Kona Hot!

[jez-4-bikes-max]

Not me!

 

[Tallpaul]

Nor me, I'd made him an offer which i'd hoped was accepted. However someone came in with a bigger one. It went for £500+

 

[jez-4-bikes-max]

Jesus

And to think we're entering a recession!

 

[Tallpaul]

There was a lot of bike there, and under all that dirt it was in great condition.

 

[Anthony]

To my mind, the only point of ending early is if someone makes you an offer you think is silly, and I must say I wouldn't pay over £500 for that.

If it went for say £550, that's valuing the frame alone at c£400. Earlier this year a seller had to have three goes to get rid of a tatty 98 Explosif 853, a frame that's almost identical to this (except maybe straighter). I think he got £115 for it including a P2, valuing the frame below £100. That makes the Hot paint plus the name worth £300.

 

[konamad]

Thats true, indeed you could pay £800 for the OMEGA SEAMASTER, or £3100 for the ROLEX SUBMARINER, both are comparible in terms of quality but you pay more for the distinctive classic look of the ROLEX and of course the ROLEX name.

Its like any comodity really - certain products by certain brands command a greater following or are rarer so they also command a premium over the more mundane run of the mill stuff!

Oh and i think the HOT also has 853 rear stays where as the EXPLOSIF does not!?

 

[Anthony]

Oh and i think the HOT also has 853 rear stays where as the EXPLOSIF does not!?

That's possible, although unlikely. And whether it makes a noticeable difference is another issue.

The guy who took over the Hot contract from the people who made this one (i.e., he made the 98 Hots) said on here that he was given the first 853 stays to work with and they were rated as hand-build only. Which would fit in with the conventional wisdom that Reynolds recommended 725 stays for 853 frames and didn't offer 853 stays. But if he is right, the fact that he had the first 853 stays in 97 suggests that the makers of the 96 and 97 Hots (all built in 96, as Altitude shut up shop in 96) didn't have them and must have used 725, as per the Explosif.

There are other differences though - the 96 Hot had a 28.6 x 7-5-7 top tube and 31.8 or 34.9 x 8-5-8 down tube (98 Explosif 31.8 x 8-5-8 and 34.9 x 9-6-9 respectively). So that makes the 96 Hot a bit lighter (maybe 100g), but not necessarily better. The thicker tubes on the Explosif weren't an economy measure, they cost the same, but Kona used them presumably because they felt they needed to stiffen the frame in order to compete with the aluminium frames that were taking over the market. I believe the 98 Hot also had thicker tubes than the 96/97, just like the Explosif.

 

[Harryburgundy]

And this just sold for £180 http://tinyurl.com/4shrp4 not in the same class for sure, but a lot of bike for the money.
(Had a feeling there was some shill biding going on, so it might be back)

 

[mynchiboy]

:shock:

That's a bit annoying, I was high bidder

I did in fact receive a message from the fella saying that the frame was nicked last night along with his other bikes :shock: Maybe somebody traced his address or something from the post?

 

[jez-4-bikes-max]

fishy fishy fishy.... :? :? :?