Serial# info

frescova

New member
I'm debating selling my vintage YO with Big 1" - just want to make sure I have the info correct before I post it.

Serial# is - 392Y3S

Does that mean:

392 - 392nd frame
Y - YO
3 - 1993
S - Small

Or is the 392 some different designation?

I'm certain it's a small and built in Sommerville in 93 (bought it in 94). Just curious what the 392 is..

Also have a big 1" with RD. 1991 - does that mean it's a 91 fork? I bought it after I bought the frame (could only afford on of them at a time at the time...)

Thanks in advance
 

frescova

New member
Thanks DocChill

Now I just need to muster the courage to post it - frame and fork have been with me just as long as my wife...
 

dubya

New member
Are the forks serial numbered too? My 95 frame has a genuine BOI but wasn't original to the frame so I'm kinda curious if I can date the fork
 

I-ROBOT

Active member
Typically forks were not serialized. IMO, this was a mistake but I had no control over it.

That fork marked RD may have been a prototype that got out into the market. I really don't know on that one. I would assume that it has the brazed tear-drop gussets on the back of each leg? We started doing that on the regular YO forks after some early failures and fatigue testing results.

I know this probably doesn't help that much but its all I can offer to you guys.

Best of luck
Scott
 

dubya

New member
Sorry to threadjack but can anyone decipher the SN on this wicked I just received in trade?

It's either B01148F

Or 801148F

Paint is thick and a bit hard to tell if it starts as B or 8
 

I-ROBOT

Active member
Most likely the SN is 881148F, meaning it was manufactured in 1988, it was the 1148th frame produced in 1988 and the F means that it is a regular Fat Chance and not a Wicked. If you have a way to measure the head tube angle, it will probably be 69 degrees. The Wicked is 71 degrees. The Fat is much easier to ride with no hands (for me anyway!!)

Good luck with it
Scott
 

dubya

New member
Most likely the SN is 881148F, meaning it was manufactured in 1988, it was the 1148th frame produced in 1988 and the F means that it is a regular Fat Chance and not a Wicked. If you have a way to measure the head tube angle, it will probably be 69 degrees. The Wicked is 71 degrees. The Fat is much easier to ride with no hands (for me anyway!!)

Good luck with it
Scott


Thanks for the quick response Scott.

I don't have the frameset yet, we're still ironing out trade details. It's my pink 1985 Stumpjumper Team for his fat chance frame and money my way. I wasn't aware of a regular Fat Chance, was it a base or lower end model similar to the Buck Shaver?

Eta: looking at the 88 Fat Chance catalog it says the bike has a U brake. This one I'm trading for has cantis front and rear (black frame w/yellow decals). Maybe a 1989 model made in 1988?
 
Last edited:

colker

Well-known member
Thanks for the quick response Scott.

I don't have the frameset yet, we're still ironing out trade details. It's my pink 1985 Stumpjumper Team for his fat chance frame and money my way. I wasn't aware of a regular Fat Chance, was it a base or lower end model similar to the Buck Shaver?

Eta: looking at the 88 Fat Chance catalog it says the bike has a U brake. This one I'm trading for has cantis front and rear (black frame w/yellow decals). Maybe a 1989 model made in 1988?

See the evolution line. It didn´t start w/ the wicked. Mountain bikes didn´t start w/ 71 degr head angles.
 

I-ROBOT

Active member
Most of the 1988 regular Fat Chance models had the chainstay mounted u-brake but there were several of each size made with seatstay cantilevers as well. Dealers could order them either way depending on their customer's desires. I don't think we charged any extra for canti's versus u-brakes on the Fats. There may have been some Wickeds with u-brake mounts as well but probably not very many. Those most likely would have been built to order only.

Scott
 

dubya

New member
Most of the 1988 regular Fat Chance models had the chainstay mounted u-brake but there were several of each size made with seatstay cantilevers as well. Dealers could order them either way depending on their customer's desires. I don't think we charged any extra for canti's versus u-brakes on the Fats. There may have been some Wickeds with u-brake mounts as well but probably not very many. Those most likely would have been built to order only.

Scott

Thanks again Scott. The catalog through me off a bit when I saw it was a U brake frame. Im.much more fond of cantis and v brakes so I'm happy, I was just wondering if the frame may have been altered. It won't see much saddle time between my 95 Yo and new 2.1, but will be a perfect candidate to yank the kids around in the Burley ��

Thanks again for the help and little known information.

Cory
 

colker

Well-known member
Fantastic and very helpful response. Thanks!

Sorry.. I should be here to serve and provide you w/ detailed replies. You never should go through the pain and effort of typing: google.com "Fat Chance catalogs".
My bad Your Highness.. .:cool::eek::(:rolleyes::confused:
 
Last edited:

dubya

New member
Sorry.. I should be here to serve and provide you w/ detailed replies. You never should go through the pain and effort of typing: google.com "Fat Chance catalogs".
My bad Your Highness.. .:cool::eek::(:rolleyes::confused:


I never asked anyone about geometry, the early Fats or if the Wicked was the first model, which I obviously knew. Some might think that being a senior member, on a nearly dead forum, that you'd be a little less snarky and a bit more welcoming to lesser educated Fat fans like myself.

You should take note of the way Scott responds to folks but I've seen you around other forums and don't expect you to lose the attitude anytime soon.

Cory
 
Top