Retrobike Forum Index

It is currently Wed Dec 07, 2016 11:50 pm

* Login   * Register * Search  * FAQ



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 39 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:57 pm 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider

Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 11:22 pm
Posts: 7306
Location: Hove
Hmmmm, the plot thickens Watson .....

Or is it me who is Watson? Hmmmmm

I find this puzzling. The bike tested for the 1997 MBR had an F7 with an ahead system, which they introduced (1") for 1997. My 1996 C16R has a threaded F7. It seems very odd if they went backwards for the 7.2 fork or if they made any 7.2s that were non-standard.

And as you mention it, I have always accepted the interpretation of the A-Pro serial numbers and have found it reliable - except for my C16, which is A405, but is definitely a 1996 frame and paint. I don't whether it is possible that they made frames in bulk, well ahead of time, and applied the finishing touches such as braze-ons nearer to the model year. The other possibility is that they may have changed the serial number format.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 17, 2011 3:15 pm 
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 8:38 am
Posts: 2679
Location: Norfolkshire
Anthony wrote:
Hmmmm, the plot thickens Watson .....

Or is it me who is Watson? Hmmmmm

I find this puzzling. The bike tested for the 1997 MBR had an F7 with an ahead system, which they introduced (1") for 1997. My 1996 C16R has a threaded F7. It seems very odd if they went backwards for the 7.2 fork or if they made any 7.2s that were non-standard.

And as you mention it, I have always accepted the interpretation of the A-Pro serial numbers and have found it reliable - except for my C16, which is A405, but is definitely a 1996 frame and paint. I don't whether it is possible that they made frames in bulk, well ahead of time, and applied the finishing touches such as braze-ons nearer to the model year. The other possibility is that they may have changed the serial number format.


There is also the option of the Forks getting replaced further down the line, maybe after a heavy impact or as an upgrade/downgrade which ever way you look at it? Perusing the forum again i have seen similar serial numbers? so the whole serial number bit being all wrong and many Retrobikers riding bikes incorrectly dated bikes :( the plot certainly does thicken...........


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 17, 2011 8:10 pm 
eBay Outing Master
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 3:53 pm
Posts: 8000
Anthony wrote:
Hmmmm, the plot thickens Watson .....

Or is it me who is Watson? Hmmmmm

I find this puzzling. The bike tested for the 1997 MBR had an F7 with an ahead system, which they introduced (1") for 1997. My 1996 C16R has a threaded F7. It seems very odd if they went backwards for the 7.2 fork or if they made any 7.2s that were non-standard.


but jussa's forks are 9.5's as per fitted to the e3's..not 7.2's?

although were the 97 e3's were threaded?

or maybe somewhere down the line the forks were just simply swappede..perhaps the old suspension ones failed and rigids were the replacement?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 17, 2011 8:24 pm 
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 8:38 am
Posts: 2679
Location: Norfolkshire
sylus wrote:
Anthony wrote:
Hmmmm, the plot thickens Watson .....

Or is it me who is Watson? Hmmmmm

I find this puzzling. The bike tested for the 1997 MBR had an F7 with an ahead system, which they introduced (1") for 1997. My 1996 C16R has a threaded F7. It seems very odd if they went backwards for the 7.2 fork or if they made any 7.2s that were non-standard.


but jussa's forks are 9.5's as per fitted to the e3's..not 7.2's?

although the 97 e3's were threaded?


I'm totally confused.com now???????


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 17, 2011 10:43 pm 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider

Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 11:22 pm
Posts: 7306
Location: Hove
sylus wrote:
Anthony wrote:
Hmmmm, the plot thickens Watson .....
Or is it me who is Watson? Hmmmmm
I find this puzzling. The bike tested for the 1997 MBR had an F7 with an ahead system, which they introduced (1") for 1997. My 1996 C16R has a threaded F7. It seems very odd if they went backwards for the 7.2 fork or if they made any 7.2s that were non-standard.
but jussa's forks are 9.5's as per fitted to the e3's..not 7.2's?
although were the 97 e3's were threaded?
or maybe somewhere down the line the forks were just simply swappede..perhaps the old suspension ones failed and rigids were the replacement?

Ah, so you're Sherlock Holmes then? Hmmmm

Well Sherlock, you're right, and I wasn't looking carefully enough - the forks are in fact called F9s as fitted to 1997 E3s (were 1" threaded on E3s) and made of 'series 9.5' aluminium. And checking the catalogues, I find that in fact the 1998 catalogue has a Clockwork with a steel F7 fork made of 'series 7.2' cromoly, so not a different pattern. But I can't check that as I can't find any picture or magazine reference to a 98 Clockwork without a suspension fork. And the 1999 catalogue doesn't say anything about the Clockwork's rigid fork option, but I do remember that it was made out of aluminium that year - but this isn't a 1999 fork, because the 1999 edition had its brake bosses facing backwards like a Pace.

So after all that, maybe this is a retro-fitting (using the correct meaning of retro :wink: ), in which case it's a very authentic-looking repaint and re-stickering. Unless they made some C16Rs at some point with aluminium forks and a colour-keyed paint job?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 17, 2011 10:56 pm 
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 8:38 am
Posts: 2679
Location: Norfolkshire
Ok then forks we have identified, how bout the frame? geometry matches up to the brochure details, and looking at loads of other C16R's it looks identical apart from the rear cantilever cable mount, so dates it around 96/97 when the switch to V-brakes across the range took place.

Ok no excuse I'm gonna contact Orange and ask gotta be the easiest way. :)

Will update as soon as I know :)

Watch this space........


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 12:03 pm 
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 8:38 am
Posts: 2679
Location: Norfolkshire
Jussa wrote:
Ok then forks we have identified, how bout the frame? geometry matches up to the brochure details, and looking at loads of other C16R's it looks identical apart from the rear cantilever cable mount, so dates it around 96/97 when the switch to V-brakes across the range took place.

Ok no excuse I'm gonna contact Orange and ask gotta be the easiest way. :)

Will update as soon as I know :)

Watch this space........


Call made to Orange Bikes UK who seemed very helpful, just awaiting a reply........... the tension is almost unbearable :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 12:27 pm 
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 8:38 am
Posts: 2679
Location: Norfolkshire
Jussa wrote:
Jussa wrote:
Ok then forks we have identified, how bout the frame? geometry matches up to the brochure details, and looking at loads of other C16R's it looks identical apart from the rear cantilever cable mount, so dates it around 96/97 when the switch to V-brakes across the range took place.

Ok no excuse I'm gonna contact Orange and ask gotta be the easiest way. :)

Will update as soon as I know :)

Watch this space........


Call made to Orange Bikes UK who seemed very helpful, just awaiting a reply........... the tension is almost unbearable :)



Result is in, many thanks to Ben @ Orange Bikes UK, you have put my mind at rest, it's official,

My bike was made in August 1996 and the forks an up-grade to the F14 Alloy forks which were offered at the time. And it is a C16R, and i was complemented on it being a very tidy build :)

Rejoice Rejoice Rejoice

Can you tell i'm a Happy Bunny :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 18, 2011 1:14 pm 
eBay Outing Master
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 21, 2009 3:53 pm
Posts: 8000
glad you got that resolved chap

always nice to have that level of clarification


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Oct 19, 2011 8:13 am 
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
retrobike rider / Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 8:38 am
Posts: 2679
Location: Norfolkshire
sylus wrote:
glad you got that resolved chap

always nice to have that level of clarification


Yeah it is, the guy at Orange was very helpful, really loving my C16R right now, thanks for the links to them saddles, got some possibles now in the pipeline :) dont think she will go through many changes unless i have to replace parts through wear & tear, but at the mo she's just fine & fruity :)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 39 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Jamis Diablo, pipmeister and 43 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