Cycling UK Forum

Does anyone have any knowledge or expertise on Kirk magnesium frames from the 80s/90s? I have one from the era between Kirk and Dawes and you don’t need to repeat all the horror stories! I have heard most of them. But some people rate them highly apparently and I was wondering whether to start riding it (gently!). Mine is a 400 lx in black and certainly looks nice enough and is well specced. I toured the factory in 1989 and noted the number of scrap rejects prior to Dawes involvement caused allegedly by poor flow density at the rear dropouts through the tooling. But what a great idea it was and a pity it didn’t fly commercially. Mine is an MTB but I don’t think that there is much difference between it and a road version.

Blimey, the only one I've ever seen up close weighed an absolute ton. Why not give it a go though, it's something different.

neilob wrote:Does anyone have any knowledge or expertise on Kirk magnesium frames from the 80s/90s?

.........….and you don’t need to repeat all the horror stories! I have heard most of them....

well this ought to be short thread then.

...But what a great idea it was and a pity it didn’t fly commercially.....

er, no, and no respectively.

Magnesium is not a suitable frame material for use either

a) in the long term or
b) on roads which see winter road salt.

cheers

A friend had three of them in short succession in the early 90s.

well this ought to be short thread then.

A genuine laugh out loud moment. Had to explain myself to Mrs Bomber.

I maybe misremembering my school physics lessons, but it should burn brightly if you get caught out on a dark night.

Hmm, I can tell you my take and let you decide to what extent it fits into ‘horror story’ folklore.
I hankered after one for years. I loved the ‘Forth Rail Bridge‘ looks and just wanted to make my own mind up about the viability of the things. Once I’d bought one I only got as far as next doors driveway before I’d made my mind up.
Horrid.
It was like riding giant piece of overcooked pasta and would change gear by itself under moderate pedal pressure.
My advice; if you own a bike museum or an empty wall, go ahead and buy one. If you want a bike to ride that won’t make you cry, forget it.

A friend bought one second hand several years ago. He spent ages doing it up as a hipster single speed bike. He was a more than a little disappointed when he took the first ride. He enjoyed it for its novelty value but said it was terrible to ride....

TheBomber wrote:

well this ought to be short thread then.

A genuine laugh out loud moment. Had to explain myself to Mrs Bomber.

I maybe misremembering my school physics lessons, but it should burn brightly if you get caught out on a dark night.

Maybe as bright as a titanium bike. Very difficult fire to put out.

Nothing to add technically or from experience, but ................

Back in 1982 living in Scotland, I was in need of a decent bike, so went into Dale's Cycles in Glasgow. Bought a Raleigh Clubman. Excellent bike, but after a few years, I was smitten by the idea of a better one.

Eventually bought the Mercian frameset, but before that, I was looking at the idea of a Kirk. I loved the quirkiness of it and the technology behind it.

Part of me wishes I bitten the bullet and done it, but no doubt I'd have gone down the Mercian route eventually anyway.

I had to write an essay at Uni once on Magnesium alloys. I sort of ran out of enthusiasm part way through as I realised what lousy engineering materials they make; weak, flexible, brittle and prone to corrosion.......

The lack of bottom bracket bracing on those frames is a joke. Different for the sake of being different??

bgnukem wrote:...The lack of bottom bracket bracing on those frames is a joke. Different for the sake of being different??

reminds me of the Paris 'Galibier' design (which is probably a fair stiffer though)



when I first saw one of these I genuinely thought that someone had built it in their shed, starting with a Raleigh 'twenty' or something. I had to have it explained to me that it was somehow special and so forth. I still can't quite see it myself...…?

BTW frames of this layout (including the Kirk) probably deserve a special prize for 'least good gear cable routing, ever'. Why not put the shifters on/near the top tube....? The frame above is a modern one (available from Condor cycles) and has ergo bosses; I reckon the chances of the gears working with underbartape cable routing for more than five minutes is 'slim to none'.

cheers

The Galibier design is said to offer a stiffer frameset than standard. I can’t see it myself. It makes perfect sense to me that a torque-resistant tube should run as directly as possible from the points at which rotational and lateral forces are applied to a frame (such as when climbing out of the saddle) ie handlebars and cranks.
I put such claims in the dubious provenance/folklore compartment along with the old chestnut of bikes fitted with 531 main tubes having a better ride quality.

Today's Quiz Question:

How much seawater would you need to provide enough magnesium for a bike frame?

Jonathan

Jdsk wrote:Today's Quiz Question:

How much seawater would you need to provide enough magnesium for a bike frame?

Jonathan

IIRC they advertised it as 1 cubic metre.

You win. Isn't it hard to believe even when you know the answer?

: - )

Jonathan