Did they ever make a ….

[FluffyChicken]

No, they didn't make one with a 950/1 number.
Even in 1998 the standard style mech was still officially the M900/901.

Top-Swing(tm) was the in thing (again a reboot of earlier Shimano front mechs iirc)

 

[d8mok]

No, they didn't make one with a 950/1 number.
Even in 1998 the standard style mech was still officially the M900/901.

Top-Swing(tm) was the in thing (again a reboot of earlier Shimano front mechs iirc)

Damn

Thank you I knew someone would know.

So really I need a M901 as that is what was around 95/96

 

[ishaw]

No, they didn't do a high clamp m950. Why is a 953 so bad? It looks like m950, smells like m950, works better than m950 and the only visible difference is the tiny number on the back of the cage.

You could run an e-tyoe m950. If your frame doesn't have a bolt hole, you can get a clamp on one to do the job (though you'll know that the band/clamp you use isn't m950 so probably won't shut you

 

[d8mok]

No, they didn't do a high clamp m950. Why is a 953 so bad? It looks like m950, smells like m950, works better than m950 and the only visible difference is the tiny number on the back of the cage.

You could run an e-tyoe m950. If your frame doesn't have a bolt hole, you can get a clamp on one to do the job (though you'll know that the band/clamp you use isn't m950 so probably won't shut you

The XTR logo and colour is different to M950. I like matchy matchy if possible.

Even M952 had two different shades of colour (no some aren’t faded) as they shifted from the lighter grey to darker mid M952 on the mechs and on M951 for the brakes.

Turns out I’ve got a M900 mech which would suit by it’s on a bike so I’d need another anyway lol

 

[FluffyChicken]

It would be 900 not 901 as in that generation 900 was bottom pull, 901 was top pull.

Honestly the 953 is nicer match to the group, it is what most people end up using.
Is this another standard 950 XTR build again ;-). Is is a bulge/oval tube causing the need for a normal (high band) mech?

I'm not sure if the first '96 M950-E front mech wanted the frame clamp, think it might have just been BB only, they did make an adaptor I think later on.

Not sure not really my knowledge E mounts.
M950 setup instructions (Oct 1996) do mention it needs the frame mount. I would also guess a adaptor would be a similar hight to a Top-Swing clamp anyway.


The catalogues for this era are all in the catalog section, not as good as my scanned copies but they are original Shimano scans.

Shimano - Product Catalogues & STI (Tech info)

These are from the Shimano Archive, these are not the same as the ones in the Retrobike Archive. These pdf are also mostly to large for me to attach directly so going to have to link off site. (I do have much better copies of these scanned or waiting to scan for 95-99ish I've just not got...

www.retrobike.co.uk

 

[d8mok]

It would be 900 not 901 as in that generation 900 was bottom pull, 901 was top pull.

Honestly the 953 is nicer match to the group, it is what most people end up using.
Is this another standard 950 XTR build again ;-). Is is a bulge/oval tube causing the need for a normal (high band) mech?

I'm not sure if the first '96 M950-E front mech wanted the frame clamp, think it might have just been BB only, they did make an adaptor I think later on.

Not sure not really my knowledge E mounts.
M950 setup instructions (Oct 1996) do mention it needs the frame mount. I would also guess a adaptor would be a similar hight to a Top-Swing clamp anyway.


The catalogues for this era are all in the catalog section, not as good as my scanned copies but they are original Shimano scans.

Shimano - Product Catalogues & STI (Tech info)

These are from the Shimano Archive, these are not the same as the ones in the Retrobike Archive. These pdf are also mostly to large for me to attach directly so going to have to link off site. (I do have much better copies of these scanned or waiting to scan for 95-99ish I've just not got...

www.retrobike.co.uk

I can’t go cold turkey staright away from M950 builds

To be fair I’ve made progress having sold 1x full group and almost a full group in parts to fund a upcoming project.

Yes oval Seat tube on a 95 frame is forcing this issue. My plan was to use this M950 groupset and 96 build kit and pretend it was like in the 90s when you’d buy a frame but take a year to build it.

Truth be told I wanted M900 on this one but another frame has been purchased which will definitely be M900 so wanted to do one as M950. However I’m now thinking of selling the M950 inc Wheels and going M900 on both projects.

 

[FluffyChicken]

Better not tell you 1995 was M910 so had a few different upgrades that are much harder to do.
Hubs, rear mech (if you look very closely at the spring), shifter-lever, cranks (well bolts)...

 

[d8mok]

Yes mate I’m aware of M910 but the bike came with M900 as standard.

I’m not a massive fan of M900 if I’m honest so I was pushing the boundary a little with the M950 and it looks nice as it sits currently. I’ll start a thread shortly on it.


I’ll know what I’m doing better once the next frame I’ve bought arrives. If it’s nice , I’ll go M900 on that. If it’s not that great I’ll do the 95 one as M900 likely. So many possibilities

 

[pw_pw_la]

M900 front mech is your answer, and here's two reason's why you should allow yourself a break from the ol' OCD:

1. It's a front mech. It just has to move between three rings. Which means no matter what year the rest of the drivetrain might be, it was pretty common BITD to keep an older front mech when you upgraded everything else.

2. Loads of the coolest old race bikes look exactly like this! It's endearing. Practical. Makes you look like you don't give a f__k! Total badass vibes, innit.

I love a mix-n-match mech situation for just this reason, personally.

Although I'm sure it's not for everybody.

In fact, I'm currently working on something that's running a DA-7700 and M952 mashup.

Which definitely won't be for everybody!

 

[Canuckbiker]

Funny to stumble on this thread. I’m running an M950 rear mech on an 93’ Cannondale which isn’t a very period correct part for it but my build is not too worried about being period correct. It’s got top end parts all the way round. I‘ve always loved the Shimano M950 RD, when I came across a good deal on a M950 RD I snapped it up and needed a bike to use it on. It shifts noticeably smoother than my M900 and M735 units and it found its way onto my C’Dale.

I’ve been running a ban clamp M735 FD along with it on this bike for some time now. As a derailleur snob I’ve not been loving the clunky look of the band clamp and always like to match front and rear mechs as well so I‘ve ordered and have a low clamp bottom pull M950 FD on the way.

My seat tube is round all the way down so not worried about it fitting. I’ve got an M737 FD low clamp on my 96’ RM and like the look as much as the top mount front derailleurs of the day, the M950 FD is a different animal as I‘d learned before ordering, I‘m kinda psyched to try it. The hinged cage I’ve read about can shift better than the fixed cage, maybe not?

As I have noted, Shimano’s hinged cage design did not last, curious why. Is it a bad design? Does it wear faster? More expensive to produce?