Now THAT Was A Bike - Moots Mountaineer
The Moots name might conjure up images of subdued looking titanium frames, most often in a classy bare gray color and with white decals on the down tube that leave no doubt as to what it is. Titanium has been Moots' material of choice for many years (they moved to titanium in the early 90s), but that hasn't always been the case. Steel was real back in the early 1980s when Kent Eriksen founded Moots out of his bike shop, Sore Saddle Cyclery, in Steamboat Springs, Colorado, and so the 1984 Moots Mountaineer was constructed using Tange 4130 steel tubing, complete with custom butting and held together with investment cast lugs.
Erikson offered two versions of the Mountaineer: one was a frame with slightly shorter and steeper geometry that was intended for racing, and another that was longer and slacker that was made more for comfort and all-day adventures. Both were essentially custom creations for the customer that could be had in nearly twenty different sizes, starting at 16" and topping out at a massive 24.5" frame. According to a 1985 interview by Richard Compton on the MOMBAT website, $1,250 USD in 1984 dollars would get you either version, which works out to about $2,860 USD in today's money.
The Moots appears to be relatively conventional, especially compared to those wild machines created ten years later, but there's more going on with the Mountaineer than its traditional double-diamond steel frame lets on. You also have to put yourself back in the mid-1980s as well, a timeframe when aluminum was still considered an extremely exotic material to build a bicycle frame out of and when Apple first debuted their Macintosh computer. In that sort of context, the Mountaineer frame's heavily butted tubing, and especially its curved seat stays and fork legs, were notable tech points.
The Moots appears to be relatively conventional, especially compared to those wild machines created ten years later, but there's more going on with the Mountaineer than its traditional double-diamond steel frame lets on. You also have to put yourself back in the mid-1980s as well, a timeframe when aluminum was still considered an extremely exotic material to build a bicycle frame out of and when Apple first debuted their Macintosh computer. In that sort of context, the Mountaineer frame's heavily butted tubing, and especially its curved seat stays and fork legs, were notable tech points.
Curved steel fork legs flexed in order to provide a bit of comfort.
Think bikes used to be simpler? Think again.
Being a mountain biker in Steamboat Springs, or anywhere in Colorado for that matter, meant that your rides were often epic affairs that gained more elevation in a single day than many people in other parts of the world did over a week's worth of pedaling. Eriksen knew that comfort was key to enjoying one's self over such adventures, which is where the gently curved seat stays and fork legs came in, with them being able to flex ever-so-slightly to take some of the edge off of smaller impacts - this was long before proper suspension appeared.
Eriksen made other concessions for all-day exploits in the high country, including having up to four water bottle locations on the frame (note that there are two on the down tube of the bike pictured here), as well as a very neat shoulder pad (spot the two bolts on the underside of the top tube, just forward of the seat tube) that could be bolted on if you knew that the day would include a lot of portaging. Remember that this is Colorado, where the mountains are big and steep, and the air is thin. Sometimes it takes putting feet on the ground to get to the top of a peak or over a high mountain pass.
The Moots stem saw the front brake cable routed through its hollow handlebar clamp bolt and out a guide on its underside.
The bike's Moots Mounts brake bosses could be positioned to work with multiple wheel sizes and brake types.
The bike could also be configured to accept a number of different wheel sizes, including 27.5" wheels and tires (known as 650B back then), thanks to Eriksen's clever clamp-on brake bosses that could be positioned wherever you required them. The 'Moots Mounts' were held in place by steel bands that wrapped around the seat stays, chainstays or fork legs, and they could be slid up or down so that the rider could run cantilever, roller-cam or even U-brakes. That sort of adaptability to different types of brakes and wheel sizes, as well as loads of tire clearance (intended to allow for room for fenders), made the Mountaineer a formidable machine back in the mid-1980s.
 |
Special thanks to The Pro's Closet for once again allowing us access to their treasure trove of historic bikes.
Photos courtesy of The Pro's Closet
Author Info:
Must Read This Week
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup
Change to a modern disc brakes. Unless I'm stuck with Avids, then I'll just stick with the u-brakes ;-D
And from the same website, here's Sheldon's description of the 27.5/650b thing: "They are trying to get people to call it "27 five," as if it were halfway between the MTB "26-inch" and "29-inch" sizes. (Get it? "five" actually is supposed to mean "point five." Actually, this size is closer to the "26-inch" (ISO 559 mm) size than the "29er" (ISO 622mm) size, and even smaller than the "27-inch" (630mm ISO) size found on older road bicycles. I strongly urge readers to resist the foolish jargon, and to use either the traditional "650B" designation, or, better yet, the internationally-standardized 584 mm designation."
Source: www.sheldonbrown.com/rim-sizing.html
A classic bike like this should not be displayed in this condition.
The people who build the moots know what they are doin.
'nuff said
No, "everybody" did not. I rode them. The Smoke up front did not work well. Though, a Dart in front and back wasn't bad.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=hshmw4to75k
The Smoke appeared in 91
The Dart didnt appear until 93 to 95
I used to ride a Raleigh Maverick (87) that looked very similar to that MOOTS, shorter stem, hi ten (heavy) frame and slack head angle
It was a blast (through those rose tints)
@therealtylerdurden It was an accessory that went on the chainstay. I think it was supposed to prevent the chain getting sucked in between the wheel and the chainstay? I could be wrong about that, though.
We had just as much fun then as now because we didn't know the difference & there was nothing better at the time.
I am more curios about the head angle differences, what was the actual head angle numbers?!
Are all sheep otherwise everyone would still use 26 inch wheels which are in fact faster and lighter,
26" wheels are the future and always have been ;0)