Diamondback Curaca

[slowdan]

Hi all,
I'm looking for more info about this trekking/citybike named "Curaca" by Diamondback. The owner told me he bought it in 1998 but I am pretty sure it's older.
It's 700x41c wheeled, 21 speeds (can't say if on cassette or freewheel), griptshift mrx, can't say about the derailleurs (probably shimano sis) and cantilever brakes (looks like shimano ct-90 but I am not sure about this). The bottom bracket is not a sealed cartridge but an old styled square taper with bearings and cones.
The frame is steel but there are no Tange or Cro-mo tabs... anyway it's printed "made in vietnam" just below the "U.S.A." sticker.

Thanks in advance for any info.

 

[spike3]

98 sounds about right, could even be slightly newer. It won't be a Tange frame or anything like that as it's a fairly low end town shopping machine. Just Ride and enjoy it would be excellent for doing what it was designed for popping into town or the pub.

 

[slowdan]

I know fromthose Sram shifters and cantilever brakes that the bike should be within 1991 and 1998 (otherwise diamondback would have gone with V-brakes). But it's not 1996 because the only 700c "trekking bikes" were Malibu and Ambition.
And as low end bike, I guess it goes with a freewheel (no cassette) and cheap hubs and crankset.
So you are telling me it's not a bike for touring, isn't it?

 

[barry2017]

You could tour on it. People tour on all kinds of bikes. If I was taking it touring, I'd want stronger wheels though.

It's not a tourer. Is it as good as one? No, not really.

Still, it's not a rip-off if you can get it for the right price. There's a good case for saying lower end components are better for touring, because they are more tolerant of poor setup. If you can get it for £20, you could do worse.

 

[dirttorpedo]

Re:

I wouldn't tour on that! Its pretty low end - high-ten steel, very low end mechs and crank. Its a very basic townie/hybrid. On par with a mass market department store bike IMHO. I wouldn't touch it myself.

 

[barry2017]

Re: Re:

I wouldn't tour on that! Its pretty low end - high-ten steel, very low end mechs and crank.

It is the rider that makes the tour. The equipment is actually pretty secondary.

While this would not be as strong or as light as a dedicated touring bike, it doesn't mean it would suddenly explode if you put a tent on the rack.

The only really important thing is being comfortable on it. If it was a choice between using one of these that fitted well or a £1,500 touring bike that didn't, I'd take this. And I say that having done week long trips on both.

 

[slowdan]

Re:

Actually I don't know how "low" a Diamondback's low-end would be. I mean... actually I don't really care about cantilever or cheap derailleurs as I am not going to race on that bike and I know that even a cheap derailleur can do its job with a proper setup.
A low-end hi-ten steel frame is probably heavier and weaker than a cro-mo by Tange, but again, you don't care about 5 lbs more or less on a touring bike that's picking up 200-250 lbs. I just wonder if Diamondback used to weld their low-end frames properly (it's made in Vietnam).
If yes, then I could try upgrading crankset and bottom bracket (I want a sealed cartridge for sure) and wheels maybe (I'd like smoother and stronger hubs).

The owner told me he paid that bike £240 ...15 years ago. :!:

 

[barry2017]

It probably did cost that when it was new.

The frame won't bend, and there's no good reason to replace the bottom bracket, or the crank unless the teeth are worn out.

Wheels are different. Before I knew about cassette hubs(I didn't know much about bikes until I had the Internet), I used to take a spare axle touring. Glad I don't have to do that any more.

The front wheel will be OK, but the back one carries 2 1/2 times as much weight as the front. That's where you need a new cassette wheel, which also means a new cassette and possibly shifters. £200 would be enough to make that bike good for touring, which means new cables, chain, quality back wheel (look at Spa Cycles for a Deore/Sputnik wheel), brake blocks and tyres.

You could get a secondhand touring bike for that price. But it might be worn out.

Or, of course, you could get that bike cheap, not fix it and do rolling repairs while travelling. Some of my best tours have involved bikes that were falling to bits on the journey.

 

[barry2017]

Saying that, looking at the photo again the fork looks bent. Has it been in a crash? If so, avoid.

 

[dirttorpedo]

Re:

Saying that, looking at the photo again the fork looks bent. Has it been in a crash? If so, avoid.

I think its the angle of the photo and the orientation of the front wheel that makes it look that way.

It is the rider that makes the tour. The equipment is actually pretty secondary.

While this would not be as strong or as light as a dedicated touring bike, it doesn't mean it would suddenly explode if you put a tent on the rack.

The only really important thing is being comfortable on it. If it was a choice between using one of these that fitted well or a £1,500 touring bike that didn't, I'd take this. And I say that having done week long trips on both.

I'm a bike snob - cromolly and mid range components or nothing for me! But seriously, there is a point between solid but heavy bomb proof utility bike and POS that will crumble to pieces under hard use. I've got only one photo to look at, and that bike looks more to the POS side of the range. It certainly isn't worth the investment of another 200 quid.