# MTB rebuild



## VamP (24 May 2011)

I am looking to update my 1994 Spesh rockhopper into a somewhat modern hardtail. Specifically I am thinking of fitting a dampened fork and disc brakes, to replace the standard items. The frame and gearset (Shimano STX) are in very good nick. 


Anyone want to comment on whether this makes sense cost wise or whether I should look at starting from scratch. Also any recommendations on suitable components - ie. want a good quality but not ridiculous budget.

To fit disc brakes I take it I will need new wheels, any other complications that I am unawere of?


Thanks dudes and dudesses!


----------



## Angelfishsolo (24 May 2011)

Does your Spesh have disk brake bosses? If it does then it could be a good project especially if you like the geometry of the bike. If not you may end up having to fork out (pardon the pun) for disk brake adaptors about which I have only heard bad things.



VamP said:


> I am looking to update my 1994 Spesh rockhopper into a somewhat modern hardtail. Specifically I am thinking of fitting a dampened fork and disc brakes, to replace the standard items. The frame and gearset (Shimano STX) are in very good nick.
> 
> 
> Anyone want to comment on whether this makes sense cost wise or whether I should look at starting from scratch. Also any recommendations on suitable components - ie. want a good quality but not ridiculous budget.
> ...


----------



## VamP (24 May 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Does your Spesh have disk brake bosses? If it does then it could be a good project especially if you like the geometry of the bike. If not you may end up having to fork out (pardon the pun) for disk brake adaptors about which I have only heard bad things.



I doubt it, disc brakes weren't fitted to bikes in 1994 AFAIK. *Goes off to google disc brake bosses and adaptors*

Without knowing what they are, I am guessing that they would only be needed for the rear wheel, as the new front fork would presumably be OK?


I do like the bike's geometry, and generally do not want to bin it if I can avoid it.


----------



## Ticktockmy (24 May 2011)

Depends on what state your frame is in, as it's a good few years old now. I would strip it down and check all the welds are still sound not suffering from any cracks. 

Brake wise you may have trouble converting the rear to Disk, as it may not have the fittings for the brake mech. Front will be ok if you are going to fit a new front suspension. If your wheel rims are still sound you can get them rebuilt with new hub or hubs if you are able to fit disk brakes all round.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (24 May 2011)

So to summarise - Rear wheel disk brake converters. Old wheels rebuilt to take disks or new disk brake wheels and front sus forks. Not bad all in all if the frame is good. Any idea as to what forks you are after?


----------



## VamP (24 May 2011)

This is shaping up nicely.


The idea only popped into my head yesterday, so open minded about fork - but definitely want a lock-out one.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (24 May 2011)

How much do you have to spend if it's OK to ask?


----------



## Muddy Ground (24 May 2011)

I wouldn't even bother with a rear disc conversion. I priced up one for my Klein - came in at £400. Disc brake + new rear wheel + convertor =






A Magura HS33 rim brake works just as well and is only £40 or so off eBay. 

As for the front fork, hmmm. 1994 bike most likely a 1" quill surely? If so, then unless you're going for a 1990's fork then it ain't gonna happen my friend. An original Pace fork would work - you can still get them reconditioned, but they only ever gave around 40mm of travel. Any other fork from that time may be problematic in getting spares, plus only a few, like the Pace, could take discs back then - and even then you need the adaptor.... headache time for discs on your bike!

Check the stem before you get carried away. A quill and it's a bit of a non-starter. 

What's wrong with reconditioning the poor girl as is? 

MG


----------



## mickle (24 May 2011)

Mountain bikes from that period were designed for rigid forks of a certain length. Installing a suspension fork raises the front of the bike by at least the amount of travel and sometimes more. Raising the front of the bike by one inch alters the head (and seat) angle by about one degree. To my knowledge the travel of the shortest travel forks currently available is 80mm - this is the standard for XC short travel hard-tails. So fitting even the shortest available fork will raise your front end by over three inches and slacken the head (and seat) angle by around three degrees, as well as lifting your bottom bracket. Three degrees and three inches doesn't sound like much but it'll have a profound effect on the way your bike handles. Robert Egger spent a lot of time getting the handling of that bike just right - combining head angle, fork offset, fork length etc. That slack head angle combined with the offset of a modern fork will cause the bike to wander at slow speeds, the forks will want to 'drop-off' to the either side rather than hold the straight ahead. The steering 'trail' dimension or caster will also be increased substantially causing overly heavy steering at speed. 

If your bike has a one inch (rather than one and an eighth) steerer (I can't remember off the top of my head) you'll have trouble finding a sus fork to fit anyway.

If it has a threaded (rather than threadless) steerer (etc) you'll have trouble finding a sus fork anyway. Not the end of the world but it will require a new headset and stem.

Cost? For a decent short travel fork? Well quite a lot actually. It's not like ten years ago when everyone was fitting aftermarket forks to rigid hardtails. These days they all come equipped. There is no big demand for aftermarket forks so there's a lot less to choose from. Decent ones are a lot of money. £200+ So you'll be spending more than the resale value of the bike to fit a fork which will wreck it's handling. And the handling was the thing you said you kliked about the bike.....

Disc brakes. If you buy a new fork it will come equipped with disc caliper mounts. Otherwise you're looking at the cost of a pair of disc adapter kits - which are a nightmare to live with - or the option of welding disc tabs on to the frame (plus a strip down and rebuild plus new paint) _plus_ the cost of the brakes, plus new disc compatible wheels. And if you have integrated Shi**no brake and shift levers - the cost of new shifters too. 

Plus labour. And no matter how much you throw at it all it will ever be is an old mountain bike with a bunch of new parts on it.

As an excercise: estimate how much you might get for your bike if you sold it, then add to that figure the amount of money you'd realistically have to spend on upgrading it. 

I suspect you'd be able to buy quite a nice bike for that kind of money....

If I were in your shoes I'd throw some road slicks on the Rock Hopper and start saving up for a new hardtail.


----------



## VamP (24 May 2011)

Brilliant! That's the kind of insight I was looking for. Sounds like the answer is a new bike. And the Spesh gets to be Third bike. Reconditioned obviously. N+1 strikes again.

I love this forum. 

Thanks to all.





mickle said:


> Mountain bikes from that period were designed for rigid forks of a certain length. Installing a suspension fork raises the front of the bike by at least the amount of travel and sometimes more. Raising the front of the bike by one inch alters the head (and seat) angle by about one degree. To my knowledge the travel of the shortest travel forks currently available is 80mm - this is the standard for XC short travel hard-tails. So fitting even the shortest available fork will raise your front end by over three inches and slacken the head (and seat) angle by around three degrees, as well as lifting your bottom bracket. Three degrees and three inches doesn't sound like much but it'll have a profound effect on the way your bike handles. Robert Egger spent a lot of time getting the handling of that bike just right - combining head angle, fork offset, fork length etc. That slack head angle combined with the offset of a modern fork will cause the bike to wander at slow speeds, the forks will want to 'drop-off' to the either side rather than hold the straight ahead. The steering 'trail' dimension or caster will also be increased substantially causing overly heavy steering at speed.
> 
> If your bike has a one inch (rather than one and an eighth) steerer (I can't remember off the top of my head) you'll have trouble finding a sus fork to fit anyway.
> 
> ...


----------



## Muddy Ground (24 May 2011)

Personally I'd keep as is - there's a strong retro movement out there. You could fit some 1994'ish forks, but remember back then they were utter crap even when new. I can remember being totally frustrated over some of the shonky crap [Quasar Links Evo anybody?] and used to swop out forks every 6 months or so. 1994 and rigid ruled the roost every time. 

Personally I'd keep as is, but look for some nice period upgrades from eBay; lighter wheels, Paul's Love levers, etc.... Much better keep your bike nice and period, and spend £600 getting a new rig from the likes of Wiggle. 

MG


----------



## VamP (24 May 2011)

Muddy Ground said:


> Personally I'd keep as is - there's a strong retro movement out there. You could fit some 1994'ish forks, but remember back then they were utter crap even when new. I can remember being totally frustrated over some of the shonky crap [Quasar Links Evo anybody?] and used to swop out forks every 6 months or so. 1994 and rigid ruled the roost every time.
> 
> Personally I'd keep as is, but look for some nice period upgrades from eBay; lighter wheels, Paul's Love levers, etc.... Much better keep your bike nice and period, and spend £600 getting a new rig from the likes of Wiggle.
> 
> MG




Yep agreed. T'was a flight of fancy, and reason prevails. Good steer on the period upgrades, and I love the bike enough to make a restoration project worthwhile. Rigid hardtail with rim brakes it shall remain


----------



## Angelfishsolo (24 May 2011)

Some Armadillos or Marathon Plus tyres on it and you'll have a very nippy hack bike at the very least 


VamP said:


> Yep agreed. T'was a flight of fancy, and reason prevails. Good steer on the period upgrades, and I love the bike enough to make a restoration project worthwhile. Rigid hardtail with rim brakes it shall remain


----------



## VamP (24 May 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Some Armadillos or Marathon Plus tyres on it and you'll have a very nippy hack bike at the very least




It's got a set of nearly new Conti Double Fighter II on now, and is fairly swift (I can average 16.7 mph on my commute vs 19.3 mph on my Bianchi) already.

Brakes are shagged, which precipitated this idea while out riding in the ruff with my GF last night. I'll just fix the brakes - easy!


----------



## Zoiders (24 May 2011)

Keep it as original as possible is my advice and ride it rigid, I wouldnt try turning into a modern MTB as it would ruin what it does best.

94 it could well be 1 1/8 A-head, it could be 1" A-head, it could even be one of the oversized 1 1/8 threaded quill designs like the Avenger, 94 was a time when the 3 designs were all kicking around.

Thinking hard I seem to remember the 94 Hopper has a normal STX-RC quill though that takes a sealed bearing.

Retro MTBs are the next big trend in cycling

http://www.retrobike.co.uk/ 

The welds on a steel Rockhopper are not known to break as they are well fabricated frames, what you do need to check though is areas like the chain stay bridge for rust, US market frames from the period are a bugger for rust.


----------



## mickle (24 May 2011)

Zoiders said:


> ..... US market frames from the period are a bugger for rust.



I'm pretty sure that American market steel frames are no better or worse for rust than frames manufactured for other territories.


----------



## Zoiders (24 May 2011)

mickle said:


> I'm pretty sure that American market steel frames are no better or worse for rust than frames manufactured for other territories.


The US market of the time was based very strongly around the Calfornian scene, it's where a huge chunk of development and market testing was done - they didn't offer seperate UK sales lines at the time, it was pretty much all US market based with a few exceptions like Muddy Fox and Orange or Pace who started adding things like down tube bosses for crud catchers.

Dry summer trails and no road salt meant they never put frame saver in US bikes, Trek MTB's of the same period rot out as well.

On-One bikes made the same mistake as well recently even though they are a UK company, frames that actualy weeped rust from drain holes and the headtube gusset.


----------



## mickle (24 May 2011)

Zoiders said:


> The US market of the time was based very strongly around the Calfornian scene, it's where a huge chunk of development and market testing was done.
> 
> Dry summer trails and no road salt meant they never put frame saver in, Trek MTB's of the same period rot out as well.



I lived in California in 1994 and worked in the cycle industry there. At that point in history Specialized had been selling bikes into Europe for a decade.

You appear to be suggesting that bikes manufactured for sale in the US market were treated differently in the factory to bikes manufactured for sale in Europe. How can I politely suggest that you are making this up? I'm sure you've seen rusty frames of the period from US centric brands - no question about that, I've seen them myself. To suggest that US market bikes were treated any differently in the Taiwanese factory from UK (say) market bikes such as.... Muddy Fox, Saracen, Raleigh is a step beyond. A guess. Because bikes made in Taiwan for the UK market - Muddy Foxes, Saracens et al, as well as British made bikes like Bromptons, Pashleys and Thorns can and do rot through. Please stop presenting what you imagine to be facts as actual facts.


----------



## VamP (25 May 2011)

Awesome!


I shall polish up my Rockhopper and go out for a spot of retro trendsetting


----------



## Zoiders (25 May 2011)

mickle said:


> I lived in California in 1994 and worked in the cycle industry there. At that point in history Specialized had been selling bikes into Europe for a decade.
> 
> You appear to be suggesting that bikes manufactured for sale in the US market were treated differently in the factory to bikes manufactured for sale in Europe. How can I politely suggest that you are making this up? I'm sure you've seen rusty frames of the period from US centric brands - no question about that, I've seen them myself. To suggest that US market bikes were treated any differently in the Taiwanese factory from UK (say) market bikes such as.... Muddy Fox, Saracen, Raleigh is a step beyond. A guess. Because bikes made in Taiwan for the UK market - Muddy Foxes, Saracens et al, as well as British made bikes like Bromptons, Pashleys and Thorns can and do rot through. Please stop presenting what you imagine to be facts as actual facts.


Stop being an agressive pedant and shitting up yet another thread, so you spent a gap year in states bully for you.

Late 80s early 90's a lot of steel was still US manufactured so stop making sweeping comparisons with the state of the industry in 2011.

Try actualy working on the older bikes and witnessing how they degrade and stop commenting on stuff you googled.


----------



## Andy_R (25 May 2011)




----------



## mickle (25 May 2011)

Zoiders said:


> Stop being an ag_*g*_ressive pedant and shitting up yet another thread, so you spent a gap year in _*the* *S*_tates bully for you. _
> _
> Late 80s early 90's a lot of steel was still US manufactured so stop making sweeping comparisons with the state of the industry in 2011.
> 
> ...


_*

*_You are Bonj and ICM£5_*.

*_Not 'gap'. They didn't have them in my day sonny. And not a year. 

'A lot of steel'? Like what for example (side from True Temper)? Making it up again.

And I never mentioned 2011, what are you on about?*
*
I have and I do work on older bikes - which is how I caught you out. I worked on one from 1914 just the other day as it goes.

Commenting on stuff I Googled? Whatever.

You keep making sweeping statements which are not true. 

Such as the one you made recently about grades of emery.


----------



## Zoiders (25 May 2011)

mickle said:


> _*
> 
> *_You are Bonj and ICM£5_*.
> 
> ...


Ah spelling pedantry, the last grasp of the shrill and indignant.

See the mods if you have a problem with people offering a different opinion to yourself.

In the mean time have a wiff of WD40 and relax as life is too short.


----------



## mickle (26 May 2011)

My problem Zoiders, as I have tried politely to explain, is your making up of things in your head and presenting them as facts. You do it all the time. And you've been doing it for as long as I can remember. All that's changed is that I've stopped biting my lip. When people are seeking after the truth you try to lead them up a blind alley. I may well come across as pedantic but I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking that advice given on this board should have some basis in reality. This is not about 'difference of opinion' its about truth. And the truth is there are many grades of emery. The truth is that there is not 'a lot of steel made in the US'. The truth is that bikes made in the mid nineties did not differ in spec or steel across different territories. Steel made in the US was no more likely to rust than steel made in Taiwan. I've worked in the bicycle industry for a long time and I know these to be facts. I had a professional involvement with Specialized on and off from 1985 till '96. I spent time in the company of Robert Egger at Morgan Hill in 1993 Zoiders. I know what I'm talking about. 

What I'm hoping will come out of these little chats is that you'll simply edit your advice to include only information you know to be true. 

Don't take it personally - my aim is not to humiliate you, but know that if you continue to spout bullshit I'll continue to pull you up on it.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (26 May 2011)

Well said Mickle 


mickle said:


> My problem Zoiders, as I have tried politely to explain, is your making up of things in your head and presenting them as facts. You do it all the time. And you've been doing it for as long as I can remember. All that's changed is that I've stopped biting my lip. When people are seeking after the truth you try to lead them up a blind alley. I may well come across as pedantic but I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking that advice given on this board should have some basis in reality. This is not about 'difference of opinion' its about truth. And the truth is there are many grades of emery. The truth is that there is not 'a lot of steel made in the US'. The truth is that bikes made in the mid nineties did not differ in spec or steel across different territories. Steel made in the US was no more likely to rust than steel made in Taiwan. I've worked in the bicycle industry for a long time and I know these to be facts. I had a professional involvement with Specialized on and off from 1985 till '96. I spent time in the company of Robert Egger at Morgan Hill in 1993 Zoiders. I know what I'm talking about.
> 
> What I'm hoping will come out of these little chats is that you'll simply edit your advice to include only information you know to be true.
> 
> Don't take it personally - my aim is not to humiliate you, but know that if you continue to spout bullshit I'll continue to pull you up on it.


----------



## Zoiders (26 May 2011)

mickle said:


> My problem Zoiders, as I have tried politely to explain, is your making up of things in your head and presenting them as facts. You do it all the time. And you've been doing it for as long as I can remember. All that's changed is that I've stopped biting my lip. When people are seeking after the truth you try to lead them up a blind alley. I may well come across as pedantic but I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking that advice given on this board should have some basis in reality. This is not about 'difference of opinion' its about truth. And the truth is there are many grades of emery. The truth is that there is not 'a lot of steel made in the US'. The truth is that bikes made in the mid nineties did not differ in spec or steel across different territories. Steel made in the US was no more likely to rust than steel made in Taiwan. I've worked in the bicycle industry for a long time and I know these to be facts. I had a professional involvement with Specialized on and off from 1985 till '96. I spent time in the company of Robert Egger at Morgan Hill in 1993 Zoiders. I know what I'm talking about.
> 
> What I'm hoping will come out of these little chats is that you'll simply edit your advice to include only information you know to be true.
> 
> Don't take it personally - my aim is not to humiliate you, but know that if you continue to spout bullshit I'll continue to pull you up on it.


Still upset about emery paper?

If you recall at the time I did explain there are several grades, most being fine for most finishing jobs as long as you don't go too fine, they don't by the way come in very course grits - thats alumium oxide paper - I can go and get the quote if you wish. You getting your knickers in a twist because you were beaten to the punchline is just your tough tits.

You were just being an agressive pedant again.

If you want to use the knowledge as a tool for own self promotion then you need to stop trying to do it at the expense of others, I have bitten my lip for long enough, I don't quote you all the time or try to pick it apart, I don't make it personal yet you seem intent on doing so yourself.

If you have a problem - see the mods, otherwise wind your neck in as I don't think for a minute your little crusade has anything to do with the content of my posts in the knowledge.


----------



## mickle (26 May 2011)

You posted: _.... Needle file and some emery paper. 

_To which I replied:_ Needle file? Really? And what grade of emery?_*

*To which you responded:_ 'Emery paper is emery paper, also known as J-cloth or wet and dry depending if it comes on a thin roll or in sheets, it doesn't come in coarse grits, you are thinking of aluminium oxide paper which is not the same thing so learn your abrasives before you comment'._

To which I replied: _Wrong._

http://www.suttontoo...Papers_325.html 

It seems to me that I asked you to clarify what grade of emery you were recommending (because I think such details are important). You suggested that it doesn't come in grades of coarseness - then suggested that I was thinking about something that I wasn't - and then I showed you proof that emery does indeed come in a range of grades.


How do you remember the conversation going?


Sorry everyone else if this is getting boring.


----------



## Zoiders (26 May 2011)

mickle said:


> You posted: _.... Needle file and some emery paper.
> 
> _To which I replied:_ Needle file? Really? And what grade of emery?_*
> 
> ...


You are quoting brand names and it means naff all. Emery/J cloth, wet and dry, all brand names and interchangable, I also credited the OP with the intelligence to not go too fine, it's hard to go too coarse with emery is they dont manufacture it in extremely coarse grits.

And a needle file is needle file unless you are looking for some very fine diamond abrasive version.

Now get over yourself and go away you tiresome little man, unless you have more stuff you want to google.


----------



## threebikesmcginty (26 May 2011)

mickle said:


> Sorry everyone else if this is getting boring.



Not at all!


----------



## Zoiders (26 May 2011)

Mickle has had a sad on ever since I questioned why people were being told WD40 was evil. I wasn't nasty about it but he took offence big time.

Ever since it's just been this non stop bullshit, he needs to grow up.


----------



## Cubist (26 May 2011)

Zoiders said:


> Mickle has had a sad on ever since I questioned why people were being told WD40 was evil. I wasn't nasty about it but he took offence big time.
> 
> Ever since it's just been this non stop bullshit, he needs to grow up.



Oh, thanks for the detailed instructions! I take it then that making my own mind up about who is and who isn't tiresome is no longer an option (again!)then?

Zoiders, as a completely disinterested outsider, may I point out that you are a very strongly opinionated poster who will sometimes wind folk up. You have an abrasive manner (if you pardon the pun) on occasions, and come across as a bit "hey, listen to ME, I'm right and the rest of them are out of step."

I have no intention of joining in the fun, but if we were to score the number of times my hackles have risen when reading your post versus the same effect by Mickle, then I'm afraid you are Leicester Tigers to Mickle's Leeds Carnegie.


----------



## Cubist (26 May 2011)

Oh, and by the way, Emery is not a generic name for the sort of finishing papers you describe. It is a specific name for paper used to finish and polish hard surfaces (not wood or paint like alu oxide paper, it's entirely unsuitable for that sort of work) 

It's name is from the emery crystals bonded to the paper. 
Here, have a free bit of googling result;


*Emery cloth* is a type of abrasive that has emery glued to a cloth backing. It is commonly used in metalworking by hand. A finer, less commonly seen grade has a paper backing instead.


*[edit]Grades*
The grade of the cloth defines the coarseness or fineness of the abrasive. Emery is rated on the average grain size glued to the backing. Common sizes are, from coarse to fine: 40, 46, 54, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 120, F, and FF. A 46 or 54 grade cloth is used on roughly filed work, while 60 to 90 grade cloth will give a good polish.[sup][1][/sup]


----------



## lukesdad (26 May 2011)

Cubist said:


> Oh, thanks for the detailed instructions! I take it then that making my own mind up about who is and who isn't tiresome is no longer an option (again!)then?
> 
> Zoiders, as a completely disinterested outsider, may I point out that you are a very strongly opinionated poster who will sometimes wind folk up. You have an abrasive manner (if you pardon the pun) on occasions, and come across as a bit "hey, listen to ME, I'm right and the rest of them are out of step."
> 
> I have no intention of joining in the fun, but if we were to score the number of times my hackles have risen when reading your post versus the same effect by Mickle, then I'm afraid you are Leicester Tigers to Mickle's Leeds Carnegie.


Way to go Cubist.....er would you like to run that last part by me one more time?


----------



## Cubist (26 May 2011)

lukesdad said:


> Way to go Cubist.....er would you like to run that last part by me one more time?


Premiership rugby teams, scorers of many points versus those who haven't scored as many !


----------



## Shaun (26 May 2011)

Erm, gents, can you please put your wanger's away and stop waving them about at each other (and I'm sooo glad we don't have a smiley for that!!  [_and don't anyone else go posting one either, thank you!!!_] ).

Seriously, please, let's not fall out.

Thanks,
Shaun


----------



## lukesdad (26 May 2011)

Cubist said:


> Premiership rugby teams, scorers of many points versus those who haven't scored as many !




Gotcha Ospreys vs Dragons


----------



## Cubist (26 May 2011)

lukesdad said:


> Gotcha Ospreys vs Dragons



No, I was talking about proper rugby teams........


----------



## lukesdad (26 May 2011)

Cubist said:


> No, I was talking about proper rugby teams........


----------



## mickle (27 May 2011)

What is this rubgy of which you speak?


----------



## Crackle (27 May 2011)

mickle said:


> What is this rubgy of which you speak?




It's a little pimple in Sport which can be rubbed down with some ICC Cricket and a match fix or two and then polished with some Premiership flim flam. Not to be confused with American rugby called football, which is also imported into this country and is an inferior rugby product. You probably know something about it from your holiday there.


----------



## threebikesmcginty (27 May 2011)

Crackle said:


> You probably know something about it from your holiday there.



It wasn't a holiday - it was a gap year, a middle class jolly!


----------



## GaryA (27 May 2011)

Weh hey! and cafe regulars complain about the arguments in P&L  

Commenting on the OP; a few years ago i built up my avalanche 0.0 from a frame on e-bay and assorted new cycle parts from merlin/wiggle chain reaction. I carefully calculated how much it woud cost and reckoned i could match an off-the shelf price..... but the final cost was £140 greater ..because- its almost a law of the universe- a large project will _always_ cost you more than you think..there will always be complications/things you have overlooked.

Maybe zoiders and mickle can agree with that one...


----------



## mickle (27 May 2011)

GaryA said:


> blah blah blah blah etc.......
> 
> Maybe zoiders and mickle can agree with that one...



as if


----------



## Angelfishsolo (27 May 2011)

+1


Cubist said:


> Oh, thanks for the detailed instructions! I take it then that making my own mind up about who is and who isn't tiresome is no longer an option (again!)then?
> 
> Zoiders, as a completely disinterested outsider, may I point out that you are a very strongly opinionated poster who will sometimes wind folk up. You have an abrasive manner (if you pardon the pun) on occasions, and come across as a bit "hey, listen to ME, I'm right and the rest of them are out of step."
> 
> I have no intention of joining in the fun, but if we were to score the number of times my hackles have risen when reading your post versus the same effect by Mickle, then I'm afraid you are Leicester Tigers to Mickle's Leeds Carnegie.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (27 May 2011)

mickle said:


> as if


----------



## Cubist (27 May 2011)

Crackle said:


> It's a little pimple in Sport which can be rubbed down with some ICC Cricket and a match fix or two and then polished with some Premiership flim flam. Not to be confused with American rugby called football, which is also imported into this country and is an inferior rugby product. You probably know something about it from your holiday there.


Never mind all that, just a quick squirt of penetrating oil will do the trick.....


----------



## Zoiders (27 May 2011)

Cubist said:


> Oh, thanks for the detailed instructions! I take it then that making my own mind up about who is and who isn't tiresome is no longer an option (again!)then?
> 
> Zoiders, as a completely disinterested outsider, may I point out that you are a very strongly opinionated poster who will sometimes wind folk up. You have an abrasive manner (if you pardon the pun) on occasions, and come across as a bit "hey, listen to ME, I'm right and the rest of them are out of step."
> 
> I have no intention of joining in the fun, but if we were to score the number of times my hackles have risen when reading your post versus the same effect by Mickle, then I'm afraid you are Leicester Tigers to Mickle's Leeds Carnegie.


I would really like to know at what stage in this thread I started being abrasive.

I quoted no person, I aimed no comment at any one person, I didn't have a go at any individual, I wasn't trying to start an argument, I did not acuse mickle of being wrong before he started a pointless flame war - Mickle was just being rude.

Point the finger else where in future thank you.


----------



## mickle (27 May 2011)

Zoiders said:


> Stop being an agressive pedant and shitting up yet another thread, so you spent a gap year in states bully for you.
> 
> Late 80s early 90's a lot of steel was still US manufactured so stop making sweeping comparisons with the state of the industry in 2011.
> 
> Try actualy working on the older bikes and witnessing how they degrade and stop commenting on stuff you googled.


----------



## dellzeqq (27 May 2011)

Admin said:


> Erm, gents, can you please put your wanger's away and stop waving them about at each other (and I'm sooo glad we don't have a smiley for that!!  [_and don't anyone else go posting one either, thank you!!!_] ).
> 
> Seriously, please, let's not fall out.
> 
> ...


this post is useless without pics!


----------



## GrumpyGregry (27 May 2011)

keep it original as far as you can whilst making sensible mods. Magura hydraulic rim brakes, pace elastomer forks, that sort of thing

(well it is what I did with mine...)


----------



## Cubist (27 May 2011)

Zoiders said:


> Stop being an agressive pedant and shitting up yet another thread, so you spent a gap year in states bully for you.
> 
> Late 80s early 90's a lot of steel was still US manufactured so stop making sweeping comparisons with the state of the industry in 2011.
> 
> Try actualy working on the older bikes and witnessing how they degrade and stop commenting on stuff you googled.


Errr, it was this bit........

Leave it now, I can't be bothered!


----------



## Angelfishsolo (27 May 2011)

+1


Cubist said:


> Errr, it was this bit........
> 
> Leave it now, I can't be bothered!


----------



## User482 (27 May 2011)

My 1993 Marin, made from True Temper steel, and used every day on my commute come rain or shine, is rust free. My 1992 Breezer, made from Ritchey Logic steel also completely rust free.

But Zoiders is completely right, obviously.

Back to the OP: I think it's already been said, but trying to turn a vintage MTB into something it's not, is expensive. Enjoy it as it is (or flog it on retrobike).


----------



## VamP (27 May 2011)

HAHAHA! This thread has taken on a life of it's own.


I am definitely keeping the bike and as original as possible. Thanks for all the on topic comments, as well as the off topic entertainment.


For the record, the frame is completely rust free - and no it's not had a completely easy life.


----------



## Zoiders (27 May 2011)

User482 said:


> My 1993 Marin, made from True Temper steel, and used every day on my commute come rain or shine, is rust free. My 1992 Breezer, made from Ritchey Logic steel also completely rust free.
> 
> But Zoiders is completely right, obviously.
> 
> Back to the OP: I think it's already been said, but trying to turn a vintage MTB into something it's not, is expensive. Enjoy it as it is (or flog it on retrobike).


And I have binned three otherwise perfect Treks from the period for rusted out chainstays bridges and a few Marins as well, I put forward ano pinion, I didn't write paragraphs about it or have a go at anyone in the process, I think the original post I made consisted of maybe 2 lines.

I am seriously getting titsed off with being the bogeyman here as it wasn't me who pushed the thread towards aggressive pedantry, this isn't the politics board so if anyone has a problem go and see the mods. As I said - up until Mickle going off on his little mission to prove what an expert google merchant he is all was fine with this thread.


----------



## Alembicbassman (27 May 2011)

Buy some new slick tyres and tubes, regrease bearings, replace cables and use it as an urban mtb.


----------



## User482 (27 May 2011)

Zoiders, you put forward an opinion masquerading as fact. That's why you get peoples backs up.


----------



## henshaw11 (27 May 2011)

Apart from any custom handbuilt frames (and I may, of course, be wrong) I'm not aware that US or UK bikes (mtb or otherwise) generally had frame saver lobbed in them. So to that extent, they're all potentially prone to rust. My '02 Orange P7 doesn't, and a mate's 95 or 96 Nickel finish P7 didn't either. Even a handful or more years ago Brant Richards (On-One blokey) used to recommend just rinsing the frame tubes round with engine oil in the event that anyone was that worried about corrosion on their frames.

I'd guess one of the worst but inspectable places on the rockhopper is likely to be at the bottom of the seattube - water gets chucked up by the rear wheel and some of it ends up there. (I used to have to empty out my ~89 'dale after every wet ride, despite the fact that the seatpost seemed a close fit). I guess have a good look down - likewise in the headtube, BB shell etc - with a torch and see what it looks like.

Re old suspension forks - yeah, you'll have trouble finding anything worth riding, or at least anything you want to ride regularly and not care about, IYSWIM. The latest early (if that makes sense) decent ones that you might find relatively easily would be Rockshox Mag 10 or Mag 21.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RockShox
- those'd be 1" (not sure about ahead or threaded...I'm sure there's a wiki somewhere). If you *can* find any old Pace forks the elastomers will almost certainly be stuffed - my mate with the P7 gave up on his ~2001 or so (my P7's the one he replaced it with) because they were knackered and he couldn't get replacements - even from Pace. By 96/97 they'd move to coils/damping cartridges. I've got a set of those (MXC I think, 60mm or 70mm travel - there was a long travel kits which added 20mm) on a '96 M2 Stumpjumper, I think I bought the forks in 97 (I bought the M2 rigid).

I'd stick with the rigid forks - they were intended to have flex anyway, not up to today's sort of riding but probably fine for an awful lot - I did more than a few trailquest events on my 'dale. Even any rigid forks you can find nowadays with disk mounts are probably going to be too long axle>crown race (istr there was a 'standard' length of about 420 or 440 mm - try measured that on your frame and see what you come up with - if you want I could measure my old rigid 'dale and see what that is, that *definitely* predates suspension).

V -brakes would be decent upgrade tho' (the parallel-push XTRs are/were some of the best - you can still buy them but they're not cheap) - but Avids or LX/XT should be good - it ought to be possible to find some on ebay for not a lot.

If you've got to buy wheels anyway, it *might* be worth buying them with rim brake rims and disk hubs if there's not much £ difference - if you then buy another bike with disks you've got a spare set of wheels.


----------



## MacB (27 May 2011)

So what have we learned here? steel frames, exposed to the right conditions, and care or lack of, can rust? There is a product, well several actually, you can put inside steel frames that will mitigate/stop this? Older frames never had this treatment yet some rusted and some did not? Many frames are still made without internal protection being added?


----------



## lukesdad (27 May 2011)

Rugger anyone ?


----------



## Cubist (27 May 2011)

lukesdad said:


> Rugger anyone ?


----------



## KenG (28 May 2011)

Id keep it original as possible, my 1995 Kona Hahanna is a pleasure to ride.
I recently rebuilt it and gained a lot of pleasure sourcing original parts, which are still available if your prepared to search, it has been used for a month now as my work bike and still feels as good as the day i bought it ( Sunset MTB's 1995).
Rebuild it, ride it, love it but most of all keep it!
Here it is before the rebuild -


----------



## BenDeason (28 May 2011)

I recently finished a similar project with an old kona frame too only i opted for more modern parts. not to everyones taste im sure but here it is


----------



## KenG (28 May 2011)

Great looking Kona, i think they are a true "do it all" type of bike, modern parts or original, they still have that great steel feel to them!


----------



## Zoiders (29 May 2011)

[QUOTE 1406525"]
I do love a nice glass of ano pinion.
[/quote]Oh do grow up.


----------



## Zoiders (29 May 2011)

User482 said:


> Zoiders, you put forward an opinion masquerading as fact. That's why you get peoples backs up.


All I said is watch some US brand frames as they are know to rot out at the seat stay bridge and I have seen that happen enough times to rightly believe that it is because they lack frame saver due to the original marketing and development of them in the US, how that became me being a bad person according to the law of Mickle is beyond me.

The only thing getting your back up is me refusing to suck up to you or mickle.

Like I said - if it gets your back up so much that people refuse to suck up to you or be bullied by you then speak to the mods or find another bogey man because this is not P&L.


----------



## mickle (30 May 2011)

Zoiders said:


> All I said is watch some US brand frames as they are know to rot out at the seat stay bridge and *I have seen that happen enough times to* rightly *believe that it is because they lack frame saver due to the original marketing and development of them in the US*, how that became me being a bad person according to the law of Mickle is beyond me.
> 
> The only thing getting your back up is me refusing to suck up to you or mickle.
> 
> Like I said - if it gets your back up so much that people refuse to suck up to you or be bullied by you then speak to the mods or find another bogey man because this is not P&L.



Get a grip. You presented assumption as fact - I pulled you up on it and you got your knickers in a twist. It's not about 'a refusal to suck up' (how old are you?) or bullying (ffs). It's about truth.

The moment it dawns on one that one is alone in arguing one's side, and 'everyone else's' opinion differs is the moment one should consider looking inside oneself at the possibility that one might, actually, be wrong. 

The US, Taiwan, France, Britain or Timbuk****ingtu. The use or otherwise of frame saver had nothing and has nothing to do with where the frame was designed, where it was built, where it sold or where it was 'marketed and developed'. As the tubes of my Uncle's early nineties Paskley Moulton will testify.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (30 May 2011)

+1


mickle said:


> Get a grip. You presented assumption as fact - I pulled you up on it and you got your knickers in a twist. It's not about 'a refusal to suck up' (how old are you?) or bullying (ffs). It's about truth.
> 
> The moment it dawns on one that one is alone in arguing one's side, and 'everyone else's' opinion differs is the moment one should consider looking inside oneself at the possibility that one might, actually, be wrong.
> 
> The US, Taiwan, France, Britain or Timbuk****ingtu. The use or otherwise of frame saver had nothing and has nothing to do with where the frame was designed, where it was built, where it sold or where it was 'marketed and developed'. As the tubes of my Uncle's early nineties Paskley Moulton will testify.


----------



## hotmetal (30 May 2011)

Ignoring the flame war, and just to add my twopennorth to the actual topic at hand, I just want to say that I 'upgraded' my 1988 Cannondale to having RockShox at some point in the mid nineties. Now, with the benefit of a) hindsight, b) nostalgia and c) a proper modern mountainbike, I wish I had kept the old 'Dale fully original. I actually only use it on road now, as a hack, and wish I had the original rigid fork. I stupidly 'lent' it to a mate who stuck it on some execrable POS and then probably chucked the whole lot in a skip. I definitely reckon the OP should save his money to get a modern bike where the wheels and frame are made for modern brakes and forks, and preserve the old bike as a piece of history.


----------



## KenG (30 May 2011)

hotmetal said:


> Ignoring the flame war, and just to add my twopennorth to the actual topic at hand, I just want to say that I 'upgraded' my 1988 Cannondale to having RockShox at some point in the mid nineties. Now, with the benefit of a) hindsight, b) nostalgia and c) a proper modern mountainbike, I wish I had kept the old 'Dale fully original. I actually only use it on road now, as a hack, and wish I had the original rigid fork. I stupidly 'lent' it to a mate who stuck it on some execrable POS and then probably chucked the whole lot in a skip. I definitely reckon the OP should save his money to get a modern bike where the wheels and frame are made for modern brakes and forks, and preserve the old bike as a piece of history.




I totally agree!


----------



## User482 (31 May 2011)

Zoiders said:


> All I said is watch some US brand frames as they are know to rot out at the seat stay bridge and I have seen that happen enough times to rightly believe that it is because they lack frame saver due to the original marketing and development of them in the US, how that became me being a bad person according to the law of Mickle is beyond me.
> 
> The only thing getting your back up is me refusing to suck up to you or mickle.
> 
> Like I said - if it gets your back up so much that people refuse to suck up to you or be bullied by you then speak to the mods or find another bogey man because this is not P&L.



And equally, I've seen enough old American MTBs in perfect health to know that they're no more susceptible to rust than any other country's brand.

So where does that leave us? It confirms that the plural of anecdote is not evidence.

I shan't dignify the rest of your little rant with a response, except to say that if you will insist on putting misinformation into the public domain, don't start crying to mummy when you get pulled up on it.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (31 May 2011)

Well said 


User482 said:


> And equally, I've seen enough old American MTBs in perfect health to know that they're no more susceptible to rust than any other country's brand.
> 
> So where does that leave us? It confirms that the plural of anecdote is not evidence.
> 
> I shan't dignify the rest of your little rant with a response, except to say that if you will insist on putting misinformation into the public domain, don't start crying to mummy when you get pulled up on it.


----------



## Muddy Ground (13 Jun 2011)

When I got my Orange Clockwork in 1995 the first thing I did was to fill the tubes with Waxoil. Wouldn't do that now; it added 400g to the frame. When people like On-One do steel frames for under £200, one senses that these things are throw away items. I think people like Ragely coat theirs, but then they are twice the price of the On-One variants so worth the effort.

You've got to remember that most bikes are made to a cost and so there will always be shortcuts taken. A manufacturer quite rightly isn't going to invest in rust proofing frames that have a relatively short lifespan anyway. So a few enthusiasts keep their bikes going? Big deal. I'm guessing if those enthusiasts kept the brand going [Cotic, Ragley etc.] through re-use and re-invention of old frames, then the manufacturer will make sure that the frames last - one day us eBay addicts may well buy new from them. But if you're a Specialized or Kona, and people only ever buy into the brand from new, and then the bikes slide into oblivion, then why bother looking after the used guys? They're marginal to the business at best.

All steel rusts. Life sucks. Move on.

MG


----------



## VamP (17 Jun 2011)

Just a quick postscript: Edmund has now had a full service, including new brake pads and cable replacement. He's running sweet as a nut, and is as much fun as ever.


Thanks to all for their encouragement to keep him as Specialized intended, and as suggested by others, I am indeed saving up for a modern MTB to add to the stable.


----------

