Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 2/25/2002 5:44:24 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/25/2002 5:48:23 PM EDT by LongIslandShooter]
Any mountain bikers out there? My Gary Fischer bike was stolen last fall, and my uncle has offered to sell me his 1993/94 Cannondale M900 for $500. It is in excellent condition, and only needs air in the tires and to get lubed. Is this a fair price? The current MSRP is about $1200.
Link Posted: 2/25/2002 6:00:49 PM EDT
It seems like a fair price. I am a road and track racer. I bought a Cannondale R900 (same tube set except the road version) frame in 1993. It only lasted a year. My next frame I got was a Litespeed. It is seven years old and still in perfect condition despite a lot of hard racing. Aluminum frames are nice until you crash. I only buy titanium frames now. My track and mountain bike frames are also Litespeed.
Link Posted: 2/25/2002 6:05:29 PM EDT
Cannondale? You mean Crack-n-fail?
Link Posted: 2/25/2002 6:13:55 PM EDT
hey LIS, I've been a MTBer for over 10 years now with no end in sight! I have been riding/racing a Jamis Dakar full suspension rig for four years and love the way this bike handles. I ride all over the country, just last Sept. I was in your neck of the woods in DC, in fact I flew out of Dulles on the 10th! My family stayed on couple of more days with intentions of visiting NYC on the 11th but changed their mind and were on their way to the White House at 9am tuesday morning! Anyway I digress, The component structure plays a large part in the price of a used Mountain Bike, so if it is XT or XTR I would say $500 would be good. If it is lower grade I would have to say $350-375. Also, if the bike has front suspension it would be a big plus. I believe the '93 time frame would not have a suspension fork but I may be wrong. anymore Q's just e-mail me at polenda@flash.net
Link Posted: 2/25/2002 6:16:03 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/25/2002 6:19:01 PM EDT by eurotrash]
$500.00 seems high to me. have there been any component upgrades and has it been ridden hard? it's an 8 year old bike. a lot has changed in the industry. 275.00-300.00 seems more reasonable if stock. btw, does it fit you correctly?
Link Posted: 2/25/2002 6:19:18 PM EDT
IMHO, a used Cannondale mountain bike is not a good investment, especially one this old. Since then, components have gotten ALOT better especially brakes and suspension. I would look for a used bike THAT FITS. Especially look for Shimano Deore, LX, XT or XTR components or SRAM 5.0, 7.0 or 9.0. Don't just look at the rear derailleur, but especially the crank and the hubs. As for a suspension fork, look for something beyond elastomers. Rock Shox Indy, Jett, Judy TT, Manitou Magnum etc... A Rock Shox hydracoil, manitou SX or xvert, or anything by Marzocchi would be a far better choice.
Link Posted: 2/25/2002 8:20:21 PM EDT
If you are not some kind of techno-weenie, and it is in good shape, you should check out this h site. It has reviews from about 1996 http://www.mtbr.com/reviews/Bike/product_18643.shtml I think that in terms of mountain bikes and the vast number of changes that have occured in 8 years and the fact that the bike is used, I would not like to pay more than $350-$-400 if it was in cherry shape. But he's your uncle. Cannondale has always had to go its own way with front shocks the Ping bicycle, and while that's very cool, different is not always better. These guys are totally right that the bike must fit you properly.
Link Posted: 2/25/2002 8:27:57 PM EDT
Gary Fishers Rule! I don't know about the Cannondales. I have a 2000 GF Sugar 4. It is a excellent ride. I did some upgrades and it rocks hard. I did buy it when the 2001 models were out so I got it for $699! So I say spend a little more for a newer model of any bike.
Link Posted: 2/25/2002 8:31:24 PM EDT
... I like my SuperV500 retrofitted with a 100mm FR Moto Headshok just fine. ... Components are the key, have not heard anything bad about the these models.
Link Posted: 2/25/2002 8:44:53 PM EDT
Originally Posted By ChrisGene: Cannondale? You mean Crack-n-fail?
View Quote
Doh! You got to it before I did [:)]
Link Posted: 2/25/2002 8:45:51 PM EDT
My GT Avalance was stolen last year. I have been trying to save up some coin for a new bike. I will either get a Gary fisher or another GT. I have never been fond of Cannondales, but have not stayed current with their bikes.
Link Posted: 2/25/2002 9:06:46 PM EDT
I have the Super-V 900. I have only had one problem. The stock polymer brake levers are crap on the Magura Louise disc brakes. I bought the alum. units and fixed that. I weight 210-220, depending on the time of year. I am 6' 3" tall, or a Clydesdale. The bike holds up fine off road. If you read rags, especially the one that is edited by ZAP (ZAP is an jerk ass), you will see just how exclusionary some riders are. Aluminum is just fine for a bike or they wouldn't still be making them in mass quantities. If you ride the bike after spending the $500 asking price, good for you....you have not lost by any means.
Link Posted: 2/25/2002 9:22:17 PM EDT
As cannondales are aluminum, much depends on the previous history and riding style of the owner (any aluminum bike). If he was a thrasher, huge guy, or strong guy, then beware as aluminum only bends and flexes only so much before it fails on "any" bike frame. Aluminum can also be "considered" non fixable on a bike frame (it can be, but it wil never last once a tube is broken and repaired). $500 for a 9 year old used bike is normally too much unless it is perfect with the great (newer in years) components and you are buying it from a bike store that will warrantee it in writing. If your uncle rarely rode it and is a little guy, and you know its' entire history, and you don't care about older component parts, and you LOVE your uncle dearly, it's a decent buy. Just know that it's the components that cost alot with bikes. The frames are a small percentage of the overall cost.
Link Posted: 2/25/2002 9:42:48 PM EDT
My experience with Cannondale has been way overpriced bikes, poor quality and recall after recall on their "innovative" products (coda disc brakes, the initial "lefty" forks, that full suspension with the carbon swingarm, etc..). Personally, I'd stay away from it, and go with a Fisher, Specialized, or Santa Cruz
Link Posted: 2/25/2002 9:52:46 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 12:16:10 PM EDT
Thanks for the help guys! I don't much about the bike regarding the technical specs other than what I posted. it's 93/94, very good condition, Shimano gears, relatively light use (city and some trails), and I am almost posotive it is totally stock. My uncle lives in Brooklyn and the bike is in storage, and I won't be able to check it out for another few weeks. As far as fit; i'm about the same size as my uncle (6'2") it from so it shouldn't be an issue. I'm not a real serious or hard rider (and I don't think my uncle was either) so I'm really not worrying about it breaking either. I will try to get him down on the price. I'm also not worried about if it's a good investment. I'm in High School and I'll have a car at the end of next year anyway.
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 12:54:46 PM EDT
For that amount of money you should seriously go look at a Brand new Specialized! In that price range they have some great stuff that is state of the art new technology. Go talk to Chris at "The Kreb Cycle" in Bellport, he's a great guy and will give you the straight story on any bike with no sales pressure. As a fellow long islander here I can vouch for him. I've done business with him for my mountain bikes for many years and you can trust him. Tim
Top Top