gfxgfx
 
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
975626 Posts in 138927 Topics by 6348 Members - Latest Member: Dannygee June 28, 2024, 03:50 AM
*
gfx* Home | Portal | Forum | Merchandise | Help | Login | Register | gfx
gfx
RADBMX.CO.UK  |  Mid School BMX (>87) 1989 to 2003 (<05)  |  Mid School ( Keep the faith )  |  shorty #1 now with added pix, woo hoo
gfx
gfxgfx
 

Author Topic: shorty #1 now with added pix, woo hoo  (Read 6843 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

teamsano

  • Guest
Re: shorty #1 now with added pix, woo hoo
« Reply #25 on: April 12, 2007, 05:48 PM »
Good stuff. That frame changed BMX totally and was so important when it came out.

why did that frame change bmx?

didnt standard get an award for being the last folk to make a frame with a standing platform?

why did platforms last so long? what a swizzzz.


I came really close to getting a lengthy, but I stuck with the S&M in the end!

what a turncoat! ;D

theRuler

  • Guest
Re: shorty #1 now with added pix, woo hoo
« Reply #26 on: April 12, 2007, 05:52 PM »
the shorty frame was super strong, the right size, and built very well

it upped the ante for frame quality

oh and everyone nicked the gusset design

christhejob

  • Guest
Re: shorty #1 now with added pix, woo hoo
« Reply #27 on: April 12, 2007, 07:20 PM »


why did platforms last so long? what a swizzzz....


because decades rule gogo!!! don't forget you're from cumbernauld bmx club, you come from the race side  :D
« Last Edit: April 12, 2007, 07:25 PM by christhejob »

christhejob

  • Guest
Re: shorty #1 now with added pix, woo hoo
« Reply #28 on: April 12, 2007, 07:22 PM »
Chris

Do you have a pic of the older standards with the tubes going into the BB? I never knew they did that, it sounds great.

no mate.. they were funky.. i just remember seeing one.. total overengineering but looked cool

SaMAlex

  • Guest
Re: shorty #1 now with added pix, woo hoo
« Reply #29 on: April 12, 2007, 08:33 PM »
Good stuff. That frame changed BMX totally and was so important when it came out.

why did that frame change bmx?
didnt standard get an award for being the last folk to make a frame with a standing platform?
why did platforms last so long? what a swizzzz.

I came really close to getting a lengthy, but I stuck with the S&M in the end!

what a turncoat! ;D

I think that the standard frames changed BMX cos they took the engineering of frames to a new level and they made it clear that if you wanted it, you really could make a frame that didnt brake (even if it weighed a bit). I am well into engineering and design so I thought what they had done was great, even if the end product wasnt perfect.

Cant comment on the standing platform but I guess some people wanted them. Not me tho.

I said I ALMOST got a lengthy ... but stuck with S&M. Gogo, I could be wrong, but dont you ride a Federal frame now, cos it was free????


bsdforever

  • Guest
Re: shorty #1 now with added pix, woo hoo
« Reply #30 on: April 12, 2007, 10:15 PM »
hey grant, remember our night at mutts? a memory i treasure, particularly the "ever hear a retard masturbating?" comment.. i think your dirtbike nearly bought it on mutt's bikerack too.. (i think tis is another thread....)

yes what a night, i wandered off at the 2-hip jam and when i got back all the S&M crew that I was with had all fooked off and left me, luckily I got to spend the night with you, will evans and the mighty mutt! I remember my day old dirtbike nearly falling off mutt's bike rack on the highway because he forgot to tie it on, I was livid but luckily the bike was okay. what a laugh!!!

do you remember him in his big Y-fronts? I don't think i even slept that night, just laughed, drank and made hours of international calls from his phone - oops!

blindingsun

  • Guest
Re: shorty #1 now with added pix, woo hoo
« Reply #31 on: April 12, 2007, 10:49 PM »
Mutt keeps ringing me and leaving dirty noises on my voicemail.. im worried.. anyone want his mobile number?


bsdforever

  • Guest
Re: shorty #1 now with added pix, woo hoo
« Reply #32 on: April 12, 2007, 11:01 PM »
Mutt keeps ringing me and leaving dirty noises on my voicemail.. im worried.. anyone want his mobile number?



i am surprised he is still alive

christhejob

  • Guest
Re: shorty #1 now with added pix, woo hoo
« Reply #33 on: April 13, 2007, 08:01 AM »
oh mutt's alive, and banned from every flatland forum in the world..  i saw him at a BS comp in 96 (after his wookie like phone calls to will's mum at midnight to get his phone bill paid) and hid under a ramp to avoid him!!

bsdforever

  • Guest
Re: shorty #1 now with added pix, woo hoo
« Reply #34 on: April 13, 2007, 10:15 AM »
he called me for years trying to get his phone bill paid

i told him i'd sent a cheque and never heard from him again...

teamsano

  • Guest
Re: shorty #1 now with added pix, woo hoo
« Reply #35 on: April 13, 2007, 11:08 PM »
i can do a decade without a silly platform. no bad for a 'racer'  :D

doubling tubing thickness in order to increase frame strength is hardly 'clever engineering, alex.

SaMAlex

  • Guest
Re: shorty #1 now with added pix, woo hoo
« Reply #36 on: April 14, 2007, 12:21 AM »
doubling tubing thickness in order to increase frame strength is hardly 'clever engineering, alex.

You got a point there!

christhejob

  • Guest
Re: shorty #1 now with added pix, woo hoo
« Reply #37 on: April 14, 2007, 11:45 AM »
i know you bleed s&m gogo, and i accept your sentiments.  i think what standard did above all was push forward the levels of build quality and durability, even if you hated platforms and their look.  if you look at a 93/94 standard compared to a B&E built s&m or homeless, there was no comparison in quality.   my homeless looked good for a bit, then i realised just how badly made it was, sandwiched double dropouts and that..  S&M really started to push up the quality after standard really got going, to the point where they are now. which is good..... 

YGT

  • Guest
Re: shorty #1 now with added pix, woo hoo
« Reply #38 on: April 14, 2007, 03:19 PM »
I agree, some of the technical inovations that S&M pushed were awful.
990 mounts that were so low the 990s needed to be filled, double dropouts, rear ends made wrong, wrong/bad tollernces on BB, HT & FC
Some of the quality issues S&M had were awfull that it would always take hours to remove the excess material for it to be anywhere near correct.

Yes standard did also some bad stuff, but they also did things like heatreated axles, 6pc bars, 1pc coaster shells (thats a tough one).
However by the time the next gen series of frames came out from S&M you were able to see that S&M was needing to change its direction of fabrication as far as game plan went.

christhejob

  • Guest
Re: shorty #1 now with added pix, woo hoo
« Reply #39 on: April 14, 2007, 06:37 PM »
don't forget standard were one of the first with the ahead on the sta too.. (same time as, ahem the gt fueler)  i LOVED how standards looked, but in retrospect the chainstays were way too low due to the dropout size.. i think this changed 96ish?

SaMAlex

  • Guest
Re: shorty #1 now with added pix, woo hoo
« Reply #40 on: April 14, 2007, 07:31 PM »
I think that S&M (and others) were bound by the people who made their frames. They managed to get parts made better than what was currently available, but there was still more that COULD be done, it would have just been very hard.

Thin drop outs were crap and S&M tried to better it by doubling them up. They would have been laughed out of the frame makers if they had asked for 6mm thick laser cut drop outs. 1” steer tubes always bent cos they were a stock size bit of tube. The idea of turning down a steer tube from thicker stock was less than welcomed (I know cos I was there when Moeller asked them to do it in 1991!). All of these ideas and more were thought about but it would have cost a fortune and would make the frame so expensive. When Standard made their frames they did much of this, and the price tag matched, but people bought them. This made other bike companies realise that people would pay more if the quality justified it.

Now, from S&Ms point of view, they make most of their parts themselves so they can do what ever they like. The early frames don’t compare to the ones they make now, but that’s not to say the early ones weren’t pushing frame design and quality a little at a time. I just think that the introduction of standard gave everything one big shove forward.

Oh, and Gogo may well bleed S&M, but he has got a bit of a Federal Bruise somewhere. :LolLolLolLol:

bsdforever

  • Guest
Re: shorty #1 now with added pix, woo hoo
« Reply #41 on: April 14, 2007, 08:13 PM »
word!

come on though, name one nice looking standard frame?? they were all ugly as hell

teamsano

  • Guest
Re: shorty #1 now with added pix, woo hoo
« Reply #42 on: April 14, 2007, 08:19 PM »
i can't comment on standard's build quality, as i never had one or realised the finish was as good as you say.
however i can agree that s+m's were poorly made, and i broke or bent every one i owned.
the final straw came when my prince albert cranks lasted 10 days before snapping and moellers response was that i was a 'fat bastard'.
upon inspection said cranks were very poorly made with weld not penetrating tube correctly.
however, these problems were caused by resources available at the time, and jumps in quality have improved the entire bmx industry.
i only ride a federal because sandy sent me one for free. ;D

christhejob

  • Guest
Re: shorty #1 now with added pix, woo hoo
« Reply #43 on: April 14, 2007, 10:20 PM »
word!

come on though, name one nice looking standard frame?? they were all ugly as hell

my first purple lengthy (oooerrrrrrrrr)  beautiful
STAs once the dropouts were better.  No, bollocls, all stas
every incarnation of the trailboss

now if we're talking ugly... the 92 holmes with the curved seatstays.    oh.. and the upside down dropouted heavy as fudge.   
BLERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHH   :D

SaMAlex

  • Guest
Re: shorty #1 now with added pix, woo hoo
« Reply #44 on: April 14, 2007, 10:28 PM »
ha ha, Ive just got one of those 92 Holmes with the curved seat stays. Its great!!!! Its got 2 drop outs stuck together and Ive got the pitchforks to match.

I dont agree with you about the HAF dropouts. I think they were cut back, just under the peg ... just like all new school bikes are now. im not so sure why it extended so far above the peg tho, ha ha. But I dont think it was, as ride UK said, upside down.

teamsano

  • Guest
Re: shorty #1 now with added pix, woo hoo
« Reply #45 on: April 14, 2007, 10:51 PM »
i agree with chris, the haf drops were pathetic.
however, did you know the curved seatstay holmes was a copy of early 80's team murray frames? altho they changed the designbecause they all broke.
i have a friend with one in pristine condition including the rip off haro stickers (holeshot technique etc)

SaMAlex

  • Guest
Re: shorty #1 now with added pix, woo hoo
« Reply #46 on: April 14, 2007, 10:58 PM »
So come-on Gogo, hook me up with your mate!!!!

I heard that they tried to do that curved stay so you got more face to face contact with the tubes to improve the welding. It was the frame maker who came up with the idea ... and it didnt work cos they broke on the curved tube and not the weld. Now you say it, I see what you mean about the murry frame. I wonder if it was the same bloke who welded that one? ha ha.

RADBMX.CO.UK  |  Mid School BMX (>87) 1989 to 2003 (<05)  |  Mid School ( Keep the faith )  |  shorty #1 now with added pix, woo hoo
 

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