Monday, August 08, 2016

Put a fork in it...it's done

A friend had a mid-1990s Iron Horse with a blown-out Marzocchi fork. After brief consideration of rebuilding or replacing the suspension fork, he went for a basic rigid fork.

Step one: prepare the mechanic.


The frame has some classic 1990s bullshit frame details


"Innovation" was the word of the decade. Setting aside the innovations that were actually from the 1890s, there was a lot of weird looking stuff marketed as technical advancement. Before the suspension revolution obliterated the old world, mountain bikes were a lot like any bike. They started out as beater bikes, after all. So the facade of innovation was decorated with tweaks to the traditional diamond frame, some of which did enhance strength and performance. Others either did nothing or were outright wrong turns. In any case, their days were numbered, as the spring-and-linkage crowd worked in their secret labs on the new species that would change the sport forever.

With a fork in it, it's done.


The new mountain bikes can take more pounding and eat up gnarlier terrain, at the cost of more moving parts and more systems to maintain: hydraulic brakes, pivots pivots pivots, shock absorbers, seals seals seals... Yes, the riding experience is either more comfortable or more rad. You also need a heftier budget in both money and time to keep one in top shape...or even just functional. Or you can ride it into the ground, as many people do, and replace it -- or abandon the activity -- when the bike finally fails completely.

7 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  2. None of my bikes have hydraulics or springs involved in the suspension or braking systems. Not even the saddles. There ARE springs in the quick releases and some of the rear racks, however, which I don't think have any effect on bike ride quality or braking.

    ReplyDelete
  3. One of my bikes has springy suspension, then again it was made in the 60's so is still working fine...

    ReplyDelete
  4. The world of bicycles has spawned legions of weird mutations. If nothing else, the older ones were built more robustly because the concept of disposability had not been as thoroughly developed as it is now. The bikes I had in the 1960s were boringly conventional, so I saw little of the more exotic offerings.

    ReplyDelete
  5. As a former mechanic, I know that preparing the mechanic is the most important step!

    Seriously--I have not had a bike with suspension in about fifteen years, when I sold my Bontrager with a Judy fork, "upgraded" with Englund air cartridges (remember those?).

    ReplyDelete
  6. The 1990s was the age of the upgrade. Remember having to replace rear derailleur return springs with stronger ones, because Shimano was doing everything it could to make sure Gripshift didn't work?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous3:09 PM

    I remember many times in the 90's and the first years of this century when I stopped and scratched my head looking at the things I saw parked and locked up in bike parking areas. Felt like they were trying to redefine the bicycle.

    But most of the people I knew who bought those things are today riding "granny bikes", simple old fashioned city bikes with coaster brakes. Too many things that could go haywire and leave you stranded. And no real reason for all this "high tech" in most cases.

    Leo

    ReplyDelete