- Feedback
- View
well , nothing actually .
what Gump said .
what Gump said .
Ok, talk to me about Konas...
- Thread starter Augustus
- Start date
I’m not an expert in engineering and can’t claim to understand exactly what it is that differentiates say Tange Prestige from plain old Tange, but as the frame builders knew their stuff and Prestige cost more, I’m willing to believe that it was ‘better’. Where ‘better’ perhaps means greater strength/stiffness for the same weight of tube.
But take 1997 as an example and take top tubes, you had the Explosif made of Columbus Max with a 31.8 x 7-4-7 top tube biovalised to 36/28, the Kilauea in Columbus Cyber with a 28.6 x 7-4-7, Cinder Cone/Lava Dome (same frame) in generic 4130 with a 31.8 x 9-6-9 and the Fire Mountain also in generic 4130 with a 31.8 x 10-7-10. i.e., all double-butted tubes, all strong enough for purpose, but great variety in weight.
The frames cost £499 for the Explosif, £399 for a Kilauea and I believe you could get Cinder Cones for £225. There is vast profit in those prices, but I understand the relativities do reflect fairly accurately the inflated prices that the tube manufacturers charge for anything fancy/low volume.
So what do you get for it? In those days the Explosif was a race bike and that’s what it was designed for. So actually the Explosif that year was no lighter than the Kilauea, but the comparison of those top tubes shows that it must be considerably stiffer, both in the biovalising and the fatter tube (just acquired a 96, but haven’t built it yet, so can’t vouch for that). But in a race bike stiff equals fast, so that’s what you want.
Then the difference between the Kilauea and the Cinder Cone/Lava Dome is much greater, half a pound in weight. And yet here the extra weight isn’t paying for any dynamic advantage as far as I can see. My 97 Kilauea is faster over rough ground than my 97 Lava Dome (although both are good) and I think it’s because rear end compliance is better, so you get better traction. But I may be imagining it. But I’d guess the Lava Dome is much more likely to survive being wrapped around a tree or a six month trek around the Himalayas than a Kilauea though. [the former being much the more likely in my case!]
And then the difference between the Cinder Cone/Lava Dome and the Fire Mountain I don’t know. Is 10-7-10 cheaper than 9-6-9? Are there different grades even within ‘generic 4130’, so that cheap 10-7-10 is the same strength as slightly less cheap 9-6-9? Don’t know. And some years the FM wasn’t double-butted, whereas the CC/LD always was. But the fact is that Fire Mountain owners all still love their bike for what it is, which is a good fun bike, even if not a race bike.
The Explosif was made of Tange Prestige in 88, don’t know 89, then Tange Prestige Concept (tapered and ovalised) from 90-92, Tange Prestige Ultimate mix in 93 and 94, Columbus Max 95-97, Reynolds 853 in 98 and 99, Easton Scandium in 2000 and 01, True Temper OX Platimum 02-04 and Dedacciai 12.5 from 2005 to date. The 853 frame is a quarter pound heavier than the Max frame, beefier all-round, as befits the move away from ‘race’ and towards ‘play’. And the modern ones are around half a pound heavier still, the increase being mainly in the stays. That’s progress.
The Kilauea was Tange Prestige in 92, Tange Prestige Concept 93 to 95, Columbus Cyber 96 and 97, Reynolds 631 in 98, then discontinued but sold as a frame in the UK only off and on until c2001 and my guess is those frames were generic 4130 like the steel Calderas of 98 and 99.
I hope this isn’t too much.
But take 1997 as an example and take top tubes, you had the Explosif made of Columbus Max with a 31.8 x 7-4-7 top tube biovalised to 36/28, the Kilauea in Columbus Cyber with a 28.6 x 7-4-7, Cinder Cone/Lava Dome (same frame) in generic 4130 with a 31.8 x 9-6-9 and the Fire Mountain also in generic 4130 with a 31.8 x 10-7-10. i.e., all double-butted tubes, all strong enough for purpose, but great variety in weight.
The frames cost £499 for the Explosif, £399 for a Kilauea and I believe you could get Cinder Cones for £225. There is vast profit in those prices, but I understand the relativities do reflect fairly accurately the inflated prices that the tube manufacturers charge for anything fancy/low volume.
So what do you get for it? In those days the Explosif was a race bike and that’s what it was designed for. So actually the Explosif that year was no lighter than the Kilauea, but the comparison of those top tubes shows that it must be considerably stiffer, both in the biovalising and the fatter tube (just acquired a 96, but haven’t built it yet, so can’t vouch for that). But in a race bike stiff equals fast, so that’s what you want.
Then the difference between the Kilauea and the Cinder Cone/Lava Dome is much greater, half a pound in weight. And yet here the extra weight isn’t paying for any dynamic advantage as far as I can see. My 97 Kilauea is faster over rough ground than my 97 Lava Dome (although both are good) and I think it’s because rear end compliance is better, so you get better traction. But I may be imagining it. But I’d guess the Lava Dome is much more likely to survive being wrapped around a tree or a six month trek around the Himalayas than a Kilauea though. [the former being much the more likely in my case!]
And then the difference between the Cinder Cone/Lava Dome and the Fire Mountain I don’t know. Is 10-7-10 cheaper than 9-6-9? Are there different grades even within ‘generic 4130’, so that cheap 10-7-10 is the same strength as slightly less cheap 9-6-9? Don’t know. And some years the FM wasn’t double-butted, whereas the CC/LD always was. But the fact is that Fire Mountain owners all still love their bike for what it is, which is a good fun bike, even if not a race bike.
The Explosif was made of Tange Prestige in 88, don’t know 89, then Tange Prestige Concept (tapered and ovalised) from 90-92, Tange Prestige Ultimate mix in 93 and 94, Columbus Max 95-97, Reynolds 853 in 98 and 99, Easton Scandium in 2000 and 01, True Temper OX Platimum 02-04 and Dedacciai 12.5 from 2005 to date. The 853 frame is a quarter pound heavier than the Max frame, beefier all-round, as befits the move away from ‘race’ and towards ‘play’. And the modern ones are around half a pound heavier still, the increase being mainly in the stays. That’s progress.
The Kilauea was Tange Prestige in 92, Tange Prestige Concept 93 to 95, Columbus Cyber 96 and 97, Reynolds 631 in 98, then discontinued but sold as a frame in the UK only off and on until c2001 and my guess is those frames were generic 4130 like the steel Calderas of 98 and 99.
I hope this isn’t too much.
I'm not really a huge fan of Konas, but my commuter is an '89/'90 Fire Mountain and only today I was thinking to myself how nicely it rode as I was whizzing to work. Made me think that I actually should try one of the bikes higher up the range. A nice 'splatter' Explosif or Cindercone maybe.
i cant wait i should be getting a 97 explosif soon 
though i was wondering....im using maguras hs11 on my 94 cindercone, and i have a spare set i was thinking of useing on the explosif. im just a bit worried becouse i get a lot of flex it the seat stays even with a brake booster would it be such a good idea to use on the explosif with all that fancy tubeing?
though i was wondering....im using maguras hs11 on my 94 cindercone, and i have a spare set i was thinking of useing on the explosif. im just a bit worried becouse i get a lot of flex it the seat stays even with a brake booster would it be such a good idea to use on the explosif with all that fancy tubeing?
Seeing as theres a thread going i have questions,im currently building a kona,i think its a fire mountain,its been painted so no badges,it has a canti hanger boss on the rear,i will get a pic,i think its a '96-97,can i have some info please as i dont know much about this model,was it a cheap model as i read above that its not a race bike,hope not as thats whats intended for?
Similar threads
