plonz 

Competing with that Karakoram would have been a sight to see. Must have been a dry course because that bike has zero clearance for mud build up with 1.95s. I remember a spring time race in Chicago where I made it maybe 1/4 mile before it was completely clogged up. Had decent Panaracer Smoke 1.95s but it was just too tight at the rear stays.

Then there's the Technium... plenty of rear stay clearance but some genius thought it would be a good idea to mount the rear brake underneath the rear chain stays. Maybe it works on aero road bikes but on mountain bikes it holds onto every soggy leaf and clump of mud that passes through it.

T-Mar

Chainstay mounted U-Brakes and Rollercams were a big trend in the very late 1980s. GT were one of the few companies who had the intelligence to mount the U-brake on the seat stays. While it comprised the clearance, it certainly wasn't as bad as the chainstay mounted versions. IIRC, the course was relatively dry but there was some mud in the ditches. The champion had created a device that looked like a combination brake booster and snow plow blade that cleared the majority of mud off the tire and prevented it packing up on the brake. He had fabricated it for winter riding, to prevent snow and slush build-up but it also worked for mud. It had added more weight to an already heavy bicycle, but in his view the benefits outweighed the weight penalty .

NA3S

This tempted me.....

1985 Specialized Stumpjumper 'Sport' F/F/HS/S

1985 Specialized Stumpjumper 'Sport'

Frame, fork, headset, & original slingshot stem; not sure the fork is original, but it came stock with a similar unicrown fork.

20.5" per the 1985 Specialized catalog, 52cm ST c-c & 56cm TT c-c

Paint definitely shows some wear/tear/beausage, but there is no damage/dents/cracks/significant rust, all the threads are good and the headset is still smooth

Fully lugged frame w/tons of braze-ons, canti mounts, proper fender mounts on the seat/chainstay bridges.

The '85 model is a nice sweet spot in terms of design and geometry, better handling than earlier models with slightly steeper angles and still retaining canti mounts; the '86 models went to 'U' brakes.

Rumor has it the early models didn't ride very well. Mike Sinyard, founder of Specialized, took a Tom Ritchey frame, the most sought after/cutting edge frames of the day, over to Japan in 1980/81 to have it re/mass produced as the 'Stumpjumper'. Ritchey some how caught wind of this and sold Sinyard a frame with some goofy geometry.... It took a few years for Specialized to figure out how to refine/correct the geometry, resulting in the '85 'Sport'.

Run it rough as is, embracing it's wabi-sabi/patina, give it a fresh paint/powder, drop bar dirt tourer, up right albatross townie, commuter/porteur, tons of clearance for fenders and big fat tires.......

Original 1985 Specialized Catalog: https://www.retrobike.co.uk/gallery2/...atalogue+1985/

$200 / No trades

Located in Bellingham, WA 98225, possible delivery to Seattle

Let me know if you've any questions/inquiries, thanks!

Jeff Neese

It would have caught my attention for sure, but at that price it would not have tempted me. Especially with the non-original fork. If it's a high-quality lugged frame you're after, there are plenty of vintage mountain bikes from the late 80s, early 90s that can be had for less, and might be easier to build a complete bike with. What's the drop-out spacing on that frame?

As a collectible, a complete Stumpjumper in good shape is worth some money, But that's not what that is - you're basically starting from scratch and that would not be the frame I would choose. Just my opinion.

styggno1

Picked this one up for a song. MB1 - top of the line in their production at the time. Putting it at 1989 with the Koski fork parts. Gathering the other parts are expensive though. Long term project.

kevins08 

Another fan of the early Trek 900 and even some 800 series here. Great bikes for the money. Id add old specialized RH and SJ too as far as value/quality/availability goes, although you'll never personally catch me on a specialized.

Older Marins seem to pop up for lower prices too, especially in your area id think.

As far as trailriding goes, I'm kinda with @plonz here. Older MTB's are very cool, but definitely lack when it comes to getting technical. Great on gravel and RtT and commuting. Swapping out the ridiculously long stems that come on a lot of older xc bikes really improves the handling off road imo.

jetboy 

what is the history for the dislike of specialized? the bikes seem fine.. so it must be??

lotekmod

I've never had any interest in owning a Specialized but it's not because I thought they were bad bikes. To me they're like the Honda Accord of bikes. Hard to fault, but a dime a dozen and hard for me to get excited about. I'll never have the money (or interest) to own a truly unique car but I'd gladly spend a couple hundred extra to own a unique bike. Also lately Specialized has been getting some bad press for copy writing words like "Roubaix" and suing others for using it.

Edit: Read about some of the Specialized lawsuits here

https://drunkcyclist.com/2014/03/12/now-know/

Lazyass

Here's a beautiful one too small for me. The seller says it's a '95 and aluminum, but it's a steel '92 Stumpjumper Pro with LX instead of XT for $180. And I believe it's a 16.5 inch frame, not 17.

Specialized Stumpjumper

kevins08 

Mike Sinyard is a dick. He basically started Specialized by stealing a Tom Ritchey design built for him and getting it massed produced in Asia as the original Stumpjumper. Then, even though he started the company based on a stolen design, Specialized is the most trigger happy company to sue for supposed copywrite infringements. I suppose its the stolen monkey on Mike's back that makes him so paranoid.

The make decent bikes, I just dont personally support that mindset.

-Kevin

Jeff Neese

Speaking strictly of vintage steel Rockhoppers, I love that they're a dime a dozen. Sure they were generic mass produced frames, but they were VERY GOOD generic mass produced frames. Full DB chromoly, high production quality, plenty of braze-ons, and (for me) excellent geometry for what I need. I also own a 1992 Trek 930 and 1989 Trek 970, both hand built lugged frames and most would say in a different league. But as a good all-purpose (and bullet-proof) frame to build on, you can't go wrong with a Rockhopper. Here's my 1993 and I don't think it turned out like the Honda Accord of bicycles.

kunsunoke 

They are. It's just that Mike Sinyard is a lawsuit-happy sphincter (sort of like Lance Armstrong, pre-Oprah), so just about nobody wants to enable him anymore.

curbtender

Local shop owner had some choice words when I asked why he was throwing this out..

vintagerando

How about a Univega? They had a higher end bike in the Alphina Pro. I see those on CL for cheap.

kevins08 

Those are good bikes, built up a nice dirt drop out of one.

jetboy 

I hear yah. I am not sure buying a 25 year old mtb for a hundred bucks off CL is enabling at this point. but yeah, sometimes you rather just not be associated. sorta like with Merckx who is a real peach -

Fred Smedley

I am keeping my 95 stumpjumper regardless of the political correctness of the decision......

eastbay71

I'm a big fan of mid to late 90's Schwinns when they were owned by Scott. Lots a good bikes from then. If you're gonna ride Tam I would look for something with low gears. Even though you can ride most of it on dirt roads there are lots of steep sections.

Hey I live at the base of Tam, PM me if you want to tackle it

eastbay71

That would be cool but there are a number of other bikes that would fit that bill. The Hoo-Koo-E-Koo and Woodlands are both named after trails on Mt Tam for instance. Or any bike by Marin Cycles would work too.

eastbay71

Looks like a good deal! I would say from personal experience you will want a new front fork. The trails on Tam are heavily rutted and rooty. I rode a rigid bike around Lake Lagunitas and quit after one 2.5 mile lap. You may also want a shorter stem to shift your weight back. The downhills are pretty intense on Mt Tam.

kunsunoke 

I have a Stumpy from that era myself, and I'm not going to dump it, either. Sinyard has already made his cash on that bike.

The Golden Boy 

I've been spending a bunch of time working on my Schwinn High Sierra.

I keep looking at all the cool features of this bike- and realize just how awesome it is. The fillet brazed head tube and the lugged unicrown fork are outrageously cool- not to mention the black chrome and gazillions of braze ons for front and rear racks, pumps, bottle cages and everything else. These bikes were built as "All Terrain Bikes" not just "mountain" bikes.

Jeff Neese

Negative comments about the founder(s) or early management team of Specialized, or any company, is opinion. Almost any company that competes aggressively in their market, will have detractors and be involved in lawsuits. I think more "bicycle industry insiders" hate Giant a lot more than Specialized, but that doesn't take away the appeal of some of their bikes. Giant was successful, as was Specialized. And also Microsoft and Exxon and Apple and Walmart, etc. Detractors, plenty. Lawsuits, plenty.

I'm not saying we shouldn't refuse to support businesses that violate our moral code. I'm just saying put things in perspective. Those that don't aggressively compete, protect their trademarks, etc. end up being extinct.

kunsunoke 

Mike, is that you?

If not, go look up the history of some of those lawsuits and legal threats. They're vexatious, and used against entities that don't have the financial resources to fight back.

I particularly liked the one where Sinyard and his crew sued a Canadian bike shop owner over the name Roubaix. Not like there isn't a town named that in northern France - or that another company (Fuji Bikes | ROAD | COMPETITON SERIES | ROUBAIX 1.1) had ever used the name before, right?

And it's not like this was ever a pattern or anything. Specialized never sued over the name "Stumptown" (in use by Portland, OR since at least 1947) or "Epic" (a general use term).

The ironic thing here is that Sinyard is so vicious about protecting intellectual property when he stole the design for the Stumpjumper from Gary Fisher and Tom Ritchey. Both of those gents got wealthy in the bike industry - and it doesn't seem like they launched vexatious lawsuits every other day.

Jeff Neese

I respect your opinion, but also recognize that it is the position that would be held by friends of those who were targeted by lawsuits, and thus automatically think the other side is being a jerk. I suspect that if I sat down with the management team of Specialized, they would have a different story and justification. It costs money to initiate lawsuits and there is always risk. I'm sure they felt they had good reason for any lawsuit they brought - businesses don't do that just "to be vicious". There is no point in continuing to point out this lawsuit or that, or who was harmed, without knowing the whole story and why they made the business decisions they did. There will always be haters. Just like there will always be people who like Specialized Rockhoppers.