gfxgfx
 
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
975811 Posts in 138943 Topics by 6371 Members - Latest Member: Robertflamn November 29, 2024, 03:55 PM
*
gfx* Home | Portal | Forum | Merchandise | Help | Login | Register | gfx
gfx
RADBMX.CO.UK  |  New School BMX 2004 - Now  |  New School Park, Street & Dirt  |  Gt Slammer 2010. Were they smaller?
gfx
gfxgfx
 

Author Topic: Gt Slammer 2010. Were they smaller?  (Read 1973 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Gal

  • Guest
Gt Slammer 2010. Were they smaller?
« on: December 09, 2012, 09:33 PM »
Hi all. I'm 43, 5ft 8 or 9 and just bought one of these. Now, my last Mongoose wasn't this small I am sure. I may be wrong though. Were the Gt Slammers smaller at all?

If I'm to ride it I will have to get a layback seat post and maybe some different bars. What do you lot suggest? I wish to keep it either in red or white to go with the frame also.

Ta!!

HEYWOOD BMX

  • Guest
Re: Gt Slammer 2010. Were they smaller?
« Reply #1 on: December 09, 2012, 09:53 PM »
GT Slammers are for kids hence the short toptube size.Get something bigger.

Gal

  • Guest
Re: Gt Slammer 2010. Were they smaller?
« Reply #2 on: December 09, 2012, 10:22 PM »
Bugger it. Just picked it up! Oh well I have a lot to learn then! Put it back up for sale on gumtree as not got enough cash for a decent frame or another bike


Gal

  • Guest
Re: Gt Slammer 2010. Were they smaller?
« Reply #3 on: December 09, 2012, 10:45 PM »
Just to ask. Is the whole frame smaller or just top tube?

Offline Dark Diggler

  • Berm Worm
  • ***********
  • Posts: 12607
  • Rated:
Re: Gt Slammer 2010. Were they smaller?
« Reply #4 on: December 09, 2012, 10:47 PM »
A slammmer has a 20" toptube, one of the longest bmx you could get in 1984 was 19.5". Get it rode  :daumenhoch:
Whats the matter Kid, don't ya like clowns? Don't we make you laugh? Aint we fukkin funny?

Gal

  • Guest
Re: Gt Slammer 2010. Were they smaller?
« Reply #5 on: December 09, 2012, 11:01 PM »
A slammmer has a 20" toptube, one of the longest bmx you could get in 1984 was 19.5". Get it rode  :daumenhoch:

Really??? If that is so I will find Bmx riding weird as hell to start with! Be like trying to pull a wheelie with my cock its so small...the bike, not my cock  ^"^

Offline GTnumber1

  • Look Back
  • *****
  • Posts: 1643
  • Rated:
Re: Gt Slammer 2010. Were they smaller?
« Reply #6 on: December 09, 2012, 11:03 PM »
get a proper DYNO slammer 90 to 94  ;)  :4_17_5:

Gal

  • Guest
Re: Gt Slammer 2010. Were they smaller?
« Reply #7 on: December 09, 2012, 11:13 PM »
get a proper DYNO slammer 90 to 94  ;)  :4_17_5:

Pics? Prices?

LENNY-LENTINI

  • Guest
Re: Gt Slammer 2010. Were they smaller?
« Reply #8 on: December 12, 2012, 10:23 AM »
First things first Brother.

I bet the Slammer came with a front load 'dropped stem' and bars about 7.5" high and 27" wide?

Get a top load stem to raise the bars then get some bars at least 8" high and 28" wide.

That will get you rolling.

Then when you've got some more dough get a 21" Top Tube frame with a 13.75" or shorter rear end and put your Slammer parts on it.

Jobs a good 'un.

Keep the faith. L


Gal

  • Guest
Re: Gt Slammer 2010. Were they smaller?
« Reply #10 on: December 13, 2012, 11:35 PM »
Cheers for the replies and pm's. I maybe swapping it for something else Saturday. Will post pics once I do ;)

RADBMX.CO.UK  |  New School BMX 2004 - Now  |  New School Park, Street & Dirt  |  Gt Slammer 2010. Were they smaller?
 

gfxgfx
gfx gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
SimplePortal 2.3.5 © 2008-2012, SimplePortal