Kona Kilauea 1994 designer

[JRGSXR]

I’ve not heard that one? I’ll have a look at my frames though…. 91, 92, 94 and 2x 96. Nice range of definite, maybe and not . If I spot anything “fishy” I’ll let you know

 

[Troy74]

I understand that Joe Murray didn't build them and he was just a designer but as an English guy living in Sweden, Scandinavian designers are really respected so even long after they're dead if a design is continued to be manufactured the original designer is always associated with it even if the item being produced goes through some slight changes for many years - just wondered if Kona was respecting a designer in that way I guess - of course if a bike has almost no design cues from that original bike then I get it - but hey - we're talking a 1994 bike here designed in 93 maybe ? So....

 

[Troy74]

Here's the fishy scale welds on my 94 Kileau I'll take a pick of my son's 2003 Lana'l and my 2006 Fire Mountain welds tomorrow - just for fun right ?

 

[JRGSXR]

Well kona didn’t really change the design of the hard tails from 94 till after 2000. Your Kilauea probably feels better than the fire mountain because it is. The Kilauea is tange with tb forks while the fire mountain is plain gauge frame and forks. Even being 2yrs older the Kilauea is the superior bike.

 

[Troy74]

It really is a superior bike - theres no denying that.

 

[Imlach]

Found this on the net


View attachment 660491

I did see that website but admittedly found the fact that it was named after a particular year of Kona bikes a wee bit dodgy. Also, is it really designed by 'Joe' or the fact that his idea lead to ______________?

 

[ClassicDodo]

I did see that website but admittedly found the fact that it was named after a particular year of Kona bikes a wee bit dodgy. Also, is it really designed by 'Joe' or the fact that his idea lead to ______________?

Concur, as per earlier in the chat Joe’s own LinkedIn profile says he left in 91, that seems slightly more definitive than a random website, which is probably what I was quoting in my initial assumption

 

[Imlach]

Concur, as per earlier in the chat Joe’s own LinkedIn profile says he left in 91, that seems slightly more definitive than a random website, which is probably what I was quoting in my initial assumption

Be interesting to know the motive behind said page, I did see the wordpress but ignored it straight away because it didn't come across as a genuine source of information. There is NO DOUBT that 94's were deeply rooted in Murray's designs, and even later you see the traces, but that doesn't automatically make it so. I think it's fair, like OP's bike shop suggested, that it is a 'Joe Murray' frame, but it was at the point of no return where things did changes substantially, although, even in later models I'd argue that many aspects of the design remained..

 

[ClassicDodo]

Be interesting to know the motive behind said page, I did see the wordpress but ignored it straight away because it didn't come across as a genuine source of information. There is NO DOUBT that 94's were deeply rooted in Murray's designs, and even later you see the traces, but that doesn't automatically make it so. I think it's fair, like OP's bike shop suggested, that it is a 'Joe Murray' frame, but it was at the point of no return where things did changes substantially, although, even in later models I'd argue that many aspects of the design remained..

Maybe an “inspired by Joe Murray” sticker would be about right, I went from a 92 Fire Mountain to a 98 Kilauea and clearly of the same lineage, with the latter being significantly better…

 

[Imlach]

Maybe an “inspired by Joe Murray” sticker would be about right, I went from a 92 Fire Mountain to a 98 Kilauea and clearly of the same lineage, with the latter being significantly better…

I agree. I've got a 97-ish Explosif and I absolutely adore the frame and the ride quality. And it certainly connects to its roots.