Oldest mountain bike in UK?

[CassidyAce]

Re:

And can we widen the topic back out ?

Perhaps now would be a good point to attempt to disentangle some of the questions involved in this thread.

1) The original question: "So what was the first cluster of US-inspired mountain bikes in the uk?"
Note: "in the UK" not "produced in the UK" and I still think that Ridgeback were the first to market in the UK, although the bikes were manufactured elsewhere. And the question asks about the "first cluster", so it would be entirely reasonable to include Saracen/Evans' first offerings and those of Muddy Fox, etc.

2) The question that much of the thread focused on: "Who was the first UK-producer of US-inspired mountain bikes that did actually manufacture their bikes in the UK?" Saracen/Evans seem like the strongest contender here but not Ridgeback because they were importing their frames.

3) "What was the first mountain bike produced in the UK (not necessarily "US-inspired")?" Something by Geoff Apps might be the answer here, depending on the answer to question 4 . . .

4) What exactly counts as a mountain bike anyway? And that question runs into standard difficulties relating to how anything can be defined. The definition is going to be blurry at the edges and that means that how we label early prototypes and forerunners of what became commonly accepted as "mountain bikes" is always likely to be disputed.

 

[Peachy!]

Re: Re:

And can we widen the topic back out ?

Perhaps now would be a good point to attempt to disentangle some of the questions involved in this thread.

1) The original question: "So what was the first cluster of US-inspired mountain bikes in the uk?"
Note: "in the UK" not "produced in the UK" and I still think that Ridgeback were the first to market in the UK, although the bikes were manufactured elsewhere. And the question asks about the "first cluster", so it would be entirely reasonable to include Saracen/Evans' first offerings and those of Muddy Fox, etc.

2) The question that much of the thread focused on: "Who was the first UK-producer of US-inspired mountain bikes that did actually manufacture their bikes in the UK?" Saracen/Evans seem like the strongest contender here but not Ridgeback because they were importing their frames.

3) "What was the first mountain bike produced in the UK (not necessarily "US-inspired")?" Something by Geoff Apps might be the answer here, depending on the answer to question 4 . . .

4) What exactly counts as a mountain bike anyway? And that question runs into standard difficulties relating to how anything can be defined. The definition is going to be blurry at the edges and that means that how we label early prototypes and forerunners of what became commonly accepted as "mountain bikes" is always likely to be disputed.

Anyone fancy offering up some dates beside the above?

 

[M-Power]

Re:

I was offered a blue first gen Stumpy from 81 way back in 91. We didnt do trade ins and he wanted £50 for it. I took it for a spin around the block but it rode like a pig so i declined. :facepalm: Wonder if its still around somewhere in London. I have two 1982 mountainbikes, both great to ride. Alas one has to go :facepalm: There must be a 1979/80 Ritchey lurking somewhere in a UK collection or museum surely ?

Classic early bikes.

https://www.flysfo.com/museum/exhibitio ... tail?num=3

 

[GrahamJohnWallace]

Re: Re:

Perhaps now would be a good point to attempt to disentangle some of the questions involved in this thread.

1) The original question: "So what was the first cluster of US-inspired mountain bikes in the uk?"
Note: "in the UK" not "produced in the UK" and I still think that Ridgeback were the first to market in the UK, although the bikes were manufactured elsewhere. And the question asks about the "first cluster", so it would be entirely reasonable to include Saracen/Evans' first offerings and those of Muddy Fox, etc.

2) The question that much of the thread focused on: "Who was the first UK-producer of US-inspired mountain bikes that did actually manufacture their bikes in the UK?" Saracen/Evans seem like the strongest contender here but not Ridgeback because they were importing their frames.

3) "What was the first mountain bike produced in the UK (not necessarily "US-inspired")?" Something by Geoff Apps might be the answer here, depending on the answer to question 4 . . .

4) What exactly counts as a mountain bike anyway? And that question runs into standard difficulties relating to how anything can be defined. The definition is going to be blurry at the edges and that means that how we label early prototypes and forerunners of what became commonly accepted as "mountain bikes" is always likely to be disputed.

Anyone fancy offering up some dates beside the above?

I think it would be a interesting at this point to compile a list of both mountain-bikes and proto-mountain-bike contenders for the Oldest mountain bike in the UK title. Where possible, it would be good to have photos of the bikes in question, something of their back.story and some form of contemporary primary evidence regarding their date of creation, marketing or import into the UK.

It would be wise to exclude examples of ordinary bikes being ridden off-road as this could lead to a long list of anecdotes relating to Victorian gentlemen riding bicycles through jungles.

Should we also exclude cyclo-cross bikes, BMX bikes and other 20 inch wheel bikes like the Raleigh Chopper/Griffter etc? This is because people do not generally consider these machines to be mountain-bikes.

 

[firedfromthecircus]

Re: Re:

The original question is open to a wide degree of interpretation simply because people's views of what a mountain bike is differ. Most would say that a mountain bike has to have fat tyres whilst in reality the width of the tyres used on some mountain bikes is quite modest by historical road bike standards. Can a mountain bike have drop handlebars? Do they need wide ratio gears or will a single speed suffice etc.

As a result, despite a wide knowledge of off-road cycling history I can't in fact accurately answer the question as posed. All I can do is provide historical information that may help others to form an opinion depending on their own personal understanding of the question.

Absolutely this.

Which is why those who like to assert what is and what isn't a 'mountain bike' are misguided. It is open to interpretation, and it is up to the individual to decide on for themselves. Thankfully people like Graham are prepared to share their knowledge freely on this forum so more people can form their own opinion from an educated position.

 

[Retro Spud]

Re: Re:

The original question is open to a wide degree of interpretation simply because people's views of what a mountain bike is differ. Most would say that a mountain bike has to have fat tyres whilst in reality the width of the tyres used on some mountain bikes is quite modest by historical road bike standards. Can a mountain bike have drop handlebars? Do they need wide ratio gears or will a single speed suffice etc.

As a result, despite a wide knowledge of off-road cycling history I can't in fact accurately answer the question as posed. All I can do is provide historical information that may help others to form an opinion depending on their own personal understanding of the question.

Absolutely this.

Which is why those who like to assert what is and what isn't a 'mountain bike' are misguided. It is open to interpretation, and it is up to the individual to decide on for themselves. Thankfully people like Graham are prepared to share their knowledge freely on this forum so more people can form their own opinion from an educated position.

100% agree with all of the above, and my earlier comments were not to bait nor sport with anyones feeling on the matter but more a quest to open the debate/learning curve (call it what you may) back up, as we’d fixated upon Geoff and no matter what your opinion on any of the above is - Geoff is, and remains just one albeit very bright and visionary individual on that evolutionary path which is still evolving.

Geoff’s place in that history is assured and well represented thanks in no short part to Graham, however it’s the bit part players - the nearly men that interest me - the broken dreams / flawed or skewed thinking and also the missed opportunities.


All down the ages history has been written and recorded by the victors, I thought this would have been the ideal opportunity to raise a glass to the under dog and tell their story - let them have at least a few annicdotal lines in the foot notes of the sports history and evolution in lieu of their 15 minutes of fame they never got to enjoy.

As Graham has stated there is no one difinable date in time to say that’s when or where it started - so can we be open minded and express an opinion without fear of being flamed or accused of heresy for suggesting or holding the belief it might have started before Geoff and has carried on ever since ?

For the record I have the utmost respect for Graham and his efforts in preserving our history and also his dignity and professionalism he has shown and maintained throughout this thread.

 

[drcarlos]

Been chatting to drew Lawson from muddyfox. According to drew their first s&g branded muddyfoxes hit the shops in 82/83.
Also s&g was a finance house behind the venture and nothing to do with s&g cycles. He cannot remember if they beat ridgeback to the punch but it was close apparently. Both would appear to predate the Evans saracens.

Carl

 

[GrahamJohnWallace]

Re: Re:

All down the ages history has been written and recorded by the victors, I thought this would have been the ideal opportunity to raise a glass to the under dog and tell their story - let them have at least a few annicdotal lines in the foot notes of the sports history and evolution in lieu of their 15 minutes of fame they never got to enjoy.

History from my point of view is about recording as accurately as possible what took place others can then interpret the information however they wish. I frankly have a big issue with the long history of 'Tracker' bicycles going unrecorded simply because 'Trackers' were a youth based cycling movement whilst cycling history has been written by adults. Geoff Apps being included in 1980s mountain biking books and whilst being usually written out of modern cycling books is of much less importance and could be justified in that many of his ideas did not transfer accross to mainstream mountain bike design.

As Graham has stated there is no one difinable date in time to say that’s when or where it started - so can we be open minded and express an opinion without fear of being flamed or accused of heresy for suggesting or holding the belief it might have started before Geoff and has carried on ever since ?

Before there were many decent quality roads, modifying bicycles to improve their rough-terrain capabilities was commonplace. As metalled roads became commonplace such all-terrain bicycles evolved into road-bikes. So what we are discussing here is not who first developed bicycles for off-road use, but who first rediscovered that riding over rough-terrain could be fun and set about reverse engineering road bikes for the purpose of off-road leisure riding.

For the record I have the utmost respect for Graham and his efforts in preserving our history and also his dignity and professionalism he has shown and maintained throughout this thread.

Thanks Retro Spud. I have been involved with mountain-biking since 1983 and have been privileged to have met many of those involved with the early years of UK mountain-biking, long before the sport became popular. I also kept a lot of old magazines, documents and books from that period so can often comment with a high degree of historical accuracy regarding what took place in the UK pre 1990.

The sport of mountain-biking will continue as long as it is fun to ride bicycles over bumps, so interest in the story of how it all started will probably endure. I just hope that future generations don't believe the marketing hype that it all began with the riding of bikes down 'Repack'.

 

[rwm1962]

If the history is not documented & referenced accurately in 50+ years or sooner all sorts of theories will be bounced around & likely the wrong ones become 'fact' . The companies themselves are often poor guardians of their own history.

 

[rwm1962]

Duplicate post