Retro Bikes of Quality

[CTK]

Foes LTS. Like much of MTB suspension innovations the technology was nicked form motorcycles, still it takes an original mind to apply it.

 

[Tad]

Foes LTS. Like much of MTB suspension innovations the technology was nicked form motorcycles,

They even painted it to look like one.

 

[FMJ]

Doesn't have to be yours:

Doesn't have to be yours:

That's not a first gen San An, though. Wrong decals, wrong headtube badge, wrong rotors, and it has a coil/oil shock.

This is the first San An prototype, and the guy who built it.

This is a first gen production San An.

 

[sinnerman]

Quality

I thought this model was worthy of inclusion to this thread....my thoughts and reasons for my choice....

A custom hand built frame by the very much respected chas roberts.
This model was race tested by Dave Hemmings to many victories (i should know.... .....lol) this race testing and development led the frame in its final format being availiable as a custom frame build from the roberts stable alongside his other longer standing frames. (the excellent race and touring models.)

This model is shown in the Roberts team colours.

During the mid to late 80s smaller "Quality" British frame builders, had several problems with frame building design due to there tubing suppliers being slow to adapt to a rapidly changing market...the mountain bike..!!!!, (for example the supply of tubing for wishbones, lugs, reynolds etc,) and there own traditional way of building that they had been taught, ie using lugs etc. Several frame builders "back then", commented on others use of tig welding, and how there frames were almost a matter of pride, and hence the use of the beautiful fillet brazing, and how they were able to change there geometry of there frames without the restrictions of lugs. (as had been there previous problem).

During the early 90s these restrictions were being lifted by better tubing options being offered by there suppliers, enabling the frame builder to dare i say "experiment" with frame geometry, choice of tubing manufacturers/tubing mix/tubing profile, and allow the frame builder to ascertain the most effective way to achieve the best possible ride, in repect to handling and responsiveness in ride feel.

Chas Roberts frame specs and choices...including the lengths he went to with the rear wishbone.

Ultra stiff Columbus Max main frame.
Composite rear stays--
---Extra stiff 4130 horseshoe to minimize brake flex
---Silver soldered Reynolds 753 stays
---Columbus SL monostay
---Massive clearances to eliminate mud build up.
---White powdercoat base, finished in D.O.G.S.B.O.L.X team colours.
---Custom Roberts stem built individually to suit each frame.

Also worth a mention, Roberts was the first to start to use an Acronym for a name of a special custom built frame model, causing a little rivalry from other frame builders like Dave Yates and Dave Lloyd, who quickly followed with names like D.O.N.K.I.S K.N.O.B, and C.A.T W.H.I.S.K.A.S, which did indeed help to cement there popularity in mountain bike circles. then and indeed now.

 

[ti-fat-man]

But, to drag the car analogy one step further, it doesn't have to be rare to be a bike of distinction. Minis are the mos influential cars of British history' as are Austin 7s or landrover defenders. None of them are rare, all of them a influential!

arhh...cue gratuitous car shot, i also like ti bikes...

 

[pete_mcc]

That's not a first gen San An, though. Wrong decals, wrong headtube badge, wrong rotors, and it has a coil/oil shock.

Well if we're being pedantic f*ckers not adding to the thread then thats not a coil oil but a Risse Genesis air shock, a fairly standard replacement to the elastomer bunch

 

[brocklanders023]

Doesn't have to be yours:

Almost all Orange free ride and downhill bikes of the last 10 years appear to be absolute rip offs of this. Lester Noble owes these guys his pension.

I'd argue against this statement as it's like saying all skinny tubed steel bikes are a rip off of blah. If you take away the monocoque tubes and single pivot swing arm (which I'm sure turned up before Mountain Cycles) the Oranges are nothing like this.

 

[FMJ]

But isn't that the point, you post up a bike and give a reason why it's a bike of distinction, argue the case, be active participants in a thread.

Quality or distinct? They can be exclusive, inclusive, or both.

I suppose this does demand that you have a tiny amount of knowledge of the history of mountain bikes and an ounce of self belief or ability to string an argument together, so it may not be for everyone but maybe those who have a passion for retro MTBs might want to post, rather those who's only contribution is to say 'don't know, dont want to play'.

Well if we're being pedantic f*ckers not adding to the thread then thats not a coil oil but a Risse Genesis air shock, a fairly standard replacement to the elastomer bunch

So someone with "a tiny amount of knowledge of the history of mountain bikes" (and Mountain Cycles in particular) corrects an OBVIOUS error of your's and you throw a hissy fit. Maybe I need some sort of "illuminati" cred to post in your precious navel gazing thread.......or only dare speak of bikes of which you deem worthy.

I'm out.

 

[kaiser]

Thats is sublime! Everything a mountain bike should be*.







*apart from that farkin bottle cage. what were you thinking!

 

[doctor-bond]

So, aside from some perhaps inevitable grumpy pedantry, I see a couple of strands here:

1. what you might call make or break innovation where builders with vision manage to get their ideas into a tangible (i.e rideable) form: viz the aheadsets, suspension linkages, disk brake systems, shown earlier by Pace, Bradbury, MC

2. what could be termed evolutionary innovation where sensible ideas are adopted and refined quietly: e.g the shape of MTB frames disclosed by the likes of Cunningham and Bradbury in the US and Overbury and Pace in the UK.

It strikes me that while both sorts of development may lead to some pretty acrimonious disputes (both within the bike industry and on user forums) about who came first, it is the interplay between step change ideas and refinement by trial and error that leads to the quality designs.

For bike ideas do seem to endure: although the power of corporate clout in the bike industry means we’ve been force fed some pretty dire offerings touted as cycling perfection (biopace is an obvious example), isn't it remakable that so many bike & componentry designs persist? Multiple wheel sizes, bearing configurations, brake types .... suspension.