The Sting

12xlr8 · #1 07-02-2005, 01:08 AM

Edited for easier reading...

Here's the deal. I am a new guy to the forums, but an old hardcore to Stings. (and somehow I will try to answer some common questions from other threads here, go figure)We need a new thread here. Anybody else ready to change gears from trying to identify an obscure Taiwaneese Team Schwinn (albeit fun for a while)? Let's talk "Serious Iron", "The Sting".

The Team Schwinn frame being discussed in another thread, at one point, had some (very few) similarities to The Sting, and the SX-2000/Sting Comp., but really only in the rear triangle. But it was made in Taiwan, and it had the geometry of an old scrambler, complete with laid back seat angle and short head tube. The serious riders all had their eyes on "The Sting". Those who couldn't afford one, but were serious about riding and racing, went with the SX-2000, and continued to dream of "The Sting". Everything else was simply substandard for serious riders from 79 on.

In 1981, they re-named the SX-2000 to Sting Competition, or more correctly, they added a model, called the Sting Competition, but the frame was identical to the SX-2000. I suppose they thought they could sell it better if it had the name "Sting" in it. The ONLY thing they changed with those FRAMES was the name, and the sticker. HOWEVER, they did change the forks on the complete bicycles! For a while you could still purchase an SX-2000, OR, a Sting Competition, and they were both being manufactured at the same time and dates. WHY? Because they had to get rid of the stock-pile of old forks on the SX-2000s. The original forks (on both The Sting, and the SX-2000) had straight dropouts where the axles attach, and they were only .100" thick. Also, it was learned that the lightening holes in the dropouts were drilled too close to the axle cutouts. When you tightened the axle nuts on the original forks, and then started pounding on them, the dropouts would crack up to the bottom lightening hole. That lower hole was also originally used for the safety washer that hooked into the hole, so that if the axle nuts came loose, the wheel wouldn't fall off. But it did little good if the dropout split there and the wheel came off with the washer and the dropouts! (I still have a set, and I had to fix them).

So the "Sting Competition" was a new model incorproating the upgraded "New Forks", along with "The Sting" in 1981 (got the new forks). The forks had 2 major improvements. First, the dropouts became much thicker (almost .150" inch, or 50% thicker!) and they have a curved bulge on the fwd side of the dropout, the lower lightening hole is smaller, and higher in the dropout so it no longer cracked there. Second, they were drilled for "Front Brakes". Serious racers now needed front binders, and were sick of drilling forks. (I have drilled my share).

... So, when doing a restoration, Is it a Sting Comp or an SX-2000??? Look at the forks' dropouts. I drilled all of my older forks for front brakes, so did many others, so a drilled front brake hole doesnt say much in itself, but the thicker and curved dropouts are key. If it has the latter, it should have a Sting Comp sticker on it, if it has the former, an SX-2000 sticker is correct. ...Of course, if someone broke their old fork and put a new fork on it then who is to say...

The other thing is, if it doesnt have any stickers on it at all, then it was probably an SX-2000, because we ripped the ugly things off the day we bought them to make them look more like "The Sting" which we couldn't afford (vindicating the decision to call it a Sting Comp.). The SX-2000 sticker was like a neon sign that said, "I am a wannabe Sting owner, but I am too poor! So off they came, and even though you could still read the sign if you knew what to look for, at least the light was off! . The newer Sting Comp. stickers looked much more like "The Sting's", and everybody liked them better that way.

So the pecking order of Desireability and function, was, and still is, if you are going to ride it., or want the latest and greatest motif, like we did back then... 1 The newer Sting (81-82) because it was still all hand made at PDG, and had the better forks. 2 The older Sting. (79-81) with older forks. 3 Sting Comp, 4 SX-2000.

As a collector, The Sting is always the King, but older years with forks that are not cracked, are way cool because so many of them broke, that they are now much rarer. Making the SX-2000 with original forks very cool as well!

..So, does anyone want to see more photos like these 3, and talk more Sting Iron? PS now I need a genuine SX-2000 sticker, because I tore all mine off 25 years ago! go figure... (anybody?)...

Randy C. · #2 07-05-2005, 10:55 AM

Tough read, a pargraph or two would help

I also am a Sting history buff, I'll correct a few of your points and follow with quoted documents.

Marc Muller now of Waterford Cycles created the Schwinn Sting. He was intructed to create the ultimate BMX frame even though having no previous BMX design experience, in 1978 the Sting was created by Marc while heading the Paramount division of Schwinn while still in Chicago.

The Sting, the Sting Compitition and the SX-2000 were always US built, everything came out of Chicago. When Marc moved Parmount production to Waterford Wisconsin in 1979 he took the Sting and only the Sting with him, the Sting Comp and the SX-2000 continued to be produced in Chicago. I have spoken with Marc and Richard Schwinn @ Waterford Cycles many times over the years, both enjoy sharing Sting history. Marc can also still match the Sting candy red and blue in his Waterford shop.

Every version of the Sting fork was always produced overseas.

Quoted reading for your enjoyment.
----------------------

The following is quoted directly from Dean Bradley, BMX PLUS

12-81,Schwinn Sting test artical.

When Schwinn introduced the Sting frame and fork in 1978 it proved once and for all that the Chicago bicycle giant was serious about bicycle motocross. At that time it was the most advanced machine to ever hit a race track. Schwinn clearly showed it's superior engineering, design innovation and capasity to build, at any cost, the best bike on the market. Now, three years later, the question is: How has the Sting stood the test of time? Is it still the most advanced machine on the racetrack?

Our answer is: Yes, but other manufactures have closed the gap on Schwinn in several areas. For example, the Sting's tapered fork blades were once a Schwinn exclusive, but now they can be found on other bikes {Panda and Redline}. What keeps the Schwinn on top is that, while some competitors are using only one or two of the Sting's best features, nobody else is using all of them. The reason is sheer economics. TheSting is expensive. The frame and fork alone are about $250.00, far and away the most expensive combo on the market.

The price is high simply because of all the details that go into making the frame. The most obvious is the expanded-oval ends on the top and down tubes. The less expensive Sting Compitition {SX-2000} also share this feature but there's a bid difference in the structure of the tubing. To get the expanded-oval shape, the end of a normal round tube is forced to swell by means of a swedging device. Obviously anytime you stretch out a tube in that manner the matal gets thinner. This is how the tubing on the Sting Compitition are. On the Sting however, this is not the case. In order for the factory to get the weight on the Sting frame down as low as it is they had to thin-walled tubing.

Expanding thin-wall tubing would be very dangerous. To get around this problem Schwinn went to bubble-butted tubing. The wall thickness on dubble-butted tubing is twice as thick on the ends. This allows them to expand the end of the tube yet still retain a sufficient wall thickness for welding.

Why go through the trouble of expanding in the first place. It's a way of increasing the weld area without increasing the size and weight of the rest of the frame tube. Schwinn gets about a 15% increase in the
weld area with this method. This, in addition to the five inch head tube eliminates the need for any type of gusset in the head area. The seat mast is also expanded at the crank hanger to help stiffen up the frame in that area.

Although not as fancy as the front half of the Sting, the rear triangle is equally well engineered. The tapered chain stays offer a great strength-to-weight ratio. The seat stays are also tapered but to a
lesser degree {the chain stays start at 25mm in diameter and go down to 16mm, the seat stays go from 14mm to 11mm}. Since the chain stays are larger at the hanger it was necessary for Schwinn to pre-dent the sprocket side chain stay in order for the sprocket to have adequate clearance. The crank hanger itself also has a 2mm bias towards the sprocket side in order to give additional clearance.

In case you haven't noticed, the Sting frame is not heli-arc welded. It is hand brazed, an expensive, but very sound method of joining together steel tubing. Brazing created less fatigue at the weld than heli-arcing {another reason why there's no gussett at thr head area}.

--------------------
Similarities [My own submission]

5 inch head tube
ovalized top tube, both ends
ovalized downtube, both ends
100% chromoly tubing
identical geometry

Frames differences, most notable first

headbadge, Sting: round , Comp: vertical long oval
headtube/headset, Sting: Road bike[smaller diameter], Comp: Standard 1"
Seat stay/seat mast junture, Sting: concave tips, Comp: round ends
Seat mast tube, Sting: ovalized at the bottom, Comp: straight tube
Tubing material, Sting: All chromoly, front three tubes are

double-butted and ovalized, rear tubes are tapered chromoly, Comp: All chromoly, top tube and down tube are ovalized but not double-butted, rear is tapered chromoly.

---------------------------

Dirt Rag Article Archive

The Poop on Gunnar
By Karl Rosengarth
(Issue #84)

The history of Waterford Precision Cycles, and their Gunnar brand, is intimately linked to the history of Schwinn bicycles. The story begins
with Schwinn's bankruptcy and buy-out in 1993, which Schwinn's web site describes quite succinctly: "1993. Schwinn files for bankruptcy. New management takes over. We fell, we got up. End of apology."
After the cigar smoke had cleared in the negotiation chambers, it
turned out that Schwinn's Waterford, Wisconsin factory still remained
on the table. Apparently, the Waterford factory, which was devoted to building Schwinn's high-end Paramount racing frames, did not appear economically viable to the new owner group. Under the economic conditions that prevailed in 1993, Asian production appeared much more practical.

That's when Richard Schwinn, former plant manager of Schwinn's last
full-scale American factory and great-grandson of company founder Ignaz Schwinn; and Mark Muller, storied framebuilder and Paramount's production chief, made an offer for the orphaned Waterford factory. To be precise, the factory went up for auction, and they made the winning bid. Now let's take a step back in time for some Schwinn history. In the early 1970s, Schwinn's Paramount brand dominated American road racing bicycle sales. By the later half of that decade, however, Paramount's tooling, lugging and tubing had become outdated. A fresh approach was needed. When Ed Schwinn took over the family business in 1979, he decided to shut down Paramount production and not start producing again until Paramount could once again be a world class bicycle. Marc Muller, who was working in Paramount's engineering division, was put in charge of re-building the Paramount brand, basically from scratch. Marc shut down the then Paramount factory in Chicago and started a new Paramount factory in Waterford, Wisconsin.

He retooled the operation and introduced a string of product innovations that quickly brought Paramount sales back to the boom level of the early '70s. Fast forward to 1993. When Richard and Marc bought the Waterford factory, they continued in the Paramount tradition by producing finely crafted, lugged frames of the highest quality. In fact, Schwinn retained the rights to the Paramount name and contracted the guys in Waterford to build Paramount frames for them. The Waterford-built Paramount frames quickly gained a solid reputation, and soon there was demand for "those bikes built in Waterford." Orders started coming in, and Richard and Marc had a full-fledged business on their hands. Since the Waterford factory already had a reputation, picking a name was easy: Waterford Precision Cycles.

But wait a minute! How does a company known for lugged and brazed objects of art start up a blue-collar TIG welded brand like Gunnar Bikes? The answer is one of those "one thing led to another" stories. Waterford had started contract building TIG welded BMX frames for Standard Bike Company of Davenport, Iowa. Over time, this association honed Waterford's TIG welding expertise. Couple that with Waterford's need to continue growing by offering a more affordable alternative to their lugged bikes, and out came the idea to create their own TIG welded mountain and cyclocross bikes. Waterford-sponsored pro racer Paul Willerton had been instrumental in offering design input for Waterford's lugged mountain and cyclocross bikes. In 1998, Waterford built their first TIG welded prototype mountain and cyclocross bikes for Paul to evaluate. Shortly thereafter, Gunnar Bikes was launched.

Gunnar is the name of Richard's Labrador, the friendly face who greets Waterford visitors and literally leads them to the factory door. But, why name a bike company after your dog, I wondered. Richard explained: "All the things you'd want to have in a bike is all the things we had in this dog. Which is a lot of fun and an lot of friendship." Kinda gets you right there, doesn't it?

(Ed note: For more information, check out www.gunnarbikes.com or
www.waterfordbikes.com )

© 2002 Dirt Rag Magazine

*end quote*

12xlr8 · #3 07-07-2005, 05:25 PM

Most excellent!, I think I have found the right contact for my next question to fill in a little known history gap in "The Sting's" history. But first, I am not exactly sure what you corrected. Agreed, "The Sting" is, and always will be, THE handbuilt icon. The Sting Competition, and the SX 2000 were never the same as "The Sting". But the SX and the SC frames were both identical in every way, and were produced and sold with 2 different names at the same time. This always confuses people. Why were they selling 2 identical frames with different names? The SX was selling as a lower line/price than the Sting Comp. in 1981 because they installed the older style forks on it. So you can have an older frame S/N of March of 1981 with the new name, Sting Competiton, and a newer July of 1981 frame with the old SX-2000 name, even though they were phasing out the SX-2000, and the frames were Identical. Most people think that they simply changed the name in 1981 to "Sting Comp." from "SX-2000" and the SX's were just old stock, but then, why are the serial numbers newer??? They did change the name, But they still apparently had many leftover forks that cracked at the dropouts. So, marketing (or someone) assembled them as SX's until they ran out of the old forks. We use to have a name for them, It had something to do with "Quick Release Droputs". because when the droputs cracked and spread, the wheel would come off with it. The newer forks were unbreakable. Pictured below, (many have forgotten that there was indeed 2 different forks on the Sting/SC/SX line-up...Old quick release, and newer unbreakable)

BIG question. The photos below were sent to me with questions about it's origin, and I did my best. I persoanlly saw Ted Guilimette break one in half, and deem it "a good idea gone bad". It was a confusing day 23 years ago, because there were 2 Ted's wearing Factory Schwinn colors at the track, and everyone thought I broke my Sting..."It was the Other Ted"...And, "it wasn't a "Real Sting", it was weird..."which Ted? what do you mean not a real Sting?"... But , in 1981 (serial number) Schwinn/Waterford was experimenting with TIG welding the Sting's Tri-ovalized frames, and they were failing miserably due to stress cracking, and other techno stuff. In short, there was no Brazed Fillets to spread the load, and I saw one tear right in half at the head tube welds. The rest of my knowlege is piece meal on this frame and I would love to learn more of the whole story from someone who really knows it. I know it looks silly, and they broke, and they were tested by Factory riders and never marketed, And didn't have badges, or decals, But they were Sting frames that were TIG welded... what was happening at Schwinn when they took this approach, who built them, who got fired over the bad idea??? Was this the first real downfall of waterford....etc...??? Have a look, and maybe we can find some facts to go with the photos, and not just speculation which is most of my knowlege on this one...
Ted

Randy C. · #4 07-07-2005, 11:00 PM

Ted,

I guess the only correction I made was that all Sting varieties and the King Sting were always made in the USA, that is until the piece-o-crap Sting that Schwinn put out in 86/87 which looks an awful lot like the close up of the welded frame you posted. Can you show more of that one including the dropouts? Whats the s/n on the welded frame?

So you used to ride for the Scwinn team?

Randy

Scrambler Guy · #5 07-08-2005, 07:25 AM

I have seen a few different variances in possible factory rides' bikes. That TIG welded frame looks an aweful lot like a later 83 or so frame. What type of SN is on that frame? Headtube? Rear Stay? Be good to see the serial number.

Good knowledge shared by both of you. Thanks. Randy is always good that way. xlr8 like your views also. Do you have pics of the fork without a brake hole? How about a straight on shot of the fork legs? Do you still have Sting's now?

Stings rule. Period. Like no other.

12xlr8 · #6 07-08-2005, 08:12 AM

The S/N is HT3 0146 on the left rear dropout, just like any other Sting. The frame is not mine, but I know where it is, and it was offered to me to purchase. It is damaged from some nincompoop bolting a sidehack onto it (go figure). I would just braze it up, and chrome it ,and it would be double welded "FrankenSting". So I told him to keep it until we can figure out it's historical net worth. They were Full on Sting Tubing, And completely TIG welded. Here is a full shot below.

I have drilled all my undrilled forks for front brakes years ago. (I am still trying to get my frameset back from my win at Indy in 1981.) It may be undrilled for front brakes yet?? A straight on shot is identical. The only difference is the Dropouts shown in the last photo above. The bottom hole in the dropout is much closer to the axle, and the front edge is straight. They are thinner at .100" inch.

I am leaving out of town for the weekend to ride some vintage trains with my 9 year old in 2 hours. I will catch up with the posts on Monday.

I have 4 total on hand right now, 3 SC's and one Sting fresh out of chrome.. One was in primer never finished from the factory off of Ginny's web site and is virgin and has show chrome as well. Makes the NOS fork chrome look even lousier than it is. Ted

Scrambler Guy · #7 07-08-2005, 08:17 AM

HT3 0146

That is an '83 frame then. I thought maybe it was. H = Month, "3" = Year. We got one of those frames as a replacement back in the day. The Sting as well all knew it was gone. I am pretty sure that you see those frames with '82 SN's also. Those are the frames that became the first Predator Sting's. I can possibly get you the rear stay decals that say Sting in the Space Invaders writing if you need them.

gts340 · #8 07-13-2005, 07:05 AM

Excuse my ignorance on the Sting but I figured this is the place to ask. Did all years of the Sting frame have a "Schwinn" badge rivetted on the headtube and were all seatposts oversize? The reason I ask is the frame I had was minus the headtube badge, but had the oversized seat post tube.

The Sting is legendary to me. I'll tell the story of this bike and how it relates to me if anyone wants to hear it.

Scrambler Guy · #9 07-13-2005, 01:46 PM

A REAL Sting never had riveted headbadge. Schwinn started having that when they went cheap to be blunt.

12xlr8 · #10 07-14-2005, 09:36 PM

Stings always had a round head badge, with Chicago on it. Sting Comps have an oval Schwinn badge, and they are all screwed on. Scrambler is right, only the cheaper stuff had riveted Taiwan badges.

12xlr8 · #11 07-14-2005, 09:50 PM

Scrambler, According to my interpretation, the Serial number HT3 is August of 1982, and the one I saw broken in half was is 1982, well before any production. The frame pictured has no holes for a head badge either.

http://thecabe.com/index.asp?F=SchwinnCodes4&D=Features

My Sting comps have numbers like DR800779, which would be April of 1980. Other wise the 8 would denote 78 or 88, and that is incorrect. D denoting April, and The R denotes the year of 1980.

Therefore the TIG Sting is 1982.

What is more interesting is that they used the codes similar to the SX2000/Sting Comp on that frame, and not Sting code format.

A Sting code of F1T0183 would be as you stated, Letter, number, letter, however, it is in the other format, letter, letter, number.

Does anyone have any photos of a PRODUCTION TIG welded Sting "Predator". I was out of it by 1984, and into women and college by then. I have never seen a PRODUCTION bike with Sting tubing, and TIG welds. If anyone can prove that this is not an urban myth, or a prototype, with a photo, or Catalog, I would love to know more. You mentioned "Space Invaders" font on the rear stay sparkes, so you are up on something I have no clue about.

Tell me more...
T

plainsbikesouth · #12 07-14-2005, 11:34 PM

Were the 83 predator stings still being made at the paramount factory, I didn't think they were.

A chicago made one shouldnt have the space between the first three digits and the last 4. HT3 at paramount would be H= August, T = Trioval, 3= 1983. Chicago would be H = August, T =1982.

I didn't think they made any stings at the chicago plant in 1982 (besides the comps, minis and kings).

12xlr8 · #13 07-19-2005, 12:23 AM

My friend has a Predator Sting. Is this the one you are thinking of? It is very different. So I took some pics.

It has triovalized down tubes, but only a 4 inch head tube.

The seat tube is ovalized, but it is only 7/8 inch, not 27mm.

The rear tubing is totally different. I maintain with the info so far, that the TIG welded Sting frame in question must be a hand built proto, built in paramount with genuine Sting tubing, to set the tone of all future Taiwan production.

Attached are comparison pics of a Predator Sting "Made in Taiwan, in black chrome, and the afore mentioned TIG welded Sting that has every single piece of tubing that a Sting has, only it is TIG welded.

Still remains pretty unclear.

12xlr8 · #14 07-19-2005, 12:57 AM

I finally found a factory photo of the undrilled SX 2000 forks you asked for. attached.

Old Stings, and ALL SX2000s always had this type of fork. Note, no brakes, no provisions for them.

New Stings and Sting Comps had the newer forks, drilled for front brakes/stronger fork dropouts.

The only difference between an SX-2000 frame/fork, and a Sting Comp frame/fork, was the sticker, and the forks. So that pretty much determines which sticker to put on them when restoring them.

12xlr8 · #15 07-19-2005, 01:09 AM

This is a crummy pic of my current Sting project. More later.

Stats are...
Fresh Show Chrome (minted dropouts), NOS fork, NOS Shimano DA Cranks, NOS Swiss EDCO BB, Pro Neck (all polished to a mirror finish), Bullseyes, NOS MX-1000 brakes, Schwinn predator tires, Black and Nickel Izumi chain, DX Pedals, Polished chain-wheel, etc....

NOTE;
I am looking for a set of handlebars like the ones in the SX-2000 photo above. The ones with the drooped crossbar. ANYBODY?