Well I’ve ordered a small and medium and will try both as they accept returns, though also got an eye on a cromo touring frame for this project which will take up to 60mm tyres and seems designed for flat bar use. Though I want the tange… Have an early 90s GT teqursta in tange infinity and it’s remarkably lighter than a timberline of the same size…

Smashing – looking good btw.

Standover on Small / Mediums anyone?

I know it says on the chart on the ebay listing but would be good to get some real life confirmation – Seems like traditional road sizing but since it’s a semi-sloping top tube it depends at what point along the top tube they measured it… Some companies measure from right under the saddle, some from the mid point of the top tube, which IMO is more realistic…

Cheers again

Anyone got a medium and would be able to measure stand over? I’d like to run one with flat bars as already have dedicated road bikes and some spare MTB calipers. I have 79cm stand over on my road bikes which touches gently… I can see I might want more clearance with a bike like this for canal path use, but think the small would be too short in the top tube for flat bars… (I’m 5ft 8…) Ta!

My gf’s Triban 500 is good – attention to detail – smaller bikes come in 650c wheels sizes. I’d personally want a road bike with more tyre clearance… Good looking bike too, but not overly nick-able.

A mechanic I know who has worked in Decathlon tells me the bikes are generally decent, bar the hubs. Also, the flat bar road bike tries to mix MTB shifters with road front mech (or flat bar road shifters with road front mech) which doesn’t work with modern drivetrains, so it never works optimally.

Get the feeling this has gone a bit off topic!

Magura HS33’s with the slave cylinders mounted upside down, like I have on my ’88 Explosif.

Or a Sturmey 5 speed hub gear with coaster brake…

You’ll get those U brakes to work fine. Pretend you are building a modern TT bike and you’ll be trendy.
Are you sure that GT is 93? I would have thought that U brakes were gone by then. 88/89 would be more likely but I may be wrong.

Yep the Timberline is 92-3 and the Tequesta is similar period. Both have 1 1/8th quill stems whereas before about 91 they used 1 inch I think, which would make them a bit less useful by modern MTB standards. I checked up thoroughly before I bought them because I didn’t want to end up with 1 inch headsets given that I knew I would likely tinker with them.

Have I gone upmarket? Can’t remember the last time I saw a riveted chainring on a reasonably decent bike.

You possibly have. I know the cost of a decent bike is more than the non-biking population would believe, but there is sometimes a loss of perspective within the biking world as to what constitutes ‘decent’. E.g. a roughly £800 Scott aluminium MTB I borrowed from the owners when staying at an B&B recently. In many ways a superior bike to an alloy bike that cost twice as much in, say 1999, which is in general more than satisfactory for most riders’ purposes, but with cost-cutting features including the aforementioned riveted chainrings. I wouldn’t buy one, because I like the idea that something is maintain-able and is made to last, but it doesn’t make it complete rubbish.

You could argue that having a riveted chainring by it’s nature means it can’t be a decent bike. But we’d be getting off topic…

how are you going to address the lack of rear brakes on either of the GTs.

Even well set up U brakes were optimistic at best….

Well I’ve ridden the Timberline in hilly Sheffield and it seems fine to me. Perhaps my expectations were lower as I’ve never used hydraulics and ride road bikes with rim brakes in the winter, but it seemed no better/worse than a well-set up canti…

I’ve just started a similar project this morning on a 1990 Marin Pine Mountain. I’m amazed how well made components were back then, all the Deore DX is still in great shape. Replaced cantis with V brakes, replaced all cables, put new grips on and properly decreased and cleaned all the drive train. Ordered some 1.5 City Jet tyres to hopefully make it a pretty fun commuter.

I agree – small things like having replaceable chainrings rather than the riveted c%@p on even otherwise fairly decent bikes today speak of a time when fewer corners were cut and less of a ‘disposable’ culture. Rose tinted specs probably!

But why replace the cantis!!!??? They rule.

Can you also use rim brakes with the frame set?

Cheers,

Sb88

Worth stretching the budget for (new)XT hubs if you can mainly for the better weather sealing or keep a look out on ebay for NOS Xt/Xtr if the prices are agreeable.

Built a couple of pairs myself so far and its worth taking time whilst building them to de-stress the spokes regularly to remove any wind-up, simple process just involving grabbing hold of alternating pairs of spokes and giving a strong squeeze.

Are you using a truing stand, or old frame/forks to build them with?

Just taken delivery of a lightly used Deore XT rear hub – Shinier than the new stuff! Keeping eye out for matching front hub…

Probably lace up at home, possibly tighten up and true at local bike co-op as they have a rentable workspace…

Not a expert on this but would go with a current Deore hub,as it will be backward compatible with 7/8/9speed.

Regards building with a disc hub I have done it with a rear wheel on a Saracen I was restoring/modernising.
Although the frame was v-brake only my thoughts were it could be used as a spare on one of my newer bikes.
I built the wheel with a XT centrelock style hub which has a moulded rubber cap over the centrelock splines so its not immediately obvious that its a disc hub(purely to keep the retro aesthetic)

Regards fitting spoke washers so people do, the experts reckon it reduces stress on the flanges/eyelets. Personally never seen a wheel with them yet and most seem to manage just fine without them.

Unovolo – thanks for a matter-of-fact and simpler reply – much more straightforward than some mechanics’ answers I’ve had!

Basically: get latest/ish hubs. Get same ones front and rear. Make wheel! Spacers for 7/8sp cassette as necessary…

Jumble – the old forks were 1997! New studs are about 1.5mm longer in terms of the whole stud, including the thicker part, but the same along the thinner part…

Is this a common thing / incompatible standards?

Hmmm. Tried swapping round arms on the studs, as well as the springs in the arms, to test this – both arms go onto the stud the same amount – the only thing that makes it pop out on either side is the spring being too short…

I wonder if the original owner (2nd hand bike) replaced the left hand side spring on both front and back, with a shorter one?

I just examined the innards of a similar-era Altus brake from my gf’s old bike (slightly lower end but similar brake) and it has different – coloured springs too – one gold, one silver, but these are the same length as each other (incidentally, they’re the same length as the shorter one of mine which pops out, so I can’t steal one!)

Makes me think that the springs should be the same length as each other…

Bigyinn – no – the ‘sticky out bit’ on the spring is the same length whichever way round it is.

Stevet1 – It’s not binding, but I have noticed that even when fully screwed in, the allen bolt does not ‘press’ the brake arm towards the fork leg. i.e the brake stud seems a bit long so the allen bolt can’t tighten any further onto the brake arm. Some sort of washer might work to apply greater pressure to the arm to push it harder against the fork?

Exactly. Very pleased with the position and I use Ergon grips.
Another gratuitous picture…

This is the route I’m going down… a very shallow drop trekking bar flipped to give a bit of drop. Cheap to see if it’s good first…

http://www.sjscycles.co.uk/humpert-toulouse-handlebars-254mm-clamp-prod34027/

http://www.wheelies.co.uk/p45934/ETC-Northroad-Handleber.aspx

This one’s a particular bargain:

http://www.parkersofbolton.co.uk/products/raleigh-trekking-comfort-alloy-handlebars?CAWELAID=620001070000090016&CAGPSPN=pla&catargetid=620001070000095017&cadevice=c&gclid=Cj0KEQjw98mvBRD-_ciSovKhq7gBEiQAEvsBZxhVoHNOQ03hqMpayundJSfcRlHJymLyLoQze_FtLUIaAsfX8P8HAQ

What could possibly go wrong?
It might be ok but who can say?
If you value your teeth and bones maybe rethink your plan.

Uh oh. Someone’s already done it…

https://www.lfgss.com/conversations/236470/?offset=150

Surely you just want to put the controls in the right place. I give you the Soma Sparrow bars, upturned, you will need a longer stem. Available in multiple widths including very wide. Love mine.

Hmmm. Nice. by ‘upturned do you mean flipped over so there is a slight drop, like a very shallow-drop drop bar?

Bit like a North Road bar, which I’m also considering.

Yeah, they need angling in more.

What I really want is a bar like a reversed mustache bar, but with flat portions instead of the sharp curve, to give 3 positions:

(From inner-most to outer-most)
1. Angled inner portion for ‘aero’ position that doesn’t drop you too low.
2. Flat, close portion for upright riding (possible brake position)
3. Bar end type horns for climbing that aren’t actually too far forwards as the bar has already swept back (possible brake position)

Maybe like an angled back riser bar with bar ends, but less ugly.

This is nearly it but doesn’t angle back in the centre

http://www.sjscycles.co.uk/humpert-comfort-revoshift-handlebars-254-mm-clamp-silver-prod28189/

That would be sweetness.

Anyway.

Now I’ve woken up a bit more and seen sense, I’ll try a cheaper version of the loop bar.

One of these.

http://www.sjscycles.co.uk/humpert-boomerang-handlebars-254-mm-clamp-prod32098/#bottomsection

http://www.sjscycles.co.uk/humpert-space-handlebars-254mm-clamp-prod34020/

Opinions on which?

I’m using some old Deore friction shifters which can be bent ( :?) to clamp on the inner portion to get them out the way.

Hmmm. Just bought a butterfly bar (!) that I’m not overly convinced by (lots of positions but they’re all ‘extra’ positions – you lose out on the normal flat bar position) so don’t want to spend much until I’ve sold some bits.

What I really want is a bar shaped like this:

_____
/ / \ \
I / \ I
I____________/ \ _____________I

All genuinely usable positions
– Angled inner portion for an narrower, still somewhat aero upright position
– Flat bar portion for upright / control
– Angled bar end portion for climbing / accelerating.

Sort of a reversed mustache bar, but with flat portions instead of a curve. Or an angled-back riser bar with bar ends, but neater than that.

Edit: Ok, so it doesn’t like my drawing, so just imagine a mustache bar reversed, with flat portions instead of a sharp curve.

None of them look like a letter H.

This does: http://store.velo-orange.com/index.php/casey-crazy-bar.html

Drool.

This is a less elegant solution…

http://www.on-one.co.uk/files/oo/blogs/original/p10100111qw01.jpg

Width isn’t a problem for me – for touring on roads/light tracks I’d want a width closer to a road drop bar (42-44cm) than a regular MTB bar (though when I rode MTBs they were only about 52cm wide!)

But yeah, you’re probably right – I imagine pulling back on the bars from the grip portion, with the closed loop, the force is taken up by the whole bar, but with it cut, you’re basically yanking back on a piece of metal welded to a bar in a vice…

So why do I still want to try it…

Seems like a design flaw in the original model to me in a way – why not have a swept back / Mary bar, then weld in the front section. Welding on the bar clamp section doesn’t seem like the “safest” solution. But for several hundred quid/dollars, I’m sure they’re good.

Get an ironmonger to make one?
My local guy made a headset extracting tool out of a bit of curtain pole for me for £1, so for some custom steel J-bars, maybe £3 and a packet of biscuits (cookies, to the Americans)… ?

:wink:

Hmmm, well I’ll stick with the Big Dummy’s when they arrive – will use 5-6cm-ish of steerer tube to add bar height, shouldn’t be a problem with a steel steerer for touring on roads / light tracks. Though the bike’s gonna end up looking like this…

http://www.thorncycles.co.uk/bikes#thethornsherpa

Sweet…

Glad I’ve not gone shorter though – nearly went with Identiti tuning fork at 395mm

I wonder if the Big Dummy fork *might* be a tiny bit harsh (fatter tyre there too perhaps)? It *looks* pretty tough (in a good way), but that aside, and based on my experience only – what’s not to like?

As you’ve found, once you go up to / above 440mm A-C there is lots more choice (as that’s ~100mm suspension fork equivalence).

Uh oh…. No-one’s told me my frame’s gonna snap… am I going to go for a longer fork in the end…?

Also, are those Jones H bars? I’ve just been ogling them…

Rose bikes have a fork that shouldbe up your street IIRC.

Hey – they do a perfectly decent looking canti-only fork, which I reckon is the same as the one I picked up from my LBS (unbranded, black, chunky tubes) but haven’t installed. However my thoughts were, while I could spend £35 on this, and still need a new fork when my front wheel goes and I end up getting a disc wheel, I might as well spend £65 on a disc-ready fork.

http://www.rosebikes.com/products/bike-components/forks/mtb-forks/stiff/

Yeah, their forks are stiff…

I bought a 425mm salsa cromoto for a hardtail that was originally specced with Marz Z2 Flys. Z2s were 432mm A2C, so I figured it would have sagged shorter than 425mm just riding along.

It’s very quick steering! It was always that sort of frame though. I could easily have gone for 445s. Pfff. A Hugo and a Dirt wizard up front have taken a little of the edge off now. Could be just right.

The Cromoto is a super looking fork – I love the silver dropouts – but (a) a but pricey for my second hand bike (b) not very available at the moment

So you reckon frame-wise it’s a do-able job to go up to roughly 450mm? There was a sus-forked version of this Trek bike in 1997, but on looking it up, the fork was only 56mm travel! RST 161b: Similar to what I insisted was fitted to my totally-suspension inappropriate Dawes Saratoga when I was about 11 one Christmas. Old Mr Scott in the LBS rolled his eyes and my dad (rides a 1970s custom built Fuji road bike) had to look away in embarrassment. They were ace and turned my paper-round bike into a dirt machine.

I’d be less keen on adding fork height to a big dummy – loaded up, there’s going to be more force to cope with. Personally, I wouldn’t worry about 2cm, but 4-5, maybe I’d worry a bit.

But in percentage terms, it’s adding 10% to the moment – are you in the heaviest top 5 percent of riders Surly designed the bike to cope with, and loading it with the heaviest 5% of loads they considered?

Probably not, so you’re probably fine adding 4-5cm

IANAE.

Hi – think you’ve misunderstood – I’m just getting the fork, not the Big Dummy bike – and putting it onto a 1997 rigid Trek MTB, so my worry is adding to the original fork length and stressing the head tube / really terribly altering handling. Everything I see online about getting longer sus forks warns against adding more than 20mm fork length due to head tube stress, so I wondered if the same applied to rigid (maybe even more so as there is no suspension to absorb some of the force). (I’m 10 stone, which is 140 pounds in US language).

I was wondering if I could safely go even longer than the 20mm extra length the Big Dummy fork will add, as there is a greater range of forks at the 445mm+ length, including a cheaper Nashbar one!

I’m also curious as to the effect on geometry – putting the numbers into an online bike geometry calculator suggests that it will increase the effective top tube, but decrease reach…