Marin Geometry / Nuances 1991 - 1996

[brokenbloodybritain]

Looking for some Marin authorities here!

I have the opportunity to pick up a 1991 Eldridge Grade for a decent price, after losing patience waiting for a 1994 Pine Mountain to present itself.

Can anyone lay out the differences likely to be found between 1991 and 1994 Marin frames?

Namely:

Rear tire clearances : earlier frames don't seem to have a crimp on the outside of the chainstay on the drive side. So smaller clearance or just thinner tube diameter?

Tube diameter : Larger diameter on later frames?

Suspension correction : What year did Marin frames start to account for suspension forks?

Steel - Alloy: What year did Marin switch to Alloy across the range?

Any guidance greatly appreciated!

 

[kingoffootball]

I am sure someone more knowledgeable will be able to answer your questions, but until then the Marin catalgouse have quite a bit of information in - for example the 1991 catalogue talks about the Afterburner stays and tells you they are 19.1mm diameter:

Catalogues | Marin Archive | Retrobike

 

[marc two tone]

Marin used tange steel across the whole range upto atleast 1996, do you mean aluminium alloy? Thats from 1992 where the Indian fire trail etc...was introduced, parallel with steel and titanium.

Geometry-wise, you get little change from marin until 1995/6. Despite brochure claims, the mtb offerings had a flat top tube and a racey stance. Any issues for fitting the rider could be rectified by altering the saddle position or stem.

For palpable improvement with geometry, 1996 with a truly suspension corrected tube layout, would see a more comfy ride.
Less stooped over, say.

See catalogue 1995 for example, even with factory options for manitou/rockshox, wont get the front up without looking silly (100mm psylo on 1992 marin looks cack! )

Tyre clearance: it's about rolling with the times, i suppose. 1989- 1994 ive just ryn 1.95. No issues. 1995 --->2.1 panaracer. No issues.
When marin entered the market for 'lets show them how its done' #...they meant it. Serious looking bikes that stood the test of time.

#not an actual quote.

 

[Tootyred]

2.1 tyres fit in most main frames from 89 onwards. The geometry is not hugely different 89 to 93 for sure, but they are " long" bikes with big top tube lengths.

Head tubes are also some of the biggest out there for frame size.....probably as they were slow to the suspension party. But great for aging riders with bad backs. Very relaxed riding, great for trails. Go a size down for something really flickable.

Weight wise, a 92 marin home grown cr-mo frame is just as light as a 89 to 91 tange prestige, However the prestige rides quite differently (nicer imo). The later tange super light etc, is well....errr....lighter again, but a little too stiff imo....but then i can feel a pea through 12 mattresses.

For my money a 92 pine mountain or Eldridge is a fine choice for not a lot of cash.

 

[brokenbloodybritain]

For palpable improvement with geometry, 1996 with a truly suspension corrected tube layout, would see a more comfy ride.
Less stooped over, say.

Yeah looking at the 1995 catalogue it seems to actively promote the idea of running suspension forks on a few models hence wondering if they changed the geometry slightly around then.

 

[pw_pw_la]

I love when a new Marin thread pops up.

Gets me more and more excited to complete this 92 Team Issue!

Let us know what you end up with, and get a thread going for the build!

 

[mclaren680]

my '95 Pine Mountain 19" (BB to centre of top tube) is currently runing 2.0 Conti Race Kings but in a past version of itself I had 2.4 Maxxis Holy Rollers on. 2.4 is the ABSOLUTE max you can fit on the rear, as even then it only gives 2-3 mm tyre clearance on the chain stays, but more on the seat stays. 2.4 also is where the tyre touches (not scrapes) the canti bosses as you fit the wheel. I don't run my Marin in muddy conditions so mud clearance is a non issue.

I THINK 91-96 frame geometry was barely tweaked, and only 97 onwards went noticeably suspension corrected. One thing I definitely noticed though is that I have a 96 Muirwoods with an identically badged 'Tange Custom Tubeset Ultralight Triple butted cro mo' to the 95 Pine Mountain, but the 16" Muirwoods frame was a bit heavier than my 19" Pine Mountain frame, so I dare say higher end models got thinner tube gauges where it counted.

 

[brocklanders023]

Pretty sure I've got 2.1 Panaracers on my 90 Palisades?

Biggest change for Marin 89/95 was the weight. The 92 range started the weight loss, with specific effort made to lighten the components before they saved loads more of for 93. 90/91 bikes are pretty hefty tbh, although they give a comfy, neutral ride.

 

[brocklanders023]

Not sure about the later bikes but on the 90's the geometry changed across the range, becoming more aggressive as you went up the range. Top tube on my Pine Mountain is defo longer than the Palisades.