Bearhawker

Hopefully not a "how long is a piece of string" question...

Back in the mid-80's I "stole" my Dad's Supercycle 10-speed that he no longer used despite it being way too big for me. Road the heck out of it for a couple of years but never knew anything about it.

Randomly I'm now wondering how it would compare to anything I ride today, but I have *no clue* as to the gearing or wheels it would have had.

Any ideas? It would have been the cheapest Supercycle 10-speed that Canadian Tire would have sold so nothing exotic for sure. He would have bought it 1982/1983.

clubman 

Many Supercycles were simply 'BSOs'...high volume production bikes made cheaply without a lot, or any, consideration for geometry, performance, mojo, whatever. It's very likely that what you ride now is vastly superior to your old bike but it certainly doesn't mean you had any less fun with it. It's not about the bike... There's a vintage Supercycle thread here with some good background and a couple of Supercycle beauties.

markk900

I think the answer to this lies a lot in what you ride by default today…. But taking your question at its most basic, the bottom end Supercycle of the time was, imo, probably better made and lighter than the current bottom end Wally World bike, but they still were not super (haha) great riding.

I just passed my red Supercycle/Motobecane on to a deserving young lady who, for what she needs, will find it adequate and it was free; it was fun for me to ride it for nostalgia’s sake but not a great riding bike (and I can compare it to several higher grade bikes of the same and newer eras).

But if you compare to something even a little higher end today I think you’ll find the bottom of the line Supercycle to be “interesting “. Like clubman says though, doesn’t mean they weren’t the gateway to adventure you remember as a kid!

Bearhawker

Thanks!

Not so much comparing quality as components. If the day ever comes that I visit the area where I lived at that time with my bike, I'd like to re-ride some of the routes I did as a teen and compare my "performance", and then factor-in the gearing and tire sizes then and now.

I know what the tires and gears are on my current bikes (and the Devinci Hatchet I'm (im)patiently waiting to arrive that was ordered some time ago...

What I have *no clue* about is the gearing/tire sizes of that early 80's hardware store bike. I never cared back then. I'm not sure I ever even oiled the chain. lol

markk900

Wheels were undoubtedly 27x1 1/4” gumwalls or black walls; gearing was likely generic shimano or sun tour 52/42 up front and 14-28 rear for 10 “speeds” (if only 7 or 8 usable). There were of course many variations but that is likely close.

The bike I reference above had Huret front and rear in that combination.

Bearhawker

Awesome thanks - that's way better info than the nothing I had before I asked.

Bearhawker

Using your numbers for the mystery memory bike, the 52/14 27x1.25" combo is not at all much different than the (still not here!) New bike's 42/11 700x45c. IE: at ~60 rpm they are both close enough to the same calculated 30km/h that the difference would be less than the error in maintaining *exactly* 60 rpm. (same for 80, rpm, etc)

THAT is extremely useful info! Thanks!

The goal is, if it *ever* transpires, is to try to ride the exact same routes doing the same thing I used to do and compare notes 4+ decades later. LOL Silly but what that's fun isn't? For instance it was farm country (still is) and the concession roads were/are approximately 2 miles long and the sideroads are approximately 1 mile long for ~6 miles around the "block". I used to depart the driveway and get into the hardest gear as quickly as possible and complete the ride without ever shifting back down. The one hill (bump really) had me switchbacking to get up it in that gear. Can I now get up that "monster hill" without switchbacking?

Knowing the effective gearing is basically the same means I will have eliminated that as a variable (or excuse!)

AGain - thanks so much for the help!