93 Kilauea questions

[spearmint]

Hello all i've got a couple of questions regarding my 1993 kilauea (roughly 17inch if that makes a difference).

First off does anyone have any idea what size seat post i should be using? unfortunately i can't measure the old one as it uses a spacer.

Secondly and probably more importantly, i've stuck on some suspension forks i had lying around (302 toras on their lowest setting 85mm) just to have a go and see what it was like. These have an axle to crown of about 425-430mm when you take sag into account (static 450mm). I'm fine to experiment with the geometry changes but what i'm more worried about is whether the extra 35-40mm of leverage and 1.5kg of weight dangling off the front is going to snap my headtube off and leave me with a messy pile of expensive tubes and teeth.

thanks for your help.

Huw

 

[letmetalktomark]

Hi there,

I currently run 63mm travel forks on my 1995 Kilauea - I would say that even 85mm is too much travel for the frame - unless you want it handling like a chopper.

Wouldn't like to comment on snapping of HT's.......:shock: :?

Seatpost mine is suppossed to take a 27.0 but I find 26.8 a better fit.

Search the site as there is loads about Kona's on here and some top notch Kona experts - I won't blow their trumpets :roll:

M

 

[Anthony]

I have a 94 Kilauea but I've never seen a 93 one so I don't know for sure how different it was.

On seat posts, mine takes a 27.2, but I know that Konas up to the Cinder Cone had 26.6 posts in 93, but whether that applies also to the Kilauea I don't know - not necessarily as the tubeset was quite different.

The 93 Konas were the last ones before 'suspension-corrected', i.e., they were designed for a 39cm P2 or a very short-travel suspension fork. From 94 onwards, the 41cm P2 came in and the frames were designed for 60-70mm travel forks. Prior to that forks had c40-50mm travel and I guess that's what the 93 Kilauea was designed for. I don't know that the consequences of fitting a much longer travel fork would be quite as dire as you suggest though. The inevitable consequence is a very slack head angle as letmetalktomark says, except yours would be even more sensitive to it. As far as breaking the frame is concerned, it depends how loony you are I guess, but I don't think fitting a fork 3-4cm too long is necessarily going to break a frame.

It says in the catalogues that the 93 and 94 Killers were both made out of shaped Tange Concept. My bike has both top and down tubes that are oval in cross section and narrower at the back than at the front (27/30 back - 30/34 front). Is yours like that?

 

[spearmint]

In terms of geometry it appears to be very similar to my cotic soul with 130mm forks which is roughly 69 degree head angle and a seat angle of 72ish. Probably not what joe murray had in mind when he designed it. But i’ll give it a go before i bash the project 2’s back on. It has definitely changed the handling for the worse (it’s not so razor sharp anymore) but i’ve only had a quick blast on so far. I’ll take it to swinley this weekend and see how it is on some hills. Hopefully i’ll still have some movement in my wrists by the end of the ride.