90s Trek 9500 Rear Suspension

[npn]

Apologies for the bad quality, does this look like the original rear suspension?

Also would you say it's a 1992 model?

 

[mk one]

Do you mean original rear shock?

 

[npn]

Do you mean original rear shock?

Yes that's what I meant.

 

[mk one]

Not sure im afraid, but here is some light reading for you, hopefully help though.

http://www.retrobike.co.uk/gallery2/v/M ... atalogues/

 

[jimo746]

Re:

That looks like a fairly modern air shock??
If it is then it won't be original.
I thought the original shock was just rubber bumpers??

 

[npn]

My thoughts too. This lady is selling 3-4 bikes and I'll be checking it out tomorrow, but I wonder what else is not original. Also the rubber boots over the stanchions don't seem to in the catalogue's pictures.

 

[66 triumph daytona]

Re:

That looks very modern,the red lever on it looks like a lock out.I thought they only had an elastomer stack originally.

 

[cce]

that shock will definitely be an improvement on what was meant to be there. They were famous for being a bit of a pogo stick...

 

[66 triumph daytona]

Re:

I dont know why but I really want one.

 

[npn]

This was one unbelievable bust.

Only the frame and the fork were original. It was incredibly sad to see how this bike was stripped of the only thing it had going for it - the XTR groupset.

But I shouldn't be surprised, there a couple of threads including one here suggesting "a waste of components": viewtopic.php?f=1&t=223464

It's just not right... All the bike needed was a modern rear shock, or as others suggested "winding up" the existing one.

It's just a bike I known, but it broke my heart to see such travesty