Kirk - Really that bad?

[StealthDJ]

So it was 1991. Normal mountain bikes were boring - you had to get something with a 'quirk'. Trimble, Pace, Proflex, whatever. My best mate bought an e-stay Alpinestars Al-Mega. I wanted the two-wheel drive bike that MBUK reviewed. I bought a GT (triple triangle's better than nothing, right?)

But I always kinda wanted a Kirk. Despite them being heavy, unweildy and impossible to carry properly.

Now I've just seen a reasonably tidy, very original example down the road from me, and I'm somewhat tempted. So the question is - exactly how fragile are they? I never knew anyone that broke one, but that's largely because I never knew anyone that owned one. But I hear stories of x-ray scans revealing deep flaws in every single one that was checked and don't want something that'll break if I actually try and ride it.

How good they were/are isn't really an issue - if that was the case, I'd not be riding retro at all, but at the same time, even for a weekend's beer money, I don't want a *complete* pup...

 

[al-onestare]

Answer - yes.

 

[TonyMerryfield]

Re:

If it has actually been used properly, and it is still in one piece today, might be a good one?

 

[greencat]

I broke two so feel somewhat qualified to answer.

The first lasted about year before the rear drop out snapped off while hurtling down an extended and rather gnarly descent. I still have the scar on my left knee.

Bearing in mind this was the early 90s, and it was my third mountain bike - I thought it was an OK rather than excellent ride. There was definitely a fair bit of flex on the bottom bracket - but frankly that wasn't something either I or my peers worried about it. I seem to remember it was fairly good at going up hills. It wasn't light but nor was it particularly heavy when compared to other mid range bikes at the time.

That frame was replaced under warranty (took about a month). That lasted another six weeks before one of the inserts for attaching a rack popped out. It was at that point I sold it onto a friend and replaced it with a second hand Dawes Ranger that was practically brand new.

I never heard of one failing in any area except where aluminium inserts had been bonded to the magnesium frame - and only the bonded in rear dropouts failing pose a serious danger. Frankly I reckon there was so much magnesium in the main frame it would take a hell of an impact to even dent it, never mind snap it. Obviously this is not legal or medical advice!

I would definitely own and ride another for old times sake - but treat it gently.

 

[velomaniac]

I'm sure I remember an episode of Blue Peter where they were going on about transport technology or some such and as a demonstration of the strength of a Kirk magnesium frame they ran over it with a Landrover Defender. They picked it up and rode it around, it seemed unscathed. Thus the frame itself must be pretty tough. I have heard though that the bits attached to the frame can be problematic over time as the Magnesium softens, BB's becoming loose, the dropout problems mentioned. Probably you could sort most of those with a bit of epoxy and carbon wrap.

 

[brocklanders023]

Re:

I'm sure I read that when new they were alright but the frames would go sloppy, leading to excessive flex. Something to do with the process used to make them? :?

 

[surfingpolzeath]

Re:

interesting read http://www.kirk-bicycles.co.uk/Kirk-History.htm

 

[drystonepaul]

Re:

I have one in my workshop. It belongs to a friend of mine and is in more or less permanent residence.

If I get bored and need cheering up I'll have a quick ride around the main space.

The flex is hilarious.

 

[KDM]

I always seem to remember that picture of the huge mountain of kirk defective frames

 

[Gaddmeister]

Re:

The casting was awful! I can remember loads of claims in the shop I worked in that had dropouts fail! When you looked at the broken pieces you could see the air bubbles in the magnesium, thus causing a week frame!