n2o
Oct 13 2009, 08:14 PM
frazer
Oct 13 2009, 10:25 PM
'77, '78, I'd guess. Chatsworth decal, not Northridge.
Those should clean up nicely.
wilko
Oct 15 2009, 05:15 PM
For era. they are the second gen design. First years had the legs about 1/4" longer than the end of the flange.
J.T.
Oct 15 2009, 07:08 PM
1978 was the first year for 5" steer tube.
n2o
Oct 15 2009, 07:16 PM
So then, would they be more era-correct than the forks that are on this frame right now? These forks have the caps in the legs.
J.T.
Oct 15 2009, 07:29 PM
MX-II's were designed with a 4" steer tube where the Pro-Line was 5"
Reilley1
Oct 15 2009, 07:40 PM
Redline made a 5" steerer tube first gen forks (1975) . Mel Stoutsenberger ran them on his modofied girl's Schwinn. Rick Twomey also has a set on the McDowell/Langosh "101" hack.
They also were used on the early Champions
KenC
Oct 15 2009, 07:55 PM
The forks would be 76 to early 79 era but the Chatsworth decals would make them late 77 to early 79
How long is the steer tube itself? Forks made for 5" head tube will actually have a steer tube a little over 6" long and these don't look that long. They would be the correct era for the MX II in the photo, if the serial number is below 8000-8300ish it would have Northridge decals but if the serial number is larger than 8000-8300 it would have Chatsworth decals
If the forks are factory drilled, this would narrow it down to mid 78 or 79
J.T.
Oct 15 2009, 08:59 PM
Meant to say Head tube vs. Steer tube. Production Redlines from '74 - '77 had 4" head tubes. The new Pro-Line frames in '78 introduced the 5" head tube.
n2o
Oct 15 2009, 10:59 PM
Thee forks are 5" total length for the steerer, so they are for a 4" headtube. Serial number on the frame is 11143.
Thanks for the info guys!
KenC
Oct 16 2009, 07:02 AM
QUOTE (n2o @ Oct 15 2009, 11:59 PM)

Thee forks are 5" total length for the steerer, so they are for a 4" headtube. Serial number on the frame is 11143.
Thanks for the info guys!
11143 would be an early/mid 78 so those forks would be correct on that frame.
wilko
Oct 16 2009, 11:11 AM
IIRC, with a painted frame, the forks would be mild steel. Nickle frames got chromolly forks.
The mild steel forks looked identical, but were a heavier.
KenC
Oct 16 2009, 12:03 PM
QUOTE (wilko @ Oct 16 2009, 12:11 PM)

IIRC, with a painted frame, the forks would be mild steel. Nickle frames got chromolly forks.
The mild steel forks looked identical, but were a heavier.
The mild steel forks were identical but from all info I have found the mild steel forks only came in black and were only offered as an individual (cheaper version) fork and not paired up with any chrome moly frames. the forks that came on the painted versions of the 77-79 MX II were chrome moly just like the frame.
If anyone has any ads or info on these, please post them
I have a pair of the mild steel forks and they are noticeably heavier. I will see if I can weight them and post the difference.
Reilley1
Oct 16 2009, 12:24 PM
They also came in Yellow a little later on and they are heavy as heck
Ken Pliska
Oct 16 2009, 02:00 PM
I have a set of Gen 1 mild steel forks right here and they come in at 2lbs 4.5 oz on the postage scale.
Keep_It_Warm
Oct 16 2009, 02:55 PM
Glad to see Jeff back in the game!
J.T.
Oct 16 2009, 03:01 PM
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.