Retrobike Forum Index

It is currently Sun Dec 11, 2016 9:02 am

* Login   * Register * Search  * FAQ



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 169 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 17  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 07, 2009 12:57 am 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 01, 2008 11:35 pm
Posts: 266
Location: hampshire
mousemat wrote:
My 1991 Pine Mountain is A20JE0074, it doesn't seem to fit with the formula does it?


my 1990 eldridges dont fit either.

one has the number m903 5?978

the other has two numbers m9133545 and m912030137


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 07, 2009 8:11 pm 
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2006 8:32 pm
Posts: 1503
Location: Southport, UK Member No:411
I spoke to Marin again regarding the different number sequences that were used.
They say that there were some variations across the years, but essentially the beginning and end never really changes.
The Factory is always first then the model and year. Different codes were used for the year. Don't forget that frames will have been made well in advance in the far east and then sprayed in the US a month later perhaps. So, your 1991 Marin may be a 1990 frame. Only a day seperates the years!!
The other constant is the final part of the code which is the frame number in production. The other bits within the code do alter and even Marin themselves can't remember them all. Why would they need to? It's not likely they'll be returned now.
I am not the most knowledgeable person to ask, but I give the knowledge I have, which came straight from Marin themselves. I only have one steel frame, so the conversation was brief, as they could tell me straight away about my particular code. I didn't need to ask any further for each of the years they produced frames as they used different coding techniques. My Titanium frames are all different and do not all carry Marin codes.
Feel free to call ATB Sales and have an in depth conversation regarding your particular code. I'm sure they'll oblige.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 26, 2009 8:31 pm 
Dirt Disciple

Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 8:34 pm
Posts: 19
Acccording to that formula the marin no. ive seen for a bbear valley says its a eldridge grade frame?

M40KE0036

Mark


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 26, 2009 9:38 pm 
Old School Hero
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 12:28 am
Posts: 175
Location: countryside-France
:) Nice informations...
Yes it seems there some variations according to the models and the years, because it doesn't work for mine...R89MT128 TET... Can I suppose 89 is for the year?...and I know TET is for the teesdale bike...But for the rest...??

EDIT: I didn't realise it was an old post :roll:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 27, 2009 8:53 am 
Dirt Disciple

Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 5:04 pm
Posts: 67
Well mine does seem to fit..

M44HAC152 for a 1994 Marvel Eldridge Grade in 17"

Paul..


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 27, 2009 12:04 pm 
Dirt Disciple

Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 8:34 pm
Posts: 19
I wonder if they ran short of frames for bear valley and badged a eldridge frame up as bear valley?, i think i read that the eldridge is i slighly higher spec frame?.
Any opinoins on this before i make a play for the bike?
Thnx

Mark


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 27, 2009 12:15 pm 
Old School Grand Master

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 1:55 pm
Posts: 8222
Location: New Forest, UK
I thought that the Bear Valley SE had the lighter frame.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 27, 2009 12:22 pm 
Dirt Disciple

Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 8:34 pm
Posts: 19
hamster wrote:
I thought that the Bear Valley SE had the lighter frame.


I think the bear valley se and eldridge grade frames were the same.
If i follow the formula then the 4 is an eldridge not bear valley then that would explain it they may have used the eldridge frames for the bear valley se :D , hence the same frame spec in the old cataloges.

Mark


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 27, 2009 1:18 pm 
Retro Guru
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2008 4:37 pm
Posts: 5198
Location: North West
You could be right with the frame 'sharing'.

Before the BVSE era (i.e. 90 - 91) I 'think' the frames from the BV upto the pine mountain were the same. The geometry change was palisades to BV, the tubing change was pine mountain to team marin.

The introduction of the BVSE shifted the lower change over point, not sure about the upper ?

My code M904010468 based on the info I posted further up the thread says that mine is a PM :?

WD :D


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 27, 2009 1:30 pm 
Old School Grand Master

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 1:55 pm
Posts: 8222
Location: New Forest, UK
Mark2260 wrote:
hamster wrote:
I thought that the Bear Valley SE had the lighter frame.


I think the bear valley se and eldridge grade frames were the same.
If i follow the formula then the 4 is an eldridge not bear valley then that would explain it they may have used the eldridge frames for the bear valley se :D , hence the same frame spec in the old cataloges.

Mark


That's what I understand too!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 169 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 17  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Tc, WWC and 36 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

About Us

Follow Retrobike

Other cool stuff

All content © 2005-2015 Retrobike unless otherwise stated.
Cookies Policy.
bikedeals - the best bike deals in one place
FatCOGS - Fat Chance Owner's Group

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group