Can retro MTBs still be ridden hard?

[legrandefromage]

Here's the most 'modern' thing I ride (road bikes not included)

Its 1999 frame so now into its 3rd decade, proper cartridge bearings for all the linkages so very smooth suspension action.

Its also made out of scrounged parts. So, the shock is 5mm longer than it should be but it has plenty of stroke so it has set with enough sag to bring the BB back down from orbit

The seatpost does need a little more layback but that can wait

shorter stem, wider bars and 120mm forks to bring the front end up

fat rims and even fatter tyres just so theres no squirreling on narrow rims

Theres still a triple up front - thats personal - I just cant leave empty chainring bolt holes and besides, getting a front mech to index is so satisfying

34/11t cassette is more than adequate for where I ride and live (it may even be a 36t)

Deore discs as they came from a carboot sale bike a couple of years ago

9spd all round as some lucky ebay purchases meant a £12 box of bits gave me a big grins worth of XT

Total build cost is less than £180

Theres all sorts 'wrong' with the build but it works, its very fast and suits the terrain when I'm fit and not eating cake

 

[legrandefromage]

Another ride all day bike that is just 'old'

Comfy and quick but very very boring zzzzzzzzzzz...

Ebay and RB purchases, about £200 in all, kept the lockdown/ furlough madness at bay

 

[legrandefromage]

and some steel!

1994 -ish

more lockdown ebay purchases to tart up a karma frame

built for the local areas again. forks have about 30mm travel which is enough (just!) and have held air for 2 years

XT again of many generations with some brand new XT rings for £15 at a local carboot sale

Its steel, it twangs, its great on and off road

it has red wheels!

 

[Tootyred]

Problem here is the comparisons !

A modern alluminium dh full sus bikes has about as much in common with a 1990 steel mtb as a the 90s mtb has with a modern road bike!

Your looking at different tools for different jobs......yes they share some characteristics (2 wheels, a chain, handlebars) and have the same basic method of operation.

But so do these!

However, the big advantage of the 90s mtb is that it sits in the middle....not off an extreme to one end; so...bit of touring..check, bit of xc riding...check, bit of road...check, bit of dh...check, cycle to the shops or pop to the pub without sniggering...check.

The one bike to rule them all.......precious.

 

[legrandefromage]

as for old aluminium, danson67 is your man but I can still remember a bit: many tubes were drawn incorrectly - the crystals in the material being left too big and stress fractures would happen

7005 series aluminium seems to be the most common to do this as it is also easier to build with and easy to repair

6061 T' series required more careful assembly as (from memory) it is air hardened so continues to harden over its lifetime - you need to repair it very carefully so as not to interfere with the post weld hardening process

I am going out on a limb here but I would hazard a guess that overall less 6000 series type frames failed than 7000 series in 'normal' use.

But! Many frames of all types failed through missuse, especially when longer travel forks were fitted to frames that were just not designed for that amount of leverage at the front end.

Then there was the 'I was just riding along' failures of 12 foot jumps or super long seatposts levering tubes off or not enough seatpost in the frame cracking all sorts, wrong size posts rammed in or undersized posts

Heck, old steel is better and can be painted nicely too

 

[Tootyred]

Heck, old steel is better and can be painted nicely too

At home, without a cancer causing highly toxic primers and acid etch!

 

[greencat]

Problem here is the comparisons !

I agree. There's up to 30 years between the specializeds on a previous page. A 1990s mountain bike looks pretty different from a 60s bike used for rough stuff.

I've got retro and modern bikes. They are all good in their own way. My 2021 vitus mythique full suspension was a grand which doesn't seem a ridiculous price and means I can keep up with my mates on a Thursday night ride. Some of my retro bikes were between free and £400 and that doesn't seem bad either.

 

[2manyoranges]

Big Cheese - excellent detail on your bikes, nice background and always good too see the care which you put into the builds. Important return to quality of materials too…all that discussion of the merits of 7000 series versus 6000 was a feature of mountain bike mags in the 90s - materials are so much more important on rigid bikes or hardtails, and as you say, when frames were going through the weight weeny period and geometry was aiming for good standover height, the dynamic forces in the frame began to change a lot - leading to a rash of nasty failures in some very expensive esoterica.

I agree re 1 and eighth headsets - King are fine, Hope too, including their early series which took some features of the King headset. It’s inch that I remember causing endless irritations….Mavic roller….Nope, works loose. Stronglight…nope, works loose. onZa Mongo 1…..evil rubbish. XT…works for ages….then works loose. CONTAX roller … actually rather good. But in the end I opted for 1inch Gorilla and Grey headlocks. They meant that you could get things OK in the workshop - mahoosive Campag headset spanners…then tighten things out on the trail after six hours of riding when play had gotten into the system again.

Re earlier post….Head tube cracking is just S C A R Y And there were various genuine examples of this worrying detachment of front from rear.…in some mainstream production bikes too. No names. You know which ones. Klein Worked wonders with their design work on tubes - thin Coke can downtubes which were stiff and strong. Wonderful. Until you had a 4 lb flint come up from the front wheel - the moment that hit the down tube you could hear the metal fold - Gerrdunk. And as I have posted before….this happened within a week of building my first Klein. Huge crease and dent in the down tube. Not fit for purpose really. In contrast, on flinty South Downs descents I have had many tube strikes on steel bikes from big flints flying up and all I need to do is get the touch-up paint out…..

 

[2manyoranges]

And of course FS enduro bikes are built like tanks these days.

Only this….

Just before Lockdown 1 I had a chance at a cosmetically-damaged alloy Transition Sentinel frame - 29 FS 160/140 travel - and I thought ’oh well…not as light as a Carbon but let‘s do it…’ and paying attention to all components but without paying a fortune I was astonished when I put it on the scales - 28lbs. Or slightly lighter than the stock Carbon build. And it rides light too…there’s really no difference between my son’s carbon Patrol and my alloy Sentinel in that department.

Now thinking back I built a 24lbs AMP B3 which really felt light. And wriggled like it was made from over-boiled tagliatelle. The back really did move in mysterious ways, even with the after-market stiffening bridge installed. It could certainly go up things. And I think there’d not be a lot in the difference in climbing ability between the Amp and the Transition. Even with the extra four lbs of the Sentinel. But point things downhill….and we would be comparing ‘tip toe, tip toe ah be careful’ with ‘let’s goooo……’

 

[novocaine]

I'm guessing that my bike falls between the cracks a bit here, but can be had for little money and I think is a good example of getting the most bang for your buck.

My main bike is neither modern nor retro, but something in between. it's got modern traits (140mm fork, short stem, wide bars) with retro traits mixed in (26", steel, non dropper) and thrown on top of it, single speed. from a geometry point of view, it's a mixed bag, the BB is a tad high, the back end is a tad long and the head angle is steep by modern standards (2 of these are modified by the longer fork) and the saddle to pedal distance is a bit excessive. it handles ok, it's a bit skitish in the back end, but that's possibly me not the bike, it's a little bit noodly in the frame and the tyre choice doesn't help.

is it fun to ride?
hell yes, It is more than quick enough for me, I can chuck it down a steep hill at an OK rate of knots, it will flatter to a point, the difference is when it does let go, it let's go completely, not gradually like a modern frame would.

what it does is fill the gap, I don't ride trail centers (I find the whole ethos around them doesn't marry with what I want, that's a different discussion), my local trails are flat to middling at best, there has been some terrible digging done over the years so I avoid the dug stuff and ride the more flowy "natural" stuff. I can go for an all day ride on it along gravel tracks and the likes with no issue too.

for everything else, there's road (apparently one is a gravel bike, but I've no idea why) bikes.