Takingabreak
Dave Yates Fan
- Feedback
- View
Thanks, as ever ,the fountain of all Kona knowledge
Kona 98 frame question
- Thread starter Takingabreak
- Start date
Anthony":22v1ixgk said:
Cheers for the correction. What was the seat tube made of or how was it made more stiff?
Re:
No, it was the down tube that was beefed up.
I assume the design philosophy was to employ a softer seat tube to complement the tapered stays and give a more sophisticated rear end, better traction etc. However that might have left the overall balance too flexy at a time when they were trying to make their steel frames stiffer, as aluminium frames were so popular. So they strengthened the down tube from a 0.9-0.6-0.9 to a 1.0-0.7-1.0 to compensate.
Overall, the weight came out pretty much the same as the Cinder Cone, but it was a better frame.
Marketing-wise, I suppose your assumption was pretty apposite. It may have been a better, and more expensive, frame so as to sit between the Cinder Cone and the Kilauea in the range, but as they didn't publicise the differences very well, many potential customers may well have assumed there weren't any. But then again, marketing men are less interested in details than designers are - and after all it was a much nicer colour, and you have to get your priorities right.
No, it was the down tube that was beefed up.
I assume the design philosophy was to employ a softer seat tube to complement the tapered stays and give a more sophisticated rear end, better traction etc. However that might have left the overall balance too flexy at a time when they were trying to make their steel frames stiffer, as aluminium frames were so popular. So they strengthened the down tube from a 0.9-0.6-0.9 to a 1.0-0.7-1.0 to compensate.
Overall, the weight came out pretty much the same as the Cinder Cone, but it was a better frame.
Marketing-wise, I suppose your assumption was pretty apposite. It may have been a better, and more expensive, frame so as to sit between the Cinder Cone and the Kilauea in the range, but as they didn't publicise the differences very well, many potential customers may well have assumed there weren't any. But then again, marketing men are less interested in details than designers are - and after all it was a much nicer colour, and you have to get your priorities right.
Thanks Anthony. As you say, they didn't do a great job explaining this...in fact unless you had 2 side by side, you'd struggle to tel the difference. Making the colours very similar: eggplant (aubergine) vs. black didn't help. Even the price points and kit were similar.
It begs the question though: which rides better? The Kilauea or the Caldera? I'd assume the former but it's all subjective ;-)
It begs the question though: which rides better? The Kilauea or the Caldera? I'd assume the former but it's all subjective ;-)
Similar threads
