full suspension stumpjumper 94?

[hurin76]

http://cgi.ebay.com/VINTAGE-1994-SPECIA ... %26ps%3D63

 

[DoctorRad]

Hubba hubba, I'd be all over this like a rash if it was in the UK

 

[FluffyChicken]

His description is wrong though...
THIS BIKE IS AN ALL ORIGINAL 1994 SPECIALIZED STUMPJUMPER

It's not all as it would originally have been. Brakes for one thing.
Shouln't have any XT on it, or Gripshift, should have FutureShox on not MAG's


and looking at the catalouge now the rear end looks wrong (around the shox at least)
http://www.mtb-kataloge.de/Bikekataloge ... ikes94.pdf (De)
and
http://www.mtb-kataloge.de/Bikekataloge ... 4_Mini.pdf (Eng)

I do know diddley squat about these though.


EDIT so with my piss poor knowledge its a 1995 edition.
http://www.mtb-kataloge.de/Bikekataloge ... ikes95.pdf
Frame matches, decals, components etc.. (other than brakes )

 

[DoctorRad]

AFAIK, the 'straight link' version as seen in the '94 catalogues and reviewed as a prototype in MBAction did not go into production and all the production models had the triangular link. If anyone knows otherwise, I'd like to know more.

You're right about the equipment though...

 

[hurin76]

stumpy

if it did not go into production, perhaps the conponents were sourced separately for the frame, that would explain the non standardised equipment...

 

[FluffyChicken]

But what makes you think it's a 1994. Decals and everything on it lead it to being a 1995 model. The "94" could well be a production date and so easily a '95 model.

If anyone knows anything about these it would help


oh just re-read your post hurin76, you have it the wrong way around this is not the possible non-production version frame for sale.

 

[DoctorRad]

Re: stumpy

if it did not go into production, perhaps the conponents were sourced separately for the frame, that would explain the non standardised equipment...

I don't think the production frame was available on its own, looks me like it's just been upgraded over the years?

 

[hurin76]

But what makes you think it's a 1994. Decals and everything on it lead it to being a 1995 model. The "94" could well be a production date and so easily a '95 model.

If anyone knows anything about these it would help


oh just re-read your post hurin76, you have it the wrong way around this is not the possible non-production version frame for sale.

i'm just going off what the other guy said..I have no idea if this was production or not, I was just offering a reason to why this bike had non standard equipment...

 

[Jamiedyer]

95 Stumpjumper

Hi Guys
It does look like a 95 model, colour and decal wise. The 94 was the Umma Gumma type green the same as the hardtail. The specs confirm its a 95, It would have come with LX gear, shifter were gripshift and front fork was a mag21.
So besides the rear brake its as good as original. The Stumpy FSR's were only around for 94 and 95 then they were either S Works or Ground Control FSR's. The frame number is October 94 when it was built but its still a 95 model. Mine was November 93 but it was a 94 model.
The flat bar linkage was only pre production and used in the catalogue, as the 94 catalogue would have been done mid 93. (no airbrushing)

Jamie

 

[DoctorRad]

Re: 95 Stumpjumper

The 94 was the Di Nicci green the same as the hardtail.

Black was an option one year, but I forget which. Wasn't the one you sold black, Jamie?