Retrobike Forum Index

It is currently Thu Dec 08, 2016 1:19 pm

* Login   * Register * Search  * FAQ



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:55 pm 
Gold Trader
Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 8:52 am
Posts: 2170
Location: Poland / Cracow
Neil
Your frame is 92 - it's the same one as those posted in 1st reply by Irh
So it's '92, Performance series (1st down to Racing series, so still top quality)

I don't know about differents in weights (maybe Stumpjumper weight his Pro Racing?) but definitly top racing frames was built of Ritchey or Columbus tubes, Tange was used in frames beeing a bit lower (fex in '93 2 of 3 racings - Comp and Team - had tange tubeset, Ritchey was only in Pro)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 11:49 pm 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2008 2:36 pm
Posts: 16748
Location: Yorkshire, England
Staying with '92

Scott Unishox are 16 1/4" A2C

That's in between a MAG20 at 16" and a MAG20 Long Travel at 16 1/2"

The Marzocchi forks of that year where also at 16"

Which as stated above is 410mm give or take 5mm depending on fork used.


Depends which Ritchey Logic tubing they are using
There was the Ritchey Logic tubing (modified version of one of the normal Tange tubing)
Ritchey Logic Prestige based on the Tange Prestige variants (may may not have use super/ultra/otherone-light tubing or just normal Prestige) but with refinements
Then there was Ritchey Logic Prestige WCS. I guess their all out tubing using the best of whatever.
Summit like that, but specifics go as far as shorter butting, not much else given by them that I've seen.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 06, 2012 9:19 am 
Old School Hero
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 5:20 am
Posts: 226
Location: Sydney, Australia
92 sounds right for the age of the bike. I imported a Comp CST from the States to New Zealand when decent mtbs cost heaps. Tubing was Tange Prestige for this one and Shimano DX components all round. Need to restore it to it former glory at Christmas time.


Attachments:
Comp CST.jpg
Comp CST.jpg [ 233.41 KiB | Viewed 694 times ]
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 06, 2012 11:51 am 
North Wales Deputy AEC
North Wales Deputy AEC
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 12:50 am
Posts: 6218
Tange Ultimate Ultralight (they're all 'Prestige') would appear to be thinner in the middle (0.5mm) and beefier at the butt joints (0.9mm) - as opposed to 0.8mm unbutted for Superlight. I'd guess that the Ritchey stuff is the Ultralight in all but name.

My web-based understanding is that Ritchey had custom(er) revised specifications for the same Tange Prestige drawn tubing which shortened the butt ends a tad to shave a few grammes. Whether this affected the ride quality is up to the pilot I guess, but its greatest effect must surely to have increased the cost, especially if it was shipped to Ritchey then on to the frame manufacturer, along with the USP kudos of course.

My Kona HOT has an Ultimate Ultrastrong downtube and top tube (all that was available) as it has the ribbed internal and external butted sections (0.7mm walling/1.0mm butts).


http://www.equusbicycle.com/bike/tange/ ... at1997.pdf
http://www.equusbicycle.com/bike/tange/ ... at1997.pdf


Attachments:
Screen shot 2012-12-06 at 10.20.57.png
Screen shot 2012-12-06 at 10.20.57.png [ 151.31 KiB | Viewed 682 times ]
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 06, 2012 11:59 am 
North Wales Deputy AEC
North Wales Deputy AEC
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 12:50 am
Posts: 6218
From the Ritchey 91/92 Parts Catalogue.


Attachments:
Ritchey Logic.jpg
Ritchey Logic.jpg [ 211.28 KiB | Viewed 676 times ]
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 06, 2012 2:08 pm 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 7:34 am
Posts: 1042
Location: Hook, Hants
I think the differences between them all with be fractional. The weight quoted in the auction is very similar to this "Ultrastrong" of a similar size (2.17kg vs 2.235kg):

http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=232089


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 06, 2012 2:54 pm 
North Wales Deputy AEC
North Wales Deputy AEC
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 12:50 am
Posts: 6218
Interesting - the down tube is clearly Ultrastrong but not the seat tube? I doubt one could call your bike 'mass/factory made' in the sense that there won't be many made at all! Someone at SWATCH must have known what they were doing speccing the tubing - I wonder what the sale cost was when complete?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 06, 2012 7:56 pm 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 7:34 am
Posts: 1042
Location: Hook, Hants
It belongs to xerxes not me, I've just taken an interest in that one too. I noticed the design is similar and I'd guess they came out the same factory as Marin's. If both had a desireable name on the downtube they'd probably sell for multiple times more! But it means you've got a high-end frame for peanuts :)

You can see there were many different options for each tube so likely no two Ultimate frames are the same or better/worse than another:

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 06, 2012 10:40 pm 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2008 2:36 pm
Posts: 16748
Location: Yorkshire, England
I have two Ultimate Superlight frames
The smaller 17" frame is ~4.7lb
The larger 19" is 4.2lb
both made within a year of each other.

Of course one is mass produced in A-Pro, probably given it's serial number, where the like of Orange got theirs from (incidentally Orange moved to Ultimate Superlight as well for the Prestige)
the other is crafted in Canada.

superlight/ultralight/ultrastrong MTB and Ritchey Logic where on the mass produced frame list.

My take it the Ultimate diamond sticker gained kudos, so they used it branded under Tange, but for the normal none prestige tubing they went for Ritchey Logic version (without the Prestige moniker) because it sounded better.... built from it's Logic Prestige range topic heritage. At some point Ritchey switched tube supplier late 90's ?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 07, 2012 10:09 pm 
Gold Trader
Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 8:52 am
Posts: 2170
Location: Poland / Cracow
FluffyChicken wrote:
Scott Unishox are 16 1/4" A2C

That's in between a MAG20 at 16" and a MAG20 Long Travel at 16 1/2"

The Marzocchi forks of that year where also at 16"

well, I measured my forks

Mags are 41cm AC (measured two 21's 94 and 95)
Marzocchi is a bit higher - 42cm AC (xc700)
Unishocks (here I was wrong) is a 42cm as Zocchi


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: borissorin, grarea, Last Exit, pipmeister and 25 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