The end is no longer nigh: Kona Bikes

Had a few Konas through my garage but one that hung around for a while was a ‘99 (I think) Stinky, Z1 forks, Avid V brakes and I really quite liked it, one of my favourite bikes although it was just used for mucking around on local wasteland/abandoned theme park.
 
And your post sums it up nicely. Brands pick up or not by luck or judgement, what's new or shiney. Kona have had their moments in the sun, and equally many in the shade. Now is one of those and depending on what happens we'll know whether it's light or dark...
 
Of all the 30+ bikes I've owned over the years and hundreds, or probably thousands, I've ridden, only two have been Konas. One was my mate's first generation Stab Deluxe with kinky downtube and stupidly steep head angle, and the other was one of Fabien's World Cup bikes. And yet I still consider them one of those great early brands that have such history in our sport because they were doing things that nobody else was, and produced bikes that suited a particular niche of riding. The original Stab was a killer UK DH bike, and their Stinky range was really one of the few 'tough' do it all bikes that was available, and they were at the time all spec'd with Marzocchi forks when they were also at their peak so got this no-nonsense reputation. But then the weight weenies returned to the industry and decried anything that was 2g heavier than its competition, the media forgot that they weren't supposed to be just writing nice stuff about the top end, lightest, most intricate stuff, and that they also needed to pay attention to the brands that didn't fly them to foreign lands to test the new bike and eat/drink for free, and some brands just got forgotten about that. Of course some of that is definitely on the marketing departments for not playing the game, but solidly performing do all bikes just fell out of fashion.

But all that said have Kona ever been on the radar for me? Nope. Well, other than when we were looking to replace my Trek in '98 which I'd grown out of and the polished Muni Mula was on the list; a combination of an MBUK review and their team running Kulas was enough for a just-about teenage me. But then we got some dual crown Manitous cheap and that was no longer an option. It's not that I've never wanted to own a Kona, just that they didn't offer anything that really did what I wanted. Their DH bikes when I was racing were always ridiculously heavy, and the team ones really quite different from production, and for Enduro again they've just not quite been there with angles and such. The closest I've owned is an early Cove Stiffee which is built on the same premise, but much higher end and better made, and of course lighter, than anything Kona had. It's like lots of companies though, they get a loyal following for doing something unique, and then migrate away from that uniqueness once they become known so they can chase sales. And then at some point the original owners decide to cash out their hard work and in come the vulture capitalists/accountants who are only interested in the bottom line and an ever increasing market share/profit, even in a nose-diving industry. So rather than downsize a bit and wait it out they take the easy option of wrapping the company up to write off the debt, and move on, because they have no attachment to the company, it's just a money making exercise. All the big companies are like that and there are very few of the old guard left in their true original form.

Regardless of all that, it's a shame to see a brand go down. It shows that the industry is fucked, the world isn't in a great shape, and just reduces consumer choice further while also making it harder for those in the industry who do love it (even if not the actual owners) to continue to working their industry. Sadly it's looking like it'll get worse before it gets better. After all, if you're in the market for a bike right now why would you even consider buying one at full whack, or even close, unless you're wanting something stupidly niche?
 
Not convinced many bike brands, like Kona, were anything more than cleverly marketed mass produced bikes we enjoyed in our younger more naive days, and now look upon with misty eyed nostalgia. I can understand the love for brands which were hand built by boutique bike makers for specific individuals - but even then it's only the frame which is special. One XT rear mech of a particular year is exactly the same as 20K other ones.

All that said, I still remember seeing my first Kona in the early 90s - and instantly getting why it was the geometry it was, admiring the aesthetics and feeling a little envious of the person riding it.

Well let’s look and remind ourselves at some of Kona’s history, and what sets them apart from “mass marketed” brands which has contributed so much to their legacy:

- Kona became known for their racing geometry due to their aggressive sloping down tube. That was borne out of Joe Murray’s knowledge of racing (and Paul Brodie heritage) that set them apart, from the competition who followed tried & tested geometry at the embro stages of the sport.

- In the earlier years, when everyone was thick on embracing Rapidfire, Kona stuck to their guns and were resolute on thumbshifters - because it was race proven and because it simply worked in the field. This no BS mentality paved the way for a loyal consumer following that remains part of Kona ethos.

- Kona were one of the first ‘consumer brands’ to push for weight saving components with their bikes starting with the Racelight movement in 1993. You didn’t find clever marketers Trek, Marin, Specialized, Muddy Fox & Raleigh measuring out the grams of components for people to digest and understand in the specced bikes. Kona believed in educating via their “ready to race” mentality.

- Mid-90s Kona dialled down its own eclectic style, using self effacing humour, and bright printed contrasted campaigns against the backdrop of serious racing. They have always embodied a ‘small brand’ mentality, in the face of competition. If they didn’t, they could never have produced the iconic marketing material that they became known for.

- Yes, some frames came from Asia and they weren’t a boutique brand, but a good percentage was made in the US. Kona never rested on their laurels and they developed many different frames with different tube materials and construction that (thankfully) catered for every budget of a buyer: from the entry level (so us then teenagers on paper rounds to eventually get on the Mtb train) to the eye-wateringly expensive high-end framesets (Ku, Hei Hei, KK or the Score) On the extreme-side, Kona had a semi / fully bespoke customer order programme via the Hot using Tom Teesdale.

What other brand achieved such a range of materials? Thats not playing it safe for clever marketing on mass production, thats industry ground breaking.

- Lastly, name another brand that has managed to maintain a race team for so long in Mtb history? Yeti were close, but became defunct half way through; Orange were there but as we know, with great sadness, didn't survive.

Perhaps most importantly, underpinning Kona’s legacy, despite an evolving mix of components and innovation (to include aluminium frames) was Kona’s second-to-none ability to create a beautifully consistent range under a single umbrella of brand identity.

Unlike a thin veil of nostalgia, this is why it Kona deserves to be iconic and have its cult status with such a loyal following it deserves.
Kona was never a Trek, a Marin, a Raleigh. If it was, you wouldn’t find people still avidly en-mass collecting their brochures, banners, posters and jerseys to this day.

I might be bias, but I can’t think of single company that did as much to pioneer the sport of MTB for the consumer as what Kona did.

Think about that.
 
Clearly, you're a Kona fanboy and bought into the mythos - and that's OK. Others are similarly affectionate and misty-eyed about the other bike brands, like Marin and Raleigh. Maybe not Trek though :D. Even when positioning themselves as taking the road less trodden, it's still branding and good marketing. Just one that happened to tick your boxes and get you in the feels. We aren't talking about a guy handcrafting frames to a unique vision in his shed here, but a company that, at least at one time sold tens of thousands of bikes which were near identical to each other and garnered a fanbase (sadly not a large or dedicated enough one to survive the current era) - and that the founders sold off for (presumably) a big pay day. Nothing wrong with that either, it's a perfectly fine legacy.
 
Last edited:
/\ Nicely put Romanrinos /\

I have to say, back in 1991 when I discovered Kona bicycles, I was not a fan. The adult me can admit I was jealous. Jealous that I didn't pick a Kona when I was choosing my first MTB a few months prior. Jealous that the ad spiel made sense, jealous of that racing image & the brand that had it's own cool bottle cage with a puncture outfit..... Here we are over thirty years later & I have 3 in my garage. One of the most iconic bikes from my MTB memories is that 91 Cinder Cone - the olive Green/gold one. It was solidly advertised in MBUK month in month out, I had to build one & I am doing.
So for the sloping top tubes, Equilibrium tyres, the rebranded Avocet saddles & Joe Murray 'cool', thank you Kona.
 
In the UK late 80s/early 90s Kona had keen prices and they cut corners where you didn't see.
They came out of Canadian roots with Rocky Mountain where most learned their craft and kept the same coolness that worked well int he UK at the time.
They had custom bikes, Ti etc and custom builds.

By the time they got to the mi's 90s they had settled into being a company selling bikes, decent stuff and had MaxOR.
All change in 1998 and it went downhill, proper bikes stopped,

Saying that in 1996 they lucked out with Marzocchi looking for someone to take a dodgy unknown fork and lucky for Marzocchi this propelled the Bomber to the status it had and probably kept Marzocchi going and Kona for a couple of years.
Kona was gone by the turn of the 00s though and hit Halfords. Nuff said.
 
In the UK late 80s/early 90s Kona had keen prices and they cut corners where you didn't see.
They came out of Canadian roots with Rocky Mountain where most learned their craft and kept the same coolness that worked well int he UK at the time.
They had custom bikes, Ti etc and custom builds.

By the time they got to the mi's 90s they had settled into being a company selling bikes, decent stuff and had MaxOR.
All change in 1998 and it went downhill, proper bikes stopped,

Saying that in 1996 they lucked out with Marzocchi looking for someone to take a dodgy unknown fork and lucky for Marzocchi this propelled the Bomber to the status it had and probably kept Marzocchi going and Kona for a couple of years.
Kona was gone by the turn of the 00s though and hit Halfords. Nuff said.

Some interesting points here. I'd challenge that it went downhill (literally!) in 1998. The Stab and Stinky, for all their faults, made a huge impression. It was more around the 2001/2 with the increasing influence of Ford, and the muddled approach with northshore. By the time Halfords were involved, agreed, that was terrible move.

However, they did have a resurgence in 2013/4 with the Process and Operator, that lasted well into 2018/9. Those 2 bikes got Kona back on the map, just like the Stab and Stinky did back in the late 90s. But again, things stagnated in that scene and their suite of bikes, in my view, got and is still, far too broad.
 
Well let’s look and remind ourselves at some of Kona’s history, and what sets them apart from “mass marketed” brands which has contributed so much to their legacy:

- Kona were one of the first ‘consumer brands’ to push for weight saving components with their bikes starting with the Racelight movement in 1993. You didn’t find clever marketers Trek, Marin, Specialized, Muddy Fox & Raleigh measuring out the grams of components for people to digest and understand in the specced bikes. Kona believed in educating via their “ready to race” mentality.

What other brand achieved such a range of materials? Thats not playing it safe for clever marketing on mass production, thats industry ground breaking.

- Lastly, name another brand that has managed to maintain a race team for so long in Mtb history? Yeti were close, but became defunct half way through; Orange were there but as we know, with great sadness, didn't survive.

Kona was never a Trek, a Marin, a Raleigh
. If it was, you wouldn’t find people still avidly en-mass collecting their brochures, banners, posters and jerseys to this day.

I might be bias, but I can’t think of single company that did as much to pioneer the sport of MTB for the consumer as what Kona did.

Think about that.

Not looking for an argument but need to raise a few points of order here!

In 1993 Marin took the same route with weight saving (having started in 92) and they made a big deal out of how light all their components were. It certainly wasn't just Kona.

Plenty of other manufacturers offered similar top to bottom ranges, GT being one, including hand built exotica.

Orange did survive although there's no official race team this year.

Kona and Marin seemed pretty similar to me tbh and there's plenty of people collecting the brochures, banners, posters and jerseys from Marin and Raleigh, just have a look on Facebook!


Kona never really registered with me bitd but that's probably because I got the Orange bug early. Never owned one (I don't think?) but I did collect and ship on a couple of the splatter bikes for a RB member years ago and remember them being lovely. Defo be a shame if they go under.
 
That's a change of bike use with the DH style bikes, so for me of no interest. Maybe the change of target marked kept them going though, most the ealry 90s riders will have left biking behind or moved on.
A new wave of youth. Still them Bombers did it for both of them (re link to the history of the Kona bomber relationship)


Someone mentioned materials above, well Alu, Ti, Steel and mixes were pioneed by quite a lot of companies in the late 80s into early 90s.
Some even went the carbon route and really pioneed new technologies (Trek being one)

I wouldn't say Kona did much with their bikes. Pretty much same frame and bike from 1993 to end of the 90s, bar a choice a tubing.
They had a price range and used it.
They didn't tweak the frame for different sizes, they didn't mix tubing for comfort, they didn't.
The only tweak was for the bargain basment bottom end bikes.


They had a formula and it worked for the standard bike, even the Alu bike are just the same thing.
Bar some funny full sus stuff they rebranded.
It kept it cheap, in bike terms.

But the reason I like them now (90s) is they just work and do it easily without the faff. You know what you are getting.

Back then, no way for me. Much more interesting and better bike in general and know not Orange bikes ;-) which I would say are the UK version of the Kona. Interesting at the evolution of late 80s/ealry 90s. Found what worked for them by about 1993 and kept with it.
You knew what you were getting.
 
Back
Top