Kona Score

[mk one]

glad you enjoyed it, means you can sell me your Hot now

The bike was designed to point and go as you say and the wider bars will deffinatly help with the control over the rougher stuff. Apparently it was also designed to be an xc bike too so should feel good with flat narrow bars as well.

Out of curiosity, is the bb higher also? and would be interested to know if the wheelbase is longer too.

Mark

 

[Pipmeister]

Re:

Thanks Mark,

...and thank you for posing some interesting questions.

I Just got the tape measure out and took some rough measurements of the Score and the 1998 Hot ..... which isn't for sale

Score --- Wheel Base: 43.5", Bottom Bracket Height: 12.75", Standover Height: 31.5".
'98 Hot - Wheel Base: 42.0", Bottom Bracket Height: 11.75", Standover Height: 29.5".

Both frames are 18", and the Hot has 60mm travel SIDs at 430mm C-A, while the Score's Rebas are 100mm travel at 475mm C-A. I take it that standover height is measured from the top of the Top Tube to the ground, at the halfway point between Seat Tube and Head Tube.

That is quite some difference - maybe I should measure an 18" frame with 80mm travel SIDs on. I would imagine that it's likely to be halfway between the two.

Pip.

 

[mk one]

The higher bb makes sense as does the longer wheelbase with the bike designed for more technical terrain, which brings me on to the question of does the bike feel top heavy at all, some manufacturers get it a bit wrong and the bike can feel tippy and unnerving.

 

[Pipmeister]

Re:

The Score doesn't feel top heavy at all, but I think you have described how my earlier comparison felt; the Maxlight XC Pro.

I reckon this is some of the issue that I have experienced with more modern bikes, but the Score feels much nearer to my usual X.C. rides - well balanced, and a bit ballsier.

Perhaps you have solved why I was never at ease on so many modern bikes in general, and the Maxlight in particular.

Here are a couple of pictures of the Maxlight in 2010 with some of components now fitted to the Score.... excuse my cheap camera lens bowing the horizontal towards the top of the first picture.

Maxlight 300910DS_1 by Philip Mock, on Flickr

Maxlight Crookham_1 by Philip Mock, on Flickr

Pip.

 

[mk one]

Yeah, im not sure why some get it wrong, maybe not enough testing!? I have rode dh bikes for many years and in the old days as the suspension got longer the bikes got taller, higher bb's, but modern dh bikes i have ridden and own have amazingly low bb's considering they have 8+ inches of travel. If the bike is designed right all the weight feels as if it is at your feet which makes the top of the bike feel light and more flickable. Some though feel as if the weight is higher, nearer the seat. Im not sure if that is intentional, as in MX designers have raised the seat height so you are sat on top of the bike to make the bike fall over easier/quicker for cornering.

Oh, and while your Hot is very nice, i actually meant your stars n bars KK

 

[al-onestare]

Re: Re:

Now there's a happy man and a dapper one too :mrgreen:

So, point and go, sensible weight distribution, bomb proof stays...pretty much the 'perfect' bike. I need to test this

Your comments about disappointing modern bikes are interesting. I wonder, with each year passing and all manner of tweaks being made year on year, I wonder if the models coming out now have improved. Are there any hard tail bikes that have this sort of core geometry? My knowledge is minimal at the best of times, but Chris Kings Cielo bikes were the only ones that seemed to have what we like (and it's the only one I've slung a leg over). That said, their BB height is 11.7".

 

[Pipmeister]

Re: Re:

Now there's a happy man and a dapper one too :mrgreen:

Yeah cheers for the cycling togs Al, which as you see fit me well .


Rightyho, I have written to Kona with regards to the Score, and have now received a reply.

If you refer back to my post on Thu Jul 27, 2017 6:44 am, you’ll see that two different contributors (one on MTBR & one on here) spoke with a considerable amount of belief that 100 Score frames were produced in total, none of which were in the size that I now own :? .

The person that I corresponded with at Kona has been there for a very long time, and is well up to speed regarding other rare frames that I have previously contacted him over. So it was a surprise to me when he said that he thinks there were between 20 and 50 Score frames made in total :!: .

Well…. I have a total of 4 confirmed serial numbers on file, including mine.

Total pictures of different Score frames that I have collected over the years, which I have on file is a maximum of 8 – although some of those could be the same frame and just photographed by a different owner.

I think therefore that it is entirely possible that a maximum of 50 Score frames were produced, or even less as we understand that production of them was apparently halted mid season.

While there is still the mystery regarding my size 18” frame, the guy at Kona suggested that my serial number at 170 was because Titanium Sports were sequentially numbering frames, regardless of the model that year. So my number 170 could have been made between some other 2000 King Kahuna frames.

I wish it was all a bit clearer really, but if anyone has any other pictures of Score Frames with a confirmed serial number, it will be of some help.

My confirmed sightings are:

KS15020
KS15022
KS17094
KS18170

Pip.

 

[al-onestare]

Re:

Super cool Pip. Apologies if you highlighted before but why was production halted?

Not another Altitude situation?

 

[Pipmeister]

Re:

I understand that it was too expensive to produce, and to buy.

We have to remember that Kona were still flying the flag in 2000 for Hand Made in U.S.A. frames. As you documented with great detail and passion in your Caldera thread, there was a seismic shift in the market, and other manufacturers had shifted away from these hand built frames.

The Hei Hei had been £1,300 for a frame in its final year of production 1999. The King Kahuna was still available at £1,600, and the Score was a whopping £1,800 for a frame and over £4,000 for a complete bike.

This is something that I save from some site a while back, but I can’t recall where now.


“-Why did this model disappear?
I was overjoyed to acquire this superb Titanium (Ti) frame-only as a factory close-out. When Kona lunched it's "Out of Bounds" line of MTB’s they set out to build the ultimate in a 'go beyond the trail' bike. What Kona’s marketing team found is that the bike was indeed "Out of Bounds" in $ as well. It was quickly pulled in mid production 2000 and Kona added the Scab and Stuff bikes to the line for 2001.”

I think it was just a bit too ambitious, and possibly ahead of its time. This is from the same site.


“Keep in mind, although this can be built-up as a light cross-country race bike (22-23lbs) it's intent was the ultimate "Out of Bounds" ultra-responsive frame. That in mind, with frame strength added where it's needed (milled Head-tube and gusseted Down-tube) and a little beefier components it will weigh in at about 23-25lbs depending on frame size and wheel type. All in all once this frame is assembled with the right balance of weight to strength components, it will become an incredible machine for trail and off-trail.

Note on Geometry: The Score has a geometry that is between Cross-Country (XC) and Mountain-Cross (jumping). Unlike the Dirt-Jump/Freestyle frames though, the Score frame was the perfect hardcore XC, Off-trail ultra-agile frame and is capable of performing jumps.”

That’s about all I know Al, so hopefully you can pull some information from that.


Pip.

 

[mk one]

Read that not so long ago, will try to find site again.

Interesting about the low production numbers and the possibility of sequentially numbered frames, that would mean there is no 170 numbered KK !? or any of the other numbers allocated to score frames. And were they only producing frames for Kona that year?

Its a shame they didnt keep actual records of frame production numbers.