How do you tell the difference between Zaskar and LE frames?

[legrandefromage]

My LE is from 93 but had XT and MAG21

 

[Smithjss70]

Did you buy it from a shop? Here in the US the LE frames were sold bare. Some shops broadly built them up but with non-XTR components. I’ll double check but I’m pretty sure the difference between a Zaskar and a Zaskar LE was M900. I had a Mag 21 on mine as well. Iconic, underestimate frame for sure. It’s the only bike I’m aware of that won World Championship titles in XC, Downhill, Trials and Slalom racing over the years.

 

[66 triumph daytona]

Re:

I thought the only difference was spec levels and the frames were identical.Maybe people thought there was a difference between the Zaskar frames as RTS frames of the period used differing frame materials for its Team and RTS 3 frames but the Zaskar and LE frames were identical.

 

[Smithjss70]

Re: Re:

I thought the only difference was spec levels and the frames were identical.Maybe people thought there was a difference between the Zaskar frames as RTS frames of the period used differing frame materials for its Team and RTS 3 frames but the Zaskar and LE frames were identical.

Same understanding here. Only difference was component spec.

 

[legrandefromage]

Mine was full xt from a GT dealer. I'd origianlly bought an RTS frame on the day but couldnt find and built up wheels so swapped it for the Zaskar that was in the sale.

 

[d8mok]

Re:

Yeh they were same up until 97/98. Then they had small changes.

 

[Smithjss70]

Mine was full xt from a GT dealer. I'd origianlly bought an RTS frame on the day but couldnt find and built up wheels so swapped it for the Zaskar that was in the sale.

Hmm. Maybe the dealer built it up? I think Hans or someone on their team told me once the LE frames were a La carte but I may be wrong. That was a long time ago. :facepalm:

 

[Once A Hero]

I have a bare Zaskar frame I plan to build up, it even needs decals. I was hoping to get some clarity on whether it should be sticker-ed as a plain Zaskar or a Zaskar LE, but reading this thread it seems there is no difference in the frame until '97ish (which it isn't, it's a '92).

The two relevant 1992 documents we have in the archives here, don't shed any light on the difference between the two, other than a plain Zaskar perhaps being offered as a full XT built solution, and the LE being 'frame-only', maybe...

1992 Catalogue:
https://www.retrobike.co.uk/gallery2/d/10505-2/1992.pdf
1992 Tech Shop Catalog:
https://www.retrobike.co.uk/gallery2/d/10509-2/TechShop92.pdf
I think I'll brand mine as an LE, just so it has a splash of colour to the decals.

It looks as though in 1991 the Zaskar was offered principally as a frame only (doesn't feature as a built bike in the line up), though it could be supplied built up with XT or XC Pro, but no mention of LE...:
https://www.retrobike.co.uk/gallery2/d/65051-2/GT1991_USA.pdf

 

[d8mok]

I’ve got several badged as LE and several non. Specs are mixed on all and sometimes it’s just what decals the frame had (or it’s faded so I’ve gone with same). Some are correct but some aren’t.

I wouldn’t worry too much. If going early type decals I think normal Zaskar looks better as less cramped.

 

[Smithjss70]

Preferred GT dealers in the US who sold complete Zaskar LE race bikes where equipped with LE decals and full M900 kit. Some of the big west coast shops in California, which is where I bought mine, actually offered some LE-decaled frames, which is where I bought mine and built it up with my own M900.