# Can anyone tell me about the GT STS-2???



## jbordwine (Jul 19, 2004)

I've came across a used GT STS-2 for sale. Can anyone tell me about this bike? I can't find any reviews. The guy bought it a few years ago and hasn't ridden it much since. It needs some tuning and a bath but looks to be in pretty good shape. The price is $300 firm. Is this a steal or is it priced at $300 for a reason???


----------



## RED5 (Jan 4, 2004)

*Walk away...*

It's priced at 300 for a reason, IT'S OLD. Not only that but by todays standards it's an outdated design, that doesn't offer alot of options as far as tuning or replacement parts (especially shocks), because of it being so old. I personally wouldn't waste my money.


----------



## Blaster1200 (Feb 20, 2004)

red5 said:


> It's priced at 300 for a reason, IT'S OLD. Not only that but by todays standards it's an outdated design, that doesn't offer alot of options as far as tuning or replacement parts (especially shocks), because of it being so old. I personally wouldn't waste my money.


Don't just walk - run like hell!

Even when they were new they were bad. I had a 1997 model (in September of 1996), and after having it only a couple months, it cracked up near the head tube. Since the aluminum lug hid the crack, I didn't see it. A broken left wrist and 9 stiches above my right eye later... (GT swapped it for an aluminum version, and upgraded most everything to XTR - I was fine with that, I'm not lawsuit happy. I had medical insurance with a minimal deduction.)

Now that that carbon fiber frame is older and likely more fatigued (from use, not from age), it's probably even more of a hazard). Run.


----------



## jbordwine (Jul 19, 2004)

*Thanks guys!!!*

Thanks guys!!!


----------



## Cohiba (Apr 22, 2004)

*I still have mine...*



jbordwine said:


> I've came across a used GT STS-2 for sale. Can anyone tell me about this bike? I can't find any reviews. The guy bought it a few years ago and hasn't ridden it much since. It needs some tuning and a bath but looks to be in pretty good shape. The price is $300 firm. Is this a steal or is it priced at $300 for a reason???


I owned both the original STS, and then later on a STS-1000DS. The later models were stronger than the older ones, which had problems with cracks near the headtube area. GT then reinforced these in their new frames (also offering a front triangle upgrade to existing users), to make the bike compatible with triple clamp forks.

I still have mine and use it as a light trailbike and love it. 5 inches of rear travel, smooth suspension... its old, but its a proven design. The rear linkage can be a little flexy if you are a heavy rider, but its not really noticeable. You can still get spare parts at i-cycles.com (new rock shox super deluxe replacements, for next to nothing). Bushing and linkage kits are also still available from www.betd.co.uk, as are the bearing upgrades. And you don't see too many of these around anymore, and this bike STILL grabs ppl's attention.

here's a pic of my ride. My main ride is a 04' Turner DHR tho' and that receives most of my lovin.

Cohiba


----------



## Weyvoless (Jan 20, 2004)

Cohiba,

That is a picture of an LTS, not an STS. The LTS replaced the STS in 1996 I believe.


----------



## RED5 (Jan 4, 2004)

*Probably...*



Cohiba said:


> ....this bike STILL grabs ppl's attention.


 either because they're amazed someone is still riding that crap or they're moronic idiots who wouldn't know the difference between a 96 STS or a 05 Enduro.

It's nice you can get bushing, bearing upgrades and linkage parts from BETD, but for the $ (coming from overseas supplier) it's really probably not worth it unless you've already got the bike and have had it since 96. As I stated before, it's a waste of money to buy now since it's so old.


----------



## Cohiba (Apr 22, 2004)

*Ummm... no*



Weyvoless said:


> Cohiba,
> 
> That is a picture of an LTS, not an STS. The LTS replaced the STS in 1996 I believe.


dude.. you got it the wrong way around mate. The pic definetly shows an STS. And as for "replacement", both the STS and LTS were sold simultaneously in their last years of production. The first STS thermoplastic came in 1996 (i bought one), which was then followed by the improved STS-1 etc. and later on by the STS-1000 etc. designs. The LTSs also came in LTS-1etc.. and LTS-1000 , analog to the STS line. And as for the suspension design, its absolutely identical.

the pic I've attached is of the original STS-1 that I owned in 1996, when it first came out. This one cracked on me tho' =(

Cohiba


----------



## Cohiba (Apr 22, 2004)

red5 said:


> either because they're amazed someone is still riding that crap or they're moronic idiots who wouldn't know the difference between a 96 STS or a 05 Enduro.
> 
> It's nice you can get bushing, bearing upgrades and linkage parts from BETD, but for the $ (coming from overseas supplier) it's really probably not worth it unless you've already got the bike and have had it since 96. As I stated before, it's a waste of money to buy now since it's so old.


Troll.

Do you even know what you are talking about? I'd be glad if i could find even a bike today that offers the bottom bracket height and non-segmented head angle adjustment that the LTS design offered due to its trunion mount.

Sure, the dude is prolly better off with a newer bike, but don't bash the LTS design, it was definetly in a class of its own. Pity GT stopped making it and went to that i-drive crap.


----------



## RED5 (Jan 4, 2004)

*Huh...*



Cohiba said:


> Troll.


 Troll? Dude I've got 12x the posts you have , plus I've been on here since before this version of the boards were introduced. So easy they're late bloome



Cohiba said:


> Do you even know what you are talking about? I'd be glad if i could find even a bike today that offers the bottom bracket height and non-segmented head angle adjustment that the LTS design offered due to its trunion mount.


 You mean like the Cannodale Jekyll? Which not only has head angle adjustment, but also a trunion mount shock. :GASP: Get out or follow up on current events much?

Though I will give you credit for riding a DHR. Definitely a sweet choice



Cohiba said:


> Sure, the dude is prolly better off with a newer bike, but don't bash the LTS design, it *was* definetly in a class of its own. Pity GT stopped making it and went to that i-drive crap.


 You said it right there, *WAS*! Meaning past tense, like old or outdated. And while I agree about the I-Drive, the LTS/STS line was due for retirement.


----------



## Cohiba (Apr 22, 2004)

red5 said:


> Troll? Dude I've got 12x the posts you have , plus I've been on here since before this version of the boards were introduced. So easy they're late bloome
> 
> You mean like the Cannodale Jekyll? Which not only has head angle adjustment, but also a trunion mount shock. :GASP: Get out or follow up on current events much?
> 
> ...


----------



## RED5 (Jan 4, 2004)

*Not my point...*



Cohiba said:


> And just cos you've posted 12x as much doesn't make you Mr. Uber know-it-all. Would have thought that in your privileged position you would have realized that. Just cos I don't particulary post much, doesn't mean I don't read this forum regularly. And its not quantity, its quality.


 You called me a troll and that designation is usually reserved for people who don't frequent the boards much.

My point was you didn't get back on here till Apr 04, so I assumed...and even though I'm not about to waste time checking on your reviews I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and just say, my bad.

Yeah the Jekyll was pretty sweet, although I believe like the LTS and STS, it's being retired this year, to make way for the new Prophet.



Cohiba said:


> And its not quantity, its quality.


 I guess for those of you who are unable to provide both, this may apply. For the rest of us it simply sounds like an excuse.


----------



## Weyvoless (Jan 20, 2004)

My bad. I was thinking of the old GT RTS. In any event. Don't buy it!


----------



## SprungShoulders (Jan 12, 2004)

red5 said:


> You called me a troll and that designation is usually reserved for people who don't frequent the boards much.


From your avatar, I think he meant that in a literal sense.  

I now return you to your flame war.


----------

