| |
Main
Date: 06 Jun 2007 19:17:16
From: Steve Gravrock
Subject: Ooh, shiny
|
I can't think of a single situation where this would be better than what
I have now, or even as good, but I want one anyway:
<http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCBkModel.jsp?spid=22271 >
Compare:
<http://www.firstflightbikes.com/1982_Specialized%20_Stumpjumper055.htm >
|
|
| |
Date: 08 Jun 2007 02:18:04
From: landotter
Subject: Re: Ooh, shiny
|
On Jun 6, 2:17 pm, Steve Gravrock <use...@sdg.users.panix.com > wrote:
> I can't think of a single situation where this would be better than what
> I have now, or even as good, but I want one anyway:
> <http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCBkModel.jsp?spid=22271>
Sweet! I rode a lot of single track on a similar bike in the late 80s.
Not as sophisticated as todays stuff--I was running Suntour *friction*
thumbies--but still as much fun as a young man had a right to have.
Smart updates where it matters. Looks like they kept the relaxed
geometry to a tee. Pricing seems fair for what will likely be a
limited run. Those tires bring back memories.
|
| |
Date: 07 Jun 2007 18:35:53
From: bryanska
Subject: Re: Ooh, shiny
|
On Jun 6, 2:17 pm, Steve Gravrock <use...@sdg.users.panix.com > wrote:
> I can't think of a single situation where this would be better than what
> I have now, or even as good, but I want one anyway:
> <http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCBkModel.jsp?spid=22271>
$1300????????
WOW. I bought a new Fuji Touring for $650 two seasons ago. The tech
was ALMOST the same.
|
| |
Date: 07 Jun 2007 16:19:28
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Ooh, shiny
|
On Jun 7, 1:09 am, Steve Gravrock <use...@sdg.users.panix.com > wrote:
> On 2007-06-07, Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jun 6, 2:59 pm, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> >> Steve Gravrock wrote:
> [...]
> >> > <http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCBkModel.jsp?spid=22271>
>
> >> Yeah, bring back a cromoly frame, no suspension, quill headset, and
> >> standard geometry, then turn it into a collectors item so you charge
> >> $1300 for it.
>
> > According to the WestEgg inflation calculator, $1300 in 2006 (the
> > latest available figures) = $608 in 1982 (using SBI's 25 years ago
> > idea).
>
> > Anyone recall what the original Stumpjumper sold for?
>
> <http://oldroads.com/arch/MTB2002_9_2210_11_45_PM.html> suggests that
> the 1982 Stumpjumper was $850.
So, at 1300 "2006 dollars" the new version is actually over 25%
cheaper than the original ($608 v $850) when inflation is taken into
account.
> I don't know if that was the first
> year or not. I would've guessed a bit more than $1k.
>
> The fact that the new Stumpjumper Classic is only available in one size
> suggests to me that Specialized doesn't expect to sell many. Either it
> started as a one-off anniversary event and they decided to do a limited
> production run in that size or its purpose is to look cool, bring out
> a sense of the line's history, and thus help sell modern Stumpjumpers.
And, being that the street price is down in the mid-$600 range, I
guess even the limited production run didn't sell. Maybe it needed
650B wheels to appeal to the neo-retro crowd. ;-)
|
| |
Date: 07 Jun 2007 08:05:27
From: landotter
Subject: Re: Ooh, shiny
|
On Jun 7, 9:39 am, "Bob in CT" <ctvigge...@comcast.net > wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 02:09:50 -0400, Steve Gravrock
>
>
>
> <use...@sdg.users.panix.com> wrote:
> > On 2007-06-07, Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com>
> > wrote:
> >> On Jun 6, 2:59 pm, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> >>> Steve Gravrock wrote:
> > [...]
> >>> > <http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCBkModel.jsp?spid=22271>
>
> >>> Yeah, bring back a cromoly frame, no suspension, quill headset, and
> >>> standard geometry, then turn it into a collectors item so you charge
> >>> $1300 for it.
>
> >> According to the WestEgg inflation calculator, $1300 in 2006 (the
> >> latest available figures) = $608 in 1982 (using SBI's 25 years ago
> >> idea).
>
> >> Anyone recall what the original Stumpjumper sold for?
>
> > <http://oldroads.com/arch/MTB2002_9_2210_11_45_PM.html> suggests that
> > the 1982 Stumpjumper was $850. I don't know if that was the first
> > year or not. I would've guessed a bit more than $1k.
>
> > The fact that the new Stumpjumper Classic is only available in one size
> > suggests to me that Specialized doesn't expect to sell many. Either it
> > started as a one-off anniversary event and they decided to do a limited
> > production run in that size or its purpose is to look cool, bring out
> > a sense of the line's history, and thus help sell modern Stumpjumpers.
>
> My friend bought a Stumpjumper and I bought a Rockhopper. I seem to
> remember paying around 500 for mine and he paid around 800 for his.
Sounds about right. I didn't have enough bucks for either, so I got a
Shogun Prairie Breaker for $400.
|
| |
Date: 07 Jun 2007 03:32:00
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Ooh, shiny
|
On Jun 6, 2:59 pm, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com > wrote:
> Steve Gravrock wrote:
> > I can't think of a single situation where this would be better than what
> > I have now, or even as good, but I want one anyway:
> > <http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCBkModel.jsp?spid=22271>
>
> Yeah, bring back a cromoly frame, no suspension, quill headset, and
> standard geometry, then turn it into a collectors item so you charge
> $1300 for it.
According to the WestEgg inflation calculator, $1300 in 2006 (the
latest available figures) = $608 in 1982 (using SBI's 25 years ago
idea).
Anyone recall what the original Stumpjumper sold for?
|
| | |
Date: 07 Jun 2007 08:50:02
From: SMS
Subject: Re: Ooh, shiny
|
Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> On Jun 6, 2:59 pm, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
>> Steve Gravrock wrote:
>>> I can't think of a single situation where this would be better than what
>>> I have now, or even as good, but I want one anyway:
>>> <http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCBkModel.jsp?spid=22271>
>> Yeah, bring back a cromoly frame, no suspension, quill headset, and
>> standard geometry, then turn it into a collectors item so you charge
>> $1300 for it.
>
> According to the WestEgg inflation calculator, $1300 in 2006 (the
> latest available figures) = $608 in 1982 (using SBI's 25 years ago
> idea).
Yeah, but the sweet spot price for bicycles has been declining over the
years, partly as production moved from the U.S. and Japan to Taiwan and
then to China. How much would a comparatively specced cro-mo mountain
bicycle cost these days? I bought one two years ago (Marin Bear Valley),
and it was on sale for about $400 with an MSRP of $600, though it did
have a suspension fork. Since then the manufacturer has decontented that
model, and it's no longer available with the same specs.
|
| | | |
Date: 09 Jun 2007 18:39:25
From: Steve Gravrock
Subject: Re: Ooh, shiny
|
On 2007-06-07, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com > wrote:
> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
>>>> <http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCBkModel.jsp?spid=22271>
> How much would a comparatively specced cro-mo mountain
> bicycle cost these days? I bought one two years ago (Marin Bear Valley),
> and it was on sale for about $400 with an MSRP of $600, though it did
> have a suspension fork. Since then the manufacturer has decontented that
> model, and it's no longer available with the same specs.
Steel mountain bikes with high end components are for the most part
boutique items, and very often 29ers, which complicates matters. That's
especially true if you insist on a rigid fork. A few examples:
On-One Scandal with rigid fork, XT drivetrain and LX discs: 1149 GBP or
$2258 currently
Soma Juice frame $439, rigid fork $120
Surly Karate Monkey 29er frame & fork $450
Salsa El Mariachi frame & rigid fork $876
Gary Fisher Ferrous $1980 complete w/suspension fork
Or you could build up Nashbar's $50 steel frame. Just to see what would
happen, I spent a few minutes putting together a comparable spec to the
Stumpjumper. I came up with a total of $1295.28 not including tax,
shipping, and any parts I forgot. I didn't shop around, so what you see
is Nashbar's price for items they have, and Harris Cyclery's for items
that Nashbar doesn't have.
Nashbar steel frame $49.95
Nashbar steel fork $49.99
Cane Creek S-2 headset $14.99
Nashbar stem $16.95
Nashbar handlebar $14.95
Nashbar grips $7.99
Nashbar seatpost $27.99
Nashbar seat binder $7.99
Nashbar saddle $14.99
XT crankset w/BB $229.95
XT front derailer $33.99
X0 rear derailer $199.99
HG93 chain $27.99
XT 12-34 cassette $79.95 (Harris)
X0 trigger shifters $199.99
Nashbar shift cables and housing $8.90
Shimano BR-R550 cantis $73.90 (Harris)
Shimano BL-R440 levers incl. cables and housing $29.95 (Harris)
Deore/Rhyno Lite wheelset $145 (Harris Cyclery)
Panaraser Smoke Classic tires $49.90
Nashbar tubes $9.98
This is not to say that that you should rush out and buy a Stumpjumper
Classic. Although it has a certain je ne sais qua that I find appealing,
I can only assume that mountain bike builders moved away from that kind
of frame geometry for a reason. I will not be rushing out to the local
Specialized shop to buy one. However, if you look at it strictly in
terms of price in relation to component spec, it's not completely out of
line. There are some rather expensive parts on that bike.
If you abandon any idea of comparable component spec and just want a
steel mountain bike, you can get the Trek 820 with mostly high-tensile
frame, RST fork, and very cheap components for $260 or any number of
department store klunkers for under $100.
|
| | |
Date: 07 Jun 2007 06:09:50
From: Steve Gravrock
Subject: Re: Ooh, shiny
|
On 2007-06-07, Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote:
> On Jun 6, 2:59 pm, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
>> Steve Gravrock wrote:
[...]
>> > <http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCBkModel.jsp?spid=22271>
>>
>> Yeah, bring back a cromoly frame, no suspension, quill headset, and
>> standard geometry, then turn it into a collectors item so you charge
>> $1300 for it.
>
> According to the WestEgg inflation calculator, $1300 in 2006 (the
> latest available figures) = $608 in 1982 (using SBI's 25 years ago
> idea).
>
> Anyone recall what the original Stumpjumper sold for?
<http://oldroads.com/arch/MTB2002_9_2210_11_45_PM.html > suggests that
the 1982 Stumpjumper was $850. I don't know if that was the first
year or not. I would've guessed a bit more than $1k.
The fact that the new Stumpjumper Classic is only available in one size
suggests to me that Specialized doesn't expect to sell many. Either it
started as a one-off anniversary event and they decided to do a limited
production run in that size or its purpose is to look cool, bring out
a sense of the line's history, and thus help sell modern Stumpjumpers.
|
| | | |
Date: 07 Jun 2007 10:39:44
From: Bob in CT
Subject: Re: Ooh, shiny
|
On Thu, 07 Jun 2007 02:09:50 -0400, Steve Gravrock =
<usenet@sdg.users.panix.com > wrote:
> On 2007-06-07, Ozark Bicycle <bicycleatelier@ozarkbicycleservice.com> =
=
> wrote:
>> On Jun 6, 2:59 pm, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
>>> Steve Gravrock wrote:
> [...]
>>> > <http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCBkModel.jsp?spid=3D22271>
>>>
>>> Yeah, bring back a cromoly frame, no suspension, quill headset, and
>>> standard geometry, then turn it into a collectors item so you charge=
>>> $1300 for it.
>>
>> According to the WestEgg inflation calculator, $1300 in 2006 (the
>> latest available figures) =3D $608 in 1982 (using SBI's 25 years ago
>> idea).
>>
>> Anyone recall what the original Stumpjumper sold for?
>
> <http://oldroads.com/arch/MTB2002_9_2210_11_45_PM.html> suggests that
> the 1982 Stumpjumper was $850. I don't know if that was the first
> year or not. I would've guessed a bit more than $1k.
>
> The fact that the new Stumpjumper Classic is only available in one siz=
e
> suggests to me that Specialized doesn't expect to sell many. Either it=
> started as a one-off anniversary event and they decided to do a limite=
d
> production run in that size or its purpose is to look cool, bring out
> a sense of the line's history, and thus help sell modern Stumpjumpers.=
My friend bought a Stumpjumper and I bought a Rockhopper. I seem to =
remember paying around 500 for mine and he paid around 800 for his.
-- =
Bob in CT
|
| |
Date: 07 Jun 2007 03:27:46
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Ooh, shiny
|
On Jun 6, 8:32 pm, landotter <landot...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Jun 6, 2:17 pm, Steve Gravrock <use...@sdg.users.panix.com> wrote:
>
> > I can't think of a single situation where this would be better than what
> > I have now, or even as good, but I want one anyway:
> > <http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCBkModel.jsp?spid=22271>
>
> > Compare:
> > <http://www.firstflightbikes.com/1982_Specialized%20_Stumpjumper055.htm>
>
> $663 B-)http://leescyclery.com/itemdetails.cfm?id=5811
I guess they were a failure in the marketplace. At ~$660, they strike
me as an okay value.
>
> First thing I'd do is swap out the BB for square taper and the cranks
> for a classic looking Sugino. The rest of the modern kit can stay.
Thumb shifters, anyone? ;-)
|
| |
Date: 07 Jun 2007 01:32:16
From: landotter
Subject: Re: Ooh, shiny
|
On Jun 6, 2:17 pm, Steve Gravrock <use...@sdg.users.panix.com > wrote:
> I can't think of a single situation where this would be better than what
> I have now, or even as good, but I want one anyway:
> <http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCBkModel.jsp?spid=22271>
>
> Compare:
> <http://www.firstflightbikes.com/1982_Specialized%20_Stumpjumper055.htm>
$663 B-) http://leescyclery.com/itemdetails.cfm?id=5811
First thing I'd do is swap out the BB for square taper and the cranks
for a classic looking Sugino. The rest of the modern kit can stay.
|
| |
Date: 06 Jun 2007 12:59:37
From: SMS
Subject: Re: Ooh, shiny
|
Steve Gravrock wrote:
> I can't think of a single situation where this would be better than what
> I have now, or even as good, but I want one anyway:
> <http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCBkModel.jsp?spid=22271>
Yeah, bring back a cromoly frame, no suspension, quill headset, and
standard geometry, then turn it into a collectors item so you charge
$1300 for it.
|
|
