What old rigid MTB has front and rear eyelets?



G

Gooserider

Guest
I'm thinking about building up an old steel MTB as a drop bar bike, and I'd
like to mount fenders and a rack. My current fendered bike is 52cm and I
have TCO(toe clip overlap). It's not a big deal but I don't like it. My
thinking is a MTB won't have this problem. Steel and lugged would be great,
but TIG steel is good. I know about the 99 Trek 970, any others?
 
L

Ludmila Borgschatz-Thudpucker, MD

Guest
Diamondback Ascent EX. Mine even has Bio-Pace.

"Gooserider" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> I'm thinking about building up an old steel MTB as a drop bar bike, and
> I'd like to mount fenders and a rack. My current fendered bike is 52cm and
> I have TCO(toe clip overlap). It's not a big deal but I don't like it. My
> thinking is a MTB won't have this problem. Steel and lugged would be
> great, but TIG steel is good. I know about the 99 Trek 970, any others?
>
 
W

Will

Guest
Gooserider wrote:
> I'm thinking about building up an old steel MTB as a drop bar bike, and I'd
> like to mount fenders and a rack. My current fendered bike is 52cm and I
> have TCO(toe clip overlap). It's not a big deal but I don't like it. My
> thinking is a MTB won't have this problem. Steel and lugged would be great,
> but TIG steel is good. I know about the 99 Trek 970, any others?


Trek Antelopes. There's a bazillion of them. Steel. Old are lugged,
newer are TIG. Old have double eyelets front and back and rack
fasteners (sleeves) on the seat stays. Newer have single eyelets.
Regular forks, no suspension. Plenty of tire clearance. Canti-brakes.
Overlap might not be an issue. They tend to have longer top tubes,
shorter stems, and a bit more rake in the fork than new units. My LBS
probably has 10 of them in it's used department. You may also want to
consider the aluminum models (Trek 7000's etc.) that came out mid-80s
on. My son had one.* Good bike. Good ride with the right tires.

* He went retro. Rides a Trek 613 now. Racked and fendered. If you're
not set on an AT (all terrain) frame, a lot of older Trek roadies had
Shimano 600 groups <g>. You can go double butted, lugged, 531 steel
that way. The sport tourers make good commuters.
 
L

landotter

Guest
Gooserider wrote:
> I'm thinking about building up an old steel MTB as a drop bar bike, and I'd
> like to mount fenders and a rack. My current fendered bike is 52cm and I
> have TCO(toe clip overlap). It's not a big deal but I don't like it. My
> thinking is a MTB won't have this problem. Steel and lugged would be great,
> but TIG steel is good. I know about the 99 Trek 970, any others?


Pretty much all of them short of race kit had eyelets. I can't actually
remember seeing one without that wasn't high end stuff that I'd never
think of converting.

BTW, Nashbar's still got those steel mtb frames on sale for $45. (with
a free seatpost!)They have seat stay threading for a rack, don't know
about eyelets. Easy enough to use P-clamps tho. Add a decent
sus-adjusted Tange fork from bikemannetwork.com, and you still end up
under $100 for frame and fork.

My local Craigslist currently has a rigid nice old mtb for peanuts, but
I doubt you live in Nashville. :p
 
W

Werehatrack

Guest
On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 17:09:38 GMT, "Gooserider"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>I'm thinking about building up an old steel MTB as a drop bar bike, and I'd
>like to mount fenders and a rack. My current fendered bike is 52cm and I
>have TCO(toe clip overlap). It's not a big deal but I don't like it. My
>thinking is a MTB won't have this problem. Steel and lugged would be great,
>but TIG steel is good. I know about the 99 Trek 970, any others?


IME, there are loads of older non-suspension mtbs with eyelets. Most
of them aren't particularly light, but they're quite common. The Trek
8x0 units mostly fit that description if I recall correctly.
--
Typoes are a feature, not a bug.
Some gardening required to reply via email.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.
 
B

bryanska

Guest
Mid-80s to early 90s Specialized Rockhoppers have two eyelets front and
back.

Watch out for chainstay-mounted rear U-brakes. They need frequent
adjustment. Later years have cantis.
 
G

Grolch

Guest
Try any late 80's, early 90's Bridgestones, The MB-1 for instance is lugged
and uses Ritchey Logic tubing....sweeeeet!


"Gooserider" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> I'm thinking about building up an old steel MTB as a drop bar bike, and
> I'd like to mount fenders and a rack. My current fendered bike is 52cm and
> I have TCO(toe clip overlap). It's not a big deal but I don't like it. My
> thinking is a MTB won't have this problem. Steel and lugged would be
> great, but TIG steel is good. I know about the 99 Trek 970, any others?
>
 
J

Joshua Putnam

Guest
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> I'm thinking about building up an old steel MTB as a drop bar bike, and I'd
> like to mount fenders and a rack. My current fendered bike is 52cm and I
> have TCO(toe clip overlap). It's not a big deal but I don't like it. My
> thinking is a MTB won't have this problem. Steel and lugged would be great,
> but TIG steel is good. I know about the 99 Trek 970, any others?


My old Bianchi Grizzly had front and rear eyelets. Can't remember its
year off-hand, the last year they came with full SunTour XC Pro.

--
[email protected] is Joshua Putnam
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/>
Braze your own bicycle frames. See
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/build/build.html>
 
G

Grolch

Guest
"Joshua Putnam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
>> I'm thinking about building up an old steel MTB as a drop bar bike, and
>> I'd
>> like to mount fenders and a rack. My current fendered bike is 52cm and I
>> have TCO(toe clip overlap). It's not a big deal but I don't like it. My
>> thinking is a MTB won't have this problem. Steel and lugged would be
>> great,
>> but TIG steel is good. I know about the 99 Trek 970, any others?

>
> My old Bianchi Grizzly had front and rear eyelets. Can't remember its
> year off-hand, the last year they came with full SunTour XC Pro.


Ah, SunTour XC Pro, Now that was a great groupo, no?

>
> --
> [email protected] is Joshua Putnam
> <http://www.phred.org/~josh/>
> Braze your own bicycle frames. See
> <http://www.phred.org/~josh/build/build.html>
 
M

mark

Guest
bryanska wrote:
> Mid-80s to early 90s Specialized Rockhoppers have two eyelets front and
> back.
>
> Watch out for chainstay-mounted rear U-brakes. They need frequent
> adjustment. Later years have cantis.
>

They not only need frequent adjustment, they get clogged up by whatever
glop you're riding through. Unless you're going to make a fixie with no
brakes or just a front brake, I would not buy any frame with a U-brake
mounted on the chainstay.

mark
 
S

SMS

Guest
mark wrote:
> bryanska wrote:
>> Mid-80s to early 90s Specialized Rockhoppers have two eyelets front and
>> back.
>>
>> Watch out for chainstay-mounted rear U-brakes. They need frequent
>> adjustment. Later years have cantis.
>>

> They not only need frequent adjustment, they get clogged up by whatever
> glop you're riding through. Unless you're going to make a fixie with no
> brakes or just a front brake, I would not buy any frame with a U-brake
> mounted on the chainstay.
>
> mark


Yeah, I had an old Fuji Sundance. Great frame, but those U brakes were
quite the pain in the butt.
 
M

mark

Guest
Gooserider wrote:
> I'm thinking about building up an old steel MTB as a drop bar bike, and I'd
> like to mount fenders and a rack. My current fendered bike is 52cm and I
> have TCO(toe clip overlap). It's not a big deal but I don't like it. My
> thinking is a MTB won't have this problem. Steel and lugged would be great,
> but TIG steel is good. I know about the 99 Trek 970, any others?
>
>

e-bay is full of rigid steel mountain bike frames and complete bikes,
most of the mountain bikes made before the mid 90s had fender eyelets. I
just scored a Bridgestone MB-3 frame and fork (Ritchey Logic lugged
steel frame) with fender eyelets that I don't think has ever been
ridden. I'm building it up with fenders, a rear rack, studded tires and
a hub generator lighting system to get to and from work in the winter.

Most modern road and touring bikes don't have TCO, how old is your bike?

mark
 
S

SMS

Guest
mark wrote:
> Gooserider wrote:
>> I'm thinking about building up an old steel MTB as a drop bar bike,
>> and I'd like to mount fenders and a rack. My current fendered bike is
>> 52cm and I have TCO(toe clip overlap). It's not a big deal but I don't
>> like it. My thinking is a MTB won't have this problem. Steel and
>> lugged would be great, but TIG steel is good. I know about the 99 Trek
>> 970, any others?
>>

> e-bay is full of rigid steel mountain bike frames and complete bikes,
> most of the mountain bikes made before the mid 90s had fender eyelets. I
> just scored a Bridgestone MB-3 frame and fork (Ritchey Logic lugged
> steel frame) with fender eyelets that I don't think has ever been
> ridden. I'm building it up with fenders, a rear rack, studded tires and
> a hub generator lighting system to get to and from work in the winter.
>
> Most modern road and touring bikes don't have TCO, how old is your bike?


The compact frames may have TCO, and are pretty common on road bikes,
though they don't exists, AFAIK, on touring bikes.
 
B

Booker C. Bense

Guest
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <[email protected]>,
Gooserider <[email protected]> wrote:
>I'm thinking about building up an old steel MTB as a drop bar bike, and I'd
>like to mount fenders and a rack. My current fendered bike is 52cm and I
>have TCO(toe clip overlap). It's not a big deal but I don't like it. My
>thinking is a MTB won't have this problem. Steel and lugged would be great,
>but TIG steel is good. I know about the 99 Trek 970, any others?
>


Pretty much every MTB made before suspension forks became
standard in the late 80's/early 90's. I have a Gary Fisher
Hoo Koo E Koo from 1988 that fits this description perfectly.
Here's a picture of it in action.

http://www.stanford.edu/~bbense/bike.jpg

The problem with most of these bikes is that they were setup
with really high riser stems. Getting a drop bar high enough
can be a problem. I used a Soma stem extender that I don't
think is made any more. The Nitto Periscope stem can be
"good enough".

_ Booker C. Bense

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBRSFQC2TWTAjn5N/lAQGPpgP+NrntHNno11w7OlT6ergdHHEYcRE6T1F9
sH0zqwzP7FXP2v6Xsia1rLTK/FBc3Z3ctFaUqdhXOaNbnqz5CQgF666rlHxTfQ00
OBj2qjZzq7SaxIYOlhRtWK5+0QX07uQyxI7TEdWlJDKhH+OXMx90In2NJeBGaUfL
/260J0LE7/E=
=IRCt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 
B

Booker C. Bense

Guest
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <[email protected]>,
SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
>mark wrote:
>> bryanska wrote:
>>> Mid-80s to early 90s Specialized Rockhoppers have two eyelets front and
>>> back.
>>>
>>> Watch out for chainstay-mounted rear U-brakes. They need frequent
>>> adjustment. Later years have cantis.
>>>

>> They not only need frequent adjustment, they get clogged up by whatever
>> glop you're riding through. Unless you're going to make a fixie with no
>> brakes or just a front brake, I would not buy any frame with a U-brake
>> mounted on the chainstay.
>>
>> mark

>
>Yeah, I had an old Fuji Sundance. Great frame, but those U brakes were
>quite the pain in the butt.


The do suck for riding in the dirt, but the actually have some
advantages for a touring bike that mostly stays on pavement or
dry dirt roads.

1. Heel/Pannier/rack clearance is not a issue.

2. Touring bikes tend to have enough load that
rear braking is a lot more useful than on a regular road bike.
If clean these brakes work very well because they are mounted
to the strongest part of the bike.

3. They work with the same levers that standard road brakes work
with.

_ Booker C. Bense


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBRSFRm2TWTAjn5N/lAQEF1QQAgU/jx+dKytF7w18Md3GYnE8djPHxijcY
L7tjK49wGuMklc7NdMqB8x9s+EmWSS4cJrI8WNv/CYt1YWQwDQds2LXRSRyxrBlM
hUB3QWTQH8IrUyFLzBZ3SKyjU5LJD7qDR+ankQdH46kGE6JZdQ6+K/4V4XiRT03/
FRcNOZTltkA=
=gXTy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 
M

mark

Guest
Booker C. Bense wrote:

>
> The do suck for riding in the dirt, but the actually have some
> advantages for a touring bike that mostly stays on pavement or
> dry dirt roads.
>
> 1. Heel/Pannier/rack clearance is not a issue.
>
> 2. Touring bikes tend to have enough load that
> rear braking is a lot more useful than on a regular road bike.
> If clean these brakes work very well because they are mounted
> to the strongest part of the bike.
>
> 3. They work with the same levers that standard road brakes work
> with.
>
> _ Booker C. Bense

I used a U-brake equipped bike ('86 Stumpjumper) on a tour through the
UK a few years back, the U brakes didn't do a damn thing for me that the
cantilevers on my current tourer doesn't do as well. I still think
U-brakes are one of the stupider ideas the bicycle industry has come up
with.

mark
 
G

Gooserider

Guest
"mark" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:O%[email protected]
> Gooserider wrote:
>> I'm thinking about building up an old steel MTB as a drop bar bike, and
>> I'd like to mount fenders and a rack. My current fendered bike is 52cm
>> and I have TCO(toe clip overlap). It's not a big deal but I don't like
>> it. My thinking is a MTB won't have this problem. Steel and lugged would
>> be great, but TIG steel is good. I know about the 99 Trek 970, any
>> others?

> e-bay is full of rigid steel mountain bike frames and complete bikes, most
> of the mountain bikes made before the mid 90s had fender eyelets. I just
> scored a Bridgestone MB-3 frame and fork (Ritchey Logic lugged steel
> frame) with fender eyelets that I don't think has ever been ridden. I'm
> building it up with fenders, a rear rack, studded tires and a hub
> generator lighting system to get to and from work in the winter.
>
> Most modern road and touring bikes don't have TCO, how old is your bike?
>
> mark


I have a 2005 Gunnar Sport. I'm running 32s and fenders, and I have TCO. I
think most bikes 52cm and under would benefit from a smaller wheel size if
they're going to be fendered. I love the Gunnar---it's comfortable, fast,
and beautiful. I only have the TCO during slow sharp turns, so I've learned
to anticipate it. A 26 inch or even 650B would help, I think.

Mike
 
M

mark

Guest
Gooserider wrote:

> I have a 2005 Gunnar Sport. I'm running 32s and fenders, and I have TCO. I
> think most bikes 52cm and under would benefit from a smaller wheel size if
> they're going to be fendered. I love the Gunnar---it's comfortable, fast,
> and beautiful. I only have the TCO during slow sharp turns, so I've learned
> to anticipate it. A 26 inch or even 650B would help, I think.
>
> Mike
>
>

I think putting 700C rims on smaller frames creates a lot of problems.
The only benefit is to the bike maker, who doesn't have the expense of
stocking two or three different rim and tire sizes for each bike model.
The Rivendell Atlantis is made with 700C rims in the larger frame sizes
and 26" rims in the smaller (<56 cm) sizes, which I think makes a lot of
sense. My tourer has a 58cm seat tube and uses 26" wheels, I can run
26x1.75" tires with fenders and have no TCO and room for a full size (28
oz) water bottle under the down tube. I think bringing back 650B tires
and rims is a great idea, it lets bicycle makers pick the optimum tire
diameter for each frame size.

mark
 
G

Gooserider

Guest
"mark" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:4%[email protected]
> Gooserider wrote:
>
>> I have a 2005 Gunnar Sport. I'm running 32s and fenders, and I have TCO.
>> I think most bikes 52cm and under would benefit from a smaller wheel size
>> if they're going to be fendered. I love the Gunnar---it's comfortable,
>> fast, and beautiful. I only have the TCO during slow sharp turns, so I've
>> learned to anticipate it. A 26 inch or even 650B would help, I think.
>>
>> Mike

> I think putting 700C rims on smaller frames creates a lot of problems. The
> only benefit is to the bike maker, who doesn't have the expense of
> stocking two or three different rim and tire sizes for each bike model.
> The Rivendell Atlantis is made with 700C rims in the larger frame sizes
> and 26" rims in the smaller (<56 cm) sizes, which I think makes a lot of
> sense. My tourer has a 58cm seat tube and uses 26" wheels, I can run
> 26x1.75" tires with fenders and have no TCO and room for a full size (28
> oz) water bottle under the down tube. I think bringing back 650B tires and
> rims is a great idea, it lets bicycle makers pick the optimum tire
> diameter for each frame size.
>
> mark


Surly does the exact same thing with the Long Haul Trucker. It is a good
idea.
 
J

jdsingleton

Guest
On Sun, 01 Oct 2006 17:09:38 GMT, "Gooserider"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>I'm thinking about building up an old steel MTB as a drop bar bike, and I'd
>like to mount fenders and a rack. My current fendered bike is 52cm and I
>have TCO(toe clip overlap). It's not a big deal but I don't like it. My
>thinking is a MTB won't have this problem. Steel and lugged would be great,
>but TIG steel is good. I know about the 99 Trek 970, any others?


1998 Giant Yukon. I think the suspension fork was a 1999 addition, but
it could have been 2000. (I haves a '98.)

Jim