Velopedia Bicycle Archive
Compare Bicycles
Compare published geometry, gearing and specifications for up to three bicycles.
Edit comparison
Add a bicycle
Search the Archive without leaving this comparison.
1 of 2 bicycles
At a glance
Key differences
Supported differences are shown below. Data limitations are labeled separately.
- Handling
2002 Diamondback Master has a 0.5° slacker head-tube angle than 1994 Diamondback Master in the archived geometry. Frame size is not identified for 2002 Diamondback Master and 1994 Diamondback Master.
Fork offset, tire size and wheelbase also affect steering; head angle alone is not a handling verdict.
- Gearing
2002 Diamondback Master has a 8% lower climbing ratio than 1994 Diamondback Master.
A lower ratio gives more mechanical advantage; rear-wheel rollout determines distance per crank turn.
- Identity & price
1994 Diamondback Master had an original MSRP $333 lower than 2002 Diamondback Master.
Original MSRP is the published list price when new, not today’s used-bike value.
Gearing comparison
Lower gears help on climbs. Higher gears suit higher speeds.
RPM
RPM = pedal turns per minute.
Lowest1.56:1Highest4.08:1Total range261%
Estimated speed at 90 RPMLowest gearHighest gear
Uses front tire 700C×23; rear size isn’t listed.
Lowest1.70:1Highest4.08:1Total range240%
Speed unavailable: wheel or tire size is missing or unclear.
How it works
Ratio = front teeth ÷ rear teeth. Hub gears also include the hub’s internal ratio. A 400% range means the highest ratio is four times the lowest.
Speeds are estimates from tire size and pedal cadence. Actual speeds vary.
Complete specification tableShows different published values and gaps where a bicycle lacks data. Different wording reflects source language, not necessarily different components. Swipe for more columns.
Specification
2002 Diamondback Master
1994 Diamondback Master
Overview
Model Year
2002
1994
Brand
Diamondback
Diamondback
Model
Master
Master
Bicycle Type
Road/sport
Road race & triathlon
Original MSRP
$1,199.99
$867.00
Colors
Siver/Black
—
Sizes
47cm, 50cm, 53cm, 56cm, 59cm, 62cm
50, 52, 54, 56, 58, 60, 62
Weight
—
—
Frameset
Frame Construction
TIG-welded
TIG-welded steel
Frame Material
7005 aluminum, butted w/replaceable derailleur hanger
Chromoly, short butted, oversize
Fork
—
Unicrown, Super Radius
Fork Material
Aluminum
—
Drivetrain
Component Group
Road Mix
Shimano RX-100 STI
Shifters
Shimano Tiagra STI Dual Control
Shimano RX-100 STI Dual Control
Front Derailleur
Shimano 105, bottom-pull/clamp-on 31.8mm
Shimano RX-100
Rear Derailleur
Shimano 105 SS
Shimano RX-100
Crankset
Shimano 105, 39/53 teeth
Shimano RX-100, 39/53 teeth
Bottom Bracket
Shimano BB-5500, 109.5mm spindle
—
BB Shell Width
68mm English
—
Rear Cogs
9-speed, 13 - 25 teeth
8-speed, 13 - 23 teeth
Chain
KMC Z-9000, 1/2 x 3/32"
Shimano CN-HG-70
Pedals
Wellgo WPD-R4 clipless
Look PM-76 (clipless)
Brakes
Brakes
Shimano Sora Dual Pivot brakes, Shimano Tiagra STI Dual Control levers
Shimano RX-100 brakes, levers
Cockpit & Contact Points
Headset
1 1/8" integrated Tien Hsin No.10 ZST
—
Handlebar
Aluminum drop bar
DB alloy
Handlebar Extensions
Not included
—
Stem
Aluminum threadless
Chromoly TIG-welded
Saddle
Selle Italia Oktavia
Avenir Comp, chromoly rails, leather cover
Seatpost
Aluminum micro-adjust, 27.2mm diameter
Kalloy SP-264 250L
Wheels & Tires
Hubs
Shimano WH-R535
Shimano RX-100
Rims
Shimano WH-R535, 16-hole
Mavic 195, 32-hole
Spokes
Shimano stainless steel, 14ga. (2.0mm) straight gauge
—
Spoke Nipples
Brass nipples
—
Front Tire
700 x 23c Vittoria Rubino
Continental Super Sport Ultra
Wheel Size
700c wheels
—
Geometry · choose a size for each bicycle
Geometry size
Head-tube angle
73°
73.5°
Seat-tube angle
72°
73°
Chainstay / rear center
408.9 mm
410 mm
Wheelbase
990.6 mm
992 mm
Fork offset / rake
45 mm
40 mm
Historical specifications are presented as an archival reference. Components may have varied by market, size, or production run. Legacy reference geometry is model-level historical data whose corresponding frame size is not identified; compare those dimensions as reference values rather than size-normalized fit data.