Did your dream bike live upto the hype ?

Re:

One of the bikes that never lets me go is the TBG Kona Explosif.

Bitd, everyone was looking to the new Fat aluminium bikes starting to flood the market, and the need for oversize headsets etc. The Explosif was skinny steel with a long headtube and a 1" headset, the first ride out was fantastic, I did go through a lot of warranty track two forks however, but once this was resolved it was hard to beat. Surprisingly it still is. Lots of other bikes really hit the spot, but I think the secret to the hype is perhaps less about the hype, and more about the fit, if its like hand in glove, it will always be.

And this is true for me of the Kona, the geometry fits, the spec is hassle free, everything works, and it was built well, and from Steel, you know what your getting the minute you threw a leg over it, and nothing has changed.

As for the Hype, I did love and do miss buying magazines, opening them and reading the reviews, seeing the adverts and wondering . The internet is good for many things, but alas it can never replicate that boyhood feeling of excitement like a good old mountain bike magazine.

M-Power":2wbprcdf said:

What was your dream bike back in the day and when you finally got it, did it live upto your expectation ?

Click to expand...

Yes and then some.

Re:

Whether the frame fits properly in vital, materials, how well its constructed, geometry, ( and anything else ? ) this all comes together in a wonderful synergy to make a bike SPECIAL. Some retro manufacturers seemed to produce base models that ‘had it’ so its not all about price.

Re: Re:

M-Power":3h4hzhs0 said:

Whether the frame fits properly in vital, materials, how well its constructed, geometry, ( and anything else ? ) this all comes together in a wonderful synergy to make a bike SPECIAL. Some retro manufacturers seemed to produce base models that ‘had it’ so its not all about price.

Click to expand...

It is true too.

I paused for thought after reading your post, and then re-reading mine.

Hype.- there must always be something that lures the consumer to that particular product.

Because of this I pondered on the Explosif. I think for me it was the initial look of the bike, it looked lean, it looked fast, it had a sloping top tube and a straight blade fork where as others avaliable at the time, were straight top tube and curved bladed forks. I had no clue how any of them rode, even with a quick pavement test ride, you couldn't have possibly made a educated judgement, other than for size. Demo days didn't exist back then.

I think for me, it was in part the things mentioned above, then a little more of the look, when most bikes had a fade paint job, or normal paint, the TBG konas had a finish more akin to a spilt pot of paint on the tubes. The spec wasn't the normal shimano either. As a young man it simply looked a little more hardcore I guess, a little more individual...…….., Something I fear Kona lost in the following years.

Re: Re:

sinnerman":10305juo said:

M-Power":10305juo said:

Whether the frame fits properly in vital, materials, how well its constructed, geometry, ( and anything else ? ) this all comes together in a wonderful synergy to make a bike SPECIAL. Some retro manufacturers seemed to produce base models that ‘had it’ so its not all about price.

Click to expand...

It is true too.

I paused for thought after reading your post, and then re-reading mine.

Hype.- there must always be something that lures the consumer to that particular product.

Because of this I pondered on the Explosif. I think for me it was the initial look of the bike, it looked lean, it looked fast, it had a sloping top tube and a straight blade fork where as others avaliable at the time, were straight top tube and curved bladed forks. I had no clue how any of them rode, even with a quick pavement test ride, you couldn't have possibly made a educated judgement, other than for size. Demo days didn't exist back then.

I think for me, it was in part the things mentioned above, then a little more of the look, when most bikes had a fade paint job, or normal paint, the TBG konas had a finish more akin to a spilt pot of paint on the tubes. The spec wasn't the normal shimano either. As a young man it simply looked a little more hardcore I guess, a little more individual...…….., Something I fear Kona lost in the following years.

Click to expand...

Thats it in a nut shell. Bikes had the same road bike touring geometry from the very early 80s but then it evolved as you mention around 88. Most manufacturers continued to mass produce bikes with this early geometry until well into the 90s. Its interesting how many of us seem to follow a specific brand over the years.

Re: Re:

M-Power":2tynb1se said:

sinnerman":2tynb1se said:

M-Power":2tynb1se said:

Whether the frame fits properly in vital, materials, how well its constructed, geometry, ( and anything else ? ) this all comes together in a wonderful synergy to make a bike SPECIAL. Some retro manufacturers seemed to produce base models that ‘had it’ so its not all about price.

Click to expand...

It is true too.

I paused for thought after reading your post, and then re-reading mine.

Hype.- there must always be something that lures the consumer to that particular product.

Because of this I pondered on the Explosif. I think for me it was the initial look of the bike, it looked lean, it looked fast, it had a sloping top tube and a straight blade fork where as others avaliable at the time, were straight top tube and curved bladed forks. I had no clue how any of them rode, even with a quick pavement test ride, you couldn't have possibly made a educated judgement, other than for size. Demo days didn't exist back then.

I think for me, it was in part the things mentioned above, then a little more of the look, when most bikes had a fade paint job, or normal paint, the TBG konas had a finish more akin to a spilt pot of paint on the tubes. The spec wasn't the normal shimano either. As a young man it simply looked a little more hardcore I guess, a little more individual...…….., Something I fear Kona lost in the following years.

Click to expand...

Thats it in a nut shell. Bikes had the same road bike touring geometry from the very early 80s but then it evolved as you mention around 88. Most manufacturers continued to mass produce bikes with this early geometry until well into the 90s. Its interesting how many of us seem to follow a specific brand over the years.

Click to expand...

It certainly played a huge part for me, the Tack two fork really showed me how i wanted a bike to handle, the geometry just seemed to fit, and the geometry/design shows in other bikes, anything that has similar angles straight blade and then the jump to suspension, give me that feeling of hand in glove. I guess hype factor played its part for the better too, in that you buy into a theory, trick bits shiny, costly? Whilst some of this 90s ano era was to be believed, ive yet to find a frame that hadn't lived up to its hype when its used a similar geometry, The Roberts D.Bs, its the same but better, to a whole different level, in thats its quicker because of its weight, its more balanced because of its tube usage, it comes at a price, but mainly because of its geometry it was hand in glove, just a hand stitched version.

Without the hype, those glossy magazines, i may not have felt the urge to find out and try so many others.

Components though, HYPE, that a whole different story.

Re:

Hype.

Look at the U-Brake,--------Whose light bulb moment was that...?

I would like to think, when the placement of this ingenious idea came to mind, they hadnt considered the world wide market and it actual usage.

And the Joke was on us all.

(In a country with mud, U Brakes, especially placed under the chainstay, before the exodus to the seat stay to compensate for the problems with chainsuck, Mud glogging on an epic level....)

we all bought into it, and it was as useful in the above conditions as a ...........Chocolate teapot.....!

Hype.

:facepalm:


Not all the best stolen ideas, add up to much more, than creating more problems than they solve.

Biopace anyone.....?

Re:

To be fair, the u brake is quite powerful and I really quite like biopace. Riding both the other day and I didn't really notice a strange pedalling sensation. Probably would have need the same with round rings too, but they're on the bike so they are staying.

Re: Re:

sthodgson":1i7g776y said:

To be fair, the u brake is quite powerful and I really quite like biopace. Riding both the other day and I didn't really notice a strange pedalling sensation. Probably would have need the same with round rings too, but they're on the bike so they are staying.

Click to expand...

Cool, for you it all did live up to the hype.

Re: Re:

sinnerman":2z4b0vi4 said:

sthodgson":2z4b0vi4 said:

To be fair, the u brake is quite powerful and I really quite like biopace. Riding both the other day and I didn't really notice a strange pedalling sensation. Probably would have need the same with round rings too, but they're on the bike so they are staying.

Click to expand...

Cool, for you it all did live up to the hype.

Click to expand...

The HYPE really started to kick in around 88/89 with Biopace II and U brakes. Before that the ads were quite passive by later standards, with a few exceptions. I confess to being promiscuous with bikes bitd, the grass was always greener. The mags, i bought them all, pricey US imports from TCR too. Always featuring these halo or iconic bikes you rarely if ever saw out on a trail, except at bike shows.

Its interesting how the RB interest has morphed from Iconic bikes 5-10 years or so ago, into bikes being so rare, having an unusual design, requiring cult membership of some secret West Coast Society and of course looking good. All admirable qualities but i have always looked for something that just rode better, great aesthetics were a bonus.