Australian Cycling Forums - Bicycles Network Australia

Love that triple pulley-wheel SunTour RD.

This pink thing might be moderately interesting. If only you didn't have to take that red thing along with it.
http://www.gumtree.com.au/s-ad/pendle-h ... 1027391424" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Seen that for a while now. I think it was Suntour GPX bits on it. Any thoughts to what the frame is?

QuangVuong wrote:Seen that for a while now. I think it was Suntour GPX bits on it. Any thoughts to what the frame is?

Forged dropouts and downtube braze-ons, together with the fluted seatpost and aero levers, are all I can see to indicate that it's a better-than-gas-pipe frame. Photo isn't clear enough to make out much more than that.

The above-the-BB front gear cable routing is a bit unusual to my eye. Everything else says "generic Japanese mid-80s CrMo", but they all usually run the cable through the guide under the BB.

I wonder how much extra you'd have to pay in order to leave the Holden behind?

Looking at something on US fleabay. Seller has flagged 'Does not ship to Australia'. No probs, I have a myUS A/C in FL, which I use for work and play; consolidate parcels... ship around monthly.
But, looks like fleabay geo-blocks you from even contacting the seller. Anyone experienced this?

frailer5 wrote:Looking at something on US fleabay. Seller has flagged 'Does not ship to Australia'. No probs, I have a myUS A/C in FL, which I use for work and play; consolidate parcels... ship around monthly.
But, looks like fleabay geo-blocks you from even contacting the seller. Anyone experienced this?

Yes, but I think i got around it by setting my address in ebay as well as in PayPal (which normally determines where things are sent) to my MyUS address. Best of luck.

Edit - and remember to set them back after the transaction otherwise you may pay for twice across the Pacific for postage, or get some really high shipping prices putting you off bidding on local items here.

barefoot wrote:The above-the-BB front gear cable routing is a bit unusual to my eye. Everything else says "generic Japanese mid-80s CrMo", but they all usually run the cable through the guide under the BB.

Just from the cross over period, I dare say. A bit like seeing 1" threaded forks on O/S tubing through the later 90s.

Nice looking miyata

http://www.gumtree.com.au/s-ad/wollongo ... 1040056122" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

amrjon wrote:Nice looking miyata

http://www.gumtree.com.au/s-ad/wollongo ... 1040056122" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

looks original bar the seat. 1988 model.

Gold plated Miyata

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/231164348450 ... 1423.l2649

Miyata_912 wrote:Gold plated Miyata

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/231164348450 ... 1423.l2649

I wouldn't mind owning the road version of the Miyata Century.

Miyata_912 wrote:Gold plated Miyata

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/231164348450 ... 1423.l2649

Wouldn't want to leave that outside ALDI for too long.

A TREK330 in Sydney. Apart from needing new break pads, and being highly sort after. all looks interesting.

Seller is camera-callenged, as well as grammar-challenged. Here's a bit of a better look. What were they, 4130 sorta stuff? Maybe about a 55? BioPace cranks, maybe?

frailer5 wrote:A TREK330 in Sydney. What were they, 4130 sorta stuff?

I've seen a few of these in the flesh and they seem well put together, as well as having paint that is pretty resistant to the passage of time. I think in general they were made from Reynolds 531 tube sets so should be robust enough. I'd certainly consider one if it came up in my size.

rangersac wrote:

frailer5 wrote:A TREK330 in Sydney. What were they, 4130 sorta stuff?

I've seen a few of these in the flesh and they seem well put together, as well as having paint that is pretty resistant to the passage of time. I think in general they were made from Reynolds 531 tube sets so should be robust enough. I'd certainly consider one if it came up in my size.

Interesting. To satisfy my own curiosity I've messaged the seller and asked for a TT measurement, as well as HT. Yes, I described what to do... I'll post here if they get back to me.

these aren't cheap but i love the dog in the background!


http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Vintage-Mint ... 331wt_1120" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
that wishbone..

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Vintage-Near ... 354wt_1120" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
that smirk!

frailer5 wrote:

rangersac wrote:

frailer5 wrote:A TREK330 in Sydney. What were they, 4130 sorta stuff?

I've seen a few of these in the flesh and they seem well put together, as well as having paint that is pretty resistant to the passage of time. I think in general they were made from Reynolds 531 tube sets so should be robust enough. I'd certainly consider one if it came up in my size.

Interesting. To satisfy my own curiosity I've messaged the seller and asked for a TT measurement, as well as HT. Yes, I described what to do... I'll post here if they get back to me.

Why the HT?

singlespeedscott wrote:Why the HT?

Second most important measurement on a bike frame, IMO.

Seat tube length is irrelevant, up to a point, because I can move the seatpost up and down (and buy a longer one if I need it).
Head tube length is important, because there's only so much adjustment you can make to a quill stem, and only so many spacers you can add or remove under a threadless stem.
Top tube length is key, because anything else you change to adjust the length of the cockpit (saddle position WRT cranks, stem length, bar reach) changes ergonomics or handling.

Anything with a short top tube and long head tube has my name on it

barefoot wrote:

singlespeedscott wrote:Why the HT?

Second most important measurement on a bike frame, IMO.

Seat tube length is irrelevant, up to a point, because I can move the seatpost up and down (and buy a longer one if I need it).
Head tube length is important, because there's only so much adjustment you can make to a quill stem, and only so many spacers you can add or remove under a threadless stem.
Top tube length is key, because anything else you change to adjust the length of the cockpit (saddle position WRT cranks, stem length, bar reach) changes ergonomics or handling.

Anything with a short top tube and long head tube has my name on it

On an old steel frame with an horizontal top tube it is irrelevant.

Old steel frames should be fitted like they were intended, not forced to fit like some modern bike. Their handling characteristics are not the same as a modern bike.

The measurements that matters the most with old steel bikes is the centre of bottom bracket to the top of the set tube. Top tube length is usually accommodated by adjustment in stem length.

If your old steel frame requires you to use a seatpost with more then 15cm of extension it's to small. Quill stems such as Cinelli and Nitto only give you about 7.5-8.5cm of max extension. Add about 3.5cm for the headset extension above the top tube and your done. Work out how much saddle to bar drop you like and go from there.

ie say your preferred saddle height is 76cm and you like a drop of 70mm you really should be looking for a steel frame with a seat tube c-t top measurement ranging from 57cm to 60cm.

LugNut wrote:There's also a ratty looking but very small Nishiki Cresta in Queensland. Seems to be a pretty underrated sport touring bike from what I can see.

munga wrote:that nishiki is a bit small for me, but i'm watching it all the same. I know the guy selling it, but he's no dealmaker. 4 bids, all by the first and only bidder, so i expect it to go a bit silly anyway.

Sold for $119, quite high considering the state of it. If it was bigger and in WA I would've pilfered it just for those damn panto forks!!!! [fistshake]

singlespeedscott wrote:
On an old steel frame with an horizontal top tube it is irrelevant.

Old steel frames should be fitted like they were intended, not forced to fit like some modern bike. Their handling characteristics are not the same as a modern bike.

The measurements that matters the most with old steel bikes is the centre of bottom bracket to the top of the set tube. Top tube length is usually accommodated by adjustment in stem length.

If your old steel frame requires you to use a seatpost with more then 15cm of extension it's to small. Quill stems such as Cinelli and Nitto only give you about 7.5-8.5cm of max extension. Add about 3.5cm for the headset extension above the top tube and your done. Work out how much saddle to bar drop you like and go from there.

ie say your preferred saddle height is 76cm and you like a drop of 70mm you really should be looking for a steel frame with a seat tube c-t top measurement ranging from 57cm to 60cm.

At the risk of going OT and getting in trouble again, I call bunkum on that (in a nice way of course ). The problem with that approach is that it gets you the "traditional" position of being ridiculously stretched out which will destroy your back in short order, unless you are able to find an incredibly short stem which might then make the handling twitchy. Plus the larger frame means more weight, so it's lose-lose. When picking a frame having the correct top tube length to allow a comfortable reach is the ONLY measurement of any real importance, whether it's steel or carbon, brand new or a hundred years old. Fashion is fleeting but you only get one spine .

I'm 5'10" Lachlan and my bikes run a 57cm top tube with a 100mm stem. Bikes range in size from a 23" fixed gear to a retro 24.5" roadie. Rides done up to 300km and 5500 metres of ascent and no sore back. However if I run 23mm tyres on course chip bitumen I get a sore back.

One of the more interesting foldups I've spotted for a while. Yep, he probably did pay a lot for it back in the day; would be a look-in at around a third of that price though. Hasn't touched on the more relevant bits, frame material and weight. In WA.
Steering clear of the above discussion, as I can't really give a scientific reasoning to my original request to the seller. :shrug: Got a feeling the topic may be difficult to put to bed.

ldrcycles wrote:At the risk of going OT and getting in trouble again, I call bunkum on that (in a nice way of course ). The problem with that approach is that it gets you the "traditional" position of being ridiculously stretched out which will destroy your back in short order, unless you are able to find an incredibly short stem which might then make the handling twitchy. Plus the larger frame means more weight, so it's lose-lose. When picking a frame having the correct top tube length to allow a comfortable reach is the ONLY measurement of any real importance, whether it's steel or carbon, brand new or a hundred years old. Fashion is fleeting but you only get one spine .

But back in the day, they didn't make every bike in 15 sizes. They'd make small, medium and large. And many of them had the same TT length for all 3 sizes.

I may well be wrong, but I believe that this is the angle Mr. Singlespeedscott is coming from with that post.

singlespeedscott wrote: Old steel frames should be fitted like they were intended, not forced to fit like some modern bike. Their handling characteristics are not the same as a modern bike.

How and why does a modern bike handle differently to an old steel bike?

Because they run shorter wheelbases, shorter chain stays, more trail and are designed for greater saddle to bar drop. All these things tend to make for a quicker handling bike which is a lot stiffer overall. Great for crits and hot mix roads. Not so great on crap coarse chip and dirt roads IMHO.