Ordered the 26" LHT in a 58cm frame before they were even out. Wanted a modern bike that somewhat duplicated the mid 80's Stumpjumpers I used to own. It is a competent bike, but like others have mentioned, it's not the most inspiring ride. Especially into a headwind. For some reason, it has never inspired me. Have had 4 or 5 different cockpit setups and may once again switch the bike over this winter. If I don't sell it and buy a fat bike.
How does it compare to the old stuff? Generally agree with the others, you will notice a higher bottom bracket on an older mountain bike. And the really slack angles. I used to enjoy riding mine as a commuting bike and all-rounder. But it was not that good on things like single track. And today's trails would be even more of a challenge, IMO. The other thing I would argue is, unless you get lucky the LHT will probably have components that will last longer. Just because they are newer. Of course, like everything that would depend on whether the LHT is new or modified and what type of parts are hanging on the older mountain bike. Also, a lot of the lower level mountain bikes from the mid to late 1980's had high tensile steel in part, if not all of the frame. This is not in and of itself that bad, but something to consider in the price. My first mountain bike was a 1984 Ross Mt. Hood and the entire bike was hi-ten although it was labeled cro-moly at the time. (This was the black bike, not the chrome version.) Even a ca. 1990 Specialized Hardrock only had a cro-moly main triangle. Oh, and to pile on what Doug just said - I live not too far from the ACA northern tier route. Each year usually see a number of bikes that are heading across the country. The most common might be the LHT. Followed by older mountain bikes. Not scientific, just my observation. Eric Platt St. Paul, MN On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 10:29 PM, dougP <dougpn...@cox.net> wrote: > Chris: > > "All-rounder" covers a lot of sins. I consider my Atlantis an all rounder > because it's my daily ride, goes off road well enough for my purposes (like > you, no single track gnarly MTBing) and I can toss 40 lbs of junk on it > (and another 10 psi in the tires) and take off on tour. But there's a ton > of bikes that'll do all that quite competently. The LHT is a known > quantity that should be a competent all rounder. > > As to the differences between a pre-sus MTB and the LHT, I can offer my > experience with my Atlantis & '90 Fisher HK-II. The two most noticeable > differences in handling come from the higher BB on the Fisher and the > shorter chainstays. The Atlantis is more comfortable, stable, predicable, > etc., BUT one needs to keep in mind it's easier to strike a pedal > off-road. The higher BB on the MTB translates into more responsive > handling with more ground clearance; desireable qualities off-road. OTH, > the longer chainstays on the Atlantis mean far less fussing around when > mounting panniers. I've used a rear rack with panniers on the Fisher, and > the bags definitely get shoved as far back as possible for foot clearance > (size 11 feet, not an unusual size). > > The Fisher is clearly a stiffer ride, as one would expect from a bike > designed to bounce down Mt Tam, etc. With 2" Schwalbe Marathon Supreme > tires, it still has gobs of clearance. There are a fair number of > braze-ons & I've had front low riders on as well as a rear rack. Recently > I discovered it has an odd-ball headset size (1-1/4") so replacement parts > may be a future issue. It's TIG welded steel, with no tubing stickers, and > cost around $500 when I bought it in 1990. It has decent parts but I'm > certain there were a gazillion similar bikes produced at the time. > > As a counterpoint, one of my touring buds has a late 90s rigid fork > Stumpjumper that he has used for touring all over the world. He's not much > for off-roading but declares the bike "perfectly adequate" for daily riding > and fully loaded touring. He tours frequently with a couple that both have > LHTs & love'em dearly. > > If you don't plan on a lot of load carrying (but somehow that sneaks up on > you when "it can be done") you might compare the Cross Check to the LHT. Of > course, right now the coolest all rounder is the Sam Hillborne.....used > ones come up for sale here from time to time. Food for thought. > > dougP > > On Friday, January 9, 2015 at 7:44:05 AM UTC-8, Chris Lampe 2 wrote: > >> Anyone have any thoughts on positives or negatives associated with >> choosing a 26" LHT versus a 90's MTB, like a Stumpjumper or Rockhopper? >> >> I'm familiar with the geometry differences between the two and I will be >> using modern components (except for stem if I go vintage) so I'm interested >> in things like ride quality, the impact of the tubing used in each, etc.... >> >> This will be an all-rounder bike that is primarily ridden on pavement >> with the option to ride on packed dirt, gravel and even double track. I >> have no interest in single-track or "mountain biking" as it currently >> exists. >> >> Riv content is that my bike project is directly inspired by the 56cm >> Atlantis but I don't have the finances to go that route. I also know there >> is a vast amount of experience with this type of bike here. >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
