Author Topic: It's 2016, still looking for a K2 Proflex 5000! (Read 20370 times)

serviceguy · « **on:** July 13, 2016, 02:29:27 pm »

I feel the urge to jump back on a MTB after many years of inactivity. I've always liked Proflex bikes but I could never afford one back in the old country (Italy, where I rode a Viner), now I find myself in a position were I can't justify the money for a new FS bikes but I do want one so I am entertaining the idea of sourcing one of these old girls! I've found a K2 5000 for sale but I am not sure what the market value of these bikes is nowadays so I would greatly appreciate some hint with regard to that.

Also, I know it was tricky to size these bikes but what would a 20" center crank to top seat tube correspond to as in Small, Medium, large or XLarge ? And most important, how would it fit a 5'11" guy or regular build (my legs are not too long nor too short for my height).

I can rarely leave my toys as they come, so as soon as I source a 5000 or 4000 a disk upgrade is going to be in order...

Thanks a lot for the space, looking forward to discuss my 'new to me' bike project in here!

fyrstormer · « **Reply #1 on:** July 14, 2016, 03:52:46 am »

There is no uniform market value. The market is too small. It's worth whatever you're willing to pay.

kiwi · « **Reply #2 on:** July 14, 2016, 04:17:45 am »

in other proflex models 20 is about as big as they come ,way big.You better try it it may be a smidgen big

serviceguy · « **Reply #3 on:** July 14, 2016, 09:41:12 am »

Thanks for the feedback.

Unfortunately when I am fixating on something I end up paying too much, at least according to my wife...I did notice there isn't much of a market for these bikes. I didn't see too many around even when they were new, but again was in Italy back than.

From the pics in the ad it looks like the top tube and the down tube almost touch at the head tube, and I believe the Way Big size had quite a gap between the two of them. That and the fact the seller says at 6'2" the frame is a bit small for him makes me think it's a Large and it should fit me at 5'11"...I can't test it, it's on the other side of the country.

serviceguy · « **Reply #4 on:** July 14, 2016, 09:45:52 am »

Actually found an expired (sigh) ebay auction for a frame that lists the size as Large and the distance between the center of BB and top of seat tube being 20" 1/4 so at 20" it should be a Large.

Spokes · « **Reply #5 on:** July 14, 2016, 12:47:36 pm »

It could be a medium or a large. The measurement you are referring to is the same on a large and medium size frame. You need to measure the length of the top tube from center seat tube to center head tube. This is the only measurement that differs between a medium and large.
Medium top tube length = 554mm
Large top tube length =579mm
I'm 6'2" and I ride a large 4000/5000. To me it feels perfect. I have a medium 957 but it never feels right. I've put an extra long stem to compensate for the shorter top tube. I have never tried a waybig ( x large) but I would think a slightly too big frame would be less of a problem than a too small. The large was recommended to me when I bought mine new from the shop in 1998.
I would say you need a large.

Price wise a 5000 sells from £50 - £250. It really depends on condition, spec and how much you want it! You don't see 5000's for sale very often so it's really how much or how little you are willing to pay.
Hope this helps
Chris

serviceguy · « **Reply #6 on:** July 15, 2016, 10:52:18 am »

Thanks for the reply Spokes!

I've actually located a closer to me 4000 in size Large (even though the price is about $100 higher than what you mentioned), the 5000 that I located in Seattle at $550+shipping sounds a little too much for an almost 20 years old bike, I am still waiting on the dude to get back to me. I also have some reservation on the CF front suspensions being 18 years old, the aluminum ones on the 4000 should be easier to check for stress cracks and weldable if needed. The rear, well, you can just hope. Sure enough being able to inspect it in person makes it a whole lot easier.

Spokes · « **Reply #7 on:** July 16, 2016, 02:25:51 am »

Whatever works best for you is fine but I wouldn't have any issues with the carbon forks or swingarm used on these bikes. They were made of a superb quality and don't break. They really are over engineered in a good way. I've only ever seen one swingarm cracked and the guy must have done something really stupid to have caused it. They just don't break.
The main thing to check is for any wear in the top and bottom links on the forks. People don't strip and re-lube them as often as they need and it wears the nylon bushes. If left too long it wears the spindle also. A rebuild kit can still be bought for the bushes but if the spindle is worn you need a spare set of forks as spares.
The same with the rear, check for side play. There shouldn't be any play in the suspension at all, just smooth travel.

Chris

serviceguy · « **Reply #8 on:** July 16, 2016, 11:01:50 am »

Again, thanks! All good info to keep in mind when checking a bike. Well, if I really like the 4000 I may keep an eye out for the 5000 as well...now, if the guy bothers to answer my e-mail so i can go check out the bike that would be great. I start having a feeling he's just going to flake on me. We'll see.

Colin · « **Reply #9 on:** July 17, 2016, 03:30:38 am »

As far as I am aware there is no material difference between a 4000 and a 5000 is there? (anyone?) it was merely a groupset difference and maybe forks and shocks, so really I'd say it's down to size and colour preference, you should even entertain other models like the Evo's and "Monkeys" which were 4000/5000 style bikes however without the CF rear end but were usually disc ready.
I'd agree about the CF forks, tough as old boots unless crashed, and would also stress the pivot maintenance importance.

Good Luck!

Col.

Spokes · « **Reply #10 on:** July 17, 2016, 08:36:21 am »

I'd say the main noticeable difference is that the standard 4000 has ELT - aluminium forks and the 5000 has CS - carbon. As Col says the group set is higher on the 5000 also. But here's the biggy ( maybe!) I always thought the 5000 was a different grade aluminium to the 4000 and possibly made in-house aka 957. Callum of RDS who spoke to people from the factory always said the team race bikes were base on the 5000 not the 4000. Is the 5000 a higher grade of aliuminium or maybe more procicly built compared to the mass produced 4000.
My 4000 has a 'Made in Taiwan' sticker on the bb but my 5000 hasn't. I've owned the 4000 from new and I bought the 5000 last year as a New old stock frame. It's brand new and never been built up. All stickers are original. There are some subtle differences compared with my 4000 also. Seat tube height is 5mm shorter, cable guides are different shape and the welding is to different standard.
The last thing is the frame numbers.
My 4000 is stamped with a small punch starting with H8G00.... Where as my 5000 is stamped with a large punch starting with PF0099...
My 856's start with H5E and H6E. My 857 starts with H7E. All these are made in Taiwan. M My 955 starts with AO44 and my 957 starts with KU6G.... Both were made in house and have larger hand stamped numbers. So it seems right to me that the 5000 was also made in house as its number starts PF0099.
Phew that turned into a long one!

A quick bit of digging and I've found the 4000 frame listed as 7005 grade aluminium and the 5000 frame listed as 7005 'elite' grade. So the 5000 is a higher spec frame but in all honesty would you really be able to tell the difference?

Chris

serviceguy · « **Reply #11 on:** July 17, 2016, 06:10:47 pm »

Well, I'm now the proud owner of a K2 4000...I ended up overpaying for what it is, as I gave it a visual inspection that turned out to be less than accurate as I did concentrate on the frame pivot (looks good) and cross link (looks good too) and complete ignored the mangled front derailleur! I did not ride the bike as I assumed it would need a tune up anyway, I did not expect it would need it that bad. I am hoping to bend the cage back in shape for now and than source either a good used or NOS unit from ebay. I did not notice any crack on the swing arms but the metal plate that holds the rear derailleur seems bent. I full tearing apart is in order soon. So far I've only located the bearing kit for the front fork RK006 bearing kit on ebay, I did a little research and I guess I should source everything I can find for the smart shock as well (RK015, RK016, RK018 and RK019). The seal kit RK004 seems not be available anymore. Any clue where I could locate it and if there's any other kit I may be after?

Willie_B · « **Reply #12 on:** July 17, 2016, 07:24:04 pm »

This should be the spec.
http://www.bikepedia.com/QuickBike/BikeSpecs.aspx?year=1999&brand=K2&model=4000

serviceguy · « **Reply #13 on:** July 17, 2016, 08:04:10 pm »

I could not leave it alone, back to the garage for more dreadful discoveries...the rear derailleur hanger is bent, how the impact that bent it did not bend the actual fork aluminum terminal is beyond me but I do not complain. 2 spares have been ordered from China so that should be taken care of. The rear shock seems to be bent as well, the spring is actually rubbing the reservoir, that seems the most expensive part unless I find a used, good stock replacement unit. Finally (but I haven't tackled the front fork yet) the front derailleur is broken, actually looks chewed by the chain and one of the leverage hinges has broken off, obviously that is beyond repair...

Off to the classifieds it is, I guess!

serviceguy · « **Reply #14 on:** July 17, 2016, 08:06:25 pm »

Thanks for the reference, mine is actually a 1998 (red, LX front derailleur).

News:

Menu

Picture Bit

Author Topic: It's 2016, still looking for a K2 Proflex 5000! (Read 20370 times)