Mountain Mitch

I have a line on a 1983 Rocky Mountain Sherpa Super Scooter which some claim to be the first mountain bike. I was thinking of a light mod into a back roads touring bike. I was wondering if anyone had any experience or knowledge of this bike model. The vendor wants $250CAN (about $175US) which seems kind of high end though the vendor insists ‘it’s a classic’.

rando_couche

Well, it's a first generation mass produced mountain bike. Some might call it a classic, others wouldn't. For my money, an early fillet-brazed Ritchey, Breezer or similar hand-made MTB qualifies as a classic, anything else not so much.

AeroFred

Well, I tend to agree with that . . .

'02 nrs

this 1 sold for $135.ca this month(repaint?) so something to compare.a comparable ross Mt. whitney's have been advertised around $500.+ but if they actually sell for that is another question.Rocky Mountain seem to retain their value.if you plan on keeping don't think it will devalue a whole lot.good riders,have owned a couple mt. whitney's.org. decals & finish are a big plus on any model.

https://www.pinkbike.com/buysell/3819913/

https://www.pinkbike.com/buysell/2416124/

base2 

Only you can judge if you think $175 US is "worth it."
For me, I'd compare it to the price derived from a fancy 2 person meal at a restaurant. It's really not all that hard to top $100 on a pair of medium priced Chicken or Steak Caeser salads and a couple of Margaritas. Throw in a tip & a night-cap...At least tomorrow, you'd still have the bike after said meal would have been long deposited and meal partner has gone home.

For me, anything under $200 is worth it just to experience a new or different bike. What's the worst that can happen? A weekend got a project & a few unallocated dollars have been displaced from my wallet?

For obvious reasons, see what the seller will accept. The bike market has crashed in the last year or 2. It wouldn't hurt to nit-pick it a bit to see where it gets you. Subtract $40 for cables & housing, maybe another $25 for each necessary tire & $10 for each set of brake pads that need replacing. Having an actual, objective reason the seller should discount carries more weight in getting the seller to budge.

tcs

The Smithsonian has in their collection a Stumpjumper identical to my 1982. Smithsonian. Hmm. Classic enough for me.

rando_couche

And FWIW, many people seem to use "classic" and "vintage" interchangeably. IMO, "classic" has to do with quality and "vintage" to do with age.

Sedgemop 

I do think some first gen mountain bikes qualify as classics. But, when in doubt, jump in here: https://www.bikeforums.net/classic-vintage/1229514-what-constitutes-classic-vintage-bicycle.html

Andy_K 

@Repack Rider could say a few things about what constitutes a “classic” mountain bike, but I think it’s very subjective and hard to judge, especially for people who weren’t a part of that early scene. Personally, I am most fascinated by the things riders did to turn other bikes into serviceable mountain bikes before production models were available. The very early production frames are interesting from a historical perspective and many are quite useful as practical commuter/city bikes. The thing is, much more so than with road bikes, modern mountain bikes are so much better than early production mountain bikes that it’s hard for me to imagine using one for its original purpose, unless you just want to get a sense of just how hardcore those people were.

bboy314

This forum is obviously more biased toward the road category, but take a look at sold listings on eBay sometime for old stumpjumpers, lugged Trek MTBs, Breezers, Fat Chance, Yeti, etc. and you’ll see that there is plenty value in them. The nature of collecting being what it is, people tend to covet things they wanted in their childhood, so I think that’s part of the reason 80s mountain bikes are rising in value, whereas older road bikes are (in general) not.

Markeologist

Simple answer, yes….classic and vintage. Just like cars, those built as race models in low volumes are the most sought after…all the more if the manufacturer was a winner. 1985 Fisher Comp, owned since new.

Pompiere

In the early days of mountain biking, there was a lot of regional influence and experimentation based on the local terrain, both with backyard builders and small companies. When the bigger corporations got involved, the designs got more homogenized across the industry to copy whatever the current trend was. I think some of those early experimental dead ends could be called "classic" , even though they were later superseded by much better ideas.

Repack Rider

My opinion of what is a classic mountain bike is not very useful here. For me, it is one built in a garage before 1985.

I'm not a collector, but over the past four decades a lot of mountain bikes have passed through my hands. The ones I have kept all have the names of my original colleagues in the sport, Breeze, Ritchey, Fisher).

Although I spent a lot of time riding fully rigid bikes in the day, I like a lot of squish now, and who doesn't appreciate working brakes?. My 1983 Ritchey Annapurna has been converted into my town bike, with 1.5" slicks. It is the zippiest town bike ever. I own a road bike (1975 Colnago) , but I never ride it.

joesch

Agree, the C&V section is about classic vintage bikes and there are many classic vintage makers that are now producing classic remakes thus not vintage.

t2p

almost instant classics

t2p

almost instant classic