Holy crap. That thing is beautiful!!!
If we hadn't just moved halfway across the country (and are still waiting for our house to sell,) I'd be all over that!
Its a fair price, but no fork is a bit of a bummer.
yeah...that's not the real reason I am not buying that awesome frame, that's in my size, that I used to want when you could still get them from QBP...its just the one that makes me feel better.
yeah...that's not the real reason I am not buying that awesome frame, that's in my size, that I used to want when you could still get them from QBP...its just the one that makes me feel better.
been there
one nation, under surveillance with liberty and justice for few
yeah that frame was pretty ahead of its time, a de-tuned cross bike that could fit 45s, during a period before 29ers, but after Bianchis little Project - x experiment. A bike you could ride to the trail, and then ride on the trail. I definitely wanted one of those to cruise the New England hills, but didn't have the flow for that kind of purchase back then.
Sorry about being nit-picky, but those forks aren't the fork the mtn cross came with. For one thing, the fork that frame came with had a larger fork crown....Those are for the euro cross, the standard racing frame.
A surly crosscheck fork would probably be more appropriate geometry wise...
foto you might be correct.
Mine are all old SwissCross forks.
Well maybe. I am running the one on the left that replaced the Windwood.
They all match my SC that came with a steel fork.
In the specs of the MC and SC (below) I received from Ritchey. They mention the axel to crown and rake but not crown width.
Should not matter much if you are using the MC to race cross (maybe if you are wanting a fat tire bike)
I can except that I might be totally wrong...I remember reading ad copy saying the mt cross was a fat tired bike and thinking to my self "that's what i need', but it looks like was designed as a flat bar cross racer with a longer top tube than the swiss cross.
I can except that I might be totally wrong...I remember reading ad copy saying the mt cross was a fat tired bike and thinking to my self "that's what i need', but it looks like was designed as a flat bar cross racer with a longer top tube than the swiss cross.
Thanks for the education.
Was not trying to say you were wrong. I really don't know if there is a difference.
I do have much more clearance up front than the rear of my SC's. I would gander that Ritchey used the same fork but now you have me thinking. (time for some research)
The MC was not a huge seller. Ritchey was trying to gain a following with the MTBers and it never caught on. There are not many out there.
I want one to add to my collection. The one on ebay is too large or it would be mine,
Yes it was designed to be used with a flat bar with a longer TT.
The long TT should not be an issue for most as the SC has a very short TT.