Retrobike Forum Index

It is currently Sun Dec 11, 2016 1:26 am

* Login   * Register * Search  * FAQ



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 227 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 19, 20, 21, 22, 23  Next

BoTM Jan 2011 Pre' 90 Special - The Poll
Legrandfromage's Green Bicycle of Quality / Mystery 2%  2%  [ 5 ]
Jerky's Pace RC100 2%  2%  [ 4 ]
bduc61's Ferraroli California 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
kirbdug's 1989 Saracen Tufftrax 1%  1%  [ 3 ]
Sithlord's 1988 Fisher Mt Tam 8%  8%  [ 17 ]
Crantinope's Kona Explosif 17%  17%  [ 37 ]
oneschnark's 1989 Grove Hard Core 7%  7%  [ 15 ]
Gravy Monster's 1989 Raleigh Avanti 5%  5%  [ 10 ]
GoldenEraMTB's 1988 Fat Chance Wicked 2%  2%  [ 5 ]
Makster's 1988 Jamis Dakota Competition 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
bmx4130cromo's 1985 GT Timberline 5%  5%  [ 11 ]
doctor-bond's 1989 Roberts Peugeot 4%  4%  [ 9 ]
landsbee's 1988 Kuwahara Cascade Cross 2%  2%  [ 4 ]
Ductape's Ritchey Timber Comp 2%  2%  [ 4 ]
skolioza's 1989 Scott Boulder 1%  1%  [ 2 ]
Dr S' 1983 Specialized Stumpjumper 15%  15%  [ 32 ]
beavis' 1989 Marin Palisades Trail 0%  0%  [ 1 ]
wired99's 1985 Claud Butler Canyon 5%  5%  [ 10 ]
kaytronika's Saracen Tufftrax 3%  3%  [ 6 ]
kaiser's KHS Montana XT 1%  1%  [ 2 ]
bushpig's 1988 Cunningham Racer 16%  16%  [ 36 ]
garethl's Pinarello 1%  1%  [ 2 ]
hollister's Bontrager 2%  2%  [ 5 ]
Total votes : 220
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 1:39 am 
BoTM Winner / PoTM Winner
BoTM Winner / PoTM Winner
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 13, 2007 10:44 pm
Posts: 1184
Location: norcal
from the home page of retrobike.co.uk
Quote:
Retrobike is the World's #1 site dedicated to vintage, retro and classic mountain bikes


what does that mean? particularly the world's part


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 1:52 am 
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 7:16 pm
Posts: 9939
Location: ÜberUnderbidder
one-eyed_jim wrote:
GoldenEraMTB wrote:
As for it being "anonymous", again, a rather foolish opinion. The only "anonymous" bike in this poll was your own.

The "casual voter" is who exactly? Can you name one? This site is geared to old mtb enthusiasts, so I fail to see where someone who would bother to make an account and participate would be "casual" about these bikes. They don't have to be fanatical, but casual, nah.

I can see LGF's point on this.

I think I know quite a lot about old bikes - perhaps more than the average Retrobike member. I don't know much about older Fats, and from that position of ignorance there's nothing that marks yours out as special. Special it may be, but to my untrained eye it could pass at first glance for a cheap late eighties Rockhopper with a drab third-party paint job...

The pictures linked from your sig make a much better case for its worthiness, but as someone who wasn't on the US east coast at the time, I don't have a gut feeling for what makes it special, and I'm sure I'm not alone in that.

Of course it's always good to learn: that's why I'm here.


Hmmm, you strike me as someone having better observation skills than that. The quality of the welds, take a look at the tig welds on rock hopper and then the welds on a Fat City bike from the 80's- a world of difference. The chainstay end caps are nicely pointed, and again, superior welds. Look at the details around the seat cluster and seat stays. Also, the type of steel used.
Rockhoppers did not come with Salsa Pro-moto stems, and they are not that easy to find in a 130mm size, and in excellent condition. The same with the IRD seatpost in a 26.4, with complete decals. The seat is the original spesh sat offered with the Fat Chance builds of the era, see ads from 88.
The craftsmanship at Fat City Cycles (mass) during the 80's was excellent, did I already mention that? I believe you can discern the difference between a handmade bike made in relatively small numbers compared to mass produced rockhopper. I've owned both, and can tell the difference, and I'm no expert rider.
I'm a bit disappointed by your post, since I've always valued your opinion on here, but that's cool, no one is perfect, right? Fat City has a rich history, and is worth a read. I don't claim mine was the most special in this vote, but it's better than a rockhopper :oops:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 1:58 am 
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 7:16 pm
Posts: 9939
Location: ÜberUnderbidder
hollister wrote:
from the home page of retrobike.co.uk
[quote=]Retrobike is the World's #1 site dedicated to vintage, retro and classic mountain bikes


what does that mean? particularly the world's part[/quote]

Perhaps it's referring to the old British Empire:
http://www.britishempire.co.uk/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 3:05 am 
BoTM Winner
BoTM Winner
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 6:19 pm
Posts: 1330
Location: USA
<iframe title="YouTube video player" class="youtube-player" type="text/html" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/rNu8XDBSn10" frameborder="0" allowFullScreen></iframe>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 3:53 am 
Old School Grand Master
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 12:21 pm
Posts: 5785
Location: Lost in Translation
GoldenEraMTB wrote:
Hmmm, you strike me as someone having better observation skills than that. The quality of the welds, take a look at the tig welds on rock hopper and then the welds on a Fat City bike from the 80's- a world of difference. The chainstay end caps are nicely pointed, and again, superior welds. Look at the details around the seat cluster and seat stays. Also, the type of steel used.

But crucially, you can't see any of those things in the competition picture, and the plain, dark paint doesn't help. You can see a slightly awkwardly proportioned, somewhat anonymous-looking TIGged steel frame with skinny stays, a skinny, nondescript unicrown fork with an ungraceful bend, a skinny seatpost that accentuates the lumpy seat collar, a skinny TIGged steel stem showing perhaps just a touch too much quill...

A Rockhopper!

Okay, I'm playing devil's advocate here a little, and I know there are a hundred differences between the two. But going into some of the details you mentioned, I'm not convinced that the little gusset between the seatstays is anything more than an affectation. Does it have a structural function? Bullet-end stays are neat, but you only need them if you insist on using parallel-sided tubing. Tapered stays tend to use material more efficiently, and are more elegant to my eye. The skinny seatpost means thick tube walls or an internal butt - again, not the most efficient use of material.

And since you mentioned quality:

http://www.compint.com/stinkingweasels/ ... ality1.htm

Quote:
I'm a bit disappointed by your post, since I've always valued your opinion on here, but that's cool, no one is perfect, right?

Right.

As I said, I'm writing from a position of some ignorance where your bike is concerned, but I know I'm not alone. And we are, after all, only judging a picture.

For my money though, Fat City really got into their stride in the nineties, and if they were interesting at the time your bike was made, it was less for what they were than for what they were going to become.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:35 am 
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 7:16 pm
Posts: 9939
Location: ÜberUnderbidder
one-eyed_jim wrote:
GoldenEraMTB wrote:
Hmmm, you strike me as someone having better observation skills than that. The quality of the welds, take a look at the tig welds on rock hopper and then the welds on a Fat City bike from the 80's- a world of difference. The chainstay end caps are nicely pointed, and again, superior welds. Look at the details around the seat cluster and seat stays. Also, the type of steel used.

But crucially, you can't see any of those things in the competition picture, and the plain, dark paint doesn't help. You can see a slightly awkwardly proportioned, somewhat anonymous-looking TIGged steel frame with skinny stays, a skinny, nondescript unicrown fork with an ungraceful bend, a skinny seatpost that accentuates the lumpy seat collar, a skinny TIGged steel stem showing perhaps just a touch too much quill...

A Rockhopper!

Okay, I'm playing devil's advocate here a little, and I know there are a hundred differences between the two. But going into some of the details you mentioned, I'm not convinced that the little gusset between the seatstays is anything more than an affectation. Does it have a structural function? Bullet-end stays are neat, but you only need them if you insist on using parallel-sided tubing. Tapered stays tend to use material more efficiently, and are more elegant to my eye. The skinny seatpost means thick tube walls or an internal butt - again, not the most efficient use of material.

And since you mentioned quality:

http://www.compint.com/stinkingweasels/ ... ality1.htm

Quote:
I'm a bit disappointed by your post, since I've always valued your opinion on here, but that's cool, no one is perfect, right?

Right.

As I said, I'm writing from a position of some ignorance where your bike is concerned, but I know I'm not alone. And we are, after all, only judging a picture.

For my money though, Fat City really got into their stride in the nineties, and if they were interesting at the time your bike was made, it was less for what they were than for what they were going to become.


loaded with opinion and little fact. Good link, though. regarding the quill stem, many would disagree with you, make that regarding most of what you wrote.

Actually, the 90's brought on the demise of Fat City Cycles, with a relocation, for monetary reasons, and eventual closing. Some might say the Serrotta built Fats were of better quality than the Mass Fats, but that would only apply to the last year or two in Mass, when quality was suffering just a bit.

I was having a bit of fun here with the back and fourth, but now it's just become tiresome. Maybe I need a break from posting here on RB. An average of seven posts a day is a bit much.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:52 am 
Old School Grand Master
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 12:21 pm
Posts: 5785
Location: Lost in Translation
GoldenEraMTB wrote:
loaded with opinion and little fact.

Of course, but that's the nature of a beauty contest. I wasn't corroborating LGF's facts: I was agreeing with his opinion.

Quote:
Actually, the 90's brought on the demise of Fat City Cycles, with a relocation, for monetary reasons, and eventual closing.

That's understood, but the features that appeal to me are the features of the nineties bikes. I didn't grow up on the east coast of the US though, and I was mainly riding road bikes in the eighties.

Quote:
I was having a bit of fun here with the back and fourth, but now it's just become tiresome.

Sorry to hear that. It's good to take a break from time to time.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 5:30 am 
BoTM Winner / Gold Trader
BoTM Winner / Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 12:36 am
Posts: 4715
Location: Burlington, ON Canada
Black bikes are like black cars. Very hard to shoot (I know, I have a black show car). You need to get the light reflecting in the paint just right to get contrast or they look bland and washed out.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 5:53 am 
BoTM Winner
BoTM Winner
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 9:13 pm
Posts: 987
Location: Aspen Park
hollister was robbed.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 7:10 am 
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 7:16 pm
Posts: 9939
Location: ÜberUnderbidder
one-eyed_jim wrote:
GoldenEraMTB wrote:
loaded with opinion and little fact.

Of course, but that's the nature of a beauty contest. I wasn't corroborating LGF's facts: I was agreeing with his opinion.

Quote:
Actually, the 90's brought on the demise of Fat City Cycles, with a relocation, for monetary reasons, and eventual closing.

That's understood, but the features that appeal to me are the features of the nineties bikes. I didn't grow up on the east coast of the US though, and I was mainly riding road bikes in the eighties.

Quote:
I was having a bit of fun here with the back and fourth, but now it's just become tiresome.

Sorry to hear that. It's good to take a break from time to time.


really. you think so? Thanks for the advice.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 227 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 19, 20, 21, 22, 23  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 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