PACE RC100?
WTF?
what was out the box about that? it was just a bog standard XC hardtail but built with square tubing, it was about as out the box as purple bar ends or biscuit coloured panaracers! or am I missing something?
kids bikes were produced with square tubing years before PACE even existed.

The square tubing on the Pace frames were only used because they couldn't get hold of round butted tubing that had the strength, weight and stiffness that they were looking for.

By having square tubes the guys at Pace could easily 'butt' the tubes externally to provide the tubing they needed.

Either the British Eagle Trailbreaker

Or the Boss Crag

Asda are really changing up the game imo

GW when the Pace was released it was like nothing else that had been done before. Up to that point, every other bike that was the top of the range for that particular manufacturer was basically a Tange Prestige frame with an XT group set. There were a few speciality frame builders like Dave Yates and Chas Roberts (Chas made the bikes for Tim Gould and David Baker in the Peugot team IIRC) putting out bespoke frames but other than that, it was all pretty standard.

The Pace RC100 was a paradigm shift because of the approach they took to building a top end race bike.
– They were the first to adopt hydraulic brakes (albeit rim brakes
– First to adopt asymetrical rear stays
– Their one piece stem steerer combo was not a first as Klein were using something similar, but the Pace system was still groundbreaking
– They used bespoke components to get the best performance, e.g. using Bullseye cranks and magura brakes.
– The BB shell was wider IIRC to match the rear stays, give more clearance and make the axle stronger
– The forks were amazing; sure they weren't the first to make composite forks (I think Keith Bontrager was), but their straight blade 531 forks were a work of art and stiffer than just about anything else at the time
– Their tubing was also revolutionary, even if it wasn't perfect. They made the tubing in house rather than rely on an stock Tange Prestige tubeset in order to get what they wanted. It's that kind of radical approach to designing and manufacturing the bike that makes it a paradigm shift.

Besides, anyone who rode one at the time was never left in any doubt that this bike was light years ahead in terms of ride quality. The thing was like a laser guided missile and weighed the square root of **** all when compared to other bikes.

GW out of interest, were you riding mountain bikes at the time? If you were I am surprised you don't remember it as being such a shift at the time. Sure it might now not look that way, but you have to put it in the context of its period.

I'm just surprised that Pace didn't continue that level of innovation.

Early Muddy Fox bikes (Courier and Explorer) – brought decent kit to the masses even if some of it (remember those chainstay mounted "frog leg" style brakes?!) was a bit daft.

Early Tushingham (now Orange) bikes – lots of innovation and crazy 80s colourways

The Stumpjumper – at the forefront of XC riding for many years. The first one brought high quality engineering to the masses (plus I have two!)

Original Joe Murray period Kona steel frames, arguably the true precursor to all of the current steel trail frames; with its geometry and ride…

That's what I was going to say. Perfect example of a paradigm shift.

I'm just surprised that Pace didn't continue that level of innovation.

me too

What's with all this Pace nonsense? They were just being **** for the sake of being ****. None of their 'ground breaking' ideas have gone anywhere and their current bikes are awful.

GeeTee – Yeah, I was riding mtbs before Pace brought out that frame (not that my memory's good enough to remember when exactly that was? 😳 ) I did ride with a few riders that shelled out for one though and comparing their riding to mine the frames were not as good (well, certainly nowhere near as strong anyway) as anything I rode at the time – mainly Aluminium hardtails, same as these days.
the Pace wasn't the first Aluminium hardtail frame. and I must admit, I have no idea what was but whatever it was that would be closer to the "paradigm shift" than it.

please explainhow the **** they rode better than anything else? maybe remove the rose tinted specs first tho? 😉

Pace was full of a few firsts so yes it probably deserves to be in the list. It was just a hardtail – but it was 'engineered' to do a specific job – go very fast very quickly – the BB was a step forward – I think at that time it was oversized and the press-in bearings were seen as a step forward – the stem/steerer was one piece and integrated and proved to be rather effective – comapred to what else was around then – it was progress. Assymetric stays – stronger rear wheels – at the time they weren't very strong so anything to improve that was excellent. Hydraulic rim brakes – 'consistent' power in all conditions.

Externally butted – I sspect was more ease of manufacturer and marketing than anything else but it did allow triple butting.

At the time it was a shift in how things were done – nowadays it would be seen as old hat but back then (89/90?) it was the future and it seemed to be a very long way off…

Not a bike but I'd say the original Marzocchi Bomber suspension fork.
Before that everything was elastomer, maybe with an oil damping cartridge but basically little lumps of rubber. Then Marzocchi came along with a coil sprung, open bath fork with massively longer travel than anything else around (4" compared to the usual 2.5") and suddenly the elastomer was dead and fork development stepped up several gears at once.

I think the original Rock Shox DS1 was spring and possible oil – elastomers didn't hit the scene for a couple of years of suspension offerings…I think…

please explainhow the **** they rode better than anything else? maybe remove the rose tinted specs first tho?
You know I think you might be right. It's probably a combination of being 16, relatively naive and not having much else to have compared them to. It's what I recall, but yes, heavily rose tinted, halcyon days, jumpers for goal posts etc, memory.
Cannondale might well be credited of making aluminium (especially oversize) popular although almost certainly not the fist alu tubed bike in existence. The 3.0 frame came out around 1990 and I remember it being very stiff but paper thin. A few guys in our club had them and dented them within a few weeks.

Although I'm not personally a fan, I'd say the Marin Mount Vision. When Lazenby won an XC NPS round on one, there was a perceptable shift in attitudes and (more importantly) expectations of what an XC FS bike was, and what it could do.

I'm NOT saying "without it, we wouldn't have Anthems and Epics", but it certainly helped shove the market forward in a positive way.

Paradigm shift?

This.

http://bmxmuseum.com/image/dscn0016_lg.jpg

RS1s were air-sprung (1988?), I's not sure what the first coil-sprung fork was but I wouldn't be surprised if it was the Bomber.

Loads of alloy frames around before 1990, including Cannondale's efforts, IIRC Klein also made a name with them (I rode an early Klein, dreadful!).

not sure what the first coil-sprung fork was but I wouldn't be surprised if it was the Bomber.

Nope – there were some about shortly after the RS1.

Raleigh bomber.
Turner Stinger.
Marin Rift Zone *range*.
Stumpjumper.
Konas.

OK so MOST forks were elastomer apart from early RockShox like the Mag 21 – silly expensive, 46mm of travel, a pain to set up due to the seals not being as good then as they are now.

Suddenly Marzocchi are on the scene with a fork offering twice the travel, twice the reliability and at half the price. It forced RockShox and Manitou to look at what they were building and go back to the drawing boards.

Most developments now are just refinements of existing kit – things like platform damping, 8sp -> 9sp -> 10sp, none of it is particularly radical. Early designs like the Pace were what really changed the way people think about "what a bike is" and what application it can have.

5th Element and other shocks with pro-pedal/ decent compression damping.

Stopped singlepivots dying a death compared to linkage designs IMO.

8sp -> 9sp -> 10sp, none of it is particularly radical

isn't that a negative improvement as a narrower chain means higher loading and faster wear ?

Cove Stiffee – long travel hardtail!
Gt rts1 first decent full susser
kona Cindercone modern ish geometry and sloping top tube
turner something proper working suspension.

Kestrel Nitro.
Monocoque carbon full suspension frame.
In 1988.
Took a long time for every one else to catch up.

The oversize press fit BB that everyone seems to be fixated on was a common U.S. BMX standard. That had been around in the 80's when I raced them. Pace might have resized it a little, I can't remember the dimensions now.
Suntour made a 2 piece crank upgrade that most of us adopted back in the day for BMX racing.
It's not too different from current Lapierre BB and cranks. but 19mm steel axle not 24m alloy.

This thread is bringing back alot of mermories! The KEstral being one f them. I'm surprised no one has mentioned the Proflex bikes, my bro had a 750 and a 952 if I remember correctly. Rear suspensiion and the flexstem. Groundbreaking stuff!
Rick. 😀

Any suss design can bob, not just single pivot.

not sure what the first coil-sprung fork was but I wouldn't be surprised if it was the Bomber.

Nope – there were some about shortly after the RS1.

such as?