93 Zaskar, should I powdercoat it?

[SeeingisBelievingGTMuseum]

NO!

 

[99sf]

Welcome!

I guess it all depends on what you intend to do with your Zaskar - if you want to ride it and use it as it was intended (giving it a good thrashing) then a few marks won't be a problem. If you're after a full restoration to catalgoue or period spec, then it might be more of an issue, but sometimes a few marks on a bike can show it's been used and cherished. Or just abused.

Powdercoating is always an option, and a fair few Zaskar's have been painted, but again, it's your choice - Zaskar's aren't the rarest bike out there after all. I have a couple myself.

Incidentally, your's would be a '92 or earlier - GT dropped the U-brake for '93. Get a few more potsts under your belt, then get a picture posted up.

Above all, enjoy it!

Hi, thanks for the info. The serial number says it was manufactured in June of 92, so I assumed it would have been an 93 model year.

I'll get some pics posted up shortly

 

[99sf]

NO!

Point taken, it will stay raw. Thanks for your help guys

 

[Drencrom]

Hi, thanks for the info. The serial number says it was manufactured in June of 92, so I assumed it would have been an 93 model year.

I'll get some pics posted up shortly

No problem. GT usually began the production run for the following year in the fall/autumn, so frames made from then onwards were for the next year. With your Zaskar it's a bit easier to guess the year, due to the switch from U-brake to canti bosses in late '92.

 

[coomber]

If you do end up passing it on I know Ringo on here is after a u brake Zaskar as well. Worth sending him a PM.

 

[SeeingisBelievingGTMuseum]

Hi, thanks for the info. The serial number says it was manufactured in June of 92, so I assumed it would have been an 93 model year.

I'll get some pics posted up shortly

No problem. GT usually began the production run for the following year in the fall/autumn, so frames made from then onwards were for the next year. With your Zaskar it's a bit easier to guess the year, due to the switch from U-brake to canti bosses in late '92.

Yes... that and the lack of a replaceable rear hanger also show it's indeed a 92 model year frame.

 

[trickylad]

I stripped and powdercoated mine and I did cop some flak for it. But we shouldn't forget it's only a piece of metal and it's your piece of metal. I did mine because of the condition it was in and how I planned to use it..

It was fine until the park bench ate it.

 

[Drencrom]

It might be more to do with the age as well; a '92 Zaskar is arguably worth keeping in it's original state where possible, as opposed to later bikes. Frightening thought, but some of them are 20 years old. Time flies...

 

[dyna-ti]

Powdercoat gives a deeper colour and is harder wearing

 

[trickylad]

It might be more to do with the age as well; a '92 Zaskar is arguably worth keeping in it's original state where possible, as opposed to later bikes. Frightening thought, but some of them are 20 years old. Time flies...

I think that's a fair point. Mine was a 97. With a cr@p paint job that had to go. If it'd been ball burnished it may have been a different decision altogether.