1992 Cannondale M500

[HarryCrumb]

This shows the colour, and a 1" steerer, plus the year matches my frame number. It could be that the bridge for Force 40 was added late on in 1991 as mine is November?

 

[FluffyChicken]

I mentioned BotE above as I had seen that and the colour, but unless 'dale ran a different year to year than pretty much every other company, then it's a 1992 model year.

Regional variation could give colour alterations as they are targeted, I don't know Cannondales.

From your pictures it doesn't look like a BotE geometry. A better picture from the side with it propped upright rather than a slight slant would confirm or not as would measuring the bottom bracket height. The fork wouldn't alter it much, the pepperoni's would need to be quite long to put the bottom bracket up that far.

Just don't worry about it and build it up

 

[otherself]

 

[HarryCrumb]

I mentioned BotE above as I had seen that and the colour, but unless 'dale ran a different year to year than pretty much every other company, then it's a 1992 model year.

Regional variation could give colour alterations as they are targeted, I don't know Cannondales.

From your pictures it doesn't look like a BotE geometry. A better picture from the side with it propped upright rather than a slight slant would confirm or not as would measuring the bottom bracket height. The fork wouldn't alter it much, the pepperoni's would need to be quite long to put the bottom bracket up that far.

Just don't worry about it and build it up

I am on it, I may just polish the hell out of it for now and get the use out of the fact that it's stripped down.

 

[mikee]

remember cannondale brochure specs and the bikes in the shops weren't
always the same ,even in the same batch on the same shop floor

 

[MAXTHEROTTI]

my m1000 is also a 11 91
mine also has twin rear bridge and removable seat clamp
but a 1 1/4 inch ahead fork

gets more confusing :?

 

[HarryCrumb]

my m1000 is also a 11 91
mine also has twin rear bridge and removable seat clamp
but a 1 1/4 inch ahead fork

gets more confusing :?

doesn't it

Thanks for the info.

 

[24pouces]

in 1991, only the EST frame had the force 40 system.
So, if your frame was welded in november 91, it's a1992 catalog bike. So, it won't be named "SM" but "M"
It can't be a SM800 or a M800 : the frame shown is a 3.0 level, not a 3.0 sloping "beast of the east"

But, and it's mysterious :
first : in 1992, all the mountain frame which had a bridge for force40 got an 1"1/4 headtube for the all aluminum pepperoni fork. (The M400 and M500 didn't got the force 40).
secondly : no green bikes

The first bike in catalog which had both force 40 and small 1" headtube was the 1992, M500, but the bike was purple or black.

When I read all the catalog : Only the 1994 M500 got the force 40, a 1" headtube and a green color
But perhaps the green was not original

 

[broomhandle]

looks like it was green. and a 1". way cool forks!!!!

the decals are not original. i think you are right a 91 sm800 if the bottom bracket has the clearance. that is the whole point of the beast o east. and the beast has a 1" fork. measure the clearance of the BB.

1991 beast of the east in green... my vote.

 

[24pouces]

Sorry, but you are wrong :
- No Force 40 bridge on the 1991 SM800
- The frame shown is not slopng : it's a level 3.0


But I agree on one point : The fork is cool