I've got a '93 Kona Kilauea frame that I'm rather fond of and want to tool up for the round the world trip I fancy in a few years time.
The problem is that the geometry is of it's time i.e. head up, arse down and not suited to big miles.
My question is how to raise the front end without it handling like a pig. Would a high rise stem suffice (not my preferred option), or could a modern suspension corrected rigid fork do the trick (looks wise I'd rather go for this).
Many thanks in advance for any advice.

The problem is that the geometry is of it's time i.e. head up, arse down and not suited to big miles.
My question is how to raise the front end without it handling like a pig

Maybe it's me but the above sounds like a contradiction, firstly head up arse down is how most of the bikes we sold to long distance riders were set up albeit often with an outrageous number of stackers but these are about the best way of making it comfortable.

Also I have to say that the bike is probably a bit underbuilt for round the world as I guess that you will be carrying big luggage front and rear and riding on made and unmade roads. For what will probably be the best possible tool for the job i'd recommend a Thorn Raven Tour or Nomad but these are not cheap and as Robin will say, it's possible to ride round the world on a bike from a skip but you will probably have to fix it more frequently, a cheaper option might be to build around an on-one inbred

Kind of agree with the above comments. The Kilu was built as an entry level race bike, long, low and responsive handling,lightweight tubing. Konas of that time had a bad habit of snapping at the driveside dropout too, which is fixable, but best avoided. It's exactly the area which would be stressed by heavy panniers. Sorry to sound so negative about your plans, but I'm sure there are better bikes for the job for not much money.

Gents, many thanks for your responses. You're most likely right but I was so hoping to continue my life journey with this frame, oh well.

Just re-read that and would like to distance myself from the hippy 'life journey' phrase. Apologies.

I've got a '93 Kilauea – high stem works great, long forks will ruin it. But again, probably not the ideal tourer. It'll do it but aside from its light weight (and if yours is like mine it's shed some ounces over the years) the tubing profile is very thin so it'll flex like buggery under full load. Again repeating the above, for a round-the-world tourer the newer Taiwanese-built Thorns are ideal. They're ugly and you have to deal with Robin's opinions as you see fit, but the build quality is nothing short of outstanding and they're designed for just that job.

Erk, torn between my love for old Konas and my equally great love for my Thorn Raven Nomad.

The Thorn is more bike than I'll probably ever need (I've lost whole 45l panniers of motivation in recent years) but it rides sooooo sweetly and can handle silly loads (30ish kilos of shopping, or the Brompton I carried home the other day on the rack).

Round the world it would just be perfect.

The Kona would make a really great commuting bike, or a lightweight singlespeed, but perhaps wouldn't be ideal loaded up.

I recently hybridisered a stunning Explosif…

…which was an unforgiveably criminal thing to do!

Bez speaks the truth… very thin tubing and I've seen a few pics (esp of SS conversions) snapping that tube. Here's mine which rides really nicely, yeah it's long and low-ish but still lots of fun in the woods. "Eyebrow" steering with a 100m stem.

I keep thinking about selling it, but then I ride it and think "nope" 🙂

I'm not going to comment on what you've done to that Explosif bananaworld, but I really like your mudguard stays, that's a lovely touch. 😀

Here's my '95 one – it also snapped the d/s dropout but has been repaired. The position is relatively long/low but then that's for mtbing. If I was going touring then I wouldn't want a parachute position.

Anyway, as above, if your hasn't snapped at the dropout yet, I definitely wouldn't go touring with it as that's quite likely to happen under full load. I've ridden mine for touring but with a pretty heavy rucksack rather than panniers but I guess the loading is the same and I didn't have any real issue with flex/etc.

I don't think that the early Kileau was that light (the first Kileau was a sort of Biro navy blue). Maybe by the standards of the day but not by modern standards. 27 lbs for a rigid bike

I took mine round the world (not pedalled). I don't suppose it was ideal but it loved it. I used it for Mounatin biking in Colorado and Utah. We also did about 3 weeks of pannier touring off road in the states as well. Including Pearl Pass.

We then did the South Island of New Zealand.

When we got back I put a 80mm fork on it. 80mm forks were a bit shorter in those days. I thought that this improved the handling which surprised me as it was built before Kona started doing suspension corrected geometry.

If I was off road touring again I'd got for a short suspension fork (A Z2 or Z3 Marzocchi) as I got really bored being bumped around all day on quite a few occasions

I think a shorter steeper stem and riser will be good. Here's mine in touring mode on the white rim trail

I think the 92 (the Biro blue one) and the 93 differed only in the rear tubes, the 93 used a butted rear end IIRC and was quoted at 4.5lb for the 18". My 20" weighed in at 4lb after its fourth spray job, which is a disturbing loss through rust and repeated sandblasting 🙂

Nice to see one that's been respectfully abused though.

…which was an unforgiveably criminal thing to do!

I. Don't. Quite. Know. What. To. Say.

Other than I take it back about mine looking garish in snowing commuting mode

Cheers Bez good to know what year it was

sadly I lost it to thieving $%*& who took it from the garage…