s.

The point I was trying to make is that this predominate interest in early 90s stuff does not mean us Brits on the site can't appreciate the older bikes and equipment. Jeff had a lot of positive comments about the Ritchey when posted, I for one would love to add that bike to my meagre collection. As mentioned in my post the initial lack of votes can be put down to the often slightly quirky BoTM voting patterns. Although the site has a lot of international users it does tend to reflect it's British heritage. One part of the British psyche which often seems to come to the fore in the voting is the love of a 'try-er', often more so than an out and out winner - you only have to look at our sporting endeavours to see this is the case 

Out of interest the complete BoTM lineup can be seen here , only a handful of bikes pre-date 1990. The main one of interest has to be RepackRider's '83 Ritchey.

As for the meets etc things do seem to be picking up here in the UK, mainly thanks to the efforts of those on the site. Our relatively small geographic scale also helps.

John


----------



## Sinjin4131 (Feb 27, 2007)

Wow...


----------



## Rumpfy (Dec 21, 2003)

rutteger said:


> The point I was trying to make is that this predominate interest in early 90s stuff does not mean us Brits on the site can't appreciate the older bikes and equipment.


Oh, for sure. Agreed.


----------



## rutteger (May 6, 2005)

Rumpfy said:


> Oh, for sure. Agreed.


Then we're all in agreement....happy days


----------



## vintagemtbr (Jun 6, 2004)

Jeff's Ritchey looks like it's paint in pink nail polish. Very pimp.:thumbsup:


----------



## RickD. (Apr 7, 2004)

*I like GOOOOOOOLLLLLLDDDDDDD!!!!*










All I can say is, DAMN.


----------



## rasaldul (Jan 7, 2004)

the wild irish rose paint looks fantastic.

i see, it's time to sell my ferrari to get all of my bikes gold plated   

definitely one-of-a-kind


----------



## shedrat29 (Jan 27, 2007)

Us Kiwis started early 80's.I remember in late 83 I had one of a handfull of mountainbikes in Christchurch ( pop 300k) but by the time I opened my first shop in 1990 , The Chaingang (cheers Gary) it was pretty big. The shop was 100% MTBs starting at $500 retail with your average XT bike about $3000 I think. I remember Cannondale 3.0 frame and forks retailed at just under $2k plus a build, we sold dozens of them over a couple of years.Love this retro stuff! We had a quite a few at the Worlds at Durango in 90.Gotta go middle age is starting the rambling, cu


----------



## mrkawasaki (Aug 2, 2006)

*Vive La Difference*

Crikey - it's not like loving a Rockhopper is a gauntlet-down challenge to other bike fanciers is it?! Surely our BOTM is only one avenue for an individual expression of what tickled/tickles your off road fancy?

As our Guvnor Rutteger said, we in the UK mostly started in '89/90 so it would be a bit false to start building gold plated klunkers now wouldn't it (I'd guess it wouldn't be long before we'd be hauled down for it either... ;-) )!?

You might also factor in what was and is actually available in the UK - then and now. Our diet might not have been comparable in historical originality but we still ate what you saw fit to send us a few years later - we are (with a few exceptions) your bastard sons!!! 

Mr K


----------



## Fillet-brazed (Jan 13, 2004)

mrkawasaki said:


> Crikey - it's not like loving a Rockhopper is a gauntlet-down challenge to other bike fanciers is it?! Surely our BOTM is only one avenue for an individual expression of what tickled/tickles your off road fancy?
> 
> As our Guvnor Rutteger said, we in the UK mostly started in '89/90 so it would be a bit false to start building gold plated klunkers now wouldn't it (I'd guess it wouldn't be long before we'd be hauled down for it either... ;-) )!?
> 
> ...


haha! 

But hey I got smoked by a young Brit in 1990 in Durango. I had been riding mtbs about 6 years by then. Wonder how long he had been riding at that point. Dont tell me a year or I'll be even more hurt.


----------

