Isn’t it funny how sometimes you can be ignorant of something until it is contrasted with something else.

Like the other day when I went straight from riding on my TT bike to my GT MTB and it was suddenly apparent to me that the GT is so comfortable it rides LIKE A SOFA. OK my MTB is made from titanium which is known for it’s forgiving nature, but the TT bike is carbon fibre which is also good for absorbing shocks.

This reminded me of the genius of the triple triangle frame design, super stiff where it needs to be but also with great vertical compliance because seat stays have a shallow angle. Of course vertical compliance is really important when going over the bumpy stuff, has anybody else come up with a design that rivals the triple triangle?

GT’s 3rd triangle, Yum

Thinking back to the 90’s GT were really forward looking back then. They were one of the first to aggressively drop those backwards, cumbersome, steel frames from their product line and forge ahead with Aluminium.

It is a pity that they seemed to lose momentum around the turn of the millenium. I mean what about other innovations that nobody has tried like making frames out of hi-tech plastics, or rear suspension that actually pivots around the Bottom bracket, how cool would that be! If they continued at the pace they were I bet they would have come up with game changing stuff like this and really taken a grip on the market, instead they seemed to sit back and fade away a bit.

Let’s have another look at that triple triangle

A triple triangle imbued bike battling with a gnarly tree

I see that bike , I see chain suck.

Whilst carbon can be designed to be more comfortable, I suspect your TT bike was built for maximum stiffness, so it’s not really a fair comparison.

What the hell is going on on your bars?

I think a lot of modern frames with traditional triangles will match that, if only because the stays don’t need to be beefy enough to cope with V-brakes trying to spread them apart each time they’re applied.

TT bikes aren’t renowned from being designed to have any compliance in them in any direction…

Maybe go from a modern FS (and most decent hardtails, Ti or otherwise) bike to the GT and see how it feels?

[edit] oh, and you need to sort the drainage out at the bottom of your garden.

They were bought out in 2001 which is when and why they went all Halfords 🙁 I’ve got a soft spot for 90s GTs though, I had a barge of a 1993 Outpost followed by a lovely chrome GT Vertigo with coaster Skyways… jumpers for goalposts…

My 90s GTs-

and I’ve got this waiting to be built-

but TT bike do jump well

Don’t get the triple triangle love. It makes for an ugly bike.

Load of bollocks. How much vertical compliance do you actually get from that frame?

I think you will find it has more to do with your back tyre and seatpost/saddle, not frame.

Mtb more comfy than TT bike?
You’re a genius you are…

I had a xizang back in the day ,it was the worst bike I owned I can say categorically, weighed nothing and because of this went no where near where you pointed it.

old zasker’s were great BITD, could be built in a number of ways, light for XC, jump bikes, 4X with a set of bombers etc.

However, I would never have put them in the compliant category. Not sure if it’s the ti of yours or you have a blind spot but plenty of others around that time (and since) far more compliant IMHO. Always felt GT’s were solid but harsh hardtails

It must be the material.

My Zaskar was extremely stiff. Fat stays, stiff material and short stay length. The main benefit I can see is lateral.

Mmm… dual slalom small Zaskar…

I had a xizang back in the day ,it was the worst bike I owned I can say categorically, weighed nothing and because of this went no where near where you pointed it.

What year was it? Mine is a ’97 which has beefed up downtube etc compared to the earlier years.
Mine is certainly solid – I did a Red Bull urban dual slalom on it once which included a bunch of stairs and a 2m drop and it did it all no problem, it was certainly going where I pointed it.

OP’s post is a joke right?

OP’s post is a joke right?

No, it looks like some kind of dropper.

Mine was 98 is had sids on it which got blamed for shite steering swapped to a Judy fsx…still shite steering it used to bounce of anything, try crossing ruts or roots even mild ones you ended up being knocked off course holding on till you could stop and that’s if the stays weren’t flexing enough to make the brakes a negotiation, had a Titanium diamond back before that, was a brilliant bike

That 3rd photo down – do you have 2x stems and bars on that bike?

OP’s post is a joke right?

No, it looks like some kind of dropper.

A gravity dropper to be precise, one of the more recent additions to the bike.
Another of the more recent additions is the tubeless wheels which I built up and put on the bike, nice big 2.2″ tyres @ 30psi almost makes up for the minimal suspension.

Laterally stiff, vertically compliant.

That 3rd photo down – do you have 2x stems and bars on that bike?

The thing on my handlebars is my mobile phone (holder was only £6 from Lidl!)
On the stem is a Garmin mount to which a ‘Hammerhead One’ is attached – a navigation device that uses little LED’s to point when turns are coming up.

Basically I was out exploring new places the day I took those shots and I pulled out my water bottles but forgot to take the other gubbins off.

Man likes his bike and all you lot want to do is piss on his chips.

Shame on you all.

Not sure if good quality trolling or monumental failure to comprehend a whole raft of engineering concepts 🙂

What’s the Hammerhead One thing like?

Mine was 98 is had sids on it which got blamed for shite steering swapped to a Judy fsx…still shite steering it used to bounce of anything, try crossing ruts or roots even mild ones you ended up being knocked off course holding on till you could stop and that’s if the stays weren’t flexing enough to make the brakes a negotiation, had a Titanium diamond back before that, was a brilliant bike

Ah yes it has quite a racey headtube angle so will go flying if hitting a rock or something like a root coming across the trail at an angle without unweighting the front wheel. I have thought that if I stick some 120mm travel forks on it would be a lot more forgiving than lower 70mm forks but then it wouldn’t be anyway near as retro.
The rear stays are quite flexy with V-brakes, at one point I was using a brake booster but then realised that there is still enough power to lock up the rear in most circumstances without the rear flexing much.

What’s the Hammerhead One thing like?

The hardware is ok, but their software still has loads of bugs (crashes etc). The system is generally usable so I am happy it was not a waste of money backing them but I am not sure they are going to improve.
I suspect it would be better to pay a bit more for a Garmin that can navigate, then don’t have to lug a mobile phone around plus it will tell you your speed and integrate with cadence or whatever other meters you want on your bike.

Mine is certainly solid …. it was certainly going where I pointed it.

and

will go flying if hitting a rock or something like a root coming across the trail at an angle

So it goes where you point it as long as it’s a smooth surface?

I’m not trying to knock you or your bike – you clearly love it and it does what you want for you but modern bikes (as a whole) are so much better at being, well, mountain bikes than anything from even 10 years ago. Your bike may do what you want but for most people they want the security and handling characteristics of modern geometry and components.

oldnpastit – Member
What’s the Hammerhead One thing like?

Indeed,

sounds like a good idea for following long off road routes for the first time but the website suggests (through the medium of pictures, I didn’t read anything) it probably only works well on road and has to be paired with their (basic Google maps road looking) app.

That tree’s gonna win.

OP’s post is a joke right?

No, it looks like some kind of dropper.

A gravity dropper to be precise, one of the more recent additions to the bike.
Another of the more recent additions is the tubeless wheels which I built up and put on the bike, nice big 2.2″ tyres @ 30psi almost makes up for the minimal suspension.

Priceless

Mine is certainly solid …. it was certainly going where I pointed it.

and

will go flying if hitting a rock or something like a root coming across the trail at an angle

So it goes where you point it as long as it’s a smooth surface?

I’m not trying to knock you or your bike – you clearly love it and it does what you want for you but modern bikes (as a whole) are so much better at being, well, mountain bikes than anything from even 10 years ago. Your bike may do what you want but for most people they want the security and handling characteristics of modern geometry and components.

I’m under no illusions about the dated handling of the bike[1]
The first bit you’ve quoted was me responding to the claim that “weighed nothing and because of this went no where near where you pointed it.” This to me sounded like a claim that the Xizang handles like a limp noodle, which it doesn’t so I disagreed.

Later there were some further details “shite steering it used to bounce of anything, try crossing ruts or roots even mild ones you ended up being knocked off course holding on till you could stop” and the light bulb lit, yes it does have a steep head angle (like most other race bikes of that era). You can steer it over rocky stuff but you need to allow the front to flow underneath you and shift your weight around – otherwise you end up looking like the guy on the cover of ST issue 106.

I’d like to pretend that I overcome the retro handling with my badass bike handling skills. However the truth is that just yesterday I didn’t pay full attention for a moment, hit a rock with too much weight on the front and went over the bars. It was at least quite a technical race course I witnessed a few people on modern full sus bikes crashing too 😀

[1]Well I am under some actually as I’ve hardly ridden modern bikes.

buckster- indeed.

Bikes innit. Meh. Ride ’em, & have fun. Go shopping on them or do jumps on them over a plank of wood and two bricks in the back street.

Pity GT were too busy forging ahead with aluminum to takes steps to prevent them cracking!
Meanwhile my backwards and cumbersome steel Kona is still in weekly use on the same trails as I use my Stumpjumper on, 20 years after I bought it… 😉

Pity GT were too busy forging ahead with aluminum to takes steps to prevent them cracking!
Meanwhile my backwards and cumbersome steel Kona is still in weekly use on the same trails as I use my Stumpjumper on, 20 years after I bought it…

Aha, well wrote, tis true, at the time an awful lot of manufacturers were trying to match the Kona such as Lava Dome, Cindercone, Explosifs et al for handling and speed/fun per £. GT didnt make it IMHO/memory, the Zaskar was good but not great and did break. Spesh did too with the stumpjumper (first S-Works?). GT were still pioneering fancy farmyard gates when the buzz was sloping TT. And that Kona style is still very much evident on most if not all HTs today

I think you will find it has more to do with your back tyre and seatpost/saddle, not frame.

Exactly.

Sorry I thought most people would pick up that the OP was satire because of the title, the silly comparison to a TT bike and vertical compliance, calling steel bike backwards, and the references to the GT STS/i-drive, and the collapse of GT in Europe.

Laterally stiff, vertically compliant.

Ah yes that’s the one 😀 I should’ve weaved that one in there.

Pity GT were too busy forging ahead with aluminum to takes steps to prevent them cracking!
Meanwhile my backwards and cumbersome steel Kona is still in weekly use on the same trails as I use my Stumpjumper on, 20 years after I bought it…

Back in ’96 I thought long and hard whether to buy a Gary Fisher Big Sur or a Kona Cinder Cone. All the hype about aluminium swayed my young mind and I went for the Big Sur and this is actually the same bike as in the first post, as you can see a few things have broken and been replaced! If I bought the Kona it might still be the original frame.

I remember another friend had a Rockhopper and he traded it up for a GT Pantera, back then we thought this was a great upgrade but now of course I’d choose the Rockhopper frame hands down, hahaha.

they are brilliant, and beautiful

I love all the GT’s being posted here. Keep them coming. I’ve got some project 2 forks that sometimes go on the Xizang as well. Anybody got a Vintage Zaskar to show? Or are they all cracked, lol.