I'm looking for input on what the new Trick Star should be.

I've got someone lined up to prototype this. I'd also graciously accept someone's rough Trick Star frame and fork to use for a guide if anyone has one to offer. I'm not sure if it'll be cut up or not, so please, nothing too pretty. I'll return the favor at some point.

Here's some key points for input:

Size/geometry: keep the same? Add TT length? Drop TT at seat mast slightly? Rear triangle the same? Headtube angle the same? Seat mast angle the same? Fork rake the same? Fork tube diameter: original or modern?

Tubing: same gage, or bump-up to the next size for added strength but also added weight?

Headtube: standard or integrated? (If integrated, I'd like to see a little feedback as to "why" integrated is better, not just because it's the latest thing. The reason why is because a standard headest probably offers more possibility for a retro-style look.

Steer tube: 1-1/8"? Steerer tube collar: full or short?

BB: Amer, Euro, Span, Mid? I'd prefer to choose the best "1" choice for this, because the more options I need to provide, the more complex (expensive) manufacturing becomes.

Tabs: gyro tabs? removeable? same location as current frames?

Mounts: canti on top? u-brake on seat or chain stays? cable guides welded on? Fork mounts yes/no/style?

TT platform: stays the same? Scale it down slightly?

Frame standers: on or off?

Fork pegs: on or off? style?

Seat mast/post diameter?

Dropouts: "Judge" thick? 3/8" or 14mm? (again, I prefer to choose the best choice. Hutch hubs will have 3/8" axles front and rear)

Anything I missed?

I'm looking for the name/info of any sources who are already machining headtubes/BB's/tabs/mounts for the frame manufacturers. If anyone is willing to share, please PM me.

It might be easier to read responses if you can copy/paste the questions and respond after each in a different font/color. Thanks!

John...all I can ask for is a longer top tube.....20"-21" or better would be GREAT and maybe a 24" option...that would RULE.

As someone who owned one. Keep the fame design the same keep the geometry the same. Do not go internal headset. standard 1-1/8th- with cups, 990's on the chainstays and forks. Make the dropouts a little thicker but do not go 14mm. And keep the platform.

John, i've got a Trickstar frame you could use. The only thing missing on it is the rear standing platforms. They were cut off by the previous owner. Don't have the matching forks though.

This all depends on what you're looking to do with the frame. Is your intention to create a tribute of sorts to the original or do create a modern frame that current riders would look at as a serious option?

IMO, anything current should have an integrated headset, 1 1/8". The reason for this is that it's a much better design overall. It's simple, works well, is extremely easy to use, bullet proof, and no need for pressing in cups. There's really no reason for anything made nowadays to use a press in HS (again, IMO).

One other thing that gets overlooked by some frame manufacturers, is it should have a standard diameter seatpost. 27.2 is a great size just because it's probably the most standard size there is...I had an early Fly frame that I had to special order a seatpost for, which took way longer than it should have because of its odd size.

If you're looking for a tribute frame, then check out some of the Kappa's that are posted...several of those were very good replica's with modern benefits (Integrated HS, 990's, etc).

Any chance of an aluminum model or is this strictly cro-mo?

Look under the Kappa Starsky thread and look at AKCUDA's blu Starsky. That would be how I would want one.

If you are to do a tribute bike, which this is right, keep the unique features of a trickstar but make it new school. Look at Knight bike company's Gt tribute. Awesome job. Please dont do a silly american bracket. Yes it was the standard 25 years ago but now its just a sign of a cheap bike. Integrated headset, mid bottom bracket and 990's on the seat stays. Keep the standers front and rear, if someone doesnt like them they could always cut off. Thick drop outs 14mm rear. By using 14mm every hub made could be used. Using 3/8th limits selection of hubs. If we want to use 3/8th hubs we can always use an adapter. Oh and do us all a favor. Dont tell us there are only going to be 500 made, then change the color a year later and make more.

copy/paste below. The only thing I've never been a fan of is a Euro BB on a full-size frame. Give's me the perception that there isn't enough there to hold me up.

i agree. has to atleast be a mid.

and look at those sexy 990s on the seatstays upside down !!!

Size/geometry: keep the same? Add TT length? Drop TT at seat mast slightly? Rear triangle the same? Headtube angle the same? Seat mast angle the same? Fork rake the same? Fork tube diameter: original or modern?

Well, what kind of freestyle is this going ot be intended for? If flatland, then keep it the top tube the original length. If it is gonna be used for street,ramps, and jumps, then something a little longer like 20.5 or 21 might be better. If flatland, then less fork rake, else, modern. Fork tube diameter should be modern. The chainstay needs to be wider to accomdate the bigger tires some riders use today. The seat tube angle seems fine to me. I honestly feel that having a street version and a flatland version of the Trick Star would be neat. I am currently looking at building a KHE Equilibrium for flatland, but if a flatland Trick Star came out before then, I'd probably get that instead.

Tubing: same gage, or bump-up to the next size for added strength but also added weight?

Bump of the size of the tubing. Whether it is flatland or street, todays riding is gonna be much more demanding on strength than they were back in the 80s. I have my USA Trick Star right next to me, and I can see that the tubing for the top tube and rear triangle definately needs to be beefed up. The downtube could be beefed up one size as well. I feel that the small tube at the headtube hsould be beefed up a little as well. Perhaps you can do something like the KHE ParisIII or KHE Equilibrium flatland frames did where the tubes meet the headtube.

Headtube: standard or integrated? (If integrated, I'd like to see a little feedback as to "why" integrated is better, not just because it's the latest thing. The reason why is because a standard headest probably offers more possibility for a retro-style look.

Integrated. Press in cups suck because it takes longer to build, and an ovalized headtube can cause a lot of headaches. Integrated is more precise and easier to adjust maintain because of that. From a marketing perspective, you will never make money if you don't implement today's technology. Remember, if you maintain the Trick Star's general tubing style (headtube joints and frame stander on top tube), then it is already gonna look retro.

Steer tube: 1-1/8"? Steerer tube collar: full or short?

1-1/8 is better! No question about that.

BB: Amer, Euro, Span, Mid? I'd prefer to choose the best "1" choice for this, because the more options I need to provide, the more complex (expensive) manufacturing becomes.

Either Euro or Mid. I never used a mid BB before, but I remember the bearings being the same size as the bearings used in American bottom brackets, so I would go that route. It seems like most frames today are either Euro or Mid.

Tabs: gyro tabs? removeable? same location as current frames?

Removable gyro tabs, same location as current. Even though I run brakes front and back for flat, pretty much all frames have removable tabs.

Mounts: canti on top? u-brake on seat or chain stays? cable guides welded on? Fork mounts yes/no/style?

Removeable 990 seat stay mounts with a hole on the seat stay cross bar for old school brakes. Make sure it says HUTCH Removable 990 brake mounts on the front as well. If you follow my guidelines, then you might as well make the cable guides removable. I am leaning towards the idea of dual cable guides.

TT platform: stays the same? Scale it down slightly?

Stay the same. Even the original size tubing would be fine.

Frame standers: on or off?

Off. Or perhaps you can have optional removable frame standers...

Fork pegs: on or off? style?

Again, off or possibly removable.

Seat mast/post diameter?

I want to be able to go to Danscomp or a decent bike shop and get a seat post. Todays standard would be best.

Dropouts: "Judge" thick? 3/8" or 14mm? (again, I prefer to choose the best choice. Hutch hubs will have 3/8" axles front and rear)

Nice thick dropouts. 14mm. You can always sell your hubes with 14mm adapters designed for your frame/forks. I noticed a lot of riders get 3/8 for the front and 14 for the rear.

In order for Hutch to be successful, you should update it as much as possible to today's prefered geometry and parts specification. You should decide what whether this will be a flatland bike or a street/ramp bike and then look at the standards for that style of riding. I personally prefer it to be a flatland bike as the frame's tubing design is much more suited for that. You could always offer another frame to be used as a street bike. I seriously hope you don't go the pure retro route though. I want Hutch to be taken seriously. Have your poster child (the Trick Star, with modern geometry of course), then make some other frames to have a presence in the street and race scene.

I'm going to echo some of the comments on what is this frame's intended use. It's a serious question if this is your first foray into the frame market. You want to start off with a bang, not a thud. Not just within the VintageBMX community either. You make it too old school and today's riders will pass up on your stuff as lame. If your objective is to sell a lot of these and have a flagship product you need to decide if it's a flatland bike or a street bike. There is no such thing as an overall flatland and street bike taken seriously these days. I've always seen the Trick Star as a flatland bike because Woody made it iconic in that regard. I think John, that you'll garner more appreciation by going modern vs. a very close reproduction. Both in the Vintage community and with today's riders.


Size/geometry: keep the same? Add TT length? Drop TT at seat mast slightly? Rear triangle the same? Headtube angle the same? Seat mast angle the same? Fork rake the same? Fork tube diameter: original or modern?

Again, what's the objective? You may want to lay back the seat tube angle, because there aren't a whole lot of laid back seat posts out there to buy off the shelf. Go modern.

Tubing: same gage, or bump-up to the next size for added strength but also added weight?

I don't know what gage was used on the original Trick Star, but thicken the dropouts. Use butted tubing to save some weight.

Headtube: standard or integrated? (If integrated, I'd like to see a little feedback as to "why" integrated is better, not just because it's the latest thing. The reason why is because a standard headest probably offers more possibility for a retro-style look.

Integrated. It's the wave of the future, don't fight it. Replacement part availability down the road is not something that should be overlooked. And like others said, they are easy to set up. Nothing screams "modern" than an integrated head tube. Five or more years from now, I wouldn't want to be looking on eBay for a quality press-in style headset replacement.

Steer tube: 1-1/8"? Steerer tube collar: full or short?

1-1/8"

BB: Amer, Euro, Span, Mid? I'd prefer to choose the best "1" choice for this, because the more options I need to provide, the more complex (expensive) manufacturing becomes.

Euro

Tabs: gyro tabs? removeable? same location as current frames?

Removable, same location.

Mounts: canti on top? u-brake on seat or chain stays? cable guides welded on? Fork mounts yes/no/style?

990 mounts UNDER the seat stays PLEEEEAAASE!! This bike will not be taken seriously as a flatland bike if you place them anywhere else. Dual cable guides (London style) on the frame. 990 mounts on the fork. Removable if possible.

TT platform: stays the same? Scale it down slightly?

This is debatable. I'd like it slightly narrowed and not as long. This could be a topic on it's own. I want to see it on, but it should not get in the way.

Frame standers: on or off?

Off

Fork pegs: on or off? style?

Off

Seat mast/post diameter?

Should fit a common size seatpost like 25.4 or 27.2.

Dropouts: "Judge" thick? 3/8" or 14mm? (again, I prefer to choose the best choice. Hutch hubs will have 3/8" axles front and rear)

You'll need to watch the trend of the freecoaster hubs. More are going 14mm now. So I'd go 14mm on the frame. 3/8" on the fork. Come up with some HUTCH branded 3/8" to 14mm chain tensioners for it.


If you need a volunteer to test ride it... I'm only a few hours drive....

Make it affordable.

Maybe the BB size should relate to what you intend to do with the new Hutch cranks. I guess most people would have new Hutch cranks as their first option on a new Trick Star. If they will based around a Profile-style 48 spline,19 mm spindle then Euro BB mite be the best option.
Agree with the above comments about intended use dictating frame design.

My opinion is that the Trick Star should be a modern flatland frame and as a companion piece there could be a retro original as a limited edition. The new Trick Star needs to be able to compete with modern flatland frames. A limited edition retro version could be identical to the original.


Size/geometry: keep the same? Add TT length? Drop TT at seat mast slightly? Rear triangle the same? Headtube angle the same? Seat mast angle the same? Fork rake the same? Fork tube diameter: original or modern?

I think the Trick Star overall geometry was pretty much spot on. I'd say look at which modern flat frames are extremely popular and consider some of the angles they use but the Trick Star was pretty good the way it was. A lower TT, just slightly, might be good. The head tube angle was always fine by me and I do believe most modern flat bikes are using the same angle the Trick Star had. The fork rake should be nothing. A lot of flat riders these days actually prefer straight forks with zero offset dropouts. Some like the dropouts in front of the fork still (I do) but zero offset is probably more popular for flatland.


Tubing: same gage, or bump-up to the next size for added strength but also added weight?

I never broke a Trick Star. The one I have is very light although modern flat frames are probably a pound or two lighter. Here's the deal, most new flatland frames will be a pound or so lighter than a Trick Star but they also break too easy because they use thin tubing to save weight. They claim all the heat treating and what not for strength but that doesn't amount to anything when the tubes bend and break because the diameter is too thin. I think the original Trick Star tubing diameter was fine. They didn't bend up and snap like crazy and they weren't heavy either. Some people may claim they want the bike strengthened but if you beef up the tubing more than it was originally you'll have a hard time selling to new flatland riders since a large portion of them are crazy over saving weight. Why else would they keep buying paper thin frames from KHE and snapping them in under a year and then go buy another? Keeping the weight down is important for a flatland bike but these days frame makers have gone too far in saving weight and the frames are not strong. Find out what size tubing others are using and go a tad thicker. I for one would be willing to buy a new flatland frame that weighed a tad more than the latest paperweight from KHE as long as I knew it would hold up for a while and not snap in half while attempting a time machine or something. People who want a Trick Star that is thicker than the original probably want a street bike. Those should be strong and most street riders don't mind having a heaver bike. Their bikes go through hell. The Trick Star was never intended as a street bike in the first place. It's a flatland frame that we just used for everything.


Headtube: standard or integrated? (If integrated, I'd like to see a little feedback as to "why" integrated is better, not just because it's the latest thing. The reason why is because a standard headest probably offers more possibility for a retro-style look.

For a new frame you have to go integrated. Nobody wants to press in cups anymore. If there were a retro version that could maybe be standard but having an integrated headset would be an obvious feature that proves its not an NOS Trick Star.

Steer tube: 1-1/8"? Steerer tube collar: full or short?

Steer tube should be same as other modern forks. If you were to do two kinds of Trick Stars then maybe a modern one and a retro one with original size forks.


BB: Amer, Euro, Span, Mid? I'd prefer to choose the best "1" choice for this, because the more options I need to provide, the more complex (expensive) manufacturing becomes.

Almost everyone uses Euro now. I'd probably just go with that for anything. It keeps things easy. Most people are used to this now. Also in terms of distinguishing between an original Trick Star and a new one this feature would be a dead give away. Nobody will be selling a new one on Ebay claiming it's an NOS original if it has a Euro BB and this isn't some feature a scammer can just easily change.


Tabs: gyro tabs? removeable? same location as current frames?

Removable is a good way to go. Some flat riders want back brakes and some don't so let them choose themselves whether to have the tabs on or off. This should be about standard for flatland bikes these days.

Mounts: canti on top? u-brake on seat or chain stays? cable guides welded on? Fork mounts yes/no/style?

Fork mounts are a must. U brake on the under side of seat stays. Can't put U brakes on chain stays anymore. Flatland gearing is small and the chain will smack the brakes. They have to be under the seat stays. Might want to think about removable rear brake mounts as well. Like I mentioned, flatlanders are crazy about weight and those that refuse to use back brakes aren't going to want a frame with rear brake mounts permanently on the frame.


TT platform: stays the same? Scale it down slightly?

This is really up for debate. I like the TT platform but I also remember the original bike. Selling a flatland frame today with a platform on it is risky. The vast majority of flatlanders don't want them. They don't need them and they add weight. I personally use an 87 Haro Master because I can't find any new flat frames that are twin tube. The reason there are no new flat frames that are twin tube or with a TT platform is because 99% of riders don't want them. Again, if there were two versions of this bike a retro one would HAVE to have this feature. Don't know if a modern one should have it or not.

Frame standers: on or off?

My opinion is that they shouldn't even have been on the original. People were always hacksawing them off anyway.

Fork pegs: on or off? style?

No fork pegs.

Seat mast/post diameter?

Whatever the standard size is now.

Dropouts: "Judge" thick? 3/8" or 14mm? (again, I prefer to choose the best choice. Hutch hubs will have 3/8" axles front and rear)

I would go with whatever thickness other modern flat frames are using. I'd also consider 3/8ths dropouts with stamped markings to show where to cut if someone wants to make them 14mm on their own. Some frame makers do this now. At least having the proper markings on the dropouts so riders can cut it themselves later is better than nothing. Or make the 14mm but with 3/8ths adapters.


Anything I missed?

If this is to be a modern flatland frame I'd study the others and see what is working and what is failing then make the Trick Star better. Flatlandfuel.com has a good assortment of modern flat frames to look at. If this is to be retro reissue identical to the original then I'd say keep everything the same except ditch the fork pegs and frame standers and go with Euro BB, integrated HS, fork 990 mounts and 990 mounts under the seat stays. In this case I wouldn't worry as much about removable tabs and mounts as the newschool crowd won't be the target market anyway.


Whatever you decide to do I'm still going to be happy about it though!

Get your hands on an 03 Starsky and copy it... with or without the toptube platform. No chainstay stands or built in fork pegs. Do that and I will buy one. Please don't make it a flatland specific bike.

This post asks the right questions. Standard out of Iowa would probably produce some HIGH quality frames, so would waterford, fbm, solid and S&M have made frames for other companies. Could also outsource to Taiwan to make it affordable. I live in wisconsin and could get the ball rolling with these companies, I also have an Og trick star hanging out.

Please don't have this frame manufactured overseas!

The place I'm working with is here in the States.

I appreciate the comments from Micahbmx about which companies do outsource work though. That helps.

Edit, add: would be 4130, modern frame for the big market (not just retro)

IMHO Kappa made the perfect "new" Trick Star design with the 2003 Starsky. So copy that!

Solid bikes out of the northwest was making anything that had to be milled for FBM and S&M for some time. Also some "claiming to be American made" companies now get the headtubes, bb, and gussets made in Taiwan and weld them in their American factories.

do not use euro. Mid bottom brackets are so clean and can still use all american bottom bracket spacers.

I'd also drop the fork pegs & rear standing platforms.

My main suggestion would be to make it modern and have it only look retro. Modern geometry. Modern features. Old headtube gusset / triangles feature, platform, looptail rear end, chrome plate with old graphics.
Take a modern frame and copy it angles-wise, and then add the old stuff.
I'd suggest a 20" top tube as it would be a long flat bike or a short ramp bike. Or, most generically / in the middle, a 20.5" top tube (moving quite far from flatland at this point).
The back end needs to be short - 13.75" is the new standard. Not sure if you could make a looptail work with a short rear end.
990s below the seat stays. Removable.
Gyro tabs: removable. Cable guides: removable.
Mid or Spanish BB shell. Euro is a horrible idea. Freestyle bikes bailed on this years ago.
Integrated headset. You can't sell a frame to a modern kid without one.
What I would do is get a 20" modern frame such as a Kink Farside, and use it to set the jig.
No platforms. Although you could have stickers there to look like they were there on first look.
25.4 seatpost is standard. tube shouldn't stick out too far above the top tube.
Thick dropouts, but small in size.
Frames weigh under 5 lbs now and are much stronger than the '80s frames.
Forks: no rake! 990 mounts. Built in lower HS race.
Also, I'd have it made in Taiwan, as the quality is very high there now, and they know how to do it right. Keeps the price down, too. MacNeil, Kink, almost everybody is getting their frames from Taiwan now. The best frames I've ridden over the past 30 years have been Taiwanese.
The worst thing that could happen with this project would be that you end up with something like the modern SE bikes or the 2009 Haro Freestyler: not serious contenders at all.
If you really want to keep the Hutch name in high esteem, you have to be on the cutting edge and not bend toward the requests of OS riders stuck in the 1980s.

I don't have the time to read the whole thread and respond to others' suggestions, but here's my two cents.

Keep it as much like the original as possible, geometry-wise. Do the thicker tubing if you want, whatever for BB, lose the fork and chainstay stands, and add centerpull mounts below the seatstay. I'd like to see the toptube platform as optional.

Basically, like the original Starsky. Too far from that, and I doubt I'd buy one. Close to that, and you can count me in for one.

Actually, I can HELP YOU OUT A LOT DESIGNING A NEW MODERN HUTCH TRICKSTAR!

I LOVE BMX FLATLAND FREESTYLE, AND I GOTTA DREAM BLUE HUTCH TRICKSTAR, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT YEAR IT IS!

I also got Solidworks 2007 and Proengineer Wildfire 3, both with Finite Element Analysis!

I'll design a New Trickstar if you cut me a deal! Give me Hutch Titanium Pedals white and blue, and 5 of the new Trickstar Frames. Also let me test ride a prototype!

I got a Mechanical Engineeering degree and I flatland freestyle. And my Hutch Trickstar is my BEST BMX Bike!

My Hutch Trickstar is in this thread! -- http://www.vintagebmx.com/community/index....wtopic=27026346

Just waiting for the originator to chime in...

Paging Woody Itson...



I think it was perfect, the first time. ®

This all depends on where you want to target this frame.

- A Retro collectors item? - keep it the same as the original.

- A street frame for the masses? Don't go there, no street rider will buy a platform frame nowadays.

- A flatland frame? Use modern specs, keep the original design:
- top tube 19", lower at the seatpost at least 2"
- chainstays 13"
- headtube 76ºHT integrated 1-1/8 with the "H" engraved on the front
- seattube 71º, standard size
- BB Spanish - (its lightweight but still strong and you dont need to be hammered in!) - machine the BB after welding!
- Brakes: removable 990 posts under the seatstays, removable cable guides (dual/london), removable gyro tabs (because lots of people dont use brakes)
- dropouts 10mm, 6mm thick, machined on the inside to reduce weight, welded flush on the outside with the stays
- slim down the platform to a minimal size
- full heat-treatment would be nice to guarantee strength.
- complete weight of 2.2kg

Well, thats just my opinion, I think many flatlanders would agree.

John,
I see a real problem here. First before you do anything, as others have said, you need to decide what your goal with this frame is. As someone who was and still is neurotic about frame specs (at least that is what all my freinds say) especially with regards to current bmx construction (A freind of mine and I had Mike Devitt, Yes the SE racing Mike Devit, working on our prototype for our company right before SE sold out to Fuji so I know a thing or two about getting a frame built. Mike is the man and he taught me a lot!) you are going to have a really hard time selling a frame with a standing platform to anyone in current BMX with the exception of the hardest of hardcore flatland guys and us vintage bmx fans. It simply will not sell otherwise. However I cannot see a trick star without one. With that in mind you need to decide if the Trick Star is really a bike you want to build. I know a significant amount of people here will flame me for that statement but it is a fact of the market. Is it truly finanacially feasible to create a trick star if you follow what makes a trick star a trick star? Things are different form back in the day. Most riders rode all disciplines and now the flatland guys are riding very specialized machines that are rather divergent from the all purpose, all around freestyle frames. Trust me as an enthusiast no one wants to see the hutch name trick star come back more than I. I was one of the kids who could not afford a trick star ( I did get a complete 85 master though, so I was not so deprived ) So the chance to own one some day is a dream of mine. (right after I get my 85 master built) I wish you good luck in your endeavor and once you can answer who this frame is targeted at I will be more than willing to give you some feedback.

Sonikk71 makes a good point. The Trick Star is and always has been a flatland frame. Selling a flatland frame these days with any kind of top tube platform is a risky proposition. It's not likely most newer riders would want it. On the flipside since you'd be the only one doing it you have something no one else is selling. But maybe no one is selling a frame like that for a reason.

Regarding head tube angles: isn't it that the lower the number the steeper and faster the steering is? I thought the original TS was a 74.5 or something like that. Someone mentioned using a 76 head tube angle but it seems most frames now are using either 74.5 or 75. I'd think as a flatland bike you want the quickest steering possible without the thing getting squirrelly. I could have sworn the original Master had a head tube that was 77 and it was like riding a chopper. Maybe I'm getting this backwards though. The head tube angle should be a quick one whatever you decide.

Regarding BB: I mentioned using Euro only because a lot of frame makers seems to be using that. Honestly though there's nothing really wrong with using Spanish or Mid either. Just don't use the old US type. Nobody uses that anymore. It seems that most flatland companies are using Euro or Spanish. The only Mid I've noticed recently is Hoffman though I'm sure there are others using it too.

I think that Mike D may disagree with you on this.

John,

I think if you went flatland specific with your Trick Star, that it should be sold as frame only. It would be cool to have a fork with it, but some guys like no rake and some a little. You couldn't please everybody. And flat is a small market. Some variations of the frame might solve some of the dilemmas.

1. flatland geometry with out the platform for the rider types.
2. traditional geometry with the platform for the collector types.

One or both as limited editions?

John just build it BIG and Strong !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!and then build more !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

if you go to johns post in the freestyle section woody replied there.

True, Mike D, one of the greatest riders to ever grace a ramp did ride a trick star. However we have to remember a copuple of things, #1 Mike was not a big guy, #2 that was then. I love all old school rides. Really I do. But in today's market very few if any ride ramps on a bike with that short of a Top Tube. Us oldschool guys can can talk all we want but the facts are things have changed. It is the same thing with the standing platform. Does that mean the new trick star should change to? That is what my post was getting at. It all depends on what his goal is with the frame. I for one would love to have an exact replica of the old one because I never got one back in the day. But I am also enough of a business man to realize that I am the minority and if John is looking to bring back Hutch to the present day rider and sell a good amount of frames that is not the way to do it.

John,
Honestly I think I'd take Woodys suggestions, Make a small run, Give one to Woody and Sponsor a few other riders and get them to evaluate the frame and go from there. I believe This type of R&D is how most companies bring products to the mass market. This will give you all the answers you need.
Oh and I'd like to see reinforced rings brazed around the headtube top and bottom for strength reguardless of any frames you make.

I'd like to think that the quote "If you build them, they will come" applies in this case.
The market for a frame and fork for a bike like this is pretty small all things considered.
I'm not trying to discourage you but Kappa has already been down this road before. And they probably made and sold less than 1000 Starsky's.
I would build a few, thicker tubing, same geometry with a slightly longer top tube, no pegs, or rear standers.
After the requests start to come in let those people that want pegs and standers order them and pay a little extra for the option.
Same for the "no standing platform crowd" and where you want the rear brakes.
After the excitement settles offer something similar in a 24" model and a "one of only one" gold plated 24" Trick Star.

Way less than 1000, way less than 100 even! Only 15 made in 2003 and I'm not too sure of the number of 2004 models, maybe 25 or so.

Speaking of that, how many gold Trick Star's did they make BITD?

After thinking more about it another idea came to mind. BITD when Specialized was just a parts distributer, they wanted to make a mountainbike. What did they do? They bought one of the best at the time. A Ritchey. They then copied it. Put their styles on proven angles and named it a Stumpjumper. That became the first mass produced mountain mike. It also built that company to what it is today. Maybe buy one or two of the best flat / street frames and run with it. Then have your sponsored riders give you input for changes on the next run. Maybe Pat from Flatlandfuel could help. I think the most important points to keep on the New Trickstar is the headtube gusset and the looptail.

I was looking into this some more regarding bottom brackets. It seems to me that mid is the way to go. I know there are several flatland frames using Euro and a few using Spanish but mid seems to make the most sense to me. I don't really see what true advantage the others would have over mid. The only thing to keep in mind is the obvious: make sure whoever welds it also machines out the bottom bracket perfectly round after the welding is done.

I think I'll just keep looking for a Kappa Starsky. Kappa did it right.

And did it first 1st!!!

No, don't make the new Trickstar with thicker tubing! I got an 85 one and built up with Skyway Mags and Redline Flights it's around 28 to 26 lbs. Great flatland bikes are lightweight, and Hutches had a reputation for being lightweight. I've had my 1983 Hutch Pro modded for freestyle since 1983 and it never cracked. So if you want a thicker tubed bike, get a HARO which is always an overbuilt tank to freestyle on and harder to do tricks... I got the 87 and 2006 Sport Retro Remake and they are heavy!

Heavy bikes SUCK BIG TIME! MY 2001 Schwinn Powermatic MAG is a heavy stinker! SO HARD to do a 180 on a heavy bike!

Make the Trickstar 2 with no built in fork pegs, keep the frame platform, use a "Trickstar 2" sticker, put 990 mounts front and rear, and no Spanish BB! I'm thinking about getting an Eastern Grim Reaper 2 frame but oh how hard it is to get a nice lightweight crank on it that uses a Spanish BB! Can't figure out how to get the FMF carbon crank on it!

It's a very minor suggestion, but one of my favorite details about my 2004 retro Master is that the rear breaks have twin brake cable guides under the top tube. That way it'd designed from the ground up to have double brake lines in the rear. Brakes also mount underneath the brake plate up top, so you can run whatever ratio you want.

As far as geometry goes, after riding a newer bike for a year or two I really prefer it to the old school ride. If I could get a Hutch Trickstar retro with 990s front and rear, integrated headset, seat post clamp, spanish or mid or euro bottom bracket (I don't care) then I'd jump all over it in a heartbeat.

To me the things that would make or break it are: it MUST have (1) looptail (2) either a restyled or original style platform (3) the signature bracing of the frame near head tube (4) be built to ride. Other than that, I really wouldn't care. Ideally it WOULDN'T have integrated front pegs (I always hated those little stubby things) but it wouldn't be a dealbreaker for me.

A final comment is that as a rider bitd the first thing I did was ditch the hutch pedals (those cages were like a meat grinder to my shins and the second thing was to replace the Mike D bars. Shortly thereafter a set of freecoaster Z-48s went onto it in place of the mags, and then I rode it nonstop for years. So I have this huge attachment to the frame/fork and the ride of the bike, but not so much the other components. Maybe that's just me though.

+1

If Hutch does that, then they will be selling an outdated bike that will appeal to old schoolers. Not smart.

The new Trick Star needs to be a modern bike that pays tribute to the original. It should have a mid BB, removable 990 mounts on the seatstays, 14mm dropouts, removable gyro tabs, and a removable brake cable stop. I would certainly keep the head tube gusset and possibly a smaller platform.

If you want an old Trick Star, buy one, but I think the smart business move would be to build a bike for the modern rider and take Hutch into the current generation.

+50
I couldn't agree more. Bring on the modern day flatland Hutch frame. Look at Ares, Quamen, KHE, Sick Child etc and figure out how to do it even better.

Most certainly. I want a modern day flatland frame with all the modern futures, but with vintage Hutch styling.

Another supporter of SAF's ideas, he nailed most of my thoughts on a modern Trick Star.