Nice survivor. I'd cruise that basically cleaned and tuned, no doubt...

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewI...A:IT&ih=018

That looks cool but, is that stem cap real?
I like the color with the black parts.

Did you also see he charged $100 for shipping..

I looked at that auction, and maybe it's because I have too many hours invested in this hobby, but I don't think "it's now as it was from the bike shop in 87"-LOL.

Brakes and levers, bars (maybe just wrong year/decals), chainwheel, and pedals are wrong. Rotor! no GYRO. NO 990's!, etc.

Maybe I missed something BITD-LOL.

However, the color is really cool and that stem cap is interesting.

J

Yeah, and the solid/all black Tech-77's is newer - not from the 80's. That pink in not faded, that is some other repainted pink, like Hutch Pink. The pinks did not fade like that, and it appears to equal throughout the bike.

that stem is one of several later aftermarket versions. it is real, but not '80s, not made by SR, not as good and not correct to be original to that bike.

i was looking at it...


the frame looks "right" as for bends and whatever, however the dropout pic shows a very thick ended chainstay tube. it looks like there were new chainstays welded on because the angles are just not right. think i even see vent holes by the bottom bracket welds. the 990 cable stop isn't right either. thats the only thing i noticed that was wierd other than that color.. it is not faded. thats toilet bowl pink.

saw that stem before.. a UK guy had it on the other OS site. maybe thats the after market UK stem.

I was hoping someone would address those issues you brought up, Carl.

I immediately noticed the "incorrect" cablestop under the BB.

Now that you mention it, in the profile pic of the whole bike...those chainstays look just too darned big! That is wierd.

As for the paint, I was wondering if it wasn't a leftover paintjob from the '86 color schemes. The paintjob definately looks old. It actually smacks of original to me, from the wear. I was wondering if the frame itself might be an extremely early (hence 'different') '87?

I just can't imagine the scenario where somebody would put that much custom work into a GT so long ago...?
What with the 90's stem cap and solid black levers, maybe somebody was putting that kinda effort into rebuilding ten or so years ago, which could explain the aged look of the paint.

I don't know...I was just looking for your thoughts...thanks!

I'd steer clear of that bike. Either the owner has no clue about 1987 Pro Freestyle Tours, or he's trying to scam someone. NOTHING on that bike says original 1987 GT Pro Freestyle Tour to me. The color is wrong, and so are all of the parts. All of them.

I don't know about this one...if it was welded (rear chainstay/drop), they got it to look factory. Same style/quality welds. And it doesn't look like it was recently done.

hmmmm...

Correct me if I'm wrong but, it definatelly looks like the 990 mount is tweaked. Especially on the left mount tube (closest to you in the pic). Am I crazy here or are my eyes decieving me? Just an observation. I'm happy for the person who bought it. But I woulda never payed that much for a non original GT bike.

I saw this auction a week ago and thought it was just some repaint job that the seller was passing off as original.

Now that I've looked closer, nothing makes sense on this bike.

Did anyone notice how round the fork blades are bent at the steerer tube compared to GT's patented wishbone style bend? That's the second set of forks like that I've seen this week.

The chainstays do look fat and they look to be bent different when they meet the bb.

The chainstays on regular PFTs are parallel with the top tube, this one is not.

The serial number does not make sense, normally it would be month than year, but this one is year than month?

If it is 8710? it would be too late to be a prototype. But maybe it is a prototype, the whole thing is weird and now I'm going to loose sleep.